Tag: Christopher Dale

  • Double or Nothing: The Two Diseases That Want Me Dead

    My depression didn’t entirely cause my alcoholism, but it certainly played a key role.

    I have two diseases that want me dead.

    One is addiction, a progressive, incurable and potentially fatal disease that presents as a physical compulsion and mental obsession. I am addicted to alcohol and, as an alcoholic, can never successfully drink again.

    There is no cure, only ways of arresting the vicious cycle of binge, remorse and repeat that leads to ever-deeper bottoms. My alcoholism took me not only to unemployment but unemployability; not only selfishness but self-destruction; not only deteriorating health and heartache but abject desperation and insanity.

    My other deadly illness is depression. By this, I mean clinical depression – a necessary distinction considering the widespread, ill-informed use of the phrase “I’m depressed” to describe mere sadness. The difference is that sadness is rational while depression decidedly is not. Depression is not an emotion; it is a chemical imbalance that leads to hopelessness and self-loathing and, for that reason, is the leading cause of suicide.

    Mourning a loved one is understandable and altogether appropriate; that is sadness. Climbing to the roof of a six-story building and nearly jumping because I considered myself toxic and worthless, as I did in my mid-20s, is not normal and certainly not healthy; that is depression.

    I will be an alcoholic and depressive for as long as I am alive. But while neither is curable, both are certainly treatable. And increasingly, I’m finding that my progress in recovering from one disease is paying substantial dividends in combatting the other.

    Weller Than Well

    I took my final drink on October 10, 2011, the last in a long line of cheap beer cans littering my car. Wherever I was going, I never got there; instead, I crashed into a taxi and kept driving. Police frown upon that. I spent the night in jail and the next six months sans license. I was in trouble physically, spiritually, and now legally, and I had finally experienced enough pain to seek salvation.

    I got sober through Alcoholics Anonymous. There are several programs effective in arresting addiction; AA just happens to be the most prolific, and embodied the sort of group-centric empathy I needed during the precarious early stages of recovery. There are few things more alienating than being unable to stop doing something that you damn well know is destroying your life. Meeting consistently with others who’ve experienced this tragic uniqueness made me realize I wasn’t alone, and provided a glimmer of something that had long been extinguished: hope.

    Unlike traditional ailments, addiction is largely a “takes one to help one” disease. I needed to know that others had drank like me and gone on to recover by following certain suggestions. AA provided both the road to recovery and, through those that had walked the path before me, the trail guides. 

    It isn’t rocket science. AA and other forms of group-centric recovery thrive on a few basic tenets. I admitted I had a problem, and saw that others had solved that problem by adhering to certain instructions. I accepted that my addiction had been driven by certain personality flaws, and that active addiction had only exacerbated these shortcomings. I made concerted efforts to begin not only amending my actions through face-to-face apologies, but also diminishing the underlying character defects that had fueled my alcoholism.

    In the process, I did not recover so much as reinvent myself. Nine years into my recovery, I am not the same person I was before becoming an alcoholic. I am better than that catastrophically damaged person.

    Like no other illnesses, recovery from addiction can make sufferers weller than well. I am not 2005 Chris – pre-problem drinker Chris. I am Chris 2.0. Stronger, smarter, wiser.

    And that brings me to my other incurable illness.

    So Low I Might Get High

    My battle with depression predates my alcoholism. In fact, the aforementioned rooftop suicidal gesture came before I was a heavy drinker. Like many people with concurrent diseases that impact mental health, one malady helped lead to another. My depression didn’t entirely cause my alcoholism, but it certainly played a key role.

    For me, bouts of depression descend like a dense, befuddling fog. At its worst, I have been struck suddenly dumb, unable to complete coherent sentences or comprehend dialogue. My wife once likened my slow, confused aura to talking with an astronaut on the moon; there was a five-second delay in transmission, and my response was garbled even when it finally arrived.

    My depression is clinical, meaning it is officially diagnosed. I am medicated for it and see a psychiatrist regularly. Upon getting sober, the first cross-disease benefit was that the anti-depressants I took daily were no longer being drowned in a sea of booze. The result of this newfound “as directed” prescription regimen was the depression tamping down from chronic to episodic. For the first time in nearly a decade, there were significant stretches where I was depression-free.

    Still, come the depression did, in random waves that enveloped me out of nowhere, zapping the hopeful vibes and purposeful momentum of early recovery. The sudden shift in mood and motivation was stark, striking and scary. Above all else, I was frightened that an episode of depression would trigger a relapse of alcoholism.

    In recovery from addiction we are taught, for good reason, that sobriety is the most important thing in our lives, because we are patently unable to do anything truly worthwhile without it. If we drink or drug, the blessings of recovery will disappear, and fast.

    Ironically, and perhaps tragicomically, by far the most formidable threat to my sobriety was my depression. One of the diseases trying to kill me was persistently attempting to get its partner in crime back. Inject some hopelessness and self-loathing into a recently sober addict’s tenuous optimism and self-esteem, and there’s a good chance he’ll piss away the best shot he’s ever had at a happy, content existence.

    For months and even years into recovery, my only defense against depression episodes was intentional inactivity. Upon recognizing the syrupy sludge of depression draining my energy – a quicksand that made everything more strenuous and, mentally, seem not worth the extra effort – I would do my best to detach from as much as possible. My routine would dwindle to a questionably effective workday and, if any energy was left, what little exercise I could muster, an attempt to dislodge some depression with some natural dopamine – a stopgap measure that rarely bought more than half an hour of relief.

    Most alarmingly, during bouts of depression I would disconnect from my recovery from alcoholism, often going weeks without attending meetings or reaching out to sober companions. In depressive episodes, the hopeful messages of group-centric recovery rang hollow, and at times even felt offensive. How dare these people be joyous, grateful and free while I was miserable, bitter and stuck.

    Over an extended timeline, though, life had improved dramatically. As a direct result of sobriety and its teachings, my status as a husband and an executive improved drastically. In rapid succession I bought a house, rescued a dog and became a father. My depressive episodes grew fewer and further between.

    But when they came, I was playing a dangerous game. I now had a lot more to lose than my physical sobriety and, despite being rarer, my depressive episodes were almost more intimidating for what they represented: irrational hopelessness amid a life that, when compared to many others, was fortunate and blessed. So when depression descended, I did the only thing that seemed logical: I whittled life down to its barest minimum, and waited the disease out. I put life on pause while the blackness slowly receded to varying shades of gray and, finally, clearheaded lucidity returned.

    Essentially, I became depression’s willing hostage. I didn’t want it to derail me, and didn’t have a healthier means of dealing with it.

    And then suddenly, I did.

    Beating Back a Bully

    For the second time in my life, I have hope against an incurable disease where before there was hopelessness. And though I can’t place into precise words exactly how it happened, I’m hoping my experience can benefit others. For the countless battling mental illness while recovering from addiction, my hope is to give you hope.

    Last fall, just as I was celebrating eight years sober, I hit a wall of depression the likes of which I hadn’t encountered in a while. Like most depressive episodes, its origin was indistinct. It had indeed been a tough year – I had lost a close relative and had an unrelated health scare, among other challenges – but trying to pinpoint depression triggers is generally guesswork.

    Anyway, there it was. A big, fat funk, deeper and darker than I’d experienced in years. But for whatever reason, this time my reaction was different. Always, my routine was to place mental roadblocks in front of my depression. I justified this by telling myself, understandably, that depression’s feelings were irrational and, therefore, not worth confronting.

    This time, for whatever reason, I took a different tack. For the first time, I leaned in rather than leaning out. I stood there and felt the harsh feelings brought on by depression rather than running from them. Whether it was sober muscle memory or simple fed-upedness, I had had enough of cowering in a corner while depression pressed pause on my life.

    The result? It hurt. A lot. But if battling depression is a prize fight, I won by majority decision. And having stood up to my most menacing bully, I fear the inevitable rematch far less.

    This would not have been possible – and is not recommended – earlier in recovery. In hindsight, I’m realizing that at least part of the reason I finally confronted my depression was that, after eight years of recovery work and a vastly improved life, I had placed enough positives around me that depression’s irrational pessimism couldn’t fully penetrate them. I had built up just enough self-esteem through just enough estimable acts that the self-loathing pull of depression couldn’t drag me down as far. I stumbled and wobbled, but I did not fall.

