October 5th, 2012
Okay, I’m not in as good a mood about the whole “Psychology Board-quitting drinking alcohol” experience this time… The not drinking alcohol part has not proven to be an issue until now although it has certainly come up a few times, especially around my upcoming anniversary and the question of whether I can sip champagne or not (obviously the answer is no). It certainly brings up the fact that so many of our social ceremonies involve alcohol and whether I like it or not, those notions are part of my view of social interaction. But that is seriously not the part that pisses me off the most.
Here it is – I am going into a helping profession, meant to support those in our society that need help. I myself have belonged to that group and still see someone on occasion, but I think I’ve come a long way in the last 12 years or so. But not only am I now forced to call in every morning (an ordeal for someone with ADHD anyway) and report for testing during work hours, but the payment for these things is absurd! Each test is going to cost between $50-$75 and I will initially be tested 4-5 times per month for a total of $200-$375 per month or $2400-$4500 per year! and that doesn’t include the $1000 per year in probation costs! That means that for a crime I committed 12 years ago, spent time in jail for and served 5 years of probation time, the CA Board of Psychology will now ask me to spend another $10,000-$14,000. Now, I should be able to afford the cost (barely) but here’s the rub the way I see it: These sorts of limitations and expenses are an endlessly difficult and probably nearly impossible hoop for a whole slew of people to jump through. By placing these sorts of demands on people with a past, no matter how distant, the California Board of Psychology is essentially squeezing out possible clinicians who may have dealt with drug and alcohol issues in the past. Even my Board-assigned probation monitor told me that she thinks this is excessive, but as usual there “isn’t much [she] can do about it.”
Money is the instrument by which we control people in this society, and that issue comes up again and again for me when I listen to rich politicians (yes, Romney) telling us that if we all just paid less taxes and if government just spent less money than we would all be better off. But that’s a lie – government provides services specifically for those of us who can’t afford to provide them for ourselves. Romney may be able to build a private road to any of his many houses but the rest of us need the government to build that road otherwise we’d only be able to drive where the rich allow us to… and they wouldn’t let us drive on their private roads anyway. So government helps the rest of us with education, transportation, food, and health care because its job is to equalize the playing field a little bit. That might seem like a digression, but here:
If people with an addiction or criminal past are made to pay $10,000-$15,000 in addition to satisfying every other requirement to become lawyers, psychologists, physicians, therapists, and more then aren’t we in essence saying to them that we don’t want them in these jobs? Aren’t we telling them that due to their past they are now damaged goods and aren’t really welcome where the rest of society lives? And if we’re telling them that when they try to become part of the helping professions aren’t we also saying that they are either unable to help or that we simply don’t want their help?
If that is what we’re saying then I think our system is fucked up. If we’re telling a portion of our society that even if they achieve everything someone else has they are not worthy of the same recognition then I think we need to take a long hard look at ourselves. Society survives and thrives because its members play together and help each other out – when we start drawing lines around what people are worth and what they’re allowed to strive for we disenfranchise exactly the portion of society we pretend to want to rehabilitate.
So I’m going to walk through this, proudly and successfully. I am going to stop drinking and I am going to pay the fees. But I am also going to speak my mind and make sure that the injustice and absurdity of the whole thing is heard, even if only by a few thousand dedicated readers. I’ve worked too hard to just turn the other cheek and say thank you. This is my life, I’ve earned the respect they can’t seem to find, and I’m going to claim it.
August 28th, 2012
Here are some drug use statistics:
- Over 80% of teens engage in some form of deviant behavior (1).
- Over 50% of high-school seniors admit to having used drugs (2).
- Only 10%-15% of the population develop drug addiction problems related to their drug use (1).
