Judge says alcoholism no disease

Fort Wayne Journal Gazette ^ | July 29, 2005 | Sara Eaton

[RobFromGa]

Judge says alcoholism no disease
Gull says attorney showed no evidence
By Sara Eaton
The Journal Gazette

Gull

During a sentencing Thursday in Allen Superior Court involving a drunken driving fatal crash, Judge Fran Gull said alcoholism is not a disease – a comment that contradicts the beliefs of much of the medical field.

Gull later defended her statement, saying she was referring specifically to the case at hand.

Gull, who is one of three criminal judges for the court, also oversees drug court – a program that began in 1997 aims to rehabilitate non-violent offenders with drug and alcohol addictions through 12 to 18 months of intensive supervision and treatment. Participants must take other steps to improve their lives, and if they remain substance free, their criminal charges are dismissed.

Before Gull sentenced Todd Anthony Bebout, defense attorney Mitch Hicks asked Gull to consider Bebout’s disease, referring to his addictions to alcohol and drugs.

“He had opportunities to rehabilitate himself, but it’s a disease. It’s not only a matter of wanting to quit,” Hicks argued. “Well, you are the drug court director, you know.”

Minutes later, while reviewing what she would consider in sentencing, Gull said Bebout didn’t have a disease.

“It’s not a disease,” she said. “People say that time and again, but it’s not.”

Gull continued by explaining that the man had a choice, and his choices led to the death of a woman. She also emphasized the man’s failed attempts at rehabilitation through the criminal justice system over the years, which included counseling, probation and intensive treatment.

Alcoholism is recognized as a disease by both the American Medical Association and the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, which is responsible for 90 percent of the nation’s research on alcohol addiction, spokeswoman Ann Bradley said.

It’s a disease that involves compulsive use that cannot be controlled until the alcohol or addictive substance is removed, Bradley said.

The symptoms of the disease, according to the institute’s Web site, include craving alcohol, loss of control, physical dependence and tolerance. Those afflicted by the chronic disease can experience withdrawal symptoms, such as anxiety, sweating, shaking or nausea.

Bradley said alcoholism is considered a brain disease and that there are medications available to help alcoholics. The difference between the addiction being a disease and a bad choice is the loss of control over how much one drinks.

When questioned about the comment later in the day, Gull defended her statements made in court. She said her comment was referring specifically to that case only. She said the attorney who brought up Bebout’s addictions invited her to comment about the situation.

“He invited me to consider it as a mitigating circumstance for sentencing,” Gull said. “But there was no evidence to show that it was a disease.”

Gull said she would have considered it had Hicks presented a medical diagnosis to establish his client’s disease. Although she did not ask for such evidence during the hearing or even mention that it was lacking, Gull later noted in a sentencing order that the argument was not supported.

Addiction doesn’t necessarily mean disease, she said, and part of the problem is the lack of consistent information, saying that the topic is still debated among various professional fields.

There are times when Gull has received medical information supporting that an offender has an addiction that has been diagnosed as a disease, she said. In those situations, which do arise in drug court, she orders the offender to follow doctor’s orders and makes that a requirement of participation in the program.

“I very specifically considered what I had in front of me,” she said. “There wasn’t anything that supported it.”

[Jeff Head]

Amen.

[absolootezer0]

amazing, a judge that actually knows this and isn't letting the client blame his problems on someone else?
that's one of the things i love about AA, they hold that the problem is personal and don't try to blame it on anyone or anything else. if everyone did this, we wouldn't ever hear about things like the coffee and obiesity suits against mcdonalds, and this bill we're trying to pass to protect gun manufacturers would be unneeded.

[Alberta's Child]

The American Psychiatric Association used to consider homosexuality a mental disorder. In 1973 they removed it from their official list of psychiatric disorders -- not because of any new research or advances in medical science on the subject, but in response to political pressure. Cases like this are a classic example of why "the medical profession" (as opposed to "medical professionals") is often one of the least reliable sources of information for someone who is seeking an objective assessment on a subject.

A lot of folks here probably remember the infamous incident that occurred at a NY Jets football game back in January of 2004. A visibly-intoxicated Joe Namath made a public disgrace of himself during a televised interview on ESPN, answering several questions from reporter Suzy Kolber by saying: "I want to kiss you!"

What people may not have seen, though, is an interview Namath gave to Bryant Gumbel on HBO's Real Sports show late in 2004 after Namath had been through an alcohol rehabilitation program that he had checked into almost immediately after the on-air incident. That was one of the most frank, blunt interviews I've ever seen, and Namath was very clear about what his treatment involved.

"I learned that I didn't have a drinking problem," he said, "I learned that I have a Joe Namath problem, and that I would always be a drunk until I addressed that problem."

Alcoholism isn't a "disease" in the classic sense of the term at all -- it's a symptom of other disorders that could include depression or other psychological conditions.

[Stu Cohen]

I believe alcoholism is a disease, and is passed along in the genes.

This all boils down to how one defines "disease".

Sometimes I get in a bad mood. That could be a disease. Sometimes I am hungry. I have a "food imbalance". It was inherited. When my mothers stomach was empty, she had a food imbalance too. The same thing happens to me. Ergo, I inherited "the gene".

It's really just as simple as to what level you define somethign as a disease.

[Porterville]

sh*t there goes my care plans using the ADA

[Porterville]

sh*t there goes my career plans using the ADA

[Stu Cohen]

Cases like this are a classic example of why "the medical profession" (as opposed to "medical professionals") is often one of the least reliable sources of information for someone who is seeking an objective assessment on a subject.