    Depression also prompted a highly unexpected reaction: gratitude. Its wistful sadness made me pause, sigh, even tear up. It made me look around longingly and grasp the blessings that, during my typically time-impoverished existence, I often take for granted. It made me feel guilty for not fully appreciating the positives in my life… but this guilt was laced with vows to cherish life more once depression invariably lifted, as it always did. There’s a difference between hopeless shame and hopeful guilt; the former yields self-hatred, the latter self-improvement.

    In this way, the tools acquired in recovery from addiction were wielded effectively against depression. There is a retail recovery element at play here: Though not as simple as a “buy one get one free” scenario, I’ve learned that fully buying into continued recovery from alcoholism can lead to significant savings on the pain depression can cause me. I have a craziness-combating coupon, and it’s not expiring anytime soon.

    To be clear: This is by no means a “totally solved” happy ending. Confronting my depression meant facing some demons that have been stalking me for decades. You don’t slay dragons that large in one sitting. I have, however, made a promising start. I have discovered that progress against complicated chronic afflictions is indeed possible, and can sometimes flow unexpectedly from sources one wouldn’t expect.

    View the original article at thefix.com

  • Prevent Opioid Overdose Deaths: A Call for Specific Prescribing Laws and Physician Oversight

    Prevent Opioid Overdose Deaths: A Call for Specific Prescribing Laws and Physician Oversight

    Make doctors precisely explain why they are prescribing opioids and why they decided on the pill count and refill allowance for each patient. 

    Recently, a friend’s teenage daughter underwent a procedure common for young adults: she had her wisdom teeth extracted. I had the same procedure performed in the late 1990s, at age 20. Back then, I was given a bottle of ibuprofen for the pain and, for the bleeding, told to apply tea bags. My friend’s daughter was given something just a tad stronger: 

    Vicodin.

    A teenager was given a strong opioid painkiller to numb the pain of a routine tooth extraction. It’s absurd that this is the accepted medication for this procedure when there are no complications, nothing that would indicate breakthrough pain on a level of requiring a narcotic that is given to cancer patients.

    However, the fight against opioid abuse is finally gaining promising victories by wielding an effective weapon: lawsuits. 

    Holding Big Pharma Accountable

    As the epidemic grew, many – myself included – called for state and local authorities to take drug companies to court for knowingly encouraging large-scale consumer usage of highly addictive prescription painkillers such as OxyContin, Vicodin and Percocet. Thousands of lawsuits have now been filed and in August, the $572 million decision won by Oklahoma against Johnson & Johnson became the first large-scale trial ruling concerning Big Pharma’s role in creating the opioid crisis. The state argued that J&J, which had supplied 60% of the opioids drug makers used for painkillers, aggressively marketed the drug to doctors and patients as safe. 

    Most recently the Sackler family – owners of Purdue Pharma, which makes OxyContin – reached a tentative settlement for$10-12 billion, a move that will result in the company’s bankruptcy

    They lied, we died, and now they have to pay up. Hopefully these are just the first few drips in an oncoming flood of restitution owed Americans by companies responsible for an unprecedented addiction crisis. They deserve whatever fates come their way – criminal, civil, or, as the 800-pound spoon left at Johnson & Johnson’s headquarters intended, shame-filled. 

    Now, as the overdose death rate shows signs of ebbing but has by no means abated – 68,000 Americans died in 2018 compared with 72,000 in 2017, hardly cause for celebration – it’s time to ask what’s next. 

    For years, drug companies pushed opioids as a panacea for all things pain-related. The result was an absolute avalanche of prescriptions: 191 million in 2017 alone, which averages to 58 opioid prescriptions for every 100 Americans. And despite guidelines intended to discourage opioid painkillers as a first-step approach to easing pain, primary care clinicians – most patients’ initial gateways to healthcare – wrote 45% of all opioid prescriptions. 

    Surgeons also have been implicated in widespread overprescribing. One study of nearly 20,000 surgeons, led by Johns Hopkins School of Public Health researchers, noted the common practice of prescribing dozens of opioid medications even for low-pain operations. Some prescribed over 100 opioid pills for the week following a surgery, along with usage instructions far exceeding guidelines from several academic medical centers. No wonder some six percent of all patients prescribed opioids post-surgery become dependent

    The diagnosis is simple: Doctors have proven incapable of, or unwilling to, exercise responsible discretion in determining which conditions and medical procedures necessitate painkillers notoriously linked to addiction, misuse, and overdose. 

    A Painful Backlash

    Complicating matters, the opioid crisis has become a two-way street. 

    In response to the backlash to the initial opioid free-for-all, many doctors have become so wary of prescribing opioids that those who truly need them are unjustly suffering. Much of this hesitancy is a reaction to guidelines issued by the Centers for Disease Control in 2016 that, according to Richard Lawhern, founder of the Alliance for the Treatment of Intractable Pain, has subjected patients with legitimate chronic pain to a “draconian reduction” in doctors willing to meet their needs with opioid-based medication.

    The problem with the CDC’s directive was vagueness of language. The guidelines state that opioids are appropriate for pain caused by cancer, end-of-life care, and “palliative care.” But “palliative” is a subjective term, and therefore confusing for doctors who, understandably, now have their guards up against malpractice suits in addition to opioid addiction and abuse. In a February 2019 reiteration of its guidelines, the CDC clarified that opioids are reasonable for chronic pain but, unfortunately, repeated its ambiguous wording concerning specific conditions. 

    However unintended, the result is patients who rely on opioids for legitimate medical reasons suffering for the sins of Big Pharma and, subsequently, the incompetence of government officials and the inadequacies – including cowardice – of doctors.

    The scale of the crisis and forcefulness of the backlash also has resulted in patients who, through no fault of their own, became dependent on opioids and, at the drop of a guideline, found themselves completely cut off from a highly addictive drug and dropped into a hellish withdrawal. The unsurprising consequence of this overreaction by doctors is patients turning to the streets for unregulated, often fentanyl-tainted heroin. Any laws written to specify opioid painkiller administration must include reasonable ways of relieving already-addicted patients through treatment centers and weaning agents like methadone and buprenorphine (suboxone). 

    However, the conviction permeating the chronic pain community – that doctors rather than laws should be the primary determinant of opioid prescriptions – simply doesn’t hold water. It’s become clear that doctors don’t necessarily know best. We need rules that hamstring the parasitic overprescribers while unhandcuffing the paranoid underprescribers.

    Guidelines Aren’t Enough

    It’s time for legislators to take the mystery out of this branch of medicine. If doctors can’t stop writing opioid prescriptions to those who don’t need them, or refusing to write prescriptions for those who do, then we must enact laws with clear prescribing instructions. 

    We’re all familiar with mandatory sentencing guidelines; we need mandatory dispensing guidelines – laws that bring harsh punishment for overprescribing pain medication when it’s not indicated, while reassuring doctors that they will not be unfairly punished for providing chronic pain patients with the relief they require.

    The time has come for customized ailment and procedure-related opioid painkiller dosing laws, complete with extensive medical rationale requirements. Make doctors precisely explain why they are prescribing opioids and why they decided on the pill count and refill allowance for each patient. 

    We also need to look at something else: ourselves. Especially in post-surgery settings, the opioid overprescribing epidemic was exacerbated by the naïve, altogether modern notion that patients should never feel discomfort or pain. 

    If alternatives to opioids don’t kill 100% of post-procedure pain, the new one-word answer should be “tough.” The idea that we can go through life without ever experiencing pain is not only delusional but, as we’re seeing, destructive. Things heal. Patients will need more, well, patience. 

    Numbing people literally to death is not the answer. It is irresponsible and dangerous to prescribe opioids for an ingrown toenail. Or for carpal tunnel syndrome. Or to a child following a tonsillectomy or, of course, a teenager after a tooth extraction. 

    On the flip side, it is cruel and flat-out stupid to deny patients with serious chronic pain access to a now-demonized family of medicines that for many has meant the difference between functioning and debilitation. 

