to be pissed off at the constant assumptions of addiction on Relationships?

[bogeyface]

Prompted by a thread but not about a thread iykwim!

There have been a couple of threads in the last few days about men going out and getting absolutely out of their trees with booze and then either not coming home or coming home and behaving like a wanker.

There is always a large proportion of replies suggesting the the man is an alcoholic, without any evidence of that at all apart from the odd bender. I am not talking about threads where there is evidence of alcoholism, but threads where these comments are made after he has a one off bender.

Why is it assumed that he must have an addiction issue instead of him just being a totally selfish thoughtless twat? Just because selfish and/or violent behaviour happens when alcohol is involved, surely it doesnt mean that the man must be addicted to it?

If a man goes on a total bender once every few weeks or months, doenst contact his OH, becomes abusive or violent when he does come home, turns his phone off etc, then he is a tosser, not necessarily an alcoholic and I am getting very pissed off at the constant assumptions that he must be. It implies that it isnt entirely his fault that he behaves like this, it his addiction, and also detracts from the main issue which is how his behaviour affects his wife and family.

So, AIBU to be fed up with these internet diagnoses that possibly cause more problems than they solve?

Annnd..... I have put this in the wrong place, sorry

I can see why. You don't have to be a soak, down the pub at opening, or pouring vodka on your breakfast to be an alcoholic.

You can be an alcoholic, and have a problem with intermittent binges.

The definition of an addiction, is basically of affects how you function, your family, your life hour jobs. If it happens repeatedly and you can't stop you have a problem.

It's possible they could be both. But if someone is binging to the point they have these kinds of issues, then yes they do have an alcohol problem.

Not alcoholics drink everyday. An alcoholic can be someone who when they have one drink they can not stop. Even if its only once a year. An alcoholic can be someone who drinks once a month, til they are wrecked. An alcoholic can be someone who becomes abusive when drunk, they are an alcoholic because (even though its is hurting them and their family) they still drink.
There are many different versions of an alcoholic and the signs can be very subtle to those on the inside who have become used to it.

But that is my point, the men that have been accused of being alcoholics can and do drink normally according to the threads posted, but there are still people telling OPs that their OHs are alcoholics. When in fact they are not, they are selfish tossers who can drink normally 90% of the time but occasionally choose not to and the wife suffers for it.

I agree with you OP-I don't think one off benders mean you are an alcoholic.

But the op isn't talking one off benders. Op said, go off on a bender once every few weeks, months and does xyz.

Then yes that's an alcohol problem.

I haven't read the threads but an occasional bender is different to a one off. If a person knows they are a tosser but drinks anyway (even rarely) and doesn't care about the impact on others. Then they are an alcoholic. If they drink a normal amount and have once got out an got drunk and been abusive, they are a tosser hut not an alcoholic, iyswim

So what is an alcoholic then? BEcause I understood to be someone who cannot drink normally.

I do not see that someone who can drink normally most of the time and then CHOOSES to go on a bender once a month (in the case of one thread on here), is an alcoholic, sorry but I simply dont agree that this is the case.

I think that the drinking is just a symptom of their bloody appalling selfish behaviour. Not everyone who drinks to the point of incapacity is an alcoholic in the same way that not every alcoholic drinks to the point of incapacity.

I dont think it is an alcohol problem house, I think it is using alcohol as a weapon to hurt someone, it could just as easily be words, drugs, fists, money etc. Its just the weapon of choice to some people.

I don't know the answer. Perhaps there isn't one definitive one. I suppose it depends if there is a "destructive" relationship and then it depends to what extent.

I meant a "destructive" relationship with alcohol, but perhaps it could include actually a wider sense in relationship to the world, as nothing is done in isolation.

An alcoholic is someone whose drinking is a problem. So going on a bender once a month, causing hurt to your family, not caring and doing it anyway is an alcoholic. Their drinking is causing problems.

Alcoholics can drink normally. You are stuck on stereotypes. An alcohol problem, is a problem. If it affects your behaviour, negatively as you have described. At a regular frequency, be it daily, monthly, weekly.

Plus if people do it knowing they behave like that and it affects their family. It's a problem. It's hard for anyone to discuss with you when you can't give any exact backgrounds, histories, incidents rather than a straw man.

Would it help if instead of alcoholic they used different terms? The DVLA defines these terms as following:

Alcohol misuse:
? a state which, because of
consumption of alcohol, causes
disturbance of behaviour, related
disease or other consequences, likely
to cause the patient, his/her family or
society harm now, or in the future,
and which may or may not be
associated with dependence?.

