Letter to the Editor
Task force
Published Tuesday, June 17, 2008
Digg
del.icio.us
Facebook
Mixx
Reddit
Stumble It!June 12, 2008
To the editor:
I am happy to see that this community continues to work on the issue of working with people who have serious and persistent alcohol dependence.
What I am not happy about is that with all the work this community has done, all the meetings, coalitions and words, treatment in this community is negligible. We should be embarrassed as a community by the amount of treatment options a community of this size has to offer.
To my knowledge, if you are an adult male without insurance you have the option of going to 12-step meetings or getting in line for Ralph Perdue’s new eight-bed facility, FNA’s Long House or Old Minto. If you happen to be female, there are a couple other treatment options.
I am not sure of the total number of beds that are offered, but it is astoundingly low given the population of the region.
Research has consistently shown the co-occurrence of mental disorders with chemical dependency is about 60-70 percent, depending on which study you look at. It is especially high in homeless populations.
There is not one facility in this community that has what is called “treatment for co-occurring disorders.” There is one in Alaska that I am aware of, Clitheroe Center in Anchorage. The standard of care for the past 10-or-more years has been to treat both mental disorders and addiction simultaneously. The state has even combined their divisions to one “Behavioral Health” division.
Given this, how is it that we are surprised when we see intoxicated people wandering our streets? It is somehow their fault? The answer is obvious. We need better treatment options in this community. We are a rich state with a huge budget surplus. The technology is there. We know how to use it.
All the talk in the world by 100 task forces wont help a single person get sober and become a contributor to society again. When is this state going to stand up and take responsibility for caring for suffering addicts and alcoholics?
Gunnar Ebbesson
Fairbanks
Community Discussion
Newsminer.com doesn't necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full user's agreement.
The state didn't turn them into drunks, why should the state "stand up and take responsibility?" As far as I'm concerned every dollar the state spends "taking responsibility" is a waste of my tax dollars. The reason all of the "meetings, coalitions, and words" haven't made a difference is because the chronic inebriates don't want to sober up. You can't drag them to rehab and make them stay. Where are the family and friends? Where is the church? Where are the community service organizations? The state is not supposed to be every bodies Nanny and Big Brother. The reason government has become so big and intrusive is because we expect them to provide for our every want. What we need is more individual responsibility.
I agree with you, Mike, that family and friends, churches, and community organizations should be much more involved in helping the needy in all areas of society. If that were the case, there would be much less need for government intervention.
However, in all fairness, there are a few local churches that have seen the need of the addicted, and have started programs that offer help and support to those willing to participate.
I don't know much about the other programs, but I do know that Reformers Unanimous has an extremely high success rate, and is a program that really works, for those willing to attend the meetings and work the curriculum. I have personally seen many, many individuals freed from addiction to alcohol, drugs, and other things, in the five years this program has been in Fairbanks.
The Fairbanks chapter meets every Friday night at 7:00 at Bible Baptist Church. There are also satellite chapters at FCC and Northstar Center, for both men and women. These meetings are made possible by a group of loving, dedicated, giving people who reach out to the less fortunate, and who are available 24/7 to offer encouragement and support. The group is a wonderful support group.
If you know someone who needs help, encourage them to try Reformers Unanimous. It works.
Any good Reformers Unanimous does is completely negated by the Bible Baptist Church's sign.
The reason the state "stand(s) up and take(s) responsibility?" is that too many people (businesses downtown) feel the intoxicated among us detract from their money making schemes. Therefore it is a vital interest of society to waste your tax dollars.
You mean the sign that said to shoot Saddam in the head, then nuke him the dark? Dude, Griff-dude. God told them to say that. They love you. They love us all. Unless you cross Bush... then it's the fishes, see?
Mike_Starkey: 'The state didn't turn them into drunks, why should the state "stand up and take responsibility?"'
Let me ask it another way: Even though (let's suppose) you didn't personally turn anybody into a persistent inebriate, do you still have any responsibility to help such people out of their situations? Do you have any responsibility for your fellow man and fellow community member? Do you have what is called "social responsibility"? I believe that you do.
You ask, "Where are the family and friends? Where is the church? Where are the community service organizations?"
Sometimes, Mr. Starkey, these groups fail to provide enough of a supportive network to keep people from falling into a life of chronic inebriation. "The state" that you deride -- that is, the political organization we share that should be devoted to the general welfare -- has twin duties here: (1) help to create a society rich in social capital (http://fairbankspedestrian.wordpress.com...), so that people may have strong networks of friends, family, church, and private service organizations, and (2) provide another safety net so that the least fortunate of us may still receive help and better ourselves.
I find the cutthroat individualism of your questions morally repugnant and not worthy of a citizen.
