by Steve Rose | Jun 12, 2020 | Suicide and Mental Health
With recent protests surrounding the death of George Floyd and calls to defund the police, I have been carefully collecting my thoughts on how to contribute to the conversation.
As a course instructor in Sociology at Eastern Michigan University, I covered race relations several times in my courses on conflict and violence in society.
The discussions we had about race were always productive and in-depth, given the diversity of students in these classes, spanning the political spectrum. There were a significant number of students of color, and many students were also preparing for a career in the military or law enforcement.
Over the last few weeks, I didn’t quite have the right words for an article on the recent events. I wanted to avoid writing an article as an obligatory political-style gesture for the purpose of virtue-signaling.
I’ve been listening, following recent developments, and finally came to a point where I’m inspired to meaningfully contribute to the discussion.
Given my background instructing criminology courses on violence and conflict and my current focus on mental health, I’ve been inspired by recent calls for police reform. These calls for reform go by the popular slogan, “defund the police.”
What does it mean to defund the police?
When I first heard the slogan, I was skeptical. I initially thought they were calling for the government to stop funding the police, effectively abolishing the public policing system, turning it into a privately run service.
This sounded like a pretty outlandish idea since such a radical move would result in a significant risk to public safety and far worse social inequality.
Without a public policing system, the wealthy would buy private security, and those without means would need to turn to gangs and vigilante justice. Private prisons in the US are a prime example of how privatizing criminal matters is a bad idea. See more on that issue here.
Although the word “defund” typically means “to prevent from continuing to receive funds,” the current slogan does not generally refer to this definition. So, what does “defund the police” mean in the current context?
Defunding the police means cutting government funding to policing and reallocating these funds to preventative measures in addition to funding social workers, crisis intervention staff, and addiction counselors, to take over mental health responsibilities.
Defunding the police does not mean simply making cuts. It means reinvesting in mental health and other programs to address poverty and reduce social inequality.
The goal is to remove aspects of policing that are ineffective and reallocate the funding where it can better serve the health and safety of the community.
How defunding the police addresses systemic racism
There are many layers involved in this discussion: race relations, class relations, policing practices, and mental health. Since they are intertwined, the call to “defund the police” must be viewed from a holistic perspective.
Put simply, the history of race relations in America resulted in disproportionate poverty among People of Color. Along with this came biased policing practices and deviant subcultures within these communities to cope with poverty and distrust of authorities. These biased policing practices perpetuate generational and racialized trauma, negatively affecting mental health.
It is important to note that systemic racism does not necessarily mean any particular individual is overtly prejudice. It means the system as a whole unconsciously produces unfair outcomes for specific groups.
Throughout America’s history, police departments have generally neglected poor black communities when it comes to homicides and have taken a heavy-handed approach when it comes to petty crimes. This resulted in unnecessary violence and disproportionate wrongful police killings in these communities.
In a 2016 study on Deaths Due to Use of Lethal Force by Law Enforcement, the researchers found the victims were:
“…disproportionately Black (32%) with a fatality rate 2.8 times higher among Blacks than Whites. Most victims were reported to be armed (83%); however, Black victims were more likely to be unarmed (14.8%) than White (9.4%) or Hispanic (5.8%) victims.”
Another 2016 study titled An Empirical Analysis of Racial Differences in Police Use of Force, analyzed data from the Houston Police Department, controlling for aggravating and mitigating circumstances that might affect police interactions. The study found:
“On non-lethal uses of force, there are racial differences – sometimes quite large… even when officers report civilians have been compliant and no arrest was made, Blacks are 21.2% more likely to endure some form of force in an interaction.”
Although this particular study was unable to find a difference in rates of police-involved shootings, the disproportionate non-lethal uses of force are concerning.
It is important to remember that officer-involved shootings are not the only lethal form of force. In the case of George Floyd, no weapons were required for a fatal interaction.
This is not only an American issue. In Toronto, the data shows that in more than a third of deadly police encounters, the victims are Black (36.5%). This is particularly disproportionate since Black people only composed 8.3% of the population in Toronto between 2000 and 2017.
Also, data shows 70.3% of all victims of deadly police encounters suffered from a mental health or substance abuse problem.
The recent death of Regis Korchinski-Paquet, a Black Toronto woman, following a mental health call to police, highlights the need for police reform. The circumstances are currently under investigation, and even if racial factors are not involved in this particular case, having specially trained mental health personnel would be a more effective use of resources.
Police are the designated first-responders to mental health crises, being called to enact skills that go beyond the bulk of their training. Although training does exist, and many officers are skillful at de-escalation, the social service sector is better suited to the task thanks to their extensive education and training in this specific area.
Consider this data on police training from a report by the Police Executive Research Forum:
This data shows how in the US, recruits receive as much training on de-escalation as they do on how to use a baton, which is very little in comparison to other areas.
There has been recently growing interest in police Crisis Intervention Teams (CITs) for mental health calls. Since there is some optimistic preliminary research on CITs, perhaps integrating the roles of police, social workers, crisis intervention staff, and addiction counselors on these specialized teams may be another way to reinvest funds going forward.
How does defunding the police address systemic racism?
Defunding the police addresses systemic racism by reallocating resources to social workers, crisis intervention staff, and addiction counselors to fill the role of mental health first-responders. This would, in turn, reduce the impact of deadly police encounters that disproportionately affect Black individuals and individuals experiencing mental health crises.
Also, with fewer police-involved killings, mental health in Black communities is improved. A 2018 study in The Lancet analyzed the impact of police killings on the mental health of Black Americans, finding:
“Each additional police killing of an unarmed Black American was associated with 0-14 additional poor mental health days (95% CI 0·07-0·22; p=0·00047) among Black American respondents. The largest effects on mental health occurred in the 1-2 months after exposure…. Mental health impacts were not observed among White respondents and resulted only from police killings of unarmed Black Americans (not unarmed White Americans or armed Black Americans).”
The study concludes programs should be implemented to reduce these kinds of killings to mitigate adverse mental health in these vulnerable communities.