    The time for general guidelines is behind us. We need strict, specific statutes that greatly diminish doctors’ discretion while placing transparency and responsibility squarely on their shoulders. 

    View the original article at thefix.com

  • Warning: Detoxing in Jail May Lead to Severe Injury or Death

    Warning: Detoxing in Jail May Lead to Severe Injury or Death

    Given the undeniable and inextricable link between jails and dangerous withdrawal from drugs and alcohol, isn’t it time that more jails had adequate detox infrastructure and medical personnel?

    In January, Frederick Adami was detained in Bucks County Correctional Facility in Doylestown, Pennsylvania. Soon, he began vomiting and defecating profusely and persistently. His cellmate’s pleas for medical assistance were ignored for hours. The next morning, guards found Adami dead in his cell. The cause of death was opioid withdrawal – a condition that, when properly medically supervised, has a near-zero mortality rate.

    In March, an inmate in a Delaware County, Ohio jail died from opioid withdrawal despite being on the facility’s medical addiction protocol. A sheriff’s office spokeswoman felt “pretty confident that there were no red flags … that there was nothing more that we could have done.” In nearby Logan County, a pending lawsuit charges that an inmate died last June after being strapped to a chair while withdrawing from alcohol — a drug whose legality belies the grave risks of nonclinical detoxing, including seizures and the substance-specific delirium tremens.

    Hard Facts and Half-Measures

    The story of withdrawal oversight in our nation’s jails is one of convincing facts met with half-measures. According to an instructive paper published by the Center for Health & Justice titled “Safe Withdrawal in Jail Settings,” 64,000 Americans died from drugs in 2016 (the number climbed to 72,000 in 2017), and 20.1 million people reported substance abuse issues in 2016.

    The paper then cites a truly eye-opening statistic: nearly two-thirds of people serving sentences in jail meet the diagnostic criteria for drug dependence or abuse. Incredibly, that data is from 2007-2009 – before the current opioid crisis and its record addiction and death totals. And since these detained people with addictions to alcohol or drugs are separated from their substances by metal bars, jails are often ground zero for withdrawal symptoms to both begin and worsen.

    Alarmingly, these hard facts are followed by soft recommendations. The paper concludes that “medically supervised withdrawal from alcohol or illicit substances is ideal whenever possible,” and that “partnerships with local medical providers can help jails safely manage withdrawal syndrome.”

    “Ideal whenever possible” is official-ese for “if it’s convenient for you” and especially “if you can afford it.” And “partnerships with local medical providers” is an intentionally vague phrase providing more cover for jails than coverage for the jailed.

    Wardens Are Not Equipped to Treat Withdrawal

    Isn’t it the duty of law enforcement officials to prevent unnecessary injuries and deaths in their own jails? High, drunk, or sober, shouldn’t concern for inmate safety be a priority? What’s more, as withdrawal tends to occur early in the detention process, it undoubtedly affects many detainees who haven’t even seen a judge yet, much less been convicted of a crime.

    Given the undeniable and inextricable link between jails and dangerous withdrawal from drugs and alcohol, isn’t it time that far more jails had adequate detox infrastructure and medical personnel?

    The issue clearly isn’t getting the attention it deserves. New York City — a historically forward-thinking city whose mayor, Bill de Blasio, is among the country’s most progressive — is a prime example, since its jail system has been a focal point of change in recent years.

    New York plans to replace its notoriously decrepit jail at Rikers Island with a number of smaller jails spread throughout the city. Despite improved safety being a key tenet of the long overdue initiative, the word “withdrawal” can be found exactly zero times in its 50-page roadmap plan

    Granted, the plan does include a program called HealingNYC, which treats opioid-dependent inmates with methadone, a known treatment for weaning. However, merely distributing meds won’t matter if an inmate shows the types of severe symptoms — including relentless vomiting and defecating — that can lead to long-term health issues or death. Further, methadone won’t do a thing for those withdrawing from alcohol.

    Though no national record is available detailing withdrawal deaths in jails, the scenario is far from far-fetched: according to HealingNYC, 17 percent of the 55,000 people admitted annually to NYC’s jails are in acute opioid withdrawal. Investigative reporting by Mother Jones found 20 lawsuits filed between 2014 and 2016 alleging that an inmate died from opiate withdrawal complications — a figure that, according to an attorney for one of the victims, likely represents a mere fraction of the actual total.

    And neither figure includes people going through alcohol withdrawal, a condition with even more dangerous complications. 

    These situations call for medical personnel, not just medicines. As a larger report on our jail system’s healthcare crisis in The New Yorker noted, “withdrawal can require close monitoring and specialized treatment that jail wardens are not equipped to provide.”

    Healthcare Behind Bars: Profits Over People

    And while many local jail systems have turned to private entities to provide healthcare for inmates, unsurprising reports have surfaced that many of these organizations place profits over people, and tend to operate only as effectively as they are overseen. In Arizona, which employs a private healthcare provider called Corizon, a pending lawsuit accuses the state of care so shoddy that it violates the Constitution’s Eighth Amendment ban on cruel and unusual punishment.

    As a recovering alcoholic, I’ve both heard and witnessed frightening accounts of alcoholics and addicts detoxing without medical assistance. Too many of these stories unfolded in jails following recent arrests; in 2011, my final drinking spree ended with 30 hours in a lower Manhattan jail following a DUI. Fortunately my withdrawal symptoms were minor, but I have no confidence in the ability of that antiquated facility — so dank and dungeon-esque it earned the nickname “The Tombs” — to handle serious withdrawal.

    Nobody is expecting perfection. Compared with larger, more concentrated state and federal prisons, jails are inherently scattered, transitional facilities operated by county or municipal law enforcement departments. With more than 3,000 jails across the country housing some 700,000 detainees, it’s unrealistic to mandate each be fully staffed and equipped to treat all facets of drug and alcohol withdrawal.

    However, we can and should do far better. Amid recent encouraging changes in the way the criminal justice system treats drug-related offenses — reduced sentencing, increased redirection and referrals to rehabs, equipping police officers with the fast-acting opioid overdose-preventing drug naloxone — it only makes sense to improve the way we deal with addiction and alcoholism at a detainee’s first true danger point. Increased funding for proper detox facilities and trained medical personnel at jails should be considered another stepping stone in an ongoing fight to reduce drug- and alcohol-related injuries and deaths.

    View the original article at thefix.com

  • Scared Straight: How My Fear in Early Sobriety Evolved Into Lifesaving Discipline

    Scared Straight: How My Fear in Early Sobriety Evolved Into Lifesaving Discipline

    I was free from myself. And this freedom was a direct result of being completely mortified at having put myself in such a precarious, powerless position. It was the most honest fear I’d ever felt – and the healthiest.

    The date was October 12, 2011. It was my second morning of sobriety, the first that I’d woken up in my bed rather than jail. Two days earlier I’d sideswiped a cab, blind drunk, and kept going. Cops frown upon that.

    For some time, I’d been building toward a last straw scenario – a no-doubter dealbreaker to finally cost me my marriage and (yet another) job. The dead silence with which my spouse departed for work that day spoke volumes, and God knew how I’d keep my suburbs-based job without a license to drive there.

    As it turned out, I still have both – the wife and the job – today, seven-plus years into recovery. And what I’ve realized is that the unprecedented fear I felt that fall morning was key to sparking my long-term sobriety.

    Recently in this space, I wrote a piece about how, for all its faults, AA groupthink can help newcomers develop much-needed discipline, as it encourages a standardized structure recommended for recovery. Meeting, sponsor, stepwork, repeat.

    But for me and for many, there was also a second, more self-sufficient catalyst to recovery: fear. Fear that you’ve already done enough to be doomed; or if you haven’t, you can’t stop yourself from making it worse still; fear to do anything at all because you’ve proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that you can’t trust yourself to do anything, at all. Fear not only of consequences, but of self.

    Sometimes it truly is darkest before the dawn. This seemingly debilitating state can, ironically, lead to lifesaving discipline of a sort we alcoholics and addicts had thought far beyond our grasp.

    Freedom in Fear

    Despite the divorce/firing 1-2 combo I felt certain was coming, that second sober morning I felt free – and not just because I was no longer behind bars.