--Paul Adasiak
"The Fairbanks Pedestrian"
Paul you jump from one extreme (starky) to you. As vehement as his comments sound yours sound just as closed minded and able to draw a circle excluding his thoughts which is in a way exactly what you are pract tracting against him for in your diatribe. Think about it.
You can lead a horse to water, but you cann't make him drink. You can force someone to treatment, but you cann't make him sober. Three hots and a cot, a trade off for a jail sentence. That is what these programs paid by millions of State dollars are for most of the people. AA is free and it works for alot of folks. Exactly how many chronics are there that the City Mayor is so concerned about. Maybe she should show as much concern for the rest of the honest, hardworking city folks who are waiting with baited breath for their tax bills in the mail.
With this attitude, why should any of you bother to feed the poor? Alcoholism is a genetic disorder. You should stop any goverment assisted diabetes, heart disease, cancer treatment, also.
I have to disagree Paul. While I think we should take care of each other, I see it as a choice, a choice that is taken away when the state takes our money (taxes) and forces us to pay for someone else's welfare. I would rather they cut taxes and stopped providing so many services. What you call "cutthroat individualism" I call personal responsibility.
A presidential candidate has proposed a plan to force us to put money into IRA's when we become employed. No thanks. I would rather that I am FREE to do what I please with the fruits of my labor.
Comrade adasiak has it all wrong...I find his obvious socialist/communist leanings even more repugnant than starkey's cold shoulder...here we have the extremes of right and left...adasiak promotes the left's cradle to grave control and starkey the "every man for himself" attitude of the conservative right...as in most things, the answer probably lies somewhere in the middle...
treatment center long term success rates are actually pretty poor. the ones who stay sober long term after treatment are the ones who continue the treatment afterwards with 12 programs. treatments and a good spin dry jump start for many alcoholics, but isn't the answer long term. they ARE costly and not an absolutely necessary middle man part of the over all solution.
families of chronic enebriates are either enebriates themselves or are so appalled with their enebriate family member that the ostracize them. churches have stepped up wonderfully here in fairbanks to help these people. the mission has a year long program. some churches have set up sober houses around fairbanks. the churches just tend to not make a lot of noise about the work they do.... the left hand not knowing what the right hand is doing thing i guess. the state has tried in the past. but you know how governments are.... to inefficient to accomplish much of anything.
you can't treat someone who doesn't want it, and most chronic enebriates don't want it. just how much ARE we our brothers keeper? what am i saying? i'm saying that the 12 step programs ARE the best solution. but you can't force people into those. at least they worked for me. i have a buddy i just talked to who has been through more treatments than he can remember. he is still out there battling the demons. i went to the 12 step program route and now, this person (with zero possibility of rehabilitation-as pronounced by the court prosecutor) has been in recovery now for 3 years and am now a law abiding tax paying member of society.
A person needs to take care of themselves. If someone refuses to change, you can throw a million dollars at them and they still won't change. Many illness can be managed, especially alcoholism. The person with the illness needs to make a choice. Many of the chronics have made their choice, which is their right.
mike, woodman(esp. first post), and of course (and as usual), exchronic are right.
Agreed.
What about the cost of an FAS baby? Begin now to teach every boy and girl the cause of FAS babies. Require it 3 hours a year. Then, ten years down the road the state can stop paying for FAS children being born because it was taught in school and the ramifications were explained. FAS IS A PREVENTABLE MENTAL ILLNESS. Why should our state have to pay for someone's bad choices?
Individual responsibility. Respect yourself, respect others. There is a difference between "law abiding and law breaking."
I am really confused!! What taxes are you talking about? I looked all over my last pay stub and for the life of me I can not find where the State of Alaska is charging me a tax. Please explain.
Is being lazy and shiftless also genetic? Is being a chronic welfare recipient a domintant, inherited trait usually found in the XX chromosomes (that's female for the readers educated at public schools)? You bet it is. The more government provides to the "less fortunate" (using the money I WORK for), the more being less fortunate becomes a lifestyle CHOICE. Welfare, which was designed as a temporary, stop-gap measure, has evolved into a professional calling.
It all boils down to personal responsibility. I choose not to drink or seek monetary assistance from the government to support my family. I choose to work two jobs to take care of our needs. Someone else may choose to park his or her rear end on the couch and let the government take care of them. It's my personal choice to retain control of my life. It may be someone else's personal choice to relinquish control of his or her life to alcohol or welfare.
I think a huge problem with most addiction treatment programs is that they replace one addiction with another (god). Reformers Unanimous, AA, NA etc all are religion based, which really doesn't work for some people.
Geek speaks-Property taxes, vehicle taxes, business taxes...every thing you buy has a tax fixed into the cost, and the federal grant money this state so loves to spend comes from your federal taxes. There is no free lunch.
Aidey -- you hit the nail on the head...
