following another thread where alcoholism has been discussed- I'd be really interested in your thoughts on this. I remember studying the French author, Zola, and the fatalism inherent in his works- alcoholism and other vices being just a terrible fate that can't be fought. I must say that I feel it is wrong to take away responsibility of choice from people- sympathy and support, yes, but to say to people that they were either genetically marked to becoming (insert alcoholics, bullimic, thief, peodophile) ... is just the way it is and little can be done- is not helpful and is actually trapping those people in destructive behaviour- for themseves, and for their families. OH's father was an alcoholic and they all suffered so, although he was not violent- and he died very young of his 3rd heart attack- refused to make any changes to his diet or alcohol intake. Why do many people seem to put alcoholism in a different 'bracket' - is it because they know that they could 'tip over the line' easily themselves. I know alcoholics (the very successsful ones, never in the gutter- but who are alcoholics all the same as they can't function without large doses of alcohol)- who are totally intolerant of over-weight people who 'stuff their faces' for instances. Or very succdessful people who drink heavily and take sleeping tablets and anti-depressants, etc, but who would scorn at someone who smokes hash or takes e's.
It is in fact amazing how similar different addictions are.
Choice is always there- tough, hard, difficult- yes- but choice there is. Choice first of all to seek help. Many illnesses offer no choice, whatsoever- and I do think there is a difference. Where that fine line is - now that is hard to say.