    Rather, my freedom was twofold. First, what’s done had been done and I couldn’t undo it. So although I was scared shitless of how my marriage and career could both abruptly end, I was free from worrying about whether I’d do something to warrant those outcomes. Been there, drank that.

    More importantly, I was free from myself. And this freedom was a direct result of being completely mortified at having put myself in such a precarious, powerless position. It was the most honest fear I’d ever felt – and in hindsight, the healthiest.

    Starting that day I became deathly afraid of my erratic, addiction-driven actions. All the vows of abstinence inspired by a worsening set of consequences and hangovers had accomplished nothing. The 7am “never agains” had become the 4pm “once agains,” again and again.

    I simply couldn’t trust myself to make decisions, and I knew it. And considering its origin – the brain of a nervous wreck, two-day-sober insane person – my next thought was illogically logical:

    “Then stop making fucking decisions.”

    This, of course, was easier said than done, and in fact sounded suspiciously similar to many former miserably-failed declarations of self-restraint. This time around, the only fresh variable was the agoraphobic, fetal-position-caliber fear permeating my body, with an assist from a stupefying fog familiar to those of us who also suffer from depression.

    I was scared. I was stunned. And I had to be at work in 45 minutes. My uncle gave me a lift. In the car ride over, one thought reverberated in my head:

    “Just get to work, do your job, and come right home.” It was all I could handle that day. It was also the genesis of an invaluable recovery tool: keep it simple.

    From Fear to Powerlessness

    I got to work and back that day, and the next. I managed to walk myself to an AA meeting a half block from home. That weekend I shadowed my miraculously still-there wife like a toddler would his mommy.

    My daily deeds had dwindled to a precious few, and fell into one of two categories: everything I did was either obligatory (work, AA meeting) or subjugated, meaning it was accompanied and determined by someone else (my wife, an in-the-know family member). If that sounds pathetic… well, it is. But it worked.

    This decision-free existence, I’ve come to realize, was a real-world Step 1, whose dual recognitions of powerlessness over inebriating substances and life unmanageability are, I believe, near-universal to recovering alcoholics and addicts regardless their particular method of sobriety.

    What ensued was a lifestyle minimalism in which my days were rigidly pre-planned, and I still had enough of my secret ingredient – fear – to prevent any deviating from this preset course. A typical day looked something like this:

    Wake up, get dressed, coffee, breakfast. Board the first of three buses (New Jersey’s transit system leaves a lot to be desired) for work. Work. Eat lunch – bagged and brought, because the fewer times you walk out of your office, the smaller the chance you’ll walk into a bar.

    Work again. Three buses home. Gym or AA, time and rides permitting.

    During this time I was never on my own in private for more than five minutes if at all possible. Being (amazingly still) married was obviously a key factor here; as someone who spent early sobriety in a self-constructed cage, I still have no idea how anyone gets sober while single – that feat would have meant too much me time to accrue clean time.

    During this period it was crucial that I built a solid sober foundation. For me, that meant making meetings, getting a sponsor, and making an honest start on the 12 steps; I strongly encourage those in other recovery programs to dive into the prescribed action plan for newcomers.

    How to Build a Foundation in Recovery, Quickly

    The point – the universal goal – is building a foundation of recovery as expediently as possible. Because fear, like our once-vivid memories of alcoholism’s harms and humiliations, fades over time. I didn’t realize it, but I was in a race against the clock to develop reliable recovery tools before my stubborn self-will—in the form of the idiotic notion that I was prepared to once again make my own decisions—returned in brute force.

    Luckily, we only need to win early sobriety once. And in this perfect storm of circumstances, I was just scared enough and stiff enough for long enough to eke out a victory. By the time my fear began to waver and wane, I had a few months and a few steps under my belt. I was on my way.

    Inch by inch, the closed door of my life began to creak open. I started to take little excursions by myself, informing my wife precisely where I was going and when I’d return. I dared go out for lunch at work from time to time. I went to the trigger-laden New York City by myself for a doctor’s appointment. And finally I passed the biggest test of all: getting my driver’s license back and, with it, all the potentially disastrous decisions that come with the open road.

    Not surprisingly, none of this success was the result of any grand master plan hatched by a raw, frightened newcomer. This was far more fortune than forethought. Regardless, it’s the results that count – both for me and, I hope, for others just beginning their journey in recovery.

    If you’re reading this as a scared-witless newcomer, take the advice of someone whose experience was accidental but nonetheless useful: Make the decision to stop making decisions. There’s plenty of time to get your life back. Now’s the time to save it.

    View the original article at thefix.com

  • Why You Should Embrace AA Groupthink and Shed Your Terminal Uniqueness

    Why You Should Embrace AA Groupthink and Shed Your Terminal Uniqueness

    AA encouraged me, a sauced snowflake loaded on liquor and individualistic narcissism, to put aside enough of myself to embrace two traits required to curb my alcoholism: discipline and structure.

    Addiction has a grand irony: For a disease whose treatment thrives on identification with fellow sufferers, its symptoms are extraordinarily individual. Precisely how addiction manifests in each of us — drug of choice, length of active substance abuse, depth of debauchery — varies more widely than nearly any major affliction.

    This is because addiction, like no other ailment, turns us insane and then turns us loose on the world. Ours is not a disease subject to controlled clinical settings; we find ourselves in circumstances that, though certainly following a pattern, have variables as unique as life is complicated. I have a recovering friend who, unlike me, has never sideswiped a taxi in the Holland Tunnel, blind drunk, and kept going. But alas, I’ve never been so creative as to hide vodka in a vase, as he has (#HappyHourFlowers).

    As an alcoholic, then, my addiction-fueled adventures differ from the experiences of other problem drinkers. These exploits also are so abnormal in terms of their setting — namely, civilized society — that they feed another peculiarity of addiction: the “terminally unique” mindset that I am, somehow, alone in my inability to stop drinking at any cost.

    For me, the result was a hopeless alienation that, in turn, only further fed my alcoholism. Afraid and isolated, I gave up trying to give up.

    Amid this lonesome landscape lies the tailored times in which we live. A solid case can be made that we are in the single most individualistic era in human history.

    Take me, for example. Like most people Gen X or younger, from early childhood I’ve been called unique, singular, special. I’ve been told I can do anything, be anyone, and was perfect exactly as I was. I am, it appears, a gentle snowflake.

    Fast forward to today’s iWorld. We have made-to-order music playlists, binge TV watchlists, e-newsletter subscriptions. Our Facebook and Twitter feeds serve up personally-algorithmed news items between posts from our personally-constructed list of cyber-friends. From our social media silos, we see, hear, and click on hyper-customized content — our own little gated communities in the World Wide Web. For God’s sake, even our sleep is customized.

    We do exactly what we want, when we want, how we want. We ultra-individualize, then wonder why modern society is so uber-fractured.

    And then, those of us with addiction get too high or too drunk for too long, and need help. Suddenly, we uber-individuals need help from… well… ourselves.

    And when we walk into the rooms of Alcoholics Anonymous, that’s exactly what we get.

    AA Pluribus Unum

    Despite its imperfections — including those noted by yours truly — nothing has ever made me feel so simultaneously special and ordinary as my early experiences in Alcoholics Anonymous. As a newcomer, I was told I was the most important person in the room; but as a person in the room I was told that, though our experiences may be vastly dissimilar, we were all here for the same reprieve to the same disease.

    First and foremost — before I ever considered that I may have found a solution to my compulsive, destructive drinking — AA provided a cure for my self-diagnosed tragic uniqueness. I wasn’t sure I could quit drinking but, after just a few meetings of identifying with the similar compulsions of fellow alcoholics, I was damn sure that I wasn’t the only one who had this affliction. A lot of acronyms get thrown around in AA; perhaps one should be Alienation Antidote.

    For me, this prerequisite to recovery — this normalization of my abnormality — was an immediate and amazing upside to AA, one that fortunately superseded or masked some of my preconceived concerns.

    Like most people, I skidded along the bottom before finding recovery. Months before my eventual sobriety date, I’d been warned by peers during an unsuccessful rehab stint that AA was a cult or, at least, cultish in its groupthink. I was told that there would be a lot of people spouting a lot of nonsense and, worse, telling me what to believe while they did it.

