Addiction/Dependence Discussion

[[Bl...]]

I have never imagined beyond my wildest dreams that people who decide to live without benzodiazepines or at least want to reduce their dose and live healthier lives would be met with such prejudice, scorn, belittlement, and contempt. If a person identifies that these meds are no longer helping them and looks for support to get off of them in humane, supporting way, they should be given that kind of support, and not just be ripped off their meds and left to suffer in complete agony.

 

LorazepamFree, let’s add to that list: apathy and indifference and disbelief. Instead of investigating that the prescribed drugs might be the possible culprit, I was called a “drug seeker” and a “psychosomatically” sick person…both labels given by professionals within the psychiatric field of medicine.

 

Any morsel of human compassion would have been welcomed, as I went through this nightmare that seemed to last an eternity.

 

Like you, PhotoBugSF, I too begged God to do something to help the indescribable pain to stop. My poor birds could only look on as I squirmed in agony on the floor. The only difference between us is, that once I finally was able to get back on Ativan, after having the drug ripped away from me for 1 1/2 months, was, I did not feel high. I think you were using the word "high" to express your relief to be stabilized?? My benzo brain can be quite faulty...even without benzo brain issues, I can miss the actual gist of a point being made.

 

Reinstating to a lower dose from what I was cold turkeyed from, helped me to stabilize to a more manageable place. But, again, I did not feel high…never did feel high on that drug…nor Ambien.

 

I never took these drugs, nor any other prescribed drug for the purpose of getting high. This remark, is in no way being said to shame anyone who needs drugs to feel high from them.

 

Speaking from how I interpret this complex subject, my story is as follows:

 

I do understand the psychologically based need to have one’s mind/body feel altered, as a result of ingesting/smoking some substance….whether organic or inorganic.

 

There was a day, a long time ago, when I did “seek” drugs. I’m not proud of my past and never will be. I learned from it, but that is all I can say about it.

 

In fact, life in a mental daze never made me feel happy and content. If anything, the drugs were my total, mental, focal point in life, and I felt like I was enslaved to them..actually I was a slave to them mentally.

 

NEVER were benzos, nor the Z-drug Ambien, problem drugs of that nature. Once I knew these drugs were the cause of my symptoms, my only focus was to get off of them safely and then to NEVER look back.

 

I didn’t even know what Ativan was…I just knew it helped my horrendous symptoms that were initially caused by Ambien (Z-drug). And then without knowing it I, unwittingly, fueled the symptoms caused by Ambien, with Ativan. Shame on anyone involved in my case from the beginning of this nightmare to the end of it, IF they knew that the drugs were the issue in causing all these horrendous symptoms, and then chose not to reveal that fact to me.

[[Fl...]]

I never took these drugs, nor any other prescribed drug for the purpose of getting high. This remark, is in no way being said to shame anyone who needs drugs to feel high from them.

 

That's the problem. We shouldn't have to apologize for making a factual statement, yet we are made to feel that way by some people who want to lump everyone under the addiction umbrella.

 

I have tried to understand where this desire to lump everyone into one category comes from and it's hard to get a straight answer from people who think that way so it hasn't been easy to figure out but as far as I can tell there are two groups of people who promote this. Group 1 is the "It's wrong to shame addicts" group. Group 2 is the "Dependence isn't a strong enough word" group.

 

To the first group I would say "I feel for people who are addicted to drugs but it's not my problem, I have my own battle to fight".

 

To the second group I would say "I understand the sentiment and agree to a point but we can't redefine established medical terminology on a whim".

 

To the both groups I would say "You really need to think about the repercussions of the narrative you are promoting because words have consequences and there are many lives at stake".

[[be...]]

Those of you who don't understand the difference between dependence and addiction, have never actually had an addiction.

 

:thumbsup:

[[Ca...]]

Can a suddenly paradoxcial reaction to benzos mean tolerance withdrawal?

[[be...]]

Can a suddenly paradoxcial reaction to benzos mean tolerance withdrawal?