Beyond police killings, perceived racism is comparable to other forms of trauma. A report published by the American Psychological Association summarizes the results of a 2012 study on Perceived Racism and Mental Health Among Black American Adults, stating:
“Black Americans’ psychological responses to racism are very similar to common responses to trauma, such as somatization, which is psychological distress expressed as physical pain; interpersonal sensitivity; and anxiety, according to the study. Individuals who said they experienced more and very stressful racism were more likely to report mental distress…”
These findings are especially relevant, given recent events, in addition to the escalating racial tensions in America since the study was published.
Calls for police reform are not new, but the most recent call to defund the police goes beyond simple band-aid solutions. These more radical reforms are reimagining the role of police by addressing root causes. It may not address all of the issues, and racially biased individuals will still exist, but it is a strong start.
To use a metaphor, if your sink keeps overflowing, are you going to mop up the floor indefinitely? Or are you going to try turning off the tap?
Police are like the mops of society, cleaning up the water overflowing from the sink. Instead of putting most of our resources toward cleaning up the mess, we should start to consider better ways to turn off the tap.
When it comes to defunding the police, the purpose is not to simply use fewer mops; the goal is to use the mops more efficiently, in addition to addressing root causes. This is where education and social programs come in.
Toronto Police Chief, Mark Saunders, affirms this perspective after his recent announcement that he will be stepping down on July 31st. He states:
“I see a lot of young Black boys getting killed by young Black boys. Law enforcement deals with those symptoms and I want to help with the cure for the disease…”
We may never be able to solve every social issue, but chipping away at these root causes can result in long-term social and economic stability, reducing crime and creating safer, happier communities.
Since the shift away from community policing toward a more militarized approach, police reform has been much needed, as the consequences are becoming hard to ignore. A popular comment by Calabash4 under this YouTube video demonstrates how even police in the US Marines are not as militarized as the civilian police:
“I was an MP in the Marines and it shocks me how policing in the civilian sector, is more militaristic than it was for me as an actual military policeman. We were taught that we were protecting our brother and sister Marines and their families. We had a “police your neighbor” approach whereas civilian police are trained with an “us against them” mentality, and have been give ordinance and taught tactics used by actual occupying forces.”
This “us against them” mentality is most robust in the most impoverished areas where the criminological Broken Window Theory has been misapplied under zero-tolerance policing and stop-and-frisk policies.
Broken Window Theory suggests creating a sense of order through frequently policing minor offenses changes the culture of an area, preventing more serious crimes. The evidence suggests that this theory did not translate into effective practice. Research on this form of policing in New York City found:
“…NYPD’s aggressive law enforcement since the 1980s has added to race/ethnicity and class tensions in NYC.”
Simply defunding the police might sound like an easy fix to decades of much-needed police reform, but there are also risks.
How many resources should be reallocated? Which areas should be cut? Will public safety be affected during the transition?
The risks of defunding the police
There are significant risks involved in defunding the police. The most immediate and apparent concerns are job loss and stretching existing officers too thin, resulting in burnout.
Transitioning to a new model of policing needs careful consideration, since an abrupt shift in funding without a plan could result in risks to public safety, especially for the most vulnerable communities.
In the book, Ghettocide, Jill Leovy tells a compelling story of how the LAPD neglected murder investigations in poor, Black areas, resulting in significant risks to these communities where violent crime ran rampant. She writes:
“This is a book about a very simple idea: where the criminal justice system fails to respond vigorously to violent injury and death, homicide becomes endemic.”
This book demonstrates how “…gangs are a consequence of lawlessness, not a cause.” In neglected poor Black areas around LA throughout the ’80s and ’90s, gangs developed as an alternative form of security and commerce. She offers the following thought experiment to illustrate this situation:
“Take a bunch of teenage boys from the whitest, safest suburb in America and plunk them down in a place where their friends are murdered and they are constantly attacked and threatened. Signal that no one cares, and fail to solve murders. Limit their options for escape. Then see what happens.”
Leovy likens the criminal justice system to a “schoolyard bully”:
“It harasses people on small pretexts but is exposed as a coward before murder. It hauls masses of Black men through its machinery but fails to protect them from bodily injury and death. It is at once oppressive and inadequate.”
This nuanced view suggests structural racism is the result of over-policing minor infractions and under-policing homicide in these poor Black areas.
A recent popular tweet illustrates this tendency toward racialized over-policing:
“George Floyd died accused of using a counterfeit $20 bill. Remember when Brock Turner ACTUALLY raped an unconscious girl behind a dumpster, got 6 months of jail but only served 3 months bc of his “good behavior”? Yeah. White privilege is real.”
When considering defunding the police, it is essential to make sure resources are not taken away from homicide investigation in communities that are the most vulnerable.
A report by Harvard Economist Roland Fryer argues Good Policing Saves Black Lives. The key is to allocate resources to forms of policing that are the most effective while defunding areas that are the least effective.
A 2017 study on policing in New York in 2014 and 2015 analyzed the NYPD’s step back from proactive policing. Instead of going out to look for crime and stopping individuals for minor offenses, the department primarily waited for calls before responding.
Interestingly, this step back did not lead to increased crime rates, as one might expect. Instead, the 2017 study found:
“…civilian complaints of major crimes (such as burglary, felony assault and grand larceny) decreased during and shortly after sharp reductions in proactive policing.”
Although correlation does not equal causation, and this is only focused on one department over a brief period, the results are worth considering.
This move by the NYPD is the exact opposite of the case previously described in Ghettocide. In those poor Black areas plagued by gang violence, the police were harsh on petty crimes but unresponsive to major ones. The step back from proactive policing in New York stopped actively seeking out petty crimes and instead responded more readily to major ones.
Simply reducing police capacity altogether could result in increased gang activity in the most vulnerable areas to fill the void in social regulation. To reduce the risk of constraining police capacity to respond to violent crimes, it is crucial to consider only cutting specific forms of policing.
Since most crime is concentrated in a small number of hotspots, resources could be allocated in a targeted way, taking direction from the “law of crime concentration.”
Criminologist, David Weisburd, suggests “hot spots policing” is the most effective use of resources since 50% of crime occurs in 4% of street segments, with 25% of crime occurring in less than 1.5% of street segments. Reallocating resources accordingly could reduce the risks involved in defunding.
Is defunding the police a good idea?
Defunding the police may be a good idea if resources are effectively reallocated to preventative measures and mental health first-responders. Defunding the police may also come with risks to public safety if funds are not sufficiently reallocated.