    And you know what? They were partially right. AA did indeed ask me to set aside some of my individualism — my preconceived notions, my longstanding perceptions, the personal penchants that made me me — in favor of a program that, I was told, had a well-established track record of helping alcoholics achieve sobriety.

    AA encouraged me, a sauced snowflake loaded on liquor and individualistic narcissism, to put aside enough of myself to embrace two traits required to curb my alcoholism: discipline and structure.

    Structured Settlement

    I came into AA a stone-cold atheist and remain a skeptical agnostic, and for a long time I thought AA’s first requirement for newcomers was that they develop faith in a higher power.

    I now realize that this isn’t true. Before AA asks for anything enshrined in the 12 steps (the higher power concept is introduced in Step 2), AA asks us to stop having complete faith in ourselves — or, at least, the drunk and desperate versions of ourselves that, alone, simply cannot stop drinking.

    The salve for this outsized self-reliance comprises some of the very same group-centric activities many AA-haters find cultish: chants like the Serenity Prayer offering a simplified perspective; readings like “How It Works” providing experience-driven direction; ubiquitous signage with familiar phrases and, of course, the ever-present Twelve Steps.

    As someone who entered AA as the Smartest Person on Earth (an unofficial title, it turned out), I fully understand how threatening this can seem. Even as a scared newcomer in desperate search of a solution, I didn’t want to trade my hellish life for a post-apocalyptic Zombieland. Despite the attraction of folks who’d clearly found a way to stay sober, I’ll admit to checking the coffee machine for Kool-Aid during my first few meetings. 

    But what I soon realized was that there was a simplistic beauty to AA’s anti-individualism that, for me, was extraordinarily effective in early recovery. My rehab roomies, I found, were just so full of themselves that, when confronted with a different approach, they reflexively labeled it full of shit.

    Are there cultish aspects to AA? Absolutely. Even Catholic masses don’t end with everyone standing in a circle holding hands. Anyone wondering why some people duck out of meetings five minutes early should re-examine that ritual.

    But by and large, AA’s so-called groupthink offers newcomers a keep-it-simple structure that — as fledgling sobriety becomes longstanding recovery — can be selectively shed. It asks spiritually disarmed newcomers to buy the whole standardized toolset… then allows us to return some piecemeal as we acquire new, more customized tools.

    I for one needed some discipline to replace the chaos my life had become. I also needed certain concepts — powerlessness over alcohol, the hurt I was causing others, the incredibly alien concept that there was, in fact, hope — beaten into my brain. In hindsight, I realize AA is repetitive for a reason.

    I see a lot of newcomers enter the rooms as customized as they are clueless. For them as for myself, rigidity en route to freedom is an entirely worthwhile tradeoff. There is value in a traditions-based organization with agreed upon rules that, when adhered to successfully, work well for many people.

    How has AA’s emphasis on the group helped you? Let us know in the comments.

    View the original article at thefix.com

  • Does Everything Actually Happen for a Reason?

    Does Everything Actually Happen for a Reason?

    “Everything happens for a reason” conflicts with AA principles: it misleads recovering alcoholics into thinking they are special—that they are somehow more worthy of salvation than the addict or alcoholic who perished.

    “Because genocide.”

    That was me, in my typically understated fashion, explaining to a newly recovering alcoholic why he shouldn’t heed the single silliest phrase permeating the rooms of Alcoholics Anonymous: “Everything happens for a reason.”

    In my seven-plus years attending AA meetings, I’ve come to know and loathe my share of cliché recoveryisms. For example, to me, “Let go and let God” overshoots otherwise sound advice against trying to control everything into a place of irresponsible complacence. “If you spot it, you got it” blames an observer simply for noticing wrong behavior or thinking, while “All of us only have today” weighs equally the experience, strength and hope of a wise old-timer and a wild-eyed newcomer. We don’t all just have today—we have all the days before it.

    And it is baffling why the Our Father—a prayer praising a conventional paternalistic, heaven-dwelling religious deity—still closes many meetings, as it directly contradicts the organization’s stated non-alignment with any sect or denomination, per its Preamble.

    So yes, AA phraseology has its share of eye-rolling headscratchers. But none are as cringe-worthy and counterproductive as the concept that every single thing that transpires in life does so as part of a grand, predestined scheme.

    In an everyday setting, “Everything happens for a reason” can be brushed aside easily enough. Outside the realm of recovery, it becomes little more than a difference of opinion; your churchgoing aunt believes God is in heaven treating us like marionettes, while you prefer a puppeteer-free existence. To each his own.

    However, AA’s penchant for preordainment is particularly problematic, due to the specific forum in which it is propagated. In a recovery setting, the notion that all occurrences— good, bad or indifferent—are part of some predetermined master plan is a double-edged sword that does a disservice to all involved, believer and nonbeliever alike.

    Unreasonable Expectations

    Let’s start with those in my column: recovering alcoholics who, though they may embrace a spiritual higher power—a rhythm of the Universe, let’s say, don’t ascribe to a god that directly intervenes in our lives. If you wonder why athletes thank the Lord after a big win, you’re in my boat. Call it the “God doesn’t score goals” perspective. 

    When people who don’t believe in an interventionist deity are told to see the hands of God in everything, there is no common ground. Many of us, myself included, were stone-cold atheists upon entering AA; some of us, myself not included, still are. A healthy agnosticism is the best many of us can muster while—and this point is crucial—retaining a recovery-capable level of self-honesty. Few stay sober by lying to themselves about something as mission-critical as spirituality.

    Upon entering AA, we were assured by both literature and longstanding members that our spiritual skepticism was fine, as long as we were willing to put faith in some sort of higher power. Many of us took Step 2 with the group itself in that role and, in Step 3, turned our will over to… well… something as best we could without the whole endeavor feeling so forced that it forced us out the door.

    And then… “Everything happens for a reason”? That’s a bridge too far­—and one apt to collapse carrying newcomers who are left feeling betrayed by the agreed upon rules of repeated spiritual engagement. It also leads to inferiority complexes, when these newcomers compare themselves to AA members who seem to take God’s Great Chess Game of Life at face value.

    Replacing that collapsed bridge is a wall. There’s no kind way to say this: Many people who don’t believe everything happens for a reason find those who do simultaneously pretentious and unsophisticated—an oxymoronic mélange of know-it-all-ism and naiveté. When I hear someone in AA insist upon God’s almighty plan, it makes me respect what they say next significantly less.

    And no, comment thread, that isn’t my arrogance—it’s the phrase’s. “Everything happens for a reason” is a condescendingly cocksure nonstarter that cleaves members off from each other. Worse, it does so completely unnecessarily, since its veracity is entirely irrelevant to the greater principles and practices of AA’s primary purpose: recovery from alcoholism and addiction.

    How many newcomers, I often wonder, have gone back out and died because they didn’t realize “Everything happens for a reason” is by no means AA dogma, but rather AA dog… something else. Even one is too many.

    And if the true believers can’t stop saying it for nonbelievers, maybe they can stop saying it for themselves. Here’s why.

    No Good Reason

    In Alcoholics Anonymous, “Everything happens for a reason” conflicts directly with the program’s principles. It does so by misleading recovering alcoholics into thinking they are special—that they are somehow more worthy of salvation than the addict or alcoholic who perished. The result is a sort of unintentional hubris that flies in the face of sobriety-bolstering ego deflation.

    By implication, declaring yourself selectively saved by an all-intervening God acknowledges that this same deity let others perish. He took Prince, Amy Winehouse and Philip Seymour Hoffman, but left… you? Forgive me if I find that conceited.

    On a macro level, I also find it insulting. This Calvinistic approach to human existence means God assents to tsunamis, earthquakes, war crimes. If you sincerely believe that God greenlighted the Holocaust, I simply don’t have much to say to you. Again, this notion of intra-organizational separation is all caused by a concept completely unnecessary to that organization.

    Unfortunately, a major obstacle in all this is utter obliviousness. From where I’m sitting, the vast majority of those who espouse, ad nauseam, that “Everything happens for a reason” do so from custom rather than castigation. By and large, religion—or, rather, a sophomoric interpretation of religion—has weaned them to believe they are somehow saved, chosen or otherwise privileged. There is an entrenchment to this flawed view of eminence that makes it as intractable as it is unpalatable.

