> They don't stop because they cannot stop due to a physical addiction.
What you wrote here is actually the issue I was trying to communicate: The notion that addicts are helpless and that the drug and/or society has already determined their outcome is the problem. This sets up a defeatist attitude where people feel like they shouldn't even try to overcome addiction because their contribution to the equation is 0%.
Different addiction programs handle this in a different way. AA/NA famously have the "submitting to a higher power" concept that is very divisive, but appears to work for many people. Other programs basically teach the user that they do have some control over their life, and that they need to start exercising little bits of control to move in the right direction (even if they can't choose to end their addiction tomorrow).
What doesn't work is telling people "it's not your fault" or trying to comfort people by blaming their problems on purely exterior sources. Addiction treatment specialists refer to this as "rescuing behavior" and will go out of their way to discourage it from support groups and in friends and family.
This is the problem with addiction explanations that try to shift the blame to society: They give the user an excuse to continue believing that they are 100% victim with no control over navigating their way out of their situation.
Why don't addicts get large doses of intravenous NAD+ by default? That would alleviate 90% of their addiction inside brain as they are typically brutally NAD+ depleted and on the hunt for anything that raises NAD+/FAD+ in the brain.
Conflating a holistic approach that acknowledges the material effect of the context around a person with the assertion that those things existing nullifies the contribution of said person's agency is one of the very stupidest contributions of individualism to society. Things can materially make abuse more likely. Actions can be taken _by society_ that will make any particular _individual_ abuse less likely, whatever the specifics in each individual situation. It is still largely effort by an abuser and their closest contacts that will make _specific, individual_ abuse less likely in the future. None of these analyses contradict.
There's a division between mitigation, where empowering people to get rid of their addiction, and root cause, around changing society to stop pushing people into addiction.
Not looking more broadly means youll never fix problems like doctors over prescribing pain killers, especially without explaining their risks
It's two separate conversations, for different purposes
Why is it not someone’s fault when they get addicted after choosing to do a known-addictive substance? “Not their fault” certainly doesn’t describe all addicts.
They don’t need to be faultless to deserve compassion.
The more life experience I have the more I conclude that assessing the existence and extent of someone's fault is a pointless exercise. People tend to exhaust enormous amounts of pointless energy stuck in that place.
Your last sentence drives it home. They deserve compassion. Who cares about subjective assessment of fault once you reach that conclusion?
What you wrote here is actually the issue I was trying to communicate: The notion that addicts are helpless and that the drug and/or society has already determined their outcome is the problem. This sets up a defeatist attitude where people feel like they shouldn't even try to overcome addiction because their contribution to the equation is 0%.
Different addiction programs handle this in a different way. AA/NA famously have the "submitting to a higher power" concept that is very divisive, but appears to work for many people. Other programs basically teach the user that they do have some control over their life, and that they need to start exercising little bits of control to move in the right direction (even if they can't choose to end their addiction tomorrow).
What doesn't work is telling people "it's not your fault" or trying to comfort people by blaming their problems on purely exterior sources. Addiction treatment specialists refer to this as "rescuing behavior" and will go out of their way to discourage it from support groups and in friends and family.
This is the problem with addiction explanations that try to shift the blame to society: They give the user an excuse to continue believing that they are 100% victim with no control over navigating their way out of their situation.