40 years old and i've drank since I was 19. For the past 5 years it has progressed to the point where I drink everynight (drunk). I know I gotta quit and wish I could. Problem is that I look forward to drinking, I get pleasure from it (a release), but I do want to quit. I've tried AA, SOS etc, read all the books and so on.
I need to quit, and wish I didn't have this addiction (although I do like the effect of drinking).
I don't know how to quit and stay quit.
Please tell me your stories or give me some help/advice. My future is counting on it.
Thanks.........
Maybe you went to a few AA meetings, but you didn't "try" AA. As it says at the beginning of How it Works , "rarely have we seen a person fail who has thoroughly followed our path." That's your answer. How badly you want it is up to you.
Hi Rizzo!
I don't know how much help I can be to you, but I can give you some background about myself and how I'm battling my drinking.
I'm 46 and always drank but the heavy drinking really started in my early 30s. My wife is also an alcoholic. Right now I've been about a month sober. Over the last two years, although I've relapsed a couple of times, I've been more sober than not. Definately room for improvement but overall I'll take it as a victory all things considered.
My addiction doctor put me on antabuse. You probably know what that is but in case not, it's a medication you take on a daily basis and if you drink alcohol while on it, you will quickly become very sick. There are a lot of mixed feelings out there about the appropriateness of antabuse (my own GP will not perscribe it). But for me it works, unless I stop taking it.
When I was drinking, every morning I would wake up with a hangover and vow that that was the last time. Then the late afternoon would come around and I'd end up getting some more liqour using excuses like: bad day, good day, there's a big game on tv tonight etc. When I take antabuse, I know I simply can't drink so it's a decision I don't have to make. The prospect of becoming sick really gets my attention and I have never "tested" it.
My wife is currently drinking and I know with her drinking and having liqour in the house, I would be drinking too had it not been for the antabuse. The key is that I must take it for breakfast. I guess the times I stopped, I got over-confident so to speak and other times I probably wanted to leave a door open for relapse. So I'm trying make sure I take it first thing, after that I'm ok.
The ideal situation would be to find out what's going on in my head or what's wrong with it that causes me to drink. But I'm a very reserved and guarded person so I don't think I could be honest enough about what really goes on up there to give a therapist or support group enough to go on to in turn help me.
My wife also has some sort of yet undiagnosed mental contidion which adds another level of complexity to my situation. I won't go into too much detail but she "flys off the handle" unexpectedly usually targeting family members for no "real" reason and can be very brutal with people while in this state which lasts usually 3-4 days. When it happens, it's entirely directed at members of my family because her family will no longer speak to her because of this behavior. This puts a lot of stress on me when it happens and I often drank to get my head away from it. Last week she had a particularily bad one. But I couldn't drink because of the antabuse. I have a small stash of valium perscribed by my doctor which helped me a lot the first night of the "fireworks". I take it sparingly and use it only when I feel I really need it like last week. Again not ideal perhaps, but it sure beats the bottle.
I'm not saying that antabuse is the "cure-all" nor that it is right for yourself. But is has given me the "willpower" that I don't always have.
If you've tried other approaches to treatment with no success, maybe it's worth a shot. You'll need to talk to a doctor and if perscribed, he/she will no doubt read you the "riot act" about what will happen if you drink while on it.
Also, you may need some help in getting through the first few nights when you stop so you really need to see a doctor to get the ball rolling no matter which treatment you choose.
Sorry if this is long-winded but you asked :) !! Anyways that's my situation and how I'm currently dealing with it. I know it's not ideal but I'm a hell of a lot more sober than I used to be and working on improving.
I wish you all the luck in the world.
I don't know how much help I can be to you, but I can give you some background about myself and how I'm battling my drinking.
I'm 46 and always drank but the heavy drinking really started in my early 30s. My wife is also an alcoholic. Right now I've been about a month sober. Over the last two years, although I've relapsed a couple of times, I've been more sober than not. Definately room for improvement but overall I'll take it as a victory all things considered.