    In this manner, “Everything happens for a reason” is an unreasonable phrase often repeated for no good reason other than a “sure, why not” reluctance to challenge outdated thinking. It’s one of those grandfathered-in phrases that should be retired, along with the uber-sexist “To Wives” chapter in the AA Big Book.

    In late 2011, as a 32-year-old just drying out off a DUI and with a wife halfway out the door, AA’s preordainment problem nearly made me explore other sobriety options. This would have been a mistake, considering how well-suited the literature, the 12 steps and the fellowship turned out to be for my recovery.

    It is in line with this concern—attracting and retaining newcomers—that a concerted effort should be made to retire “Everything happens for a reason” from the rooms of AA. And I for one believe that doing so depends entirely on our efforts, not God’s plan.

    View the original article at thefix.com

  • Death Threat: The Unique Dangers of Grieving in Recovery

    Death Threat: The Unique Dangers of Grieving in Recovery

    Though I’ve developed tools for dealing with heartache and anguish in sobriety, this level of grief is a sadness on steroids against which I feel futile and frightened.

    My father’s older brother, Stephen Dale, died at age 69 in mid-August. He was more than the family’s patriarch; he was its ballast, its mooring. The home he made with my aunt Linda served as safehouse to a chaotic tribe on holidays, birthdays, and just-for-the-hell-of-it pop-ins.

    Uncle Steve and I enjoyed a relationship where calls and text messages about long-debated or joked about topics would rouse the other in real-time. “Hey Uncle Steve, guess what I just saw…” We lived our lives in each other’s pockets — an intimate, instant-access closeness that is simply irreplaceable.

    He died very suddenly. One day he was there; then the next morning, before I could even reach the hospital, he was gone. Massive heart attack. By the early afternoon, I was writing the obituary, a prelude to the eulogy I would deliver days later.

    But this is not an obituary, nor a eulogy. This is about what happens next — when a recovering alcoholic, like me, finds himself mired in grief and unable to anesthetize himself with drugs or alcohol. It’s about the specific attributes of grief that, I’m finding, are particularly dangerous to people in recovery. And it’s an attempt to identify with my peers who may have suffered similarly but, as often happens to me, couldn’t quite congeal their disjointed feelings into a cohesive narrative.

    Grieving has peculiarities and pitfalls for those of us in recovery. Let’s discuss why.

    Pain That Many Know, Reactions That Few Experience

    Everyone in recovery has heard the cliché: “Bad things don’t stop happening just because you got sober.” In my seven years of sobriety, my wife has miscarried and, during her next pregnancy, I had a small stroke a week before our son was born.

    And given the recovery forums in which we now find ourselves — AA meetings, SMART, sober networks, etc. – most of us see death. We witness fellows with a common disease relapse and die. A record 72,000 Americans died of drug overdoses in 2017. I personally knew three of them — people who, sadly, literally couldn’t get clean to save their own lives.

    But Uncle Steve is different. He knew more about my past, my present and my psyche than anyone save my wife. He was incredibly well-read and unyieldingly tolerant, a combination that made him my chief counsel and safest sounding board. He was flesh and blood that, given a world of other options, I would have chosen to be my flesh and blood.

    A lot of us have Uncle Steves, that most special of relatives. Upon losing that person, anyone — normie or alky — suffers a harsh blow. We feel like a piece of our foundation has been uprooted, part of our shared history deleted. There are secrets about us that die with our Uncle Steves. They leave an unfillable hole, forever, and we know it. 

    For those of us in recovery, though, grief of this depth has its own oddities and perils. Strangely, upon learning the terrible news, our initial reaction can be both validating and shame-inducing: When I learned that Uncle Steve had died, my very first thought was “Shit, I can’t drink over this.” And because I knew I couldn’t, I knew I wouldn’t; the work I’d done in sobriety was about to pay off again, big time.

    Though comforting, this survival-minded reassurance brought an unsettling guilt exclusive to recovering addicts: the self-congratulation of passing a tough test to sobriety. It was just the beginning of what has become an ongoing struggle to rectify grief with recovery.

    Disruption, Deserved.

    Many of us in recovery have struggled mightily with both temperament and resentments. As someone for whom anger has been a tremendously burdensome issue, one AA literature passage that has always resonated with me is from the Twelve Steps & Twelve Traditions. In the chapter discussing Step Ten, it cites justifiable anger as an emotion that “ought to be left to those better qualified to handle it.” Alcoholics are inherently tone deaf when it comes to the level of outrage a given situation warrants – usually, we overshoot it considerably.

    In sobriety, then, we work to temper most of our emotions — good and bad — to find a balance most of us never knew. My dramatically downplayed demeanor has been a crucial element to my recovery. In this space a few months ago, I discussed the importance of limiting the amount of people, places and things that can “anger, intimidate, or otherwise derail” us. In my opinion, this is as true a marker of sober progress — and maturity — as exists.

    Grief, however, sticks out from this everyday mantra like a sore thumb. Especially when we lose someone of Uncle Steve-caliber closeness, deep sadness is not only justified but altogether appropriate. In fact, lack of sadness could be considered insulting to the deceased… our dead loved one deserves our emotional disruption. We owe our Uncle Steves that.

    For those of us whose recovery includes maintaining healthy habits and routines, the combination of a broken stride and broken heart is uniquely troubling. The aversion we’ve built up to emotional disturbances can be a disservice to our sobriety in these instances.

    Since my uncle’s passing, I’ve found myself nipping around the edges of a turbulent sea of grief, afraid to do anything more than dip my toe in lest I drown. Though I’ve developed tools for dealing with heartache and anguish in sobriety, this level of grief is a sadness on steroids against which I feel futile and frightened.

    More than anything, I fear that wading into these waters may lead directly to diving into a bottle; as far-fetched as that may seem for those of us with longstanding recovery, this guarded approach to our most valuable asset — our sobriety — is entirely understandable. In grief, however, it can become a hindrance — a defense mechanism stranding us ashore, emotional landlubbers.

    At least a portion of this procrastination, I realize, is rooted in fear of a less drastic reversion. With seven solid years of recovery, I know the chance of a physical relapse from this is slim. For one, it would be the absolute last thing Uncle Steve wanted. Whether they were in recovery themselves (my uncle was not an alcoholic), our Uncle Steves are vital aspects of our sobriety, and drinking or drugging upon their deaths is undoing part of their legacy. For that reason, among others, getting drunk over this is a nonstarter.

    No, what many of us fear upon losing an Uncle Steve isn’t physical relapse, but rather regressing to a state of heightened emotional vulnerability. In addiction and fledgling recovery, we were often hypersensitive and underprepared to meet life on life’s terms. Now, atop solid sober ground, meeting death on death’s terms feels like a rare, even unique scenario capable of causing a catastrophic earthquake.

    Sure, I’ve been shaken in sobriety before — but not this violently. I’m afraid of the aftershocks of so seismic an event. In recovery, we have healthy fears not only of drinking and drugging, but of revisiting the level of emotional rawness that made us stuck in addiction in the first place.

    Gradually, in recovery we’ve pieced our lives back together, and we don’t want these blessings to unravel in one calamitous emotional nosedive. This may ring particularly true with the multitudes of addicts who, like me, also have struggled with depression. Regardless, everyone in recovery can recall a time when emotional fragility made us unable to adequately function. As a husband, father and career communicator, it’s that panicked, fuzzyheaded state that I most fear.

    Like hard truths in early recovery, though, I’m finding that Uncle Steve-level grief has a ready-or-not resonance. When we lose someone that close, there’s simply too many things in our day-to-day lives that remind us of the deceased. Almost daily, I find myself reaching for my phone to share something Uncle Steve would find equally interesting or humorous. The resulting double-edged sword leaves me both missing my uncle and mad at myself for forgetting, albeit momentarily, to miss him.

    And more frequently, during fleeting moments of calm in my crowded-with-blessings sober life, Uncle Steve is there, quietly commanding attention. Ever patient, his spirit seems to loom as large, or as little, as I can handle in that moment. I swallow manageable doses of sadness with limited side effects and reassurance that, like in recovery, more will be revealed.

