- This topic has 9 replies, 8 voices, and was last updated 13 years, 5 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Okay Sisters, this is IMPORTANT!
The American Society of Addiction Medicine (ASAM) has released a new definition of addiction highlighting that addiction is a chronic brain disorder and not simply a behavioral problem involving too much alcohol, drugs, gambling or sex. This the first time ASAM has taken an official position that addiction is not solely related to problematic substance use.
When people see compulsive and damaging behaviors in friends or family members—or public figures such as celebrities or politicians—they often focus only on the substance use or behaviors as the problem. However, these outward behaviors are actually manifestations of an underlying disease that involves various areas of the brain, according to the new definition by ASAM, the nation’s largest professional society of physicians dedicated to treating and preventing addiction.
“At its core, addiction isn’t just a social problem or a moral problem or a criminal problem. It’s a brain problem whose behaviors manifest in all these other areas,” said Dr. Michael Miller, past president of ASAM who oversaw the development of the new definition. “Many behaviors driven by addiction are real problems and sometimes criminal acts. But the disease is about brains, not drugs. It’s about underlying neurology, not outward actions.”
The new definition resulted from an intensive, four‐year process with more than 80 experts actively working on it, including top addiction authorities, addiction medicine clinicians and leading neuroscience researchers from across the country.
The full governing board of ASAM and chapter presidents from many states took part, and there was extensive dialogue with research and policy colleagues in both the private and public sectors.
The new definition also describes addiction as a primary disease, meaning that it’s not the result of other causes such as emotional or psychiatric problems.
Addiction is also recognized as a chronic disease, like cardiovascular disease or diabetes, so it must be treated, managed and monitored over a life‐time.
I have put a link to the full, long version of the new policy for anyone who is interested. You can access it in the ‘Members Pages’ menu on the right of this page and click ‘Resources’ and then ‘New Definition of Addiction’.
Or download the PDF by clicking here:
New Definition of AddictionPlus, I will work on either an article or podcast that will break it down into understandable terms and discuss the implications for treatment of Sex Addiction.
But, most importantly, I think this will allow all of us who are involved with a Sex Addict to understand that we are dealing with not only emotionally damaged individuals, but someone who also has a physically damaged brain.
There should never be a shadow of doubt any more that this is THEIR problem and we have not and do not in any way contribute to their illness.
Goodbye COSA!
Thank you, JoAnn! I’m so interested to see what the treatment implications are…wow! Ok, off to read the long version.
Thanks JoAnn!
“The new definition also describes addiction as a primary disease, meaning that it’s not the result of other causes such as emotional or psychiatric problems.”
I totally agree with this statement.
‘
Yes, this sheds a whole new light on the Personality Disorders issue.
But, just because someone has one disease it does not mean that they cannot also have another.
Much food for thought.
chomp, chomp…
I think this pretty much sums up what most have already realized, however, the slippery slope is that the “experts” have not “identified” SA, as an “addiction” which kinda blows the wind outta our sails. We know otherwise, because the behavior/symptoms meets the criterion for a diagnosis of addiction. Pretty simple.
Still, its forward motion. I have thought a lot about this… especially as I myself, was in denial about what I scoffed at predator’s partner for doing which was not SEEING what was going on right under her nose. (however, I did not have a “lexie” writing me to clue me in and ya know… I wish that I did!) I wasn’t able to really DELVE into what was really happening, because I couldn’t face it.
That doesn’t make me a co-dependent. It makes me someone who has built a life around this man and had children with him and promised to make a commitment to him for the rest of my life. I couldn’t imagine a life without him in it. And ya know what? I still can’t.
We will be separating, but I think in time, we can go back to being friends. I’m not so dumb as to throw the baby out with the bath water… I’m throwing the baby out and KEEPING the bath water! LOL (sometimes I really crack myself up too!) 😉
The bottom line for me, is that a wife/partner could be the most ball busting hideous creature alive, and while that could drive a man to have an affair.(it should drive the couple to get help! Also SAs do not choose the ball busting type of woman.) Whatever is going on, it does not make a man go into the compulsive-gotta-have-it mode of uncontrollable acting out, over and over and over… (and the same would hold true if a man is married to a SA).
The problem for me, is that so much of what is deemed to be codie behavior, seems to be more about self-preserving behavior which and or a reaction to a severely traumatic experience. Its a death and a fuck you all rolled into one.
my therapist at NY presbyterian says that there really is no such thing as “co-dependency”. She’s an expert in the field and I believe her. Yes, there are co-dependent traits and people who have a cluster C dependency disorder, but that is something else. And even so, those traits might be difficult to live with, but they can’t turn someone’s partner into a SA. There is no logic in it.
xo ~ L
JoAnn,
Isn’t your interview with Doug Weiss coming up soon? This might be an interesting topic for conversation, re: his philosophy on treatment, and whether or not this definition changes anything from his point of view.This might be a stupid question, but might this decision mean that treatment for sex addiction could be covered under health insurance policies. Not just the therapy sessions but the in-patient intensives. Just curious.
CB
I have now read this document twice.
So, if I understand this, the addiction is NOT a symptom of an underlying condition, but its own disease. But there may be co-occurring psychiatric disorders that “contribute” to the “appearance” of addiction. By “appearance” do they mean what it looks like, or the fact that it appears at all?
Also, the report says that one of the three cognitive changes in addition is “The inaccurate belief that problems experienced in one’s life are attributable to other causes rather than being a predictable consequence of addiction.” Perhaps this explains why spouses and partners are blamed and named in the addiction, as if their actions result in the SA’s acting out.I’m in one of my “I’m going out of my mind” periods as I contemplate the absolute patriarchal inane horseshit non-thinking thinking that generated the whole co-addict, co-dependent garbage. When are the therapists and the experts going to sit down and eat crow? I want a ringside seat.
Never Diane,
They are never going to eat crow? And when I read on this site and look at the HUGE amounts of time we have wasted out of our own lives both trying to understand these creeps and trying to recover from being involved with them….I sometimes question if we don’t partially deserve some psycho label put on us. For myself, co-idiot maybe? 🙁 Karen
Hi KMF,
I don’t think we deserve a label for spending time trying to figure it out, that is just sensible. That is our resolve and how we come to terms with what has happened to us. And it adds to the fire when we are basically swimming up stream, opposite the current, with our therapists and the SA’s; when we do not feel we are part to blame. We then have to try to come to terms with well…things are just not going to add up. That we think differently than the therapist and that our SA’s are liars, despite his rave reviews from his therapist. I know they are all not liars, but with SA i think they are guilty until proven innocent with time and continued effort and truths.
No you are not a co-idiot. This is your life here and your marriage. Its not a time to make quick hasty decisions. But rather well thought and practical decisions. Love,
Flora
- The forum ‘News, Events, Happenings and Links’ is closed to new topics and replies.