We are in the midst of a unique moment where long-needed police reforms are actively being considered. With Minneapolis council members vowing to disband its police, the political motivation to go beyond band-aid solutions finally exists.
Although the words “defund” and “disband” are powerful, they can also be misleading. The general call for defunding refers to budget cuts for police departments and reinvestment in communities, not blanket abolition of all forms of policing activity.
Disbanding a police department is nothing new. In Camden, New Jersey, in 2012, the entire police force was laid off and reformed with a new mission toward community policing. The culture of that department was radically transformed. Since then, there has been a steady drop in crime and increased public trust in the police.
Here is a powerful short documentary on the story of Camden, New Jersey: Camden’s Turn: a story of police reform in progress.
I am optimistic that the recent protests have sparked real change, many of which are already being deliberated by city councils. Although these are challenging times, there is hope. The “defund the police” movement gives policymakers a specific, actionable goal: more effectively allocating policing budgets.
We must then carefully consider how to reinvest the funds to build healthier communities, increasing mental health first-responder capabilities, and supporting community policing initiatives to rebuild public trust.
Adjusting budgets will not solve everything, but it is a start. It forces departments to take a look at the research on what works, evaluate what is not working, and reallocate resources to best serve the goal of public safety.
Like this article? Join the mailing list to receive email updates when new ones are published:
by Steve Rose | Jun 1, 2020 | Addiction and Recovery
On the go? Listen to the audio version of this article here:
Being addicted to a person is not generally what comes to mind when people think about addiction. We generally think about addiction as being hooked on substances that have addictive chemical properties.
As an addiction counselor specializing in behavioral addictions, I’ve seen many people develop addictions to things that are not substances. A few common behavioral addictions include gambling, gaming, social media, and work. This leads to the question: can you be addicted to a person?
You can be addicted to a person. This is also referred to as relationship addiction, love addiction, or codependency. Each of these consists of seeking external validation to compensate for low self-esteem.
If you or someone you know is struggling with mental health issues, you can check out my resource page for suggestions on how to find help.
What it Means to be Addicted to Someone
Although the word “addiction” is commonly used to describe intense craving, the clinical use of the term only applies if something is becoming destructive. As stated in my article, When Does Something Become an Addiction?
Something becomes an addiction if it begins to have significant harmful impacts on other areas of your life. In addition, the individual experiences craving, loss of control over the substance or behavior, and is unable to stop despite these harms.
Although strong healthy relationships often involve a high level of desire for the other person, the word “addiction” would only apply if this desire becomes destructive.
For example, codependent relationships often consist of one person focused on helping another person at the expense of meeting their own needs.
A common codependent scenario may consist of a spouse of a person with an addiction who feels the need to continually hold everything together. They take care of the household, make excuses for the other person’s irresponsible behavior while neglecting their own needs, and losing a sense of their own identity.
This behavior may look like helping, but it is actually a form of enabling. As described in my article, When Does Helping Become Enabling?:
Helping becomes enabling when you diminish someone else’s responsibility by not allowing them to experience the natural consequences of their behavior.
This leads to perpetuating the problem, keeping you trapped in a cycle of martyrdom, attempting to gain external validation to overcome low self-esteem.
Other forms of addictions to persons like relationship or love addiction work the same way when someone continually seeks the romantic attention of others.
Although there are many different ways you can be addicted to another person, the common features include low-self-esteem, seeking external validation, and harmful consequences in one’s life.
Let’s take a look at what the research says about the origins of this unique form of addiction.
What Causes Addiction to a Person?
Since this form of addiction is so centered on seeking external validation, it is closely related to early childhood attachment experiences.
In a study titled, Psychological Correlates of Codependency in Women, they state:
An association was demonstrated between codependency and parental alcoholism, or history of childhood abuse, or both.
These early childhood experiences may increase a person’s likelihood of developing codependent relationships. Early turmoil can instill a deep sense of distrust and relational insecurity.
Psychologists refer to this relational style as anxious attachment. Inconsistent displays of affection in childhood may result in a child being generally anxious, fearing potential abandonment. In adulthood, this results in distrusting others while simultaneously craving intimacy.
The lack of secure attachment can result in persons being highly dependent on relationships, often concerned about abandonment from a romantic partner. Rather than getting to the root of the issue, persons with this type of relational addiction seek short-term reassurance at the expense of long-term relational health and security.
Some of these short-term behaviors include the following:
- Trying to impress others to get their approval
- Trying to fix others
- Doing things to be perceived as “the hero”
- Excessive gift-giving
- Constantly adapting to “fit in”
Like an addiction to substances, these short-term coping behaviors result in long-term consequences. Let’s take a closer look at how this type of addiction is similar to other addictions.
Addiction to a Person is Like Other Addictions
New relationships often share many features of addiction, including craving, euphoria, and withdrawal. In a study titled, Intense, Passionate, Romantic Love, the authors ask if love is a natural addiction. Using fMRI brain scans, they found the following:
…feelings of intense romantic love engage regions of the brain’s “reward system,” specifically dopamine-rich regions, including the ventral tegmental area, also activated during drug and/or behavioral addiction. Thus, because the experience of romantic love shares reward pathways with a range of substance and behavioral addictions, it may influence the drug and/or behavioral addiction response.
Since romantic love induces similar brain activity to other addictions, this leads to the question of when the clinical use of the word “addiction” is appropriate.
It would not be accurate to define every person entering into a new relationship as “addicted” since the word only applies when a substance or behavior has an increasingly negative impact on your life.
In a study on The Lived Experience of Codependency, the researchers share the experience of a person who compared the sense of obligation to stay in a dysfunctional relationship to a sense of military duty:
I would be in relationships that were unhealthy, unequal, umm unpleasant umm and I would stay in them, you know, no matter what, like a marine, umm … It’s my duty, God gave me this!
Another participant describes their sense of an unstable identity as the following:
…it is like the chameleon, you know, trying to fit in with every situation rather than allowing myself to be who I am…
The question of “who I am” is often unanswered among persons in this situation, but it is an important area to consider when trying to regain control.
Recovering from an Addiction to a Person
If you are struggling with this type of addiction, it can be helpful to reach out to a psychologist or counselor who specializes in this area.
