The problem with any single label for a complex issue is that it implies a level of understanding or agreement that probably doesn’t exist. This is true for all labels and it is especially true for addiction. If I say that you are an addict and you then agree with me that, it will sound like we have agreed about what is wrong with you. We probably have not agreed at all. Beyond knowing that the word addiction involves using too many mood altering substances for too long, there may be little agreement. And that is a problem. Because most of the time, we stop trying to understand what is wrong after we have agreed on the label “addict.” Changing the words to SUDS (Substance Abuse Disorders) has not fixed the problem.
What if addiction is not a single entity? What if there are multiple definitions of addiction? What if there was a way to look at the issue of drinking too much, taking too many pills in a multifaceted way? What if addiction was more of a matrix rather than a single definition?
There is a natural history of recovery that is unique to each individual. No two people recover in exactly the same way. We must learn to facilitate these individual pathways and stop insisting that everybody’s recovery look exactly the same. That there is only one way to recover is not only inaccurate, it has failed as a treatment model.