 

I don't believe so. I was paradoxical but not in tolerance.

[[Ph...]]

You sit in a room with someone.  It's quiet.  So you say to this person the following:

 

"I am dependent on a benzodiazapine medication."

 

What does the person think?  What is the mental reaction?  The thought stream goes like this:  "Oh, so you have an affliction that requires medication.  Okay, I understand.  We all depend on things.  I'm dependent on a PPI to control acid reflux."

 

But, let's change the messaging a little bit.  Instead, you say to the person the following:

 

"I am addicted to a benzodiazapine medication."

 

The thought stream of the listener changes dramatically.  It might go something like this:  "Addicted?  There's a problem here.  I feel disturbed.  I need to know more."

 

The first scenario results in no action, no perception of a real problem either in the micro or in the macro.

 

The second scenario results in alarm.  And alarm is the first step in affecting change both in the micro and in the macro.

 

What are you all so afraid of?  Do you want to solve this problem or not?  Of course, when you use the second scenario you have an obligation to skillfully explain why you are addicted, and further, why this is a serious problem for society.  Be a part of the solution.

 

[[li...]]

I think we are going in circles.

 

´"I am addicted to a benzodiazapine medication."

 

The thought stream of the listener changes dramatically.  It might go something like this:  "Addicted?  There's a problem here.  I feel disturbed.  I need to know more."´

 

What would the person in question do ? Urge the ´addict´to just stop taking the drug, or to seek help from addiction services ? We all know how well that goes. More than 99 % of all people won´t understand anyway. Not without investing a lot of time in studies, at an academic level.

 

´dependence´ seems too harmless. But what else is there ? ´iatrogenically harmed´ ?

 

´Of course, when you use the second scenario you have an obligation to skillfully explain why you are addicted, and further, why this is a serious problem for society.  Be a part of the solution.´ At a practical level, people will equate addiction with drug seeking, craving, dose escalation, addiction behavior.

[[Fl...]]

You sit in a room with someone.  It's quiet.  So you say to this person the following:

 

"I am dependent on a benzodiazapine medication."

 

What does the person think?  What is the mental reaction?  The thought stream goes like this:  "Oh, so you have an affliction that requires medication.  Okay, I understand.  We all depend on things.  I'm dependent on a PPI to control acid reflux."

 

But, let's change the messaging a little bit.  Instead, you say to the person the following:

 

"I am addicted to a benzodiazapine medication."

 

The thought stream of the listener changes dramatically.  It might go something like this:  "Addicted?  There's a problem here.  I feel disturbed.  I need to know more."

 

The first scenario results in no action, no perception of a real problem either in the micro or in the macro.

 

The second scenario results in alarm.  And alarm is the first step in affecting change both in the micro and in the macro.

 

What are you all so afraid of?  Do you want to solve this problem or not?  Of course, when you use the second scenario you have an obligation to skillfully explain why you are addicted, and further, why this is a serious problem for society.  Be a part of the solution.

 

Once again, you completely ignore the ramifications of switching labels. Forget about the word "dependence" for a minute. That certainly does not accurately describe the illness that I have 6.5 years after my last dose of a drug, but I don't think anyone could tell me with a straight face that I am "addicted" to clonazepam either.

 

You are going to dodge this question as everyone does when confronted with the ugly reality of what happens to someone when they are medically treated as an addict when the absolute worst thing that can happen to them is to be yanked off the drugs quickly, but what would you say to someone who was negligently treated in this way? "Gee, I'm sorry that your doctor yanked you off of these drugs cold turkey, possibly setting you up for an extremely painful and protracted illness that could last for years, cost you your career, friends, family, your house and who knows what else, but we have to call this addiction because it's the only word that anyone will pay attention to"?

 

On another thread you said that people who avoid calling it addiction are part of the problem, but anyone without some kind of agenda can see that quite the opposite is true.

[[...]]

I'm wondering, Photo, if you're not missing an important point or two.