The question is:
If the majority of teens experiment with drug use, and so few eventually develop drug addiction problems, should we be focusing on something other than stopping kids from trying drugs? Read the rest of this entry »
|Posted in: Addiction Stories, Alcohol, Cocaine, Drugs, Drugs, Education, For others, Marijuana, Meth, Opinions, Prescription, Tips
Tags: about addiction, about drug addiction, addiction, addiction causes, addiction drugs, addiction problems, addiction research, addiction statistics, adolescent, adolescent drug abuse, alcohol and drug abuse, arrest, crystal meth, develop drug, develop drug addiction, develop drug addiction problems, deviant, drug, drug abuse information, drug abuse prevention, Drug addiction, drug addiction problems, drug addiction research, drug problems, drug use, Drugs, education, experimentation, intervention, kids, marijuana, my addiction, pregnancy, problem, teen, teenage smoking, teens, teens and alcohol, teens and drugs, use, weed
July 11th, 2012
Q &A – Dr. Adi Jaffe PhD Interviewed By Tony O’Neil of The Fix
“A man was attacked on the side of the highway, authorities find the attacker eating a the victims face, and only after multiple bullet wounds is the attacker stopped.” This Zombie-like behavior is common in Hollywood scary movies, but as of late the new “Bath Salt” epidemic has turned places is like Miami into a real life Zombieland, or at least that’s what we have been told.
UPDATE: We now know that the assailant in this case (Rudy Eugene) had only traces of marijuana in his blood and no evidence of bath salts use. However he was previously diagnosed as schizophrenic and we know that especially for those at risk, marijuana use is associated with psychotic breaks.
What are “Bath Salts”?
Bath Salts are a street name given to a number of meth like drugs, so we’re not talking about your everyday Epson salt here. Although drugs like MDPV have just been made illegal, most of these substances seem to be cathinone derivatives and are central nervous system stimulants that act through interruption of dopamine, norepinephrine and to a more limited extent serotonin function.
It’s very important to note that research on this is still in its early stages and so reports are limited. However, it seems that at low to moderate doses the most common effects for MDPV can be thought of as either meth-like or like very strong adderall or ritalin – so users experience stimulation, euphoria, and alertness. Mephedrone seems to act more like MDMA (ecstasy) than meth, at least in early animal research with these drugs. At high doses however, and obviously there is no one regulating the dose since these drugs are sold as if not for human consumption, the effects can look like psychosis. These are not necessarily very different from meth induced psychosis which can include panic attacks, severe paranoia, self-mutilation, and violence.
There are several confirmed research reports (individuals who had only MDPV in their system) of people injecting or snorting MDPV and developing severe psychosis, “running wildly throughout the local neighborhood,” foaming at the mouth and being combative when approached. Worse still, these individuals can develop severe organ failure, require intubation (breathing tube insertion through throat), and at times die even in the face of extreme medical intervention.
How do Bath Salts affect the nervous system?
These drugs tend to be sympathomemetic, which means they induce sympathetic nervous system activation – the increased heart rate, temperature, etc. This is also where they can be most dangerous even when people don’t develop the possible psychotic effects (due to organ failure from the hyper activation).
Can one become addicted to Bath Salts?
I think that there’s no question that this stuff can cause physical dependence. I personally know of a client at matrix here in west la who came in specifically for “over the counter stimulant addiction” to drugs like these. He was snorting, then injecting them and stayed up for days. Eventually he was hospitalized with severe agitation and mild psychosis. These high doses are almost certainly, based on what we know with meth and MDMA, also causing neurotoxicity (some of the effects irreversible).
What Harm Reduction model should be used for Bath Salts?
It seems that MDPV and mephedrone are indeed drugs worth worrying about, at least in so much as they are completely unregulated when sold “not for human consumption.” While their effects at low/moderate doses are not severe are can be thought of as related to those of other stimulants, at high doses they can be lethal and can certainly bring about serious negative psychological effects. I always think that there is some room for harm reduction when trying to get some control over abuse of such drugs. In this case, while it’s probably best to stay away completely, I would urge people who are going to use to be careful and not to use large amounts of this stuff before seeing how they react. The neurotoxicity and cardiac effects can be too extreme and may lead to severe irreversible consequences at high doses.
How can the media help resolve this epidemic?
Press coverage always makes more people aware of an issue than they were before the topic was covered. In this case, especially if we can sneak in some of the above harm-reduction messages along with the overall “don’t use this stuff” text we normally see, we might be able to use the opportunity to save some lives. I think, as I’ve said before, that people (especially kids) are going to be on the lookout for ways to change their experience no matter what. The question is how we react when they do things we don’t like and how does our reaction affect their future behavior.