My addiction doctor put me on antabuse. You probably know what that is but in case not, it's a medication you take on a daily basis and if you drink alcohol while on it, you will quickly become very sick. There are a lot of mixed feelings out there about the appropriateness of antabuse (my own GP will not perscribe it). But for me it works, unless I stop taking it.
When I was drinking, every morning I would wake up with a hangover and vow that that was the last time. Then the late afternoon would come around and I'd end up getting some more liqour using excuses like: bad day, good day, there's a big game on tv tonight etc. When I take antabuse, I know I simply can't drink so it's a decision I don't have to make. The prospect of becoming sick really gets my attention and I have never "tested" it.
My wife is currently drinking and I know with her drinking and having liqour in the house, I would be drinking too had it not been for the antabuse. The key is that I must take it for breakfast. I guess the times I stopped, I got over-confident so to speak and other times I probably wanted to leave a door open for relapse. So I'm trying make sure I take it first thing, after that I'm ok.
The ideal situation would be to find out what's going on in my head or what's wrong with it that causes me to drink. But I'm a very reserved and guarded person so I don't think I could be honest enough about what really goes on up there to give a therapist or support group enough to go on to in turn help me.
My wife also has some sort of yet undiagnosed mental contidion which adds another level of complexity to my situation. I won't go into too much detail but she "flys off the handle" unexpectedly usually targeting family members for no "real" reason and can be very brutal with people while in this state which lasts usually 3-4 days. When it happens, it's entirely directed at members of my family because her family will no longer speak to her because of this behavior. This puts a lot of stress on me when it happens and I often drank to get my head away from it. Last week she had a particularily bad one. But I couldn't drink because of the antabuse. I have a small stash of valium perscribed by my doctor which helped me a lot the first night of the "fireworks". I take it sparingly and use it only when I feel I really need it like last week. Again not ideal perhaps, but it sure beats the bottle.
I'm not saying that antabuse is the "cure-all" nor that it is right for yourself. But is has given me the "willpower" that I don't always have.
If you've tried other approaches to treatment with no success, maybe it's worth a shot. You'll need to talk to a doctor and if perscribed, he/she will no doubt read you the "riot act" about what will happen if you drink while on it.
Also, you may need some help in getting through the first few nights when you stop so you really need to see a doctor to get the ball rolling no matter which treatment you choose.
Sorry if this is long-winded but you asked :) !! Anyways that's my situation and how I'm currently dealing with it. I know it's not ideal but I'm a hell of a lot more sober than I used to be and working on improving.
I wish you all the luck in the world.
Antabuse can help, but it's not a long term solution. Zep, you state that you'd like to find out what's going on inside your head and why you drink. That's exactly what the 12 steps are for. But it aslo requires us to get honest, especially with ourselves. It sounds like you're on the way to getting honest with yourself so the next step is getting honest with others. You may find that once you start opening up it gets easier. Good luck and congrats on the 1 month.
Chris
Chris
With respect, AA is not the only way. Despite the AA rhetoric it has a low success rate.
The majority of sober alcoholics do it on their own because they are fed up of being sick and tired and dealing with the consequences of their addiction.
If you want to get off the booze go and see a drug and alcohol service, try Antabuse and get some counselling or CBT and learn new ways to deal with old reasons to drink.
If AA works for you that is fantastic too.
The majority of sober alcoholics do it on their own because they are fed up of being sick and tired and dealing with the consequences of their addiction.
If you want to get off the booze go and see a drug and alcohol service, try Antabuse and get some counselling or CBT and learn new ways to deal with old reasons to drink.
If AA works for you that is fantastic too.
Links on AA success:
Effectiveness of 12 steps
How Effective is AA
AA And Its Success RatesA Contemporary Brief
Effectiveness of 12 steps
How Effective is AA
AA And Its Success RatesA Contemporary Brief
That nonsense by A. Orange is the biggest bunch of crap I've ever seen. If you want to believe that nonsense, feel free. The true facts are that AA has proved over many years to be by far the most effective treatment for alcoholism.