Alcohol dependence:
?A cluster of behavioural, cognitive
& physiological phenomena that
develop after repeated alcohol use &
which include a strong desire to take
alcohol, difficulties in controlling its
use, persistence in its use despite
harmful consequences, with evidence
of increased tolerance and sometimes
a physical withdrawal state.?

As you can see, many people fit these definitions when they may not be aware of it. Out of the people I know who drink I'd say a majority actually fit the definition of misusing alcohol, and a substantial proportion even of dependence. Just because a lot of people in this country drink unwisely doesn't mean it's OK behaviour, sometimes people use that to justify it.

I would say the couple of threads I have just scanned are having issues with alcohol. Spending money the family doesn't have is a big sign.

Also for what its worth, I don't think anyone is using the label as an excuse.

Alcoholic 'status' IMO is when the person in question has a destructive relationship with alcohol (I think medically speaking ,alcoholism is when you develop a physical Tolerance to it)

I know of someone who only drank a few times a year but when he did he would blackout,he saw himself as someone who couldn't drink sensibly and went to AA and remained sober.

I personally don't think it matters if you only get wankered 2-3 times a year,if you drink yourself into unconsciousness -you have a problem with alcohol.

Alcohol is a problem when it's costing the drinker more than money. And from the few recent threads from partners who are suffering because of their DH/P's drinking then the DP fits the description.

Of course what is clear to people on the outside looking in - is not always clear to the alcohol abuser. After all the Alky's mantra in 'always somebody else to blame'.

Am wondering if the OP's DP has a problem but OP doesn't want that label attaching to them. It's not always the alcoholic who is denial.

Nope, he rarely drinks and when he does he only has a couple. The last time he got roaring was his stag night 2.5 years ago (and boy was he roaring, he came in, sat down, slid onto the floor, got the giggles and fell asleep!).

I just think that attaching labels can be at best unhelpful and at worst damaging. To an OP who is having severe problems with a partner who doesnt drink often but disappears or becomes violent after the odd bender, she may end up believing that he cant help it if she accepts a diagnosis by forum of alcoholism. She may be more reluctant to leave an abusive relationship than she would otherwise be, if it lulls her into believing that he has a problem that she can cure.

Rather, I think it would be better to not bandy these labels about, and focus on the repercussions that the OP is dealing with ie: desertion, violence, verbal abuse etc.

This is what I never understand about MN.

No-one is actually saying "OP, he is def an alcoholic, run, now" they are tossing out suggestions. If it is definitely not the case, the OP can say so. If it is a possibility, it might give them something to think about.

But people always accuse others of diagnosing.

Really. It's mad.

Actually bogeyface, I think the opposite. Mostly people are deeply afraid when they are confronted with the label of alcoholism. In a society where drinking is more or less the norm, going out and getting lashed to one extent or another is within the boundaries of acceptable but alcoholism is not. I think the intention, rather than to suggest these people can't help it because they are problem drinkers, is to say the OP can't help the situation - because this is not 'social drinking gone awry' but something more serious. Something the OP can't change.

If someone gets smashed, comes home, giggles, passes out and Goodnight Vienna... superb, no issues there.

If they come home having had alcohol in any quantity, on a range of squiffy to shit-faced, but are rude, insulting and aggressive, they have a problem with alcohol, in that it changes their behaviour in a negative manner.

all abusive men will find a reason to abuse: I'm stressed at work, depressed, I had a drink, the kids are playing up, you don't have sex with me enough.

Many times the drink IS held as an excuse for shitty behaviour, but mostly OPs are told that it's not an acceptable excuse to be treated like shit, no matter the reason.

I don't think people DO get hung up on the addiction, they are more likely to dismiss it and tell the OP to sort out the rest of it and tell the H/P to get help or get out until he does sort himself out.

Thats what I meant above Happy when I said that alcohol is just their weapon of choice. They know that staying out all night, or coming home and smashing up the house (or the OP :() hurts her, and because he wants to hurt her, he doesnt stop doing it.

Whether the man is an alcoholic or not is irrelevant and I dont believe it helps an OP at all. There are women who would ,when faced with that, decide to stay and help him through it rather that do the safer option which is to leave agreeing to return after he has sorted himself out, when without that label they would be more likely to leave.

I simply dont see that it is helpful, all an abused OP needs to know is that it isnt her fault and that remains true no matter what his mental, physical or emotional state is.

In short, I feel it muddys the waters and can confuse matters to the point where an OP could feel bad for leaving a man with a problem that isnt really his fault.......

You know it happens, we have all read threads like that :(

All alcoholics/dependant drinkers will find a reason to use.