Yes Gracesgran, the article in the Mail is shall we say rather more populist in its slant than his articles in the Telegraph, which tend to be more discerning 
I don't think the Telegraph would have included this gem of a paragraph for instance:
"This is why the disease model is championed by so many of the liberal elite — it’s a way they can show each other how caring and sympathetic they are. It makes them feel better about themselves.
Similarly, this is why people are wary of publicly challenging the idea — because they are fearful of being branded cold-hearted."
Granjura No-one is comparing children with brain tumours with adults with alcoholism - that is quite irrelevant to this discussion.
I notice that although Max Pemberton says alcoholism shouldn't be called an illness, he carefully avoids saying what he thinks it should be called. A condition? What differerence does it make what you call it?
Most ill-health, apart from infectious disease, is due to chronic conditions, and often the course of it can be affected by how much the patient contributes to its management. Type 2 diabetes is a prime example. Patients can choose to modify their diet and postpone the need for drug therapy, or they can choose not to, and perhaps suffer the consequences that people have a higher risk profile for, sooner rather than later. I don't believe that people with diabetes who don't manage their coindition well are actively choosing ill-health.
Even some forms of cancer are now regarded as chronic conditions that can be managed, rather than illnesses to which someone has to submit.
I don't think alcoholism should be regarded any differently.