If you are struggling with codependency, you can find local support on the Psychology Today therapist search engine. If you are interested in a lower cost option, visit BetterHelp.com.
A key area to consider when recovering from codependency is asking yourself this simple question: “What do I want?”
Getting clear on your values allows you to regain your own sense of purpose, building a sense of independent identity. I’ve written about values in my article on How to Stop Living in Your Head, where I share an exercise used in Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT):
Imagine you have a mind-reading machine that can tell you the thoughts of someone close to you. Tune in to what that person is thinking about you. What are they thinking about what you stand for? What do they think are your personal strengths? What do you mean to this person? In an ideal world where you are the person you want to be, what do you hear this person thinking?
What theme do you see?
Come up with a few core values and keep them with you throughout the next week, being mindful of how they inform your actions.
Some examples of values include compassion, creativity, authenticity, community, order, justice, courage, curiosity, and loyalty.
If you find yourself drawn to valuing compassion, it is important to also consider whether or not your attempts to help others are genuinely compassionate.
Compassion can be defined as a form of giving for the benefit of the other person. Codependent “helping” is often not compassionate since it is intended to benefit the helper through external validation, often enabling the other person to continue down a destructive path, allowing for a perpetual cycle of “helping.”
My article, “When Does Helping Become Enabling?” takes a deep dive into the dynamics of helping vs. enabling, allowing you to better understand how to truly express compassion when trying to help someone.
by Steve Rose | May 26, 2020 | Addiction and Recovery
On the go? Listen to the audio version of the article here:
Are you trying to help someone, but it is only enabling the problem to continue? This is a common question among persons trying to help someone with an addiction, but it also applies to other areas of life.
This article will help you understand whether or not your attempts to help are actually helpful, or if they are based in codependency, enabling boundary violations and perpetuating unwanted behavior.
In simple terms, when does helping become enabling?
Helping becomes enabling when you diminish someone else’s responsibility by not allowing them to experience the natural consequences of their behavior.
Helping allows someone to gain further responsibility, whereas enabling takes away pain in the short-term, making a problem worse in the long term.
Let’s take a deeper dive into this distinction.
The Difference Between Helping and Enabling
It is important to emphasize the similarity between the definition of addiction and the definition of enabling.
Addiction is a behavior resulting in short-term relief at a long term-cost. Enabling consists of the same process.
Consider the tiger metaphor I shared in my article on Why Responsibility is So Important:
Imagine you invited a tiger cub into your home. It is cute, cuddly, and harmless. You notice it begins to purr loudly, and the only way you can make it stop is to feed it red meat. Over the months and years, you keep doing this, but the tiger is now several hundred pounds, requiring whole sides of beef. Rather than a cute purr, the tiger roars ferociously for its meat. You are terrified, so you keep giving him the meat so he will leave you alone. The more you feed it, the larger it gets, and the more trapped you become.
Helping the tiger stay fed keeps it quiet in the short-term, but you soon realize you’re only enabling its growth. Eventually, you’re trapped with a huge roaring tiger, feeling like you have no choice but to “help” it.
Are you really “helping” the tiger? On one level, it looks helpful, but is this “helping” really about the tiger? Or is it about you.
Are you feeding the tiger out of genuine compassion? Or are you feeding the tiger based on your own fears and insecurities?
Are there safe boundaries between you and the tiger? Or are there no boundaries, leaving you at the mercy of its appetite?
Are you taking care of your own needs? Or is your eye always on the tiger, anticipating its next move?
If the tiger becoming dependant on you for food? Or are you allowing it to develop long-term independence in the wild?
As you have probably noticed by now, this is not really about tigers; it is about your relationship to other people who require your help.
Helping comes from a place of firm healthy boundaries, encouraging the other person to take further responsibility, allowing for long-term growth.
Enabling comes from a place of weak personal boundaries, encouraging the other person to continue sidestepping responsibility, preventing long-term growth.
Going beyond metaphor and theory, let’s take a look at what helping and enabling look like in the real world.
Enabling Someone With an Addiction
Enabling looks different in each circumstance, but common scenarios include the following:
- Lending money to someone with a gambling issue
- Making excuses for a partner who neglects family obligations due to substance use
- Treating repeated hangovers as merely being “sick”
- Taking on a partners portion of family obligations to keep everything together
- Paying for an adult son or daughter’s food and living expenses, when their funds are going to a substance or addictive behavior
- Turning a blind eye to red flags to avoid conflict
- Putting the needs of others before your own, causing severe self-neglect and potential loss of one’s own self-identity
- Attempting to gain self-esteem and respect through continually doing things for others or trying to be “the hero”
- Gradually building an underlying resentment toward persons one is trying to “help”
- Making empty threats after repeated boundary violations
- Feeling an underlying sense of needing to be needed, attempting to fill the void through several of the “helping” behaviors listed above
Enabling can look like helping, on the surface, but as you can see, there is a pattern in this list.
Enabling means doing things for someone when they can do it for themselves. This diminishes their responsibility due to the lack of natural consequences, leading to continued violations.
Enabling comes from a place of “good intentions” without healthy boundaries. At the extreme end, codependency keeps people trapped in destructive relationships due to their underlying unhealthy need to feel needed due to low self-esteem.
To learn more about healthy and unhealthy versions of this universal human need to be needed, check out my popular article: The Need to Be Needed.
Helping Someone With an Addiction
Helping consists of doing things someone can not do for themselves, leading to long-term growth and responsibility. Helping behaviors consist of the following:
- Listening to someone’s experience without judgment and assumptions
- Not overlooking red flags and holding someone accountable for their actions
- Setting clear and firm boundaries regarding responsibilities and expectations
- Collaborating on potential treatment options
- Seeking your own form of support
- Engaging in effective communication
To learn more about effective communication, check out my in-depth article: The Ultimate Guide to Helping Someone Change.
Helping is compassionate, not manipulative. It comes from a place of genuine giving rather than an attempt to receive external validation. Although it is giving, it comes from a place of firm personal boundaries, and one’s own needs are not being compromised in the process.
Helping is like a cast for a broken arm. It allows the bone to repair itself, simply by being there. Like a cast, helping becomes enabling when the cast is on too long. Rather than giving strength, the cast is now making the arm weaker as muscle tissue becomes depleted since it does not need to hold itself up.