 

Firstly, I'm thinking it's quite likely we'd all agree with you that "dependence" is far too soft of a word and, absolutely 100%, I also believe the person to whom we're speaking would most likely interpret it as you say.  Here's the missing point though.  We have no choice.  The term "dependence" is already out there in all the studies and literature and is the accepted medical term.  We had/have no say in that word.  Me, I'd even prefer it if it were the watered down SSRI "Discontinuation Syndrome" (notice how they conveniently left out the word "withdrawal" there too?).  And that's also far from ideal, but at least I believe it has hit home.  (And for sure, iatrogenically harmed, well, that ain't gonna fly).

 

Therefore, this huge problem we're presently up against with doctor denial, inappropriate medical treatment, disability issues, etc., etc.  needs to be combated.  Words conjure up images.  We know how the word "addiction" is going to be received.  And, for what it's worth, when I speak to people, I use the two words interchangeably, but it's all in context.

[[Lo...]]

Photo, you did say you were begging God to die when you were C/T'd off of 3mg Xanax. Some of us wouldn't have to beg God to die off of that dose. Some of us would have actually died from that kind of cold turkey. 3mg Xanax is 6mg Ativan. If I had to C/T off of that much, I would no longer be on this Earth. It would have been too much for my body to handle. Some people like yourself have the genetic makeup to physically endure being on those kinds of doses. Many of us could not do that.

[[pr...]]

Photo, you did say you were begging God to die when you were C/T'd off of 3mg Xanax. Some of us wouldn't have to beg God to die off of that dose. Some of us would have actually died from that kind of cold turkey. 3mg Xanax is 6mg Ativan. If I had to C/T off of that much, I would no longer be on this Earth. It would have been too much for my body to handle. Some people like yourself have the genetic makeup to physically endure being on those kinds of doses. Many of us could not do that.

 

 

no wonder i am such a severe case and taking so long to heal. c/td from 30 mg valium - 1750mg soma and 2mg xanax after being on a pretty high dose of klonopin. i tried to do a successful cross over from klonopin to valium but couldn't get lower than 30 mg. sorry, just had to vent on how much i did such a stupid thing. why didn't ANYONE tell me something else? i'm surprised i am not dead. i wish to God i was only on 3mg xanax or 6 mg ativan instead. by the way the last day of all the benzo's i was on - i had taken some ativan in my cocktail.  i know this is a debate kind of thread but i just had to vent off LF's post. 

 

my poor brain. :'(

[[Lo...]]

Photo, you did say you were begging God to die when you were C/T'd off of 3mg Xanax. Some of us wouldn't have to beg God to die off of that dose. Some of us would have actually died from that kind of cold turkey. 3mg Xanax is 6mg Ativan. If I had to C/T off of that much, I would no longer be on this Earth. It would have been too much for my body to handle. Some people like yourself have the genetic makeup to physically endure being on those kinds of doses. Many of us could not do that.

 

 

no wonder i am such a severe case and taking so long to heal. c/td from 30 mg valium - 1750mg soma and 2mg xanax after being on a pretty high dose of klonopin. i tried to do a successful cross over from klonopin to valium but couldn't get lower than 30 mg. sorry, just had to vent on how much i did such a stupid thing. why didn't ANYONE tell me something else? i'm surprised i am not dead. i wish to God i was only on 3mg xanax or 6 mg ativan instead. by the way the last day of all the benzo's i was on - i had taken some ativan in my cocktail.  i know this is a debate kind of thread but i just had to vent off LF's post. 

 

my poor brain. :'(

 

That's ok prettydaisis. Venting is totally ok. So sorry to hear about the experience you went through. I hate debates myself. I hated them even before these pills. I don't know how I get suckered into them. Maybe I am too emotional. All the addiction vs dependence stuff sounds too clinical to me. This is more of a horrific suffering type thing. I don't even care how people get there or whatever. Low dose, mid-dose, high dose. Feels like everyone goes through some type of profound suffering here.

 

Whatever we call this phenomenon, I just keep thinking "was my life really that out of whack that I ended up where I ended up? What was the core/root problem that drove me in this direction?". I still don't have all the answers.

