Alternative and Non-Traditional Alcoholism Treatment
January 1st, 2008 |Written by Edward W. Wilson, Ph.D., MAC
Click here to contact Edward and/or see his GoodTherapy.org Profile
Non-traditional alcoholism treatment methods have always recognized that 12 Step models work for some individuals but not for most, at least not for very long. The problem is that nothing else seems to either. Designing effective treatment for individuals turns out to be a complicated business that must take into account many variables in ways that don’t easily lend themselves to any particular model. As a result most programs offer little beyond “don’t drink, go to meetings, work your program, and repeat – forever.”
It’s also difficult to remember that people have been quitting drinking for as long as alcohol has existed. Some individuals quit when their doctor suggests it’s time; others when spouses threaten to leave; a few when they collect their first DUI with all of the attendant costs and embarrassment; and still more just because they decide to. They quit with or without help or programs or meetings.
So, what happened?
Historically, most current treatment methods grew out of the experiences of two intractable alcoholics, Bill W. and Dr. Bob. They discovered a way that worked when nothing else had for them, thus giving birth to AA and the 12 Steps. And that way was generalized by treatment providers to individuals whose personal characteristics are far different from Bill and Bob, two white, male, middleclass, middle-aged, drinkers
Despite marketing to the contrary, alcoholism is not an equal opportunity disease. Its prevalence varies drastically depending on age, ethnicity, geography, income, education, religion, and many other factors. Treatment which fails to take these factors into account is far less likely to be successful than methods which do. As a result, 12 Step success tends to correlate to how closely the client matches the original Bill W./Dr. Bob profile.
Additionally, treatment programs which fail to address differences in how individuals process information will also suffer. In the 1960’s and 1970’s Dr. Jane Loevinger, at Washington University in St. Louis, developed a model of adult development. Working with Dr. Loevinger’s test protocol in Minnesota and Alaska in the 1990’s, Dr. Ed Wilson referenced developmental levels to 12 Step success, along with identification of those clients for whom traditional treatment was apt to be ineffective as well as those for whom it is frequently counter-productive.
As noted, the development of comprehensive and effective treatment stratagies for individuals is challenging and multi-faceted. Paradoxically, including developmental levels as another variable actually makes things simpler – if not easy. It allows the clinician to rapidly determine the client’s suitability for 12 Step programs; calculates the initial effective proportions of the cognitive/behavioral therapeutic mix; indicates the proper “half-stage” of distance to maintain so that the client feels neither patronized nor mystified; and the likeliest methods of avoiding relapse.
Developmental considerations do not, of course, offer any miracles. Effective treatment will still require conscientious therapists who are neither wedded to any particular model nor hampered by their own history. Additionally, with time and trust, clients are apt to reveal higher cognitive levels that necessitate continuous adjustment to the treatment plan. But that is, after all, the definition of “professional,” isn’t it?
Good therapeutic services are not static and neither are people. To suggest as much, as in never ending “recovery,” is to do a disservice to conscientious clinicians and clients alike.
©Copyright 2008 Edward W. Wilson, Ph.D., MAC. All Rights Reserved. Permission to publish granted to GoodTherapy.org. The following article was solely written and edited by the author named above. The views and opinions expressed are not necessarily shared by GoodTherapy.org. Questions or concerns about the following article can be directed to the author or posted as a comment to this blog entry. Click here to contact Edward and/or see his GoodTherapy.org Profile
January 18th, 2008 at 7:46 am
This blog was very enlightening. It was so refreshing to read why the 12 step programs don’t work for some. I read a lot about the fact that they don’t work, but rarely does an author so adeptly give a clear and concise reason for why the program doesn’t work. Going to the origins of the program and then relating them to developmental stages is both genius and loaded with common sense. Thanks for a great entry!
January 18th, 2008 at 7:48 am
I, too, thought that that this blog was interesting. I guess I bought into the “equal opportunity disease” and thought that each demographic was as susceptible to the disease as the next. But, knowing that this is not the case, a lot of doors are opened. Doors that lead to different lines of thinking and therefore different lines on treatment. Now I can see why some of my clients respond so well to 12 step programs while others don’t get past the first step before quitting.
January 18th, 2008 at 7:50 am
I have actually examined developmental level before recommending a 12 step program and it has worked well. And, developmental stages do seem to correlate very well to the type of program that best helps a person quit drinking. The more developed a person is, the less he or she needs a formal program. He or she sees the logic behind quitting and understands that the behavior is no longer working for him or her. The lower the development level, the more support someone needs to stop drinking.
January 18th, 2008 at 7:52 am
I am just glad to see people being open minded about alternative methods to treating alcoholism. For so long, the only way was AA and 12 step programs. If you couldn’t quit with those, well, the problem was clearly with you and not the program. It is high time we all recognize that a 12 step program does work miracles with some alcoholics, but not all. And, when the program doesn’t work, it just wasn’t the right answer for the alcoholic. It’s not that the alcoholic is inherently flawed, it’s that the program was created for a very specific type of alcoholic. I think that alcoholics need to have an understanding of this concept before they start any program. If we don’t explain this thinking, they will take their failure personally rather than realizing the program just wasn’t suited for them.
May 11th, 2008 at 1:43 am
Treatment approaches include yoga, tai chi, group therapy, counseling, education sessions, therapeutic massage or acupuncture, sober fun activities, physical fitness at the gym, and more…,i feel this are the alternative and nontraditional
==========
jack
This is a comprehensive addiction portal focusing on topics of alcohol and drug abuse.
http://www.alcoholaddiction.org