Conclusion
Letting other people learn to hold themselves up is one of the greatest gifts we can give them. Enabling keeps a person dependent on you. Although enabling fuels underlying resentment in the “helper,” both parties in a codependent relationship are dependent on one another. The helper needs the person to stay in need of help to artificially fulfill their need to be needed.
Helping is collaborative and compassionate, but also careful. It comes from a place of genuine giving, while maintaining personal boundaries. It helps the other person build the strength to help themselves, fueling a sense of purpose, responsibility, and motivation for long-term change.
If you are interested in learning more about what causes people to change, I’ve written about the psychology of motivation in my article titled, What Causes People to Change?
If you’re frustrated, trying to help someone who refuses to change, that article explains why, giving a detailed account of what contributes to real lasting change.
by Steve Rose | May 23, 2020 | Addiction and Recovery
On the go? Listen to the audio version of the article here:
Working in a residential treatment program for behavioral addiction, meditation is an important part of daily programming. Despite meditation having powerful benefits for persons with an addiction, it is an area of programming clients often have difficulty getting into.
Many clients also underestimate the power of meditation, compared to other facets of addiction treatment. Meditation’s recent growth in popularity is more than merely a personal development trend, as researchers discover its surprising neurobiological benefit.
So what are the benefits of meditation for addiction?
Meditation can reduce symptoms of depression, anxiety, and improve emotional regulation, leading to improved coping skills for persons with addiction. This allows for increased behavioral control and spiritual development.
Let’s take a look at the science supporting the benefits of meditation for addiction treatment, then I will share an inspirational recovery story to illustrate the transformational power of meditation.
What is Meditation?
Meditation often congers up images of eastern mystics basking in sublime ecstasy while dwelling in solitude for years on end.
This is not what meditation looks like in the real world.
Although the practice was developed in eastern spiritual traditions, the field of psychology recently adopted secular versions of the practice. This means meditation can now be approached as simply a form of mental exercise. Like going to the gym, you don’t need to pledge allegiance to any particular faith tradition.
One of the most prominent figures who popularized a secular version of meditation is Jon Kabat-Zinn, a biomedical researcher, and founder of Mindfulness-based stress reduction. He defines mindfulness as the following:
“…awareness that arises through paying attention, on purpose, in the present moment, non-judgementally.”
So much of our daily lives are filled with operating on autopilot, inattention to the present, and judgment.
“What if I’m not good enough? What do they think of me? What if I didn’t do that report properly? What if I fail this class and don’t graduate on time? Am I a failure?”
These thoughts keep us trapped in our heads, mentally replaying catastrophic scenarios. This way of operating spikes cortisol, leaving you feeling stressed and anxious. As a result, many people turn to alcohol, substances, or addictive behaviors to escape the underlying tension.
Meditation is simply a mental exercise applying mindfulness, mantras, or focus on a particular emotion or intention. This psychological exercise builds mental resilience, leading to better coping strategies.
For the purpose of this article, I am generally referring to mindfulness, as defined above by Jon Kabat-Zinn.
Science on the Benefits of Meditation
In a meta-analysis on The Psychological Effects of Meditation, the researchers found meditation may serve two different purposes:
“…as a means for psychotherapy or/and for personal and spiritual advancement. Yet the boundary between these two purposes is not clear-cut, and we feel that it is perfectly all right to use meditation whenever it might have benefits.”
In addiction treatment, the psychological and spiritual realms are often interlaced, given the addiction field’s spiritual roots in 12-step programming. This does not mean one has to adopt any particular perspective; instead, the focus is on emphasizing whatever works for an individual.
A systematic review and meta-analysis on Meditation Programs for Psychological Stress and Well-being, published in the Journal of the American Medical Association found:
“…meditation programs can reduce the negative dimensions of psychological stress. Mindfulness meditation programs, in particular, show small improvements in anxiety, depression, and pain with moderate evidence and small improvements in stress/distress and the mental health component of health-related quality of life….”
Despite the power of meditation, only 58% of treatment centers in a U.S. national sample used meditation as part of treatment for substance use. This compares to 91% of programs endorsing a twelve-step orientation. Although both can be effective, especially if combined, the power of meditation has yet to be fully recognized.
How Does Meditation Work for Addiction?
According to a study looking at The Role of Meditation in Addiction Recovery:
“…incorporating meditation into the lifestyle of individuals recovering from addiction provides a consistent means of preparing for inevitable, addiction‐related life challenges and a coping skill that can help maintain equilibrium in living with ever‐present peril.”
Meditation is one of many useful tools for persons in recovery, helping a person maintain a sense of control when faced with difficult thoughts or emotions.
One key area impacted by meditation is emotional regulation. Meditation strengthens parts of the brain associated with emotional control, allowing someone to respond to situations thoughtfully rather than simply reacting.
In a study titled, Mindfulness meditation improves emotion regulation and reduces drug abuse, the researchers analyzed the impact of a mindfulness practice called integrative body-mind training (IBMT). After only five days of practice, they found significant changes in the brain and hormonal activity among participants. They state:
“…short-term IBMT can significantly reduce craving (Tang et al., 2013). These results lead us to speculate that the increased ACC activity (related to self-control) suppressed craving even without the participants’ conscious intention. There are several routes through which mindfulness could influence addiction. IBMT reduced the amount and duration of cortisol to a stressful challenge (Tang et al., 2007), which may work to reduce addiction. Another possible explanation is based on the finding that mindfulness practice leads to a non-judgmental stance (awareness and acceptance) regarding addiction, which could reduce negative emotion, conflict, and stress, and thus lead to reduced smoking.”
Comparing the brains of smokers and non-smokers, the study goes on to show that the smokers had deficits in the pre-frontal cortex—the area of the brain associated with self-control. After the five days of mindfulness training, these deficits were improved. The study concluded that mindfulness is useful for both addiction treatment, as well as prevention.
An Inspirational Story of Recovery
To illustrate what the science of meditation means in human terms, I thought it would be helpful to share the experience of Jillian Leonard.
Experimenting with various substances since she was 14, Jillian spent roughly a decade trapped in the chaos of addiction. She developed addictions to opioids (morphine, Percocet, and oxycodone) anxiety medications (Ativan and Clonazepam), and stimulants (cocaine, ecstasy, and speed).
