|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
||||||
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||
|
Man of the Month
The Politics of Addiction THE MORNING AFTER: IS OUR PRESIDENT A RECOVERED ALCOHOLIC? As the national election hangover is beginning to dissipate, and the result rather than the process of picking a president is coming into focus, it's time to take a sober look at the person we chose. In explaining his DUI arrest at the age of 30, candidate George W. Bush acknowledged he "made mistakes" in his life. So did candidate Clinton in 1992 after the Jennifer Flowers affair came to light. In this way, as well as in his good looks, personal charisma and "compassionate conservatism" (the mirror image of "a new democrat") Bush, rather than Gore, is "the next best thing" to Bill Clinton. Indeed, from a psychological perspective, the similarities between Bush and Clinton overshadow the differences between them in political belief and intellectual aptitude. On the positive side, both men have an engaging, feel-good interpersonal style. Their ability to capture the political center and to build consensus is not merely a result of cold political calculation. It's also a function of their innate desire to please and their ability to respond to the subtle emotional cues of their audience—the American people. On the negative side, the recklessness of their personal conduct—one involving sex, the other alcohol—brings up the question of addiction and its implication for character. Far be it for me to label Bill Clinton a "sex addict," but the specter of a brilliant and disciplined man doing stupid and impulsive things certainly hints in that direction. As for Bush, what are we to make of the fact that following a history of two arrests, at least one of which was alcohol-related, apparent drug use, and a less-than- stable employment record, the man stopped drinking and "got a job" at the age of 40? Bush simply says he drank too much at times so he just decided to quit. "I haven't had a drink in 14 years!" he says. But as anyone who has ever worked with substance abusers knows, the picture might be a bit more complicated than that. First, when assessing someone's substance use you have to add up all the substances they use as well as other impulsive and compulsive conduct. Many an alcoholics will stop drinking but continue to smoke marijuana, falsely claiming I'm not an addict. And it's not as if being arrested in college for disorderly behavior is unrelated to the kind of bad judgment and poor impulse control involved in substance abuse. Repeated if discrete behavior problems do form a pattern. In fact, an arrest and behavior record such as George W. Bush's is likely to get a young man in his twenties rejected as psychologically unqualified to be a police officer at NYPD. This at least was the case some years ago when I was a police psychologist. Secondly, most people who drink and drive don't get caught. Those who do tend to be those who do so frequently that they are statistically more likely to get caught. Of course, many of us who misbehave, even seriously, in our extended adolescence—which I suppose by some count lasts all the way to 30 or even 40—eventually grow up to be responsible and mature citizens. Which brings us to the third and most important question: what are we to make of Bush's decision to stop drinking altogether, rather than, say, drink responsibly or in moderation? In assessing alcoholism it is most useful to ask the patient if he ever tried to stop drinking. When he tells you, oh, yeah, I once stopped for six months, you are a step closer to confirming the diagnosis of alcoholism. The same might be true if he says he had stopped for three years. Generally, after several years of sobriety the risk of relapse goes down significantly, but as any truly recovered alcoholic will tell you, once an alcoholic always an alcoholic. Furthermore, the paradox of recovery is that in order to stop drinking and avoid relapse the alcoholic must accept that he is powerless over his addiction. Of course, it's possible that this is precisely what Bush did when he decided to quit drinking, knowing that he couldn't handle it. Being a politician, however, he is not going to proudly declare he's an alcoholic in recovery. Unfortunately for us, this means that we are unlikely to know if he's denying his addiction only to us or also to himself. The latter possibility, of course, is much more frightening, especially since relapse is often induced by stress, which is probably the only sure thing our president can expect in next four years. |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
||
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
||