Replacing one life consuming addiction with another.
What a great deal!
NOT!
Government funded treatment of chronic inebriates makes sense as long as the focus is efficiency, not "morality". At a certain level government funded treatment of chronic inebriates is likely to be the most cost-efficient way to prevent the costs associated with traffic accidents, police calls, FAS, and other health costs like ER visits caused by drunkenness.
My above comments have just been called "closed minded" and "socialist/communist". Maybe I brought that on myself by using inflammatory phrases like "cutthroat individualism" and "morally repugnant".
Let me try again, without anything that could be interpreted as personal. (This way, you may imagine that the following doesn't apply to *you*.) Since I don't believe in absolute, immutable truth, I am usually happy to be argued with and persuaded, as long as you can leave the ad hominem attacks out of it.
(1) Individuality is necessary and should be protected. But individualism is not a sufficient moral or philosophical basis for civil society. It says nothing about cooperation, kindness, or obligation -- all of which are essential when people come together to live in community.
(2) Not everything boils down to personal responsibility. Some forces that affect us are out of our control. For example: the conditions of our birth (are we born with FAS?), our upbringing (which permanently affects our neurochemistry), and the opportunities available in the culture we find ourselves in (are there jobs for unskilled laborers that pay a living wage?) -- all of these affect us but are circumstances created by others.
As agents who both directly and indirectly affect the lives of others, we have an obligation to those others. That obligation may be to help them directly, or it may be to create circumstances under which they can thrive and give back to society.
Let me reiterate those first two points: Individuality is necessary and must be protected. Personal responsibility cannot be denied, nor can we deny that some individuals make bad decisions. But individualism and personal responsibility are insufficient social principles; they alone cannot do the moral "work" we demand of them. Other principles, like social responsibility or mutual obligation, must come into play in any society that wishes to rise above barbarism.
(continued next post)
(continued)
(3) We rarely need for "the state" -- or whatever we call the body authorized to compel people -- to foster individualism. We have enough store of individualism and self-interest on our own; the state must merely protect it.
(4) One of the state's goals should be to foster community, so that we have the opportunity to form reliable networks of family, friends, church, and charitable non-profit agencies. The state should provide the infrastructure so that community and social action may thrive.
(5) Another of the state's goals should be to help protect those people whom we -- through our collective and usually unintended actions -- have helped put in the hardest circumstances.
(6) Personal responsibility is important. But an excessive zeal for punishing (or denying help to) those who make bad choices can hinder our ability to do social good. That is, if our highest concern is making sure that nobody must ever pay for helping another out of his or her bad choice, we will have to abandon all hope of doing social good -- because some irresponsible people would *always* slip through. If we wish to have a society that performs collective action or promotes the general welfare, we must put a higher priority on helping others than on denying those who would take advantage.
--Paul
I'm sorry Mike but you are misinformed. Our property taxes do not go to the state. Vehicle taxes help subsidise D.O.T. What Business Tax? Federal Grant Monies do not go to inebriates.
Geek speaks-You don't think any of your local tax dollars go to directly or indirectly fund or subsidize every aspect of every government program within the community, be it local, state, or federal? Almost every state or federal funded program requires local matching money of some kind. Not to mention the cost of supporting the program with local services, which are paid for by your property tax dollars. The tax exempt status that non profits enjoy are great for the non profit, but the Borough and City still need to collect a fixed amount of money, so the property taxes of those who don't enjoy an exemption are a little higher to make up for their free ride. Last year Fairbanks started requiring all businesses to purchase a business license. That's just another source of revenue for the government. If you believe that there is no federal money going to the many alcohol related treatment programs, then you are extremely naive. As far a vehicle taxes subsidising DMV, the Alaska state constitution doesn't allow any monies collected to be designated for any specific cause. All monies go into the general fund and the legislature allocates the use of all funds. The overall point is that any time the government of any level funds anything it is costing you money. Even the billions of dollars being collected by the state from the oil companies is costing you money. No business pays taxes. You pay their taxes for them through higher prices. I am not misinformed, you are just not taking the time to view the overall big picture.
Mr. Ebbeson has made his point. The point is that if someone needed, and wanted, substance abuse treatment for a cooccuring disorder in the Interior they would not be able to get it. There are not enough treatment programs to meet the demand. The waitlists to get into treatment (these being people want to get sober) are up to 9 months long. When a person has a disease, and alcoholism/drug addiction is a disease, then what does it say wbout our society that we do not provide care for those in need? We would all die of shame if our community did not provide chemotherapy to those sufferring from cancer! How can we sit back and not offer treatment to those suffering from addiction? We all have responsibility in helping those, who may be trying to help themselves already, but lack the resources to do so. Thank you Mr. Ebbeson for bringing this to our attention.