At the height of her addiction to speed, she states:
“I was taking 7 or 8 pills per day most days, awake typically 3 to 4 days straight, working full time and eating and drinking almost nothing.”
She was eventually hospitalized for psychosis and was at a crossroads. After being discharged from the hospital, she was left with no direction on how to cope with all of the racing thoughts about what she had just been through.
“The memories of the psychosis were at the forefront of every thought that I was having. I figured that maybe if I listened to calming music at night while I slept, it would be comforting enough to ease the anxiety and fear that I was experiencing. I began by searching YouTube for meditation music and found several that would play for 8 hours straight. For about two weeks I played them every night while I slept, and started noticing a drastic positive switch concerning my thought patterns. I was feeling calmer throughout the day. At that point I did my first sit down guided meditation and immediately was able to drop into a deep meditative state with periods of calm, peace, and bliss throughout the day afterward. Those peaceful states, brought on by the meditations, almost completely override the desire to cover up any negative emotions that I may be having with a substance.”
Her meditation practice did not take away the struggles that came with recovery. Instead, it made life easier to manage when those struggles were present. A major part of these struggles was the low self-esteem caused by severe bullying in middle school. Using substances became a way to escape the mental pain.
Her meditation practice started her on a spiritual journey, changing her perspective on the bullying she experienced and its impact on her self-esteem. She states:
“Throughout my spiritual journey, I have developed the belief that polarity in life experiences is there as a teacher. Without the negative experiences we are not able to fully appreciate the positive ones as much as we could. By having negative experiences with bullying, I am now able to appreciate the positive mental states I achieve by practicing meditation and mindfulness.”
Beyond appreciating the contrast of these positive mental states, meditation allowed her to gain distance from her negative thoughts and painful emotions, rather than identifying with them when they come up. Jillian states:
“It’s being able to view my past experiences through a state of observation as opposed to being immersed in the negative emotions caused by the memories. I am now able to have the negative memories of that time come up and not be sucked in by the emotions that typically come from the memories. As a result of these changes of perspective, I can now cope with low self-esteem issues by not identifying myself with them anymore. The thoughts and emotions of low self-esteem will still come up but I am able to separate from them.”
Meditation does not erase negative thoughts or stop painful emotions. Instead, it allows you to observe them, accept their existence, and keep living your life.
Like clouds in the sky, negative thoughts might roll in, but ultimately, you cannot control the clouds. You can notice them, but it is ultimately your decision to turn your attention to other things. Watching the clouds all day won’t change the weather. Instead, you can acknowledge they are there and focus on other things that matter, knowing the clouds will eventually part. Regarding her negative thoughts, Jillian states:
“I observe them, accept they are happening, and I do not attach my identity to them because I understand I am not my thoughts. Had I not developed the tools to distance myself from my thoughts, I am not sure I would be on the path I’m on today.”
Throughout her recovery, her perspective changed from being inwardly focused on medicating her low self-esteem to being outwardly focused on the impact of her behavior on others:
“My focus changed by elevated states of empathy brought on by meditation and learning about spirituality. I started to understand that my behaviors have a ripple effect onto others, whether I see it or not. I started to view other people through a lens of empathy and connection, considering their own personal states as opposed to being absorbed in my own. The way that it happened was by looking internally and asking myself if my own self-focus was the type of energy that I wanted to put out in the world or not. I then decided—emphasis on it being a decision—that I would rather live my life in a state of giving and understanding rather than self-centeredness.”
She attributes her ability to make this decision to the new perspective offered by meditation. Identifying with troubling thoughts keeps you trapped in negative, self-focused thought patterns. Jillian states:
“Once we start to observe instead of immerse, we start to see that we are not the identity of the thoughts, therefore, making it less of a challenge to create new thought patterns, such as the ability to identify whether or not we are in a state of self-focus or a state of empathy.”
Regarding the role of the ego, Jillian states:
“I feel like the ego has its place, but is the enemy when it runs the show. By bypassing the ego in any given situation and instead communicating from a place of love, authenticity, and empathy, that is how I believe the ego can be pushed aside and contained. Once the ego is running things, that is when it becomes the enemy and a person might find themselves in lower states of consciousness such as fear, guilt, and lack.”
Jillian began her meditation practice without any formal training, as an attempt to relax before bed. Throughout her journey, she discovered some helpful resources for persons interested in starting their own meditation practice:
“I find myself using guided meditations that are facilitated by a great practitioner named Lilian Eden. She has a YouTube channel with a wide variety of meditations geared towards different areas such as stress coping, sleep aid, sound healing, connection with spirit, the list goes on. I also use an app called Insight Timer. The app is full of meditations for whatever areas in life you might want to focus on. I attend sound healing group meditations occasionally and they are great for getting out of your own space and connecting with others while meditating in a group setting. I also recommend picking up books on spirituality. They can help a person understand the why question as to whether someone should start a meditation practice or not.”
If you are still skeptical about meditation, or have tried it and didn’t notice any results, Jillian has some words of encouragement:
“If a person is starting a meditation practice and finds themselves wondering why they are doing it and if there is actually any benefit, I can personally assure that there is. It takes time and practice but what you will eventually get from it is invaluable if you allow yourself to work on it.”
Jillian attributes all of her addiction recovery to meditation. She states that after leaving the hospital, she never took medication and never sought counseling:
“It has been the number one key for me personally… everything else followed.”
If you want to reach out to Jillian, you can connect with her on Facebook, here.
Interested in Learning More?
If you are interested in learning more about how to apply mindfulness training to your own recovery, I offer practical exercises in my article on How to Stop Living in Your Head.
My approach to mindfulness is based on the psychological principles of Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT), supported by over 330 clinical trials.
To read more of my writing on addiction, visit my Addiction and Recovery article page.
by Steve Rose | May 19, 2020 | Addiction and Recovery
As a course instructor in an addiction counseling program, I’ve had several students ask if you need to have experience with an addiction to become an addiction counselor.
The field of addiction recovery originally developed in 12-step circles throughout the twentieth century, and the vast majority entering this field had a history of addiction.