    That last sentence would have made for an artful sign-off, but life — or death — seldom provides such tidiness. As much as a loss can be a learning experience it is still, on the whole, a loss. And, like some of our worst acts in full-blown addiction, sometimes the knowledge and growth bestowed in recovery aren’t enough to offset the bad with the good. Some transgressions can’t be wiped away with transcendence.

    Uncle Steve has been gone two months and I, a recovering addict whose present peak required a series of bottoms, still subconsciously — and egotistically —expects this is building toward something grander than the inglorious absorption of tragedy. Often, our post-relapse recoveries from addiction have been linear, accruing wisdom and utilizing lessons learned. I keep waiting for Uncle Steve’s death to ascribe to a similar, simpler healing process – an expectation that has proven persistently misguided.

    No such revelations exist. In the end, those of us who struggle with addiction, despite being affected by grief in ways that differ from others, must deal with it in the same fashion: imperfectly, inconsistently, and with ultra-personalized feelings toward the dearly departed that were endearing in life but alienating in death. Unlike recovery, there’s no program for losing our Uncle Steves.

    View the original article at thefix.com

  • Re-Balancing Act: How to Restore Marital Equilibrium in Recovery

    Re-Balancing Act: How to Restore Marital Equilibrium in Recovery

    Was I really at an AA meeting as I claimed, or was this the night that I—and all hope for our marriage—would vanish anew?

    For my wife Patricia and me, it’s been a long road to even. Ish.

    My wife said “I do” in April 2007 to a man who, despite depression and anxiety issues, did not suffer from addiction. The honeymoon period didn’t last long: By 2009, I was a full-blown alcoholic. A year later I became unemployed and, as substances other than alcohol steepened my spiral, unemployable.

    After a semi-successful rehab stint in early 2011, I began stringing together sober weeks instead of days, disappearing once a fortnight while my wife waited hopelessly. Finally, with one of Patty’s feet firmly out the door, I started my current and only stretch of significant sobriety in October 2011.

    We’d been wed just 4½ years, and the rollercoaster marriage dynamic was about to take its third sharp turn. Patty had gone from a warm wife to a cold caretaker – from a blushing bride to blushing with anger and embarrassment as her husband descended into addiction and all its indignities. She was fed up and worn down.

    And now she would be asked to transition yet again, to cede the necessary high ground she’d claimed so that someday, hopefully, we could once again stand on even footing.

    Our journey together has been imperfect, but has taught us both about how addiction warps the dynamics of a marriage – and how that damage can be repaired in recovery. For couples committed to staying together in addiction’s aftermath, let’s explore likely marital dynamics at three stages of single-spouse alcoholism: active addiction, fledgling sobriety and long-term recovery.

    Active Addiction

    Ironically, perhaps the least complicated dynamic any marriage can have is when one partner is mired in active addiction. One spouse has lost all credibility and the capability to make mutually beneficial contributions, while the other has, onerously, had the scales of responsibility tilt completely into her lap – or, more accurately, fall on her head. The addict has been stripped of all rightful respect and authority; he is a nuptial nonentity, because adulthood is a prerequisite for marital influence.

    Simply put, my wife signed up for a husband and got a child instead.

    The logistical stress my wife shouldered—scraping by on one income, coming home to a drunk husband in a smoke-filled apartment, the transparent excuses and laughable lies—should be familiar to most spouses of alcoholics.

    Throughout this stage, the marital power dynamic is non-negotiated and unsustainable. It is also deeply scarring, for both parties. My guilt and shame, her resentment and disappointment. My elaborate schemes and emphatic denials, her eroding ability to give me the benefit of the doubt. For us both, a creeping sense of confusion, hopelessness and doom.

    All of this creates a silo effect. The deeper my bottom fell, the higher the wall between us rose. For the marriage to once again become… well, a marriage—a union of two equal halves—the walls would need to crumble. But they had to crack first.

    And then, after one last humiliation comprised of a drunken hit-and-run and handcuffs, I was finally done.

    A marriage stumbling on a high wire now had a chance to regain some balance. But for couples, one spouse’s early recovery can shake like an earthquake, causing seismic shifts to a power dynamic that, though broken, proves nonetheless stubborn.

    Fledgling Sobriety

    However simple (albeit awful) the marital dynamic during active alcoholism, the relationship during nascent sobriety becomes, conversely, exceedingly complex. This timeframe is crucial to the marriage’s long-term survival, as both parties simultaneously try to heal fresh wounds, regain some semblance of normalcy and find a workable path forward together.

    For Patty and me, my fledgling sobriety was, at the same time, emergency and opportunity. This might not have been my last chance at recovery, but it was likely our marriage’s last chance at enduring.

    In those vital first months, the power dynamic shifted dramatically, despite my wife’s understandable reluctance to budge an inch lest I take several yards. After being on the receiving end of years of lying about our actions and whereabouts, our spouses struggle to believe we’ll come home at all, let alone come home sober. Was I really at an AA meeting as I claimed, or was this the night that I—and all hope for our marriage—would vanish anew? The PTSD of a waiting wife, burned too many times to trust, is an excruciatingly slow-mending injury.

    That injury is soon joined by insult. Because my wife watched as perfect strangers did something her most fervent efforts could not: get and keep her husband sober.

    She felt suspicious, and scornful… and guilty for feeling either. Her downsized role in my recovery seemed unfair given the years wasted playing lead actor in a conjugal tragedy.

    For alcoholics, swallowing pride is a life-and-death prospect pounded into our heads by program literature, AA meetings and sponsors. For their spouses, though, this ego deflation is just as necessary to the survival of their marriage, and generally comes without guidance or reassurances. Considering this, my wife’s humility-driven leap of faith was far more impressive than my own.

    And throughout this, she was forced to cede more and more marital power to a man who, mere months ago, deserved all the trust afforded an asylum patient. I was gaining friends, gaining confidence and, sometimes, even gaining the moral high ground.

    When your spouse has been so wrong for so long, the first time he’s right is jarring. Somewhere in my wife’s psyche was the understandable yet unhealthy notion that the one-sided wreckage of our past absolved her of all future wrongdoing. Fights ensued as I argued for the respect I was earning while she clung to a righteousness never requested but reluctantly relinquished. Unilateral disarmament—intramarital or otherwise—is counterintuitive and, given my history, potentially unwise.

    The harsh truth was that the marriage had to become big enough for two adults again, and the only way that could happen was for one partner to make room. This is patently unfair and, I believe, a key reason many marriages end in early recovery. That my wife and I navigated this turbulent period is among the most gratifying achievements in each of our lives.

    Long-term Recovery

    Our road became considerably less rocky when my wife, for the first time, became more certain than not that her husband’s sober foundation was solid enough to support a future. For us, that unspoken sigh of relief came about 18 months into my recovery, though this timeframe can vary widely.

    For couples, an invaluable asset ushered in by long-term recovery is the ability to openly address not only each individual’s feelings, but the likely influencers behind those feelings – especially those concerning the disparate, often difficult-to-pinpoint damage one spouse’s alcoholism inflicted upon both partners’ psyches. My wife and I each have our own semi-healed, often subconscious wounds that, still frequently, reopen in the form of a visceral repulsion, reflexive resentment or other knee-jerk reaction.

    At times, then, there remains residual weirdness between us. But the reassurance of my reliable recovery provides safe harbor to explore these issues as our marriage’s power dynamic draws ever closer to even.

    Many of these mini-problems are a blend of individual personalities and lingering, addiction-related trauma. My wife and I both have foibles that, we agree, are part intrinsic and part PTSD; fully parsing the two is impossible, even when examining ourselves rather than each other.

    An example: My wife is markedly introverted, and I certainly know her better than anyone. But even for her closest comrade—me—praise and positive acknowledgement come sporadically at best. At least some of this, she admits, is not simply her quiet nature but rather a prolonged hangover from years of my alcoholic drinking. Perhaps seven years is too little time for proactive cheerleading; check back with us in another seven.