I think that we can use the real information – possible death and psychosis, especially when snorted or injected – to alter the ways people use Bath Salts, allowing for a campaign that isn’t only looking to stop the use of the drug but that is focused on minimizing consequences. However it seems that the press isn’t covering the range of possible effects but is choosing instead to focus on the most outrageous. These types of scare tactics haven’t worked too well in the past for curving drug use, but it doesn’t hurt TV ratings so I don’t expect it to stop.
Will banning bath salts help?
I believe that in this case, as we can already see, we are once again going to be playing a cat and mouse game that congress seems happy to play. They’ll outlaw more components of Bath Salts (MDPV, mephedrone, and methylone apparently already are controlled) but new ones will continue to come out. To me, the question is whether we believe we will one day ban all psychoactive substances we have issue with or whether we will be successful in developing a strategy for dealing with their abuse in a way that helps recognize and intervene early.
I think that the banning approach makes it less likely that people with abuse problems, or even acute medical problems, will contact authorities for help. Worse yet, it makes it nearly impossible for us to get a handle on safer use practices for a specific drug as they all get replaced by new variations – often ones that are even more dangerous.
Although the press has made the Bath Salt epidemic much more like a Hollywood production than reality, there are issues that need to be addressed. I just don’t believe in scaring the public into action, I’d prefer if popular media were just honest with the public about these drugs so that people can draw their own conclusions.
April 8th, 2012
In all but 13 States in the U.S., drug possession for personal use is still considered a felony punishable by years in prison and hefty fines. This despite the fact that a significant portion of those arrested meet criteria for dependence (addiction) on the drugs they are caught with, and the fact that our own federal drug abuse agencies (The National Institute on Drug Abuse – NIDA) considers addiction to be a medical condition that involves reduced control over the drug use itself. I guess that’s why the federal government also considers possession for personal use as a misdemeanor.
In essence these state laws are putting drug users, and especially drug addicts, at risk of being locked up for years, placed on parole, and subject to the endless other barriers to employment and housing, which make it more difficult for these convicted felons to reintegrate into the community. As if fighting drug addiction wasn’t hard enough.
The question is, would reducing the penalty for drug possession for personal use to a misdemeanor in more states result in increased drug use and crime or would it actually help free up resources being used for incarceration towards more effective strategies for combating the problem?
California State senator Mark Leno is bringing up a bill for consideration in the state senate (SB1506) that is seeking to do just that – reducing the penalty for possession for personal use of any drug to a misdemeanor. Mind you, this law is not to affect any other drug-related offenses such as drug possession for sale, drug manufacturing, or transportation. What it would do is cap the maximum incarceration length of possession at one year in jail (not more years in prison) as well as cap the maximum community supervision length at 5 years (3 years are commonly assigned for such offenses).
I know what some of you are saying – drug users know they’re breaking the law and they should be punished for it. Indeed, punishing them for it will make them less likely to use, which will leave them facing no jail time instead of continuously facing single years in jail for reduced drug possession offenses. Besides, if we cut the penalties for drug possession aren’t we being soft on crime? Aren’t we saying that using drugs is okay?
The problem with that argument is that it assumes that states that have higher penalties for drug possession for personal use have lower rates of crime, drug use, or drug possession arrests. The don’t. Indeed, the 13 states (and D.C.) that already consider drug possession for personal use a misdemeanor have incarceration rates that are no higher, illicit drug use rates that are slightly lower, and addiction treatment admission rates that are on par and even a bit higher than the rates of felony states. Again, that means the states that reduced the penalty for drug possession see less arrests, more people in addiction treatment, and a smaller percentage of their population using such drugs. Interestingly, those results are somewhat similar to the effect complete decriminalization had on drug use, crime, and addiction treatment in Portugal.
In previous articles we’ve spoken about the stigma of addiction and the barriers people report to entering addiction treatment in the U.S. Aside from cost and lack of information, people usually report that they either don’t want help, think they can handle the problem on their own or are too ashamed to ask for help. We’ve also reported on the ridiculous prison overcrowding problem in California due to the high incarceration rates of drug users. The question of decriminalization has come up many times (see here, here, and here) and the evidence I’ve seen keeps pointing towards the conclusion that reduced penalties get more people into addiction treatment while reducing incarceration rates with no real collateral increased in illicit drug use or crime. When you think about it, since the Harrison Narcotics act of 1914 essentially created the black drug market in the U.S. when it restricted, for the first time, the sale of narcotics, it makes sense that loosening up those restriction would reduce the size of that same black market and with it drug-associated crime.