Today, the addiction counseling field has expanded beyond the 12-step model, integrating lessons from the field of psychology. With this shift, there has been an increasing number of professionals in the field who are not in recovery themselves.
Many people now wonder whether or not counselors without a history of addiction can be effective in treating addiction. This leads to the question: Do you have to be an addict to be an addiction counselor?
You do not need to have a history of addiction to be an effective addiction counselor. Also, there are both benefits and risks to entering the field after having personal experience with addiction.
Addiction counseling is one of the few professions where personal experience with the issue has often been conflated with competence in the role.
For example, psychologists can be effective without having experienced depression, personal trainers can be effective without ever having been unfit, and gynecologists can be effective without ever having been female.
This does not take away from the power of personal experience. Perhaps you may want to find a peer who has overcome depression, commiserate with a friend who also struggles with their fitness, or talk to another female who also struggles with similar gynecological issues.
Talking to someone who has been through a similar personal experience can be powerful, especially early on, but is not equivalent to seeking professional support. Professional competence in addiction counseling can be attained, independent of one’s personal background.
Let’s take a closer look at how this idea of experience being required for competence developed in the addiction field, then I will share my own unique path into the field.
History of the Addiction Field
The modern culture of addiction recovery began in the 1930s with the development of Alcoholics Anonymous. In 1954, Narcotics Anonymous was also founded, stating:
“The ultimate weapon for recovery is the recovering addict.”
These fellowships developed out of a sincere desire to reach out and help others who have been through similar experiences.
Throughout the early and mid-twentieth century, persons suffering from addiction were largely stigmatized and harshly judged as morally bankrupt and weak-willed. The mutual support, sense of open and honest connection, and the sense of direction provided by the Twelve Steps were—and continues to be—life-saving for persons with addiction.
The 12-step approach was likely far superior to psychological approaches throughout the early and mid-20th century when psychology had a crude and rudimentary approach to addiction treatment.
During the latter part of the 20th century, with the development of cognitive-behavioral therapy and motivational interviewing, the field of psychology became better equipped to effectively treat addiction, and the field became professionalized.
Now, the addiction recovery field exists as a hybrid between 12-step approaches and psychological approaches. Many residential treatment programs exist somewhere on the spectrum between these two frameworks.
Also, persons in recovery may seek support from a variety of different sources, often blending 12-step peer-support with the additional support of a psychologist, social worker, or addiction counselor.
Benefits of Being a Counselor in Recovery
Because of the 12th step’s focus on carrying the message of recovery to others, many persons who enter roles as addiction counselors have a history of addiction.
There are benefits and risks from becoming an addiction counselor while in recovery. A significant benefit includes being a personal role model that recovery is possible, offering hope and inspiration to persons feeling stuck.
Another benefit includes the ability to rapidly develop trust and reliability, allowing the other person to not feel alone in their experiences.
In addition, a person in recovery may be more familiar with the culture of substance use, allowing them to comfortably discuss usage, effects, and experiences.
There are moments when someone seeking recovery may want to talk to someone who has been through recovery themselves. Although they can pursue this kind of peer support without a counselor in 12-step programs, a counselor who also has this experience can be helpful during moments when this kind of support is required.
Risks of Being a Counselor in Recovery
Although having experience with addiction has its benefits, the experience alone does not necessarily make someone an effective counselor. Also, there are several risks involved when someone in recovery enters the professional addiction field.
According to a study titled, Recovered Addicts Working in the Addiction Field, important areas to consider, include the following:
“Potential risks for relapse… the ex-addict’s motivation for entering the addiction field, [one’s ability to anonomously seek] personal help from self-help groups… over involvement with clients, over involvement with work, over identification with clients, and the repercussions of relapse.”
Being stable in one’s own recovery is essential before entering the field to help others. Counseling conversations may put someone in early recovery at risk of relapse.
Another study titled, Former Substance Users Working as Counselors, looks at the subjective experiences of persons in recovery who entered the addiction field. They identified several areas to consider, including the limits of self-disclosure, the counselor’s objectivity, and the risk of losing credibility during a potential relapse. Regarding self-disclosure, they state:
“The issue is relevant for all kinds of professional and paraprofessional staff, but the therapeutic interventions of the paraprofessional staff will often be based on their own experiences into treatment and recovery (e.g., rock-bottom experiences).”
For any counselor, including persons in recovery, sharing one’s personal experiences should be focused on benefiting the other person and should not take the focus away from them. Distinct from an A.A. or N.A. meeting, self-disclosure in a counseling session is generally briefer and tailored to the specific situation.
Sharing one’s recovery story can have benefits, as previously described, so long as it does not distract from a client-centered focus.
Another risk for persons in recovery involves their experiences potentially distorting their view of the client’s situation. The previously cited article states this is:
“…[the ability] to interact with the client without letting his own experiences or perceptions distort his judgment and intervention. Counselors with a history of addiction often have a personal history, which in many ways is similar to the history of the client. This can impede the counselor’s ability to be objective in assessment and treatment planning, and there is a risk that the counselor may impose his own standards or criteria for success upon the client, omitting to evaluate the actual complaints.”
Any counselor—whether in recovery or not—who makes assumptions about a client and rigidly imposes their own standards sacrifices a productive therapeutic relationship, further alienating a client by making them feel misunderstood.
The article goes on to point out another risk persons in recovery may need to consider when entering the addiction field, regarding relapse:
…a counselor’s relapse is not a private matter as long as he or she is employed in a substance or alcohol-user treatment service—especially not when the counselor’s main qualification is a history of recovery.
I would disagree with the point that this is a person in recovery’s main qualification since counseling skills are independent of one’s background. Despite this, relapse does pose a genuine professional concern. The authors go on to state:
“A minimum of two years’ abstinence is usually requested prior to employment in substance or alcohol-user treatment services… [persons in recovery] represent a hope for a better future, and if they relapse, they risk losing their credibility as counselors. If the counselor’s recovery status is the core of the therapeutic relationship, relapse is a potent issue for clients, and the agency must deal with this reality…. Their personal success in maintaining recovery then determines their professional identity, and as a consequence, their ability to maintain a job and regular income.”