[[Lo...]]

Sometimes I honestly wonder "Should we really care?" Why is it our responsibility to solve the problem that hadn't been solved in decades? Isn't it just better for each of us to focus on our own healing and well-being, first and foremost?

 

I don't think it's the responsibility of psychiatric survivors to fix psychiatry.

[Guest [Le...]]

Hi All,

 

Since the post below has already been quoted a few times, I'd just like to comment on it for the sake of members who may be in the middle of acute, following a cold turkey.

 

Dying, or even nearly dying, is certainly not the usual outcome after cold turkeys, even from much higher doses than the 3 mg of Xanax mentioned. In fact, I'm hard pressed to find an actual death directly caused by a benzo cold-turkey, and the known problem of seizures can be medically controlled temporarily until that danger has passed.

 

We may feel that this is what dying is like, but for someone in the midst of it, reading that a cold turkey death is even a remote possibility is pretty triggering.

 

This is just my two cents as a BB member (without my snazzy Moderator beret) - when I was trying to survive the aftermath of a relatively minor CT, this type of commentary would have sent me into a fear-frenzy.

 

Rather than rehashing the very common benzo feeling of imminent death, it might be good to instead read Success Stories by those who have survived benzos, and even cold turkeys. Here's an inspiring one:

 

  2 years and TIME is what it took!

 

Leslie

 

Photo, you did say you were begging God to die when you were C/T'd off of 3mg Xanax. Some of us wouldn't have to beg God to die off of that dose. Some of us would have actually died from that kind of cold turkey. 3mg Xanax is 6mg Ativan. If I had to C/T off of that much, I would no longer be on this Earth. It would have been too much for my body to handle. Some people like yourself have the genetic makeup to physically endure being on those kinds of doses. Many of us could not do that

[[be...]]

Hi All,

 

Since the post below has already been quoted a few times, I'd just like to comment on it for the sake of members who may be in the middle of acute, following a cold turkey.

 

Dying, or even nearly dying, is certainly not the usual outcome after cold turkeys, even from much higher doses than the 3 mg of Xanax mentioned. In fact, I'm hard pressed to find an actual death directly caused by a benzo cold-turkey, and the known problem of seizures can be medically controlled temporarily until that danger has passed.

 

We may feel that this is what dying is like, but for someone in the midst of it, reading that a cold turkey death is even a remote possibility is pretty triggering.

 

This is just my two cents as a BB member (without my snazzy Moderator beret) - when I was trying to survive the aftermath of a relatively minor CT, this type of commentary would have sent me into a fear-frenzy.

 

Rather than rehashing the very common benzo feeling of imminent death, it might be good to instead read Success Stories by those who have survived benzos, and even cold turkeys. Here's an inspiring one:

 

  2 years and TIME is what it took!

 

Leslie

 

Photo, you did say you were begging God to die when you were C/T'd off of 3mg Xanax. Some of us wouldn't have to beg God to die off of that dose. Some of us would have actually died from that kind of cold turkey. 3mg Xanax is 6mg Ativan. If I had to C/T off of that much, I would no longer be on this Earth. It would have been too much for my body to handle. Some people like yourself have the genetic makeup to physically endure being on those kinds of doses. Many of us could not do that

 

:thumbsup:

[[Ph...]]

I'm wondering, Photo, if you're not missing an important point or two.

 

Firstly, I'm thinking it's quite likely we'd all agree with you that "dependence" is far too soft of a word and, absolutely 100%, I also believe the person to whom we're speaking would most likely interpret it as you say.  Here's the missing point though.  We have no choice.  The term "dependence" is already out there in all the studies and literature and is the accepted medical term.  We had/have no say in that word.  Me, I'd even prefer it if it were the watered down SSRI "Discontinuation Syndrome" (notice how they conveniently left out the word "withdrawal" there too?).  And that's also far from ideal, but at least I believe it has hit home.  (And for sure, iatrogenically harmed, well, that ain't gonna fly).