I have spent the last 10 years researching the best ways to fight addiction problems and almost everything I’ve seen suggests that treatment and prevention efforts, not long jail or prison sentences, are the best ways to combat the problem. I have seen evidence that very shirt-term incarceration can help certain resistant offenders, but those efforts can easily be applied for misdemeanor and require nothing close to multiple-year sentences. For that reason, I support not only Senator Leno’s SB1506 bill in California, but other efforts around the country to reduce the criminal penalties associated with simple drug possession to get more of the people who need help into addiction treatment and away from jails. It saves us money, it is more humane, and it just makes sense.
If you want to help Senator Leno pass this bill, contact his office through this link: http://sd03.senate.ca.gov/
U.S. Census Bureau, 2012 Statistical Abstract, Table 308. Crime Rates by State, 2008 and 2009, and by Type, 2009 (2012).
Collins et al., (2010). The Cost of Substance Abuse: The Use of Administrative Data to Investigate Treatment Benefits in a Rural Mountain State. Western Criminology Review 11(3), 13-28.
Gardiner, Urada, and Anglin (2011). Band-Aids and Bullhorns: Why California’s Drug Policy Is Failing and What We Can Do to Fix It. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 23, 108-135.
|Posted in: Education, Links, Opinions, Treatment
Tags: addiction, drug, drug possession, drug possession personal, drug use, drug use crime, Leno, Mark Leno, personal use, personal use misdemeanor, possession, possession personal use, SB1506, treatment, use
January 23rd, 2012
CNN released a news article a little while back titled “With anti-addiction pill, ‘no urge, no craving‘” that seems to suggest that a cure for addiction has been found. As usual, news reporting on these sort of topics revolves around a kernel of truth, with nice window dressing an a serving of embellishment.
While naltrexone, and topiramate, have been shown to improve outcomes in addiction treatment, they have by no means revealed anything that would warrant giving them the title “anti-addiction pills.”
Indeed, there are now a few different preparations of Naltrexone, including a long acting version called Vivitrol that while relatively expensive, has been shown to be relatively effective at cutting relapse rates for both alcoholics AND heroin (or opiate addicts). Note the difference though here between my language and that used by CNN; Naltrexone has been shown to reduce relapse rates, not eliminate them, and current research seems to show that it is most effective only for specific groups of alcoholics who have a specific type of Mu opioid receptor.
As the article points out, a combination of therapies, including behavioral therapies, medications, and social-support, are still the best option when it comes to addiction treatment.
We’re a long way off from finding anything that can be considered a cure for addiction, no matter what some treatment centers like to claim, but these pills should help us stem the tide while we keep looking…
|Posted in: Education, Medications, Opinions, Treatment
Tags: addiction, addiction cure, addiction pill, alcoholics, anti addiction, CNN, cure, cure addiction, heroin, mu, naltrexone, news, opiate, opioid receptor, pill, relapse rates, topiramate, treatment, vivitrol
September 7th, 2011
Teens raised in affluent homes display the highest rates of depression, anxiety, and drug abuse according to a recent article in Monitor on Psychology, the APA‘s monthly magazine.
One of our recent posts dealt with some of the issues unique to teens and drugs. In addition to the issues we’d already mentioned, the article named a number of reasons for the high prevalence of mental-health issues among affluent teens. Among them were an increasingly narcissistic society, overbearing parents, and an common attitude of perfectionism.
Each of these reasons are likely contributors to the prevalence of mental health and drug abuse issues among upper-middle-class (and above) teens. Still, as far as I’m concerned, the main take home message of the article is this:
Money truly doesn’t buy happiness – Rich teens and drug use.
While drug abuse research often focuses on the lower socioeconomic strata these recent findings indicate that being financially stable offers little in the way of protection from some of the most common psychological difficulties.
Thankfully, the researchers cited in the article gave some simple advice to parents:
- Give children clear responsibilities to help around the house.
