An Effective Alternative to Drug Intervention Programs

 It may come as a surprise to most readers but the truth is professional interventions are not helpful to anyone. A professional intervention is defined as an unannounced meeting among family, friends, a professional and the substance user. This type of intervention is called a "family intervention." In such interventions, substance users are brought into a room where their family, friends and a professional interventionist await them. If done according to plan, the substance user has no idea of the meeting or the reason for or the topic of the meeting. Upon entering the room the substance user is instructed by the professional interventionist to sit down and listen as each family member and friend reads pre-written letters about the damage the substance user has caused.

The rationale behind this method is actually based on the denial theory talked about in some of my previous articles. The idea is that if family members and friends confront the substance user with how hurtful the substance user's behavior is, then the substance user will suddenly understand, admit they need help and decide to stop the troublesome behavior by attending a treatment program. This, of course, presupposes that denial exists and the "addict" or "alcoholic" (both erroneous terms) is clueless as to the pain and anger family and friends must endure because of the drinking and drugging.

The ambush (intervention) is not only based on the false assumption of the denial theory, it is fraught with resentment creating rhetoric and can do lasting and serious harm within families already struggling with resentment, hostility and pain. In addition, there is an obvious conflict of interest on the part of the professional interventionist as the interventionist measures nanoparticle success by whether or not the person enters into a program; which is usually the program willing to pay the greatest fee to the interventionist.

Being that most interventionists are hired by treatment centers and paid on a commission, there is a motive to make sure the subject of the intervention is deemed sick. Certainly, the main goal is not to empower the substance user and the family, but rather to get the person to reserve a bed at the rehabilitation program that is paying the interventionist. (It is important to note here that there are independent interventionists, who are not working directly for a particular facility, but many of them are paid a "finder's fee" by the rehabilitation facility, in addition to being paid a fee by the family.)

Regardless of who pays the interventionist, the primary motive of the intervention is to coerce the substance user into an alcohol or drug treatment program. There is no attempt to teach moderation or present other options that may allow the individual to remain at home and move on with life