The article goes on to share the personal story of Charlottle who works in the addiction field and has a history with the Twelve Steps of A.A./N.A.:
“I am still linked with the Twelve Steps program. But I have also moved away from it—in the job that I have, and all my different kinds of colleagues. I’ve learned a lot from that. I have found out that I am not that different. . . the first few years [of being abstinent] you think you are so unique. And that it is only us [former substance users] who can’t manage.. . but mostly it’s things that everyone has a hard time handling. This has helped me not to feel different. I actually forget that I’m an ex-addict.”
This highlights the importance of seeing beyond whether or not someone has been through recovery themselves. Everyone experiences difficult thoughts and emotions and copes with these things differently. Rather than making in-groups and out-groups, it is important to evaluate a counselor by their abilities rather than their experiences.
My Own Story
The more extended version of my long and winding path into addiction counseling is shared here. For the purpose of this article, I can share a brief overview.
I have never experienced addiction, nor was I motivated to enter the field due to the experiences of family members. I fell into working in problem gambling prevention by accident since I needed an income to supplement my part-time teaching position at Eastern Michigan University.
In the problem gambling prevention role, I ended up learning quite a bit from the people I listened to. I also developed counseling skills from extensive training in motivational interviewing. Over time, I became increasingly passionate about the area and continued to grow through two of the most crucial counseling skills: empathy/understanding and meeting people where they are at.
Although I never experienced exactly what the other person is going through, no one else necessarily has either. Each person’s situation is unique, and the most effective thing I’ve found is to make no assumptions and stay curious. At its core, addiction is a way of coping with emotions that all of us experience. My role is to be with that person, collaboratively working through mental barriers.
I’ve learned a considerable amount of technical skill from books and training, but the human component can’t be learned from a book. It requires genuine humility and compassion. Working in the field, I’ve seen persons with a history of addiction and persons without a history of addiction make the exact same mistake: making assumptions and having too much of an ego. This results in an ineffective authoritarian interpersonal style, causing shame, alienation, and resistance.
Just as someone with a history of addiction may impose their experiences on others, a person who learned these skills from a book can impose a rigid theoretical structure onto their way of working with a client. This is something I’ve been working through over the past few years.
I had a great deal of practice working through this during my employment in a withdrawal facility. When I started, I immediately assumed everyone knew I didn’t have a background using substances. This insecurity soon faded away as I became swept up in the intensity of the role and the need to be completely client-focused.
I found myself doing a lot of listening and very little talking, noticing that clients rarely ever asked questions about me or my experiences. A few people had asked and were surprised I did not have experiences with substances, but the vast majority didn’t ask.
While in acute withdrawal, the clients generally only cared about what I could do for them and whether or not I cared. My personal life, my extensive educational background, and my complete lack of experience using substances seemed irrelevant. Some of the most in-depth interactions I had with clients ended with them knowing nothing about these things. Instead, I focused on keeping them as comfortable as possible, collaborating on a treatment plan, and listening more than talking.
Becoming an Effective Counselor
Let’s make a comparison to being a good salesperson. The experience of being sold can make you better at sales, but being sold doesn’t necessarily make you good at sales. You can be excellent at sales without drawing on your experiences of being sold to, but drawing on one’s personal experience can contribute to further growth.
If you are inspired to enter the addiction field, but have no personal experience with addiction, it is of course not advisable to go out and start a meth habit for “learning purposes”. Rather, draw on the emotions of transferable experiences.
Several emotions are involved in addiction, including shame, isolation, and dispair. Draw on moments when these emotions became overwhelming.
There are also several thoughts commonly involved in addiction, including the thought that you are not good enough, the thought that you’re a failure, and the thought that there is no way to get out. Draw on moments when these thoughts became overwhelming.
Listening to someone from a truly empathic place means accurately understanding what they are saying, logically and emotionally. In other words, listening with your head and your heart.
You don’t need to experience the exact issue someone else has experienced. Instead, you can pull from an experience that draws on the same emotions, thoughts, and behaviors. In terms of addiction, I haven’t experienced anything destructive, but I’ve dealt with something close to learning addiction where I tend to develop an obsessive focus on narrow areas, at the exclusion if other things. If not kept in check, it could for sure take over and become distractive.
Beyond listening from your head and your heart, I believe being an effective counselor requires both confidence and humility. Whether you have experience with an addiction or not, it is easy to feel like an imposter in the field. The “counselor” mask is a way to bolster yourself against insecurities, taking your focus off the client, and putting it on yourself. Clients can immediately sense this and shut down.
No matter your background, addiction counseling is an art. An effective counselor blends empathic understanding with carefully targeting the psychological processes that lead to change.
Now, teaching within an addiction counseling program at a local college, I’ve tried to share this same message. Since about a quarter of students don’t have a personal history of addiction, many of them wonder if they can be effective counselors.
Whether someone has personal experience with addiction or not doesn’t seem to make a difference in their potential to be an effective counselor. Either way, the barriers to human connection are the same. Here are a few barriers I’ve encountered that apply to anyone in the counseling field:
- Making assumptions
- Assuming you know what is best for someone
- Applying rigid recovery frameworks
- Seeking validation for your abilities/ professional identity
- Trying to “save” someone
- Not meeting someone where they are
- Doing things for someone rather than supporting their autonomy
- Too much talking and not enough listening
- Confrontation rather than collaboration
There are likely several more, but the point is that whether or not you are in recovery, these barriers are universal. Persons in recovery may be more likely to violate some of these, while persons who are not in recovery are more likely to violate others.
If you have any other suggestions for barriers to connection, I’d be happy to add them. Leave a comment below, and we can engage further!
If you are interested in reading my recent article on motivational interviewing—a foundational counseling skill—you can find it here: How Does Motivational Interviewing Work?
In that article, I take a detailed psychological look at the mechanics of this powerful technique, showing how and why it works.
Conclusion
Whether or not you have a history of addiction, you can become an effective counselor. Having a history of addiction has the benefit of offering a different type of connection and inspiration, but also has certain risks involved.
I’ve personally found that my background has not been relevant and have learned that counseling skills are independent of one’s own personal experience.
Although technical learning helps ground your approach in evidence-based practices, the most effective counseling skills cannot be learned in books. They must be developed from humility, compassion, and experience in client-centered interactions.
This has been something I have been thinking about for several years now, so hopefully, this article helps inspire others who are entering the field, wondering if personal experience with addiction is necessary.