- Take part in community service (to unite the family and reduce narcissism).
- Reduce TV watching (especially of reality TV shows that glorify celebrity and excess).
- Monitor internet use.
- Stop obsessing about perfect grades and focus instead on the joy of learning for its own sake.
I couldn’t agree more with these recommendations. Having taught a number of classes myself, I have witnessed the ridiculous inflation in students’ expectations of top grades. I think it’s time we turned attention back to the family and reintroduce some of the basic skills that many addicts find themselves learning much too late… Often in recovery.
|Posted in: Alcohol, Cocaine, Drugs, Education, For others, Marijuana, Meth, Opiates, Opinions, Prescription, Tips
Tags: abuse, affluent, anxiety, celebrity, challenge, class, depression, grades, internet, middle, money, monitor, narcissis, perfectionism, responsibilities, rich, skill, substance, teens and drugs, television, tv, upper
August 3rd, 2011
I was 49 years old when one of my loved ones entered a residential alcohol treatment program and I found myself plunged into a whole other world – a world that included terms and concepts like codependency, adult children of alcoholics, 12-step programs, co-addictions, dual diagnosis and the role a family member has in the denial that protects a loved one’s drinking. The family addiction world was a world I found confusing and overwhelming as I learned just how many of my loved ones had an alcohol problem and what that had meant in my life.
True to my nature, I began my quest for deeper understanding in the same way I’d approached my six other published nonfiction books and numerous articles. I immersed myself in research, intent on learning as much as I could about the subject – in this case alcoholism and treatment programs – and then all of the other issues that emerged as I tried to understand why a loved one drinks too much and why someone like myself puts up with it for so long. I started attending Al- Anon meetings, doubled my individual therapy sessions and attended family-help group sessions at the treatment center, as well.
My book, If You Loved Me, You’d Stop! What You Really Need To Know When A Loved One Drinks Too Much, and my blog, www.breakingthecycles.com, are the culmination and continuation of my discoveries. I hope that by sharing what I have learned, others – whether a parent, friend, sibling, spouse or child – will find the tools they need to live their lives.
I share this information because I wish I had known it, that it had been openly and freely talked about, long before I’d spent decades grappling with my various loved ones’ drinking. I try keep my shares (including my book) very short and simple. I know, myself, that when I first started looking for information, I was frustrated with the variety and depth of the books and research on what I was striving to understand – excessive drinking (alcohol abuse), alcoholism, co-addictions, adult children of alcoholics, codependency, dual diagnosis, how to help the alcoholic stop drinking, how to heal the family, how to talk to your children, family in recovery – and the list went on and on.
For now, I’d like to leave you with my top key discoveries:
1. Alcoholism is one of the diseases of addiction – a chronic relapsing disease. Check out www.hbo.com/addiction for a wealth of information. It’s produced by HBO, NIAAA, NIDA and The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.
2. To begin treating addiction, the substance of abuse must be stopped in its entirety in order to allow the structural and chemical changes in the brain to change and recover.
These first two discoveries freed me from my continued efforts to try control my loved ones’ drinking and thus stop my nagging, raging, deal-making and shaming – the behaviors I’d been using in order to “help” them stop [hence the title of my book, If You Loved Me, You’d Stop!…]. They also allowed me to respect the person but hate the disease and know that until that person came to grips with the power of addiction, they would/will continue to drink, no matter how hard they try to control their drinking.
3. Other family members need help, too, in order to change some of the behaviors they’ve adopted in order to survive but that are actually getting in the way of their living healthy, happy, fulfilling lives, regardless of whether their loved one stops drinking or not.
4. Alcoholism is a young person’s disease. Due to brain imaging technologies of the past fifteen years or so, neuroscientists have been studying how the brain develops. According to NIAAA, half of alcoholics were addicted by age 21 and two-thirds were addicted by age 25. Click here to better understand why.
5. Having a dual diagnoses (a mental illness, such as depression, bipolar, ADHD or PTSD) and an addiction (to alcohol or drugs) is common. Click here for information.
|Posted in: Drugs, Education, Opinions, Treatment
Tags: 12 step, addiction, alcoholism, codependency, dual-diagnosis, family addiction, NIAAA, NIDA, residential, young