    There are also times when my 12-step recovery delivers on its promise of making me, as the saying goes, “weller than well.” For my wife, who’s been consistently well enough her whole life—insomuch as she’s never sideswiped a taxi blind drunk and then tried to outrun a cop car—sometimes this growth is mildly threatening, especially in terms of our still-tightening power dynamic. Her character defects were never so dangerous that they required emergency repair. Still, as my demeanor has become less volatile, there has been a softening of her own character. Whether this is her absorbing some of my progress or simply letting her guard down another notch is anyone’s guess – including hers.

    No matter the progress, we will both always be damaged, however minimally, by my addiction – a permanent weight that makes truly equal marital balance unlikely, if not impossible. We will always be better at forgiving than forgetting, and the inability to accomplish the latter carries a weight that tips scales, slightly but surely.

    We have, we believe, as much balance as possible considering where we were and where we are now. For couples with a spouse in long-term recovery, appreciation for that tremendous leap forward in fortune can more than make up for the inherent inequality addiction inflicts on a marriage – a gap that shrinks substantially but never completely closes.

    View the original article at thefix.com

  • How Sponsoring Fellow Alcoholics Is Teaching Me How To Parent My Son

    How Sponsoring Fellow Alcoholics Is Teaching Me How To Parent My Son

    How do I, an alcoholic with a dysfunctional childhood who didn’t even begin maturing until his early 30s, go about the daunting duty of raising a son to manhood?

    Recovery through Alcoholics Anonymous has helped me build an incredible life. A restored marriage, a promising career, and a comfortable suburban home highlight the tangibles; the wisdom of the program and mentorship of its members have provided the intangibles – accountability, purpose, sanity.

    Two years ago marked the most notable blessing to date: The birth of my first and only child, Nicholas.

    This gift, however, also presents my most vexing sober challenge yet: How do I, an alcoholic with a dysfunctional childhood who didn’t even begin maturing until his early 30s, go about the daunting duty of raising a son to manhood? How do I break, as much as any parent can, the cycle of insanity Nicholas has inherited?

    As Nicholas approaches toddlerdom – where he’ll start truly developing lifelong memories – solidifying certain notions of parenthood has become increasingly urgent. “What type of dad do I want to be?” is quickly becoming “What type of dad am I?” It’s becoming clear that these child-rearing concepts aren’t going to magically manifest; I need to search for them.

    And where I keep finding answers is the only relationship in which I’m actually qualified to give guidance: my role as an AA sponsor. Here are just a few of the many parenting perspectives my experiences as a sponsor have helped formulate.

    Coddling Is Counterproductive

    The most meaningful child-rearing principle that sponsorship has instilled in me carries even more significance considering our helicopter-parenting, participation trophy-wielding times: Coddling trades short-term ease for long-term hardship.

    Many addicts, myself included, are recovering from people pleasing as well as alcohol and drugs. Our diseases demanded instant gratification and, by necessity, we were talented at telling people what they wanted to hear in order to skate by or score more.

    When we become sponsors, we must play a longer game. We learn that giving a sponsee an undeserved pat on the back when what he needs is a kick in the ass is not only counterproductive, but downright irresponsible. Enabling a sponsee’s laziness or self-denial can mean being party to his relapse.

    Sponsorship has taught me that I can’t shield someone from tough choices, uphill climbs and heavy lifting. As much as I root for a sponsee, I can’t want his recovery more than he does; as my son grows, I’ll fight similar urges to carry an oversized share of burdens he himself must bear.

    The overall message is clear: work hard for worthwhile goals. In a sponsee’s case, that goal is long-term sobriety and perpetual personal progress; in my son’s, the goal is responsible, upstanding citizenship and self-sufficient adulthood.

    Here, AA is endearingly traditional in its nose-to-the-grindstone approach to progress.

    There is a grit factor in the rooms that, these days, is sorely lacking outside of them. To both sponsees and children, “get to work” is the kind of simple but meaningful instruction that is easily understood and, when followed, results in both tangible and character-building rewards.

    I’m finding that the less I coddle my sponsees the more favorable the result. I am increasingly confident that the same will hold true for my son. Soft sponsorship yields soft recovery. Ditto for soft parenting.

    Keep Calm and Carry On

    Roll your eyes all you want, but when this starting appearing on mugs and memes everywhere, I hoped (beyond hope, it turned out) that more people would adopt a mantra that AA so effectively espouses.

    Few markers are more telling of one’s maturity than the breadth and depth of people, places and things that anger, cower or otherwise derail him. As someone who, according to men with many more years sober than me, had “smoke coming from his ears” as a newcomer, I’ve learned this lesson particularly harshly. It’s taken years of trial and error – of getting a little less angry to similar situations, then reflecting on how useless and toxic that rage was – to form a demeanor even remotely resembling even-keeled.

    Watching my sponsees struggle with this journey – with getting totally jammed up over matters of dubious-at-best significance – is Exhibit A of sponsor-sponsee symbiosis. As I talk my sponsees down off the inevitable next ledge, I remind myself to practice what I preach.

    I am committed to developing this big-picture, c’est la vie attitude in my son. And while anyone with a two-year-old understands how successful I’ve been thus far (not much, if at all), I can look to my own imperfect, ongoing transformation as proof that progress takes trial, error and – most of all – time.

    For now, this concept lives in little things. “I can see that you’re very sad about having to stop watching TV, but you’ll see Peppa Pig tomorrow,” I’ll tell a crying Nicholas, as the credits of his favorite show roll while I usher him off to bed. Or “It’s PJ time,” I tell a sobbing, splashing boy engrossed in his bathtime toys. “We’ll get all dry and get some milk, how’s that?”

    These gentle nudges, I hope, will push Nicholas toward a more bird’s-eye worldview where he realizes that the little things in life aren’t worth getting upset over. As he grows I’ll instill in him, gradually and imperfectly, that a precious few things warrant more than a brief moment’s annoyance. Here, my role as a sponsee gives me the best chance to break yet another inglorious familial cycle: rage-aholism.

    Think for Yourself

    Though AA most assuredly isn’t a cult (cue the usual troll bile in my comment thread), at times it is certainly prone to an unsophisticated, unhelpful herd mentality. There are sayings and beliefs in the rooms that I find silly, arrogant, or wildly inaccurate.

    I am upfront about this with my sponsees; they are free to disagree with me on any of my program-related peccadilloes. The overarching lesson is each of us needs to find a recovery that is workable within the construct of our authentic self. “Faking it to make it” will only take us so far; eventually, recovery through the 12 steps is a journey in self-discovery, one which, per popular program prose, demands rigorous honesty.

    First and foremost is the childish belief, held by far too many in AA, that God has saved them specifically. Simply put, this implies that God chose to let others die. I often wonder whether the person proclaiming such nonsense realizes that his belief system is based on declaring himself more special than fellow sufferers. Neither my sponsees nor my son will be weaned on such pompousness.

    Oddly, another whopper that permeates AA is the polar opposite of this holier-than-thouism. It is uttered every time a newcomer is told that his experiences, strength and hope matter as much as someone with longstanding sobriety – that each of us “only has today.”

    This well-intending white lie creates an unproductive false equivalence between those who’ve thoroughly followed recovery’s path and those just beginning to trudge the trail. Because AA – like parenthood, I’m educated-guessing – is about mentorship more than anything else. My responsibility to pay it forward isn’t as relevant if everyone has the same amount of currency.

    This all boils down to three words that I find myself repeating to sponsees and, because of this, will find myself repeating to Nicholas: “You’re still learning.”

    Sit back. Relax. Learn. Don’t overextend yourself. No, sponsee, you shouldn’t go to a bachelor party in Las Vegas at four months sober. I have enough sobriety to handle that, you don’t. Yet. And no, 17-year-old Nicholas, you aren’t driving across the country with your friends because you aren’t ready to do that. Yet.

    These are just a few examples of how the privilege of guiding recovering alcoholics through the 12 steps will help me guide my son through childhood. As my sober experiences grow in tandem with my son, there will undoubtedly be many more points where sponsorship intersects with parenting – much to Nicholas’ benefit.

    And of course, there’s this: if Nicholas comes home with his eyes pinned, I’ll know what’s up. My rocky past and recovering present will allow me to recognize the warning signs of the scourge of my son’s generation: opioids. Should that day come, my recovery may help save my son’s life, as it did my own.

    View the original article at thefix.com