Well said.

[Alberta's Child]

See #43. I am not questioning whether an alcoholic is afflicted with some kind of medical condition. My point is that alcoholism is usually a symptom of something else -- not a "disease."

[Conservomax]

Alchoholism: Disease? Yes. Excuse? No.

[BibChr]

You're right, though I think the primary motivation for making everything a disease is philosophical.

Dan

[Stu Cohen]

I have a lib acquaintance that claims alcohol and drug additions are diseases just like my heart arrhythmia.

I've just been diagnosed with one. If you don't mind my asking, what kind do you have, and what do they give you for it.

[JRjr]

You should attend one of my family's reunions. Out of my parents 60-odd direct descendants, there are about 25% of us in recovery. Plus a couple more I'm keeping a meeting chair warm for...

[Jeff Head]

GREAT post.

[Glenn]

I learned that I have a Joe Namath problem, and that I would always be a drunk until I addressed that problem.

Because Namath didn't call it a disease, it is not a disease?

The pathology and progression of alcoholism is well defined. I happen to believe there is a "gay gene" as well.

Keep an open mind, eh? It will amaze you what you might conclude.

[Knitting A Conundrum]

Alcoholism absolutely runs in my family...long history of people every generation dealing with it...but as they told me in a drug class my son had to attend...even if you don't come from a background where substance abuse is common, put enough of that stuff in your system often enough, and you too will be addicted.

I didn't have a drinking problem, cause I chose not to make it one.

But I did have a 3 pack a day cigarette problem, which I kicked 8 years ago, almost 9 years. It's not easy. Detoxing is hard, but it just takes time.

The question really is: once you detox are you going to live clean, or go back into your substance problem?

My brother has both an alcohol problem (he binge drinks, but not often enough to get addicted, thank goodness), and has tried to quit smoking multiple times. Once, he had a medical condition that kept him off cigarettes for months. But he went back anyway.

The real disease problem (mental compulsion, or whatever you want to call it) comes not after you detox, but what happens after that...addictive behavior leads one to go back into the substance of choice, or sometimes, to substitute some other behavior.

It's still a choice. If you know you're going to drink, and then you drive and commit vehicular homicide, you are guilty of making very bad choices, especially the driving while under the influence.

Alcoholism doesn't make someone drink and drive. That's choice.

[uncitizen]

No. It's because their parents were alcoholics.

[Stu Cohen]

You should attend one of my family's reunions. Out of my parents 60-odd direct descendants, there are about 25% of us in recovery. Plus a couple more I'm keeping a meeting chair warm for...

Something that is often overlooked is ethincity. For instance, people of Irish decent can hold alcohol better than the marjority of Asian people. In Germany, beer is food, even for kids ... but they rarely act out in violent intoxication after 4 pints of beer as say, and Englishman might.

Many Koreans are allergic to alcohol altogether, as they do not have sufficient liver enzymes to break it down, and it is converted into all kinds of nasty things in their body.

There are many ways we can view alcohol, nd how it affects families and groups. But, the fact is that the act of picking up a drink and taking it as voluntary. And not doing so will not hurt a person.

There is a theory, and I am 100% serious, that circumcised infants develop an "endorphin deficiency" due to an increased production of pain receptors in their body due to the procedure. It has been statiscially shown that this group has a higher tendance to consumer opiates (heroin, or painkillers and the like) to compensate for the lack of saturation of endogenour opiods.

Is this possible? Absolutely. If we can have serotonin deficiencies that can be treated with Paxil, should we can have endorphin deficiencies.

The fact is that everyone walking on the face of the earth today has 'a disease'. Everyone. There are no exceptions.

Therefore, I only use the word when someone has a life-threatening one which requires extensive medication to sustain life.

Nobody is right or wrong in this debate, it's like arguing whether the color blue is pretty. Everyone just has their own definition of the term.

[Alberta's Child]

You can't have it both ways, chief. Let's go back to Post #26 and review what you stated there:

Ever been in a detox ward? Ever been in a rehab facility?

You can't use a detox ward and a rehab facility as supporting evidence that alcoholism is a "disease," then turn around and immediately shrug off what Namath himself learned in his rehabilitation program (in what was likely one of the most respected and effective alcohol rehabilitation facilities in the United States, too).

The pathology and progression of alcoholism is well defined. I happen to believe there is a "gay gene" as well.

There may be something that is defined as a "gay gene" or an "alcoholism gene" by medical science, but these will never be definitively linked to homosexuality and alcoholism -- mainly because medical science will have no way of explaining why so many people with these genes don't exhibit any of the symptoms of these conditions.

[Alberta's Child]

In Germany, beer is food, even for kids ... but they rarely act out in violent intoxication after 4 pints of beer as say, and Englishman might.

That's an excellent point, and it illustrates how the effects of alcohol are often linked to genetics more than anything else. There is probably something inherent in the genes of Anglo-Saxons that differs from the genes of Celts, which would explain why the same four pints of beer could produce dramatically different results in the German and the Englishman.

[Glenn]

You can't use a detox ward and a rehab facility as supporting evidence that alcoholism is a "disease," then turn around and immediately shrug off what Namath himself learned in his rehabilitation program (in what was likely one of the most respected and effective alcohol rehabilitation facilities in the United States, too).

If you would go to a detox ward and rehab center, you would understand that it is called a "disease". The Namath quote did not exclude that, did it? He simply spoke that which he came to conclude via rehab. It's part and parcel the desired result. A way to deal with the disease.