I would actually be interested in that proof. I think if 12 steps work for you that is fantastic but in all honesty I have never seen any evidence that they work. The well-worn "Rarely have we seen a person fail who has thoroughly followed our program" is not evidence. Its a platitude.
I want to be clear that I am not knocking 12 step programs. I just am curious to know what evidence there is that it works.
I want to be clear that I am not knocking 12 step programs. I just am curious to know what evidence there is that it works.
It may be well worn, but it's still just as true. If you want evidence I suggest you go to some meetings. It's been shown over decades that if you make meetings a regular part of your life, get a sponsor and work the steps you'll stay sober. AA is very clear that there is no cure to this disease. So if you "follow the path" for a year, two years, five years and then stop doing these things you stand a good chance of drinking again. We hear it in the rooms over and over again. Those of us who've been there know alcoholism/addiction is a powerful disease and so by it's very nature chances of lifetime sobriety are low. But to give ourselves the best possible chance, "thoroughly following the path" is still the way to go.
Chris
Chris
where do those ridiculous statistics come from that 'AA' does not work...indeed of the last couple of years ive been to 5 meetings a week for the first year then 3 a week thereafter add to that regular trips to my GP(doctor) and never at anytime at any of those meetings has any sort of survey on success been carried out...
Statistics show that 98% of statistics are plucked out of thin air.... ;)
Statistics show that 98% of statistics are plucked out of thin air.... ;)
In order to keep this a safe place for those who seek help and fellowship, please respect the rights of others by following these guidelines:
Be mindful of the words you use, avoiding obscene or offensive language.
You can disagree with AA without being offensive.
Thank you,
The moderators
Be mindful of the words you use, avoiding obscene or offensive language.
You can disagree with AA without being offensive.
Thank you,
The moderators
I have been to meetings and seen mostly people in a continuous cycle of recpvery and relapse, along with some wonderful examples of longterm sobriety. You cant just claim the successes, you have to ackowledge the failures too. When you are going well, AA claims your success, but when you relapse it is claimed that you weren't working the program properly.
Simply saying "it has been shown over years" or "it is well known that AA is successful" is just anectodal. I would love to see that stastics on success rates but of course we will never see them since it is an anonymous organisation.
I know just as many people that have found recovery without AA as those that have done it via 12 steps.
Chris you say that you see the effects of not going to AA meetings in the rooms all of the time, but you are not hearing from the people that dont go to meetings and are doing wonderfully well. You're only hearing from the converted. Its liking going to Church and asking how many people believe there is a God.
Im not saying it doesnt work. Im just saying that claims that it has a high success rate are just not supported by any evidence.
Simply saying "it has been shown over years" or "it is well known that AA is successful" is just anectodal. I would love to see that stastics on success rates but of course we will never see them since it is an anonymous organisation.
I know just as many people that have found recovery without AA as those that have done it via 12 steps.
Chris you say that you see the effects of not going to AA meetings in the rooms all of the time, but you are not hearing from the people that dont go to meetings and are doing wonderfully well. You're only hearing from the converted. Its liking going to Church and asking how many people believe there is a God.
Im not saying it doesnt work. Im just saying that claims that it has a high success rate are just not supported by any evidence.
AA's Criticism
Specific criticisms sometimes put forth by AA's critics (some of whom go so far as to call AA a cult) include:
There have been at least three randomized clinical trials that studied the effectiveness of AA. Specifically: Ditman et al. 1967; Brandsma et al. 1980; Walsh et al. 1991.