 

Therefore, this huge problem we're presently up against with doctor denial, inappropriate medical treatment, disability issues, etc., etc.  needs to be combated.  Words conjure up images.  We know how the word "addiction" is going to be received.  And, for what it's worth, when I speak to people, I use the two words interchangeably, but it's all in context.

<<"We have no choice.  The term "dependence" is already out there in all the studies and literature and is the accepted medical term.  We had/have no say in that word.">>

 

"Accepted medical term."  Ahhh yes, our thought-leaders, God bless 'em.  We have no say in that word? 

 

Of course we have a choice and a say.  I make that choice often.  People's eye widen, they look a little shocked and uncomfortable, and then I discuss it with them.  They leave our conversation knowing the risk and the danger of benzos.  Makes my day.  One more person, maybe one more family, forewarned.  You don't get this done with "dependence."  You get it done with "addiction." 

 

This ain't nasal spray folks, this shit will ruin your life.

 

[[Lo...]]

I'm wondering, Photo, if you're not missing an important point or two.

 

Firstly, I'm thinking it's quite likely we'd all agree with you that "dependence" is far too soft of a word and, absolutely 100%, I also believe the person to whom we're speaking would most likely interpret it as you say.  Here's the missing point though.  We have no choice.  The term "dependence" is already out there in all the studies and literature and is the accepted medical term.  We had/have no say in that word.  Me, I'd even prefer it if it were the watered down SSRI "Discontinuation Syndrome" (notice how they conveniently left out the word "withdrawal" there too?).  And that's also far from ideal, but at least I believe it has hit home.  (And for sure, iatrogenically harmed, well, that ain't gonna fly).

 

Therefore, this huge problem we're presently up against with doctor denial, inappropriate medical treatment, disability issues, etc., etc.  needs to be combated.  Words conjure up images.  We know how the word "addiction" is going to be received.  And, for what it's worth, when I speak to people, I use the two words interchangeably, but it's all in context.

<<"We have no choice.  The term "dependence" is already out there in all the studies and literature and is the accepted medical term.  We had/have no say in that word.">>

 

"Accepted medical term."  Ahhh yes, our thought-leaders, God bless 'em.  We have no say in that word? 

 

Of course we have a choice and a say.  I make that choice often.  People's eye widen, they look a little shocked and uncomfortable, and then I discuss it with them.  They leave our conversation knowing the risk and the danger of benzos.  Makes my day.  One more person, maybe one more family, forewarned.  You don't get this done with "dependence."  You get it done with "addiction." 

 

This ain't nasal spray folks, this shit will ruin your life.

 

PhotoBugSF,

 

Spreading out awareness is great. Freaking out people on this forum who already have the awareness is not. If you keep going with your frightening, fear-inducing posts here, I am leaving this forum for good.

[[Fl...]]

Still waiting for anyone on the other side of this debate to address any of the points that clearly illustrate why the use of the addiction label is straight up dangerous for people who find themselves tangled up in this mess. Explain to me how you justify the grievous harm this label causes patients.

 

If you don't have anything more than "We should use certain language so people pay more attention" I can't take your argument seriously.

 

 

 

[[...]]

I'm wondering, Photo, if you're not missing an important point or two.

 

Firstly, I'm thinking it's quite likely we'd all agree with you that "dependence" is far too soft of a word and, absolutely 100%, I also believe the person to whom we're speaking would most likely interpret it as you say.  Here's the missing point though.  We have no choice.  The term "dependence" is already out there in all the studies and literature and is the accepted medical term.  We had/have no say in that word.  Me, I'd even prefer it if it were the watered down SSRI "Discontinuation Syndrome" (notice how they conveniently left out the word "withdrawal" there too?).  And that's also far from ideal, but at least I believe it has hit home.  (And for sure, iatrogenically harmed, well, that ain't gonna fly).

 

Therefore, this huge problem we're presently up against with doctor denial, inappropriate medical treatment, disability issues, etc., etc.  needs to be combated.  Words conjure up images.  We know how the word "addiction" is going to be received.  And, for what it's worth, when I speak to people, I use the two words interchangeably, but it's all in context.