Dr. Ditman found that participation in A.A. increased the alcoholics' rate of rearrest for public drunkeness.[1]
Dr. Brandsma found that A.A. increased the rate of binge drinking. After several months of indoctrination with A.A. 12-Step dogma, the alcoholics in A.A. were doing five times as much binge drinking as a control group that got no treatment at all, and nine times as much binge drinking as another group that got Rational Behavior Therapy. Brandsma alleges that teaching people that they are alcoholics who are powerless over alcohol yields very bad results and that it becomes a self-fulfilling prediction -- they relapse and binge drink as if they really were powerless over alcohol.[2]
And Dr. Walsh found that the so-called "free" A.A. program was actually very expensive -- it messed up patients so that they required longer periods of costly hospitalization later on.[3]
While AA acknowledged in the foreword to the second edition of the Big Book that "we surely have no monopoly", one of the stories following the main text of the book still claims that AA is "the only remedy" to alcohol abuse (BB, pg. 259. Emphasis added.), despite some current research which shows that high percentages of alcohol abusers recover without medical treatment (Treatment of Drug Abuse and Addiction -- Part III, The Harvard Mental Health Letter, Volume 12, Number 4, October 1995, page 3.). Another study suggests that AA may be "no better than the natural history of the disease" in keeping people alive and sober (The Natural History of Alcoholism: Causes, Patterns, and Paths to Recovery, George E. Vaillant, pgs. 283-286.)
The claim that people who refuse to work the program thoroughly, or do but are not helped by it, are "constitutionally incapable of being honest with themselves" (BB, pg. 58.), implies that, by definition, the AA program itself is incapable of failure, provided that the alcoholic is properly motivated. This seems to deny the existence of honest, motivated individuals for whom the program doesn't work. ("consitutionally incapable of being honest with themselves" has nothing to do with motivation and everything to do with being thorough through the steps and when the truth gets to be too much, backing down and not trudging through the rough spots.)
A lack of official checks and balances designed to keep sponsors from abusing their position (though sponsors can be fired at any time)
Claims that alcoholics are "doomed to an alcoholic death" unless they decide to "live on a spiritual basis" (each AA member being allowed to decide for himself what "spiritual basis" means) (BB, pg 44) and "Unless each A.A. member follows to the best of his ability our suggested Twelve Steps to recovery, he almost certainly signs his own death warrant." (12x12, pg. 174).
In the discussion of self-centeredness, statements such as "Sometimes they [other people] hurt us, seemingly without provocation, but we invariably find that at some point in the past we have made decisions based on self which later placed us in a position to be hurt." (BB, pg. 62. Emphasis added.) may be generalized so as to leave no room for instances where the victim was blameless, such as childhood sexual abuse or another form of mistreatment of either children or innocent adults unable to protect themselves. Many AA members interpret this to mean that blameless victims are at fault for continuing to be hurt by a past event, and not at fault for the past event itself. This interpretation is incompatible with the text, since it clearly refers to the actual acts of others, not the victims' attitudes towards those acts, and suggests the problems of victims are that they have made "decisions based on self", that, later place them in a position to be hurt, not that they have chosen to remain affected by earlier hurts. An unofficial slogan sometimes heard in AA is "There are no victims, only volunteers." This clearly indicates the belief that nobody is ever victimised in any way that they could not have avoided. (Some AA members believe that these types of statements are only intended to warn against a habitual victim mentality. Some AA members understand that people can experience either innocent bad luck or be seriously victimized through no fault of their own.) In any case, the interpretation suggests that whether one continues to be hurt by previous abuse is something one can have full choice over, whereas physical and mental trauma resulting from victimisation might be chronic and something the victim is truly powerless over.
The claim that "If we were to live, we had to be free of anger." (BB, pg. 66) when psychologists say that while anger must be managed, it is not possible or healthy to do away with it entirely. (Some AA members interpret "free of anger" to mean that one should not be enslaved by their anger, be a "rageaholic," or engage in habitual toxic anger, not to mean that they should have no anger at all.)
The "To Wives" chapter of the Big Book being written as advice from one wife of an alcoholic to another, when it was in fact written by Bill W. himself despite his wife Lois' desire to write it (Getting Better: Inside Alcoholics Anonymous, Nan Robertson, page 70-71)(This assertion is contradicted by "Pass it on", the book about Bill Wilson. The book says another AA wife wrote the chapter.)
Bill W.'s frequent use of first-person plural giving the implication that all alcohol abusers have similar defects of character (6th Step) and past experiences (examples: "...something had to be done about our vengeful resentments, self-pity, and unwarranted pride." 12x12, pg. 47. and "We never thought of making honesty, tolerance, and true love of man and god the daily basis of living." 12x12, pg. 72. Emphasis added.)