<<"We have no choice.  The term "dependence" is already out there in all the studies and literature and is the accepted medical term.  We had/have no say in that word.">>

 

"Accepted medical term."  Ahhh yes, our thought-leaders, God bless 'em.  We have no say in that word? 

 

Of course we have a choice and a say.  I make that choice often.  People's eye widen, they look a little shocked and uncomfortable, and then I discuss it with them.  They leave our conversation knowing the risk and the danger of benzos.  Makes my day.  One more person, maybe one more family, forewarned.  You don't get this done with "dependence."  You get it done with "addiction." 

 

This ain't nasal spray folks, this shit will ruin your life.

 

PhotoBugSF,

 

Spreading out awareness is great. Freaking out people on this forum who already have the awareness is not. If you keep going with your frightening, fear-inducing posts here, I am leaving this forum for good.

 

Aww, LF, hugs    Honestly, I didn't read anything scary at all in Photo's post.    Isn't it interesting how two people can read exactly the same words and yet interpret them so completely differently.  I do believe he's merely reinforcing his argument that unless we use strong language like "addiction", all our hard work and energy spent in trying to educate others and prevent them from falling into the same trap as us BBs, will fall on deaf ears as long as we keep using and fighting for the word "dependence".

 

I'll say it again, I agree with Photo's sentiments 100% but when David is trying to fight Goliath, we have to be strategic about it ... and that, unfortunately, means having to accept and compromise (if you will).  And I'll also repeat that I, too, use the word "addiction" when chatting to someone one-on-one, but I use that word very carefully and I'll "personalize" it, as in using them (or their kid) as an example.  E.g. "Ever been given a script for narcotics after periodontal work?".  

 

(PS - LF, you know I'd never let you leave this forum for good anyway, I'd hunt you down and find you wherever you may be hiding!  ) 

[[wa...]]

Yes, I'd bring Lorrz Free back, too!  The forum would be less interesting without you, LF.  Just read what helps you.  Sometimes it takes some searching on here but its around.  WBB

[[be...]]

I suspect she'll be around as we all know where she lives. Also we can find her on any petition.

[[Ph...]]

Well that's just the thing.  The last straw for LF might have been the "this shit will ruin your life" statement.  It's a bummer to think that one's life may have been ruined by some jerk in a white coat that one trusted.  But what are we supposed to do here?  Curl up in our security blankets and suck our thumbs?  Continue to believe and parrot the bought-and-paid-for thought leaders, academics and industry shills who create soft medical terms that minimize the dangers of these pills?  But yet many if not most of my fellow buddies here believe that these newly-minted terms are appropriate, valid, true.  Fully invested.  They talk about the pain this level of honesty causes those who are currently addicted.  Oh, the stigma, the shame!  Please cut the crap.  You're not just ignoring an epidemic, you're helping to feed it.

 

I think of an appointment I had with my psychiatrist, oh, about 15 years ago.  I owe her a lot, actually.  She was my supplier and she knew it.  So, I asked her directly.  "I'm addicted to this stuff (Ativan) now, right?"  Without hesitation and with complete certainty, she said "yes."  She could have answered like the first guy and mumbled some nonsense about how benzos are like insulin, you know the routine...patient compliance via bullshit.  These people KNOW these drugs cause addiction, and they know they cause addiction fast.  But what do you do as a doctor in a world where there's some malpractice lawyer waiting to cash in?  You hide behind a word.  But, oh my, the word has surpassed all expectations.  The victims and their advocates now believe the word!

 

Come on folks.  You want your kids and eventually your grand kids to wind up in this forum, or worse yet in a detox clinic getting their brains fried because our culture wants to play games with words?  Does the prospect of this make you want to leave this thread?  Is it too much?  Well, do what you gotta do, I guess.

 

It's benzodiazepine ADDICTION.  Get the T-shirt.

 

[Guest [ba...]]

Interesting discussion.  Addiction certainly seems a more powerful, emotion-evoking word compared to dependence.  I'm not sure if more emotion is what people who are struggling to get thru withdrawal/recovery need.  Nor do I think that anybody in withdrawal needs the additional negative connotation that 'addict' implies to many people. 

 

I agree that there is a problem in handing this stuff out so freely as well as with people who take these pills so willingly (whether prescribed or taken recreationally).  Perhaps labelling substances like benzos and opiates as 'highly addicting substances' (right on the prescription bottle) would an effective term to use for people who are considering using these drugs.  It labels a shortcoming of the drug instead putting that onus on the user.  There is still a responsibility for potential users who should know that it's risky to take highly addicting substances.  There is also responsibility for the prescribing physician for recommending a highly addicting substance whether it be a benzo or an opiate.  Yes, there are times when these drugs are necessary - but they're not intended for long-term use and should carry appropriate warnings.  If a physician chooses to ignore the warnings of researchers and patients' experiences, then that decision needs to be transparent with risks fully acknowledged and accepted by BOTH parties.

 

People are looking for quick fixes for their anxieties and benzos often provide a quick fix (for a while).  However, if confronted with a choice between actual therapy (which takes longer) a quick fix with the following warning:

 

"Klonopin is a highly addicting drug.  The use of this drug for even short periods of time may result in dependence or addiction that may require a long and difficult withdrawal.  The use of this drug for more than two weeks is highly discouraged."

 

I think therapy starts to look better than the quick fix.

 

Let's not worry about labelling those who have found this forum the hard way.  Instead, let's use better product labelling to warn those who might end up here in 5-10 years.

[[Be...]]

Still waiting for anyone on the other side of this debate to address any of the points that clearly illustrate why the use of the addiction label is straight up dangerous for people who find themselves tangled up in this mess. Explain to me how you justify the grievous harm this label causes patients.

 

If you don't have anything more than "We should use certain language so people pay more attention" I can't take your argument seriously.

 

https://www.madinamerica.com/2017/07/uniting-critical-voices-collaborate/

 

This is one reason.  A very good reason.  We have to come together to overcome the status quo power structure that exists.  Remaining fragmented with personal agendas won't work to create any meaningful change.  No matter your stance regarding the dependence vs addiction discussion excluding one group or another for whatever reason diminishes the power of the goal which is change.  The language we use is irrelevant if no one listens.  Most I run into in real life speak and understand the language of addiction.  It holds their attention.  To affect change and overcome the powerful structure that controls our issues we need numbers and unity first.  When I start talking about benzos and dependence and iatrogenic harm the language doesn't make sense.  The idea doesn't really make sense, it's not in their experience or part of their understanding.  It sounds like an excuse to everyone who speaks the language of addiction which is most of them. 

 

I don't disagree with your message FloridaGuy, it's simply that most not affected by these meds don't speak the language or care that much.  They don't have the time or interest to pursue your (our) points much less change and overcome a lifetime of belief (addiction paradigm). 

 

To get the kind of broad change you are looking for everyone who has been affected by these psych meds has the stand together.  Your goals can't be achieved by being insensitive, uncaring, intolerant or outright dismissive of someone else's history.  Invalidating others experiences is exclusive and counterproductive to the goal of change.  We are stronger together than we are apart.  From my perspective and dare I say the existing power structures perspective with benzos addiction is the language that is spoken most of the time.  That being said not including that language excludes a large percentage of those who would be your ally in the broader goal called change. 

 

The lobby for change needs to include everyone despite their affiliation with one camp or another.  Otherwise we (you) will be seen as a fringe and radical element. Something that can largely be ignored and discarded and to date has been. 

 

Your (my) goal is simply not as easy as changing the language used to speak about benzos.     

[[Ki...]]

PhotoBugSF,

 

As I'm sure you're aware, this is a hotly debated subject on the forum.

 

In an advance effort to keep this thread civil, I'm asking anyone who responds to adhere to forum guidelines, including no anti-doctor statements, and being respectful towards fellow members.