The contradiction between Bill W.'s claim that "We will seldom be interested in liquor. "If tempted, we recoil from it as from a hot flame" We will see that our new attitude toward liquor has been given to us without any thought or effort on our part. It just comes! That is the miracle of it." (BB, pgs. 84-85) and his own admission that even co-founder Dr. Bob "was bothered very badly by the temptation to drink. "Unlike most of our crowd, I did not get over my craving for liquor much during the first two and one half years of abstinence." ["Dr. Bob's Nightmare"] (BB page 181)
AA's heavy reliance on numerous slogans [7] [8], including ones used to defer criticisms brought up during meetings, such as "Take the cotton out of your ears and put it in your mouth!"
Specific criticisms sometimes put forth by AA's critics (some of whom go so far as to call AA a cult) include:
There have been at least three randomized clinical trials that studied the effectiveness of AA. Specifically: Ditman et al. 1967; Brandsma et al. 1980; Walsh et al. 1991.
Dr. Ditman found that participation in A.A. increased the alcoholics' rate of rearrest for public drunkeness.[1]
Dr. Brandsma found that A.A. increased the rate of binge drinking. After several months of indoctrination with A.A. 12-Step dogma, the alcoholics in A.A. were doing five times as much binge drinking as a control group that got no treatment at all, and nine times as much binge drinking as another group that got Rational Behavior Therapy. Brandsma alleges that teaching people that they are alcoholics who are powerless over alcohol yields very bad results and that it becomes a self-fulfilling prediction -- they relapse and binge drink as if they really were powerless over alcohol.[2]
And Dr. Walsh found that the so-called "free" A.A. program was actually very expensive -- it messed up patients so that they required longer periods of costly hospitalization later on.[3]
While AA acknowledged in the foreword to the second edition of the Big Book that "we surely have no monopoly", one of the stories following the main text of the book still claims that AA is "the only remedy" to alcohol abuse (BB, pg. 259. Emphasis added.), despite some current research which shows that high percentages of alcohol abusers recover without medical treatment (Treatment of Drug Abuse and Addiction -- Part III, The Harvard Mental Health Letter, Volume 12, Number 4, October 1995, page 3.). Another study suggests that AA may be "no better than the natural history of the disease" in keeping people alive and sober (The Natural History of Alcoholism: Causes, Patterns, and Paths to Recovery, George E. Vaillant, pgs. 283-286.)
The claim that people who refuse to work the program thoroughly, or do but are not helped by it, are "constitutionally incapable of being honest with themselves" (BB, pg. 58.), implies that, by definition, the AA program itself is incapable of failure, provided that the alcoholic is properly motivated. This seems to deny the existence of honest, motivated individuals for whom the program doesn't work. ("consitutionally incapable of being honest with themselves" has nothing to do with motivation and everything to do with being thorough through the steps and when the truth gets to be too much, backing down and not trudging through the rough spots.)
A lack of official checks and balances designed to keep sponsors from abusing their position (though sponsors can be fired at any time)
Claims that alcoholics are "doomed to an alcoholic death" unless they decide to "live on a spiritual basis" (each AA member being allowed to decide for himself what "spiritual basis" means) (BB, pg 44) and "Unless each A.A. member follows to the best of his ability our suggested Twelve Steps to recovery, he almost certainly signs his own death warrant." (12x12, pg. 174).
In the discussion of self-centeredness, statements such as "Sometimes they [other people] hurt us, seemingly without provocation, but we invariably find that at some point in the past we have made decisions based on self which later placed us in a position to be hurt." (BB, pg. 62. Emphasis added.) may be generalized so as to leave no room for instances where the victim was blameless, such as childhood sexual abuse or another form of mistreatment of either children or innocent adults unable to protect themselves. Many AA members interpret this to mean that blameless victims are at fault for continuing to be hurt by a past event, and not at fault for the past event itself. This interpretation is incompatible with the text, since it clearly refers to the actual acts of others, not the victims' attitudes towards those acts, and suggests the problems of victims are that they have made "decisions based on self", that, later place them in a position to be hurt, not that they have chosen to remain affected by earlier hurts. An unofficial slogan sometimes heard in AA is "There are no victims, only volunteers." This clearly indicates the belief that nobody is ever victimised in any way that they could not have avoided. (Some AA members believe that these types of statements are only intended to warn against a habitual victim mentality. Some AA members understand that people can experience either innocent bad luck or be seriously victimized through no fault of their own.) In any case, the interpretation suggests that whether one continues to be hurt by previous abuse is something one can have full choice over, whereas physical and mental trauma resulting from victimisation might be chronic and something the victim is truly powerless over.
The claim that "If we were to live, we had to be free of anger." (BB, pg. 66) when psychologists say that while anger must be managed, it is not possible or healthy to do away with it entirely. (Some AA members interpret "free of anger" to mean that one should not be enslaved by their anger, be a "rageaholic," or engage in habitual toxic anger, not to mean that they should have no anger at all.)
The "To Wives" chapter of the Big Book being written as advice from one wife of an alcoholic to another, when it was in fact written by Bill W. himself despite his wife Lois' desire to write it (Getting Better: Inside Alcoholics Anonymous, Nan Robertson, page 70-71)(This assertion is contradicted by "Pass it on", the book about Bill Wilson. The book says another AA wife wrote the chapter.)
Bill W.'s frequent use of first-person plural giving the implication that all alcohol abusers have similar defects of character (6th Step) and past experiences (examples: "...something had to be done about our vengeful resentments, self-pity, and unwarranted pride." 12x12, pg. 47. and "We never thought of making honesty, tolerance, and true love of man and god the daily basis of living." 12x12, pg. 72. Emphasis added.)
The contradiction between Bill W.'s claim that "We will seldom be interested in liquor. "If tempted, we recoil from it as from a hot flame" We will see that our new attitude toward liquor has been given to us without any thought or effort on our part. It just comes! That is the miracle of it." (BB, pgs. 84-85) and his own admission that even co-founder Dr. Bob "was bothered very badly by the temptation to drink. "Unlike most of our crowd, I did not get over my craving for liquor much during the first two and one half years of abstinence." ["Dr. Bob's Nightmare"] (BB page 181)
AA's heavy reliance on numerous slogans [7] [8], including ones used to defer criticisms brought up during meetings, such as "Take the cotton out of your ears and put it in your mouth!"
It always amuses me to see how much effort some people put in to criticizing something that has helped so many people.
Chris
Chris
It has also hurt a lot of people. People who are "FORCED" by the courts to attend meetings that can actually due damage to them and leaves them no other choice to seek treatment.
AA has hurt a lot of people? Excuse me? And if somebody doesn't want to be "forced" by the courts to do something, I strongly suggest they don't participate in any criminal behavior. If somebody were damaged because they were forced by the court to attend AA, I can only imagine what would happen to them if they were "forced" to go to jail.
Hey Guest--LMFAO
Rizzo Hurt people ??Can you explain what you mean please.
See what I mean.
There success rate is terrible, they even quote it as such as did Bill W. in his day. Having to admit that you are powerless leaves indivduals with a sense of worthlessness and hopelessness. And that higher power ia a real crock, we all have the power in us if we just find the right direction. And, we don't drink because we have character defaults, we drink because we have a chemical imbalance and allergy to ethanol. Get your facts straight and quit misleading people with that AA garbage.
This message was edited by the moderators. Second warning.
There success rate is terrible, they even quote it as such as did Bill W. in his day. Having to admit that you are powerless leaves indivduals with a sense of worthlessness and hopelessness. And that higher power ia a real crock, we all have the power in us if we just find the right direction. And, we don't drink because we have character defaults, we drink because we have a chemical imbalance and allergy to ethanol. Get your facts straight and quit misleading people with that AA garbage.
This message was edited by the moderators. Second warning.
Have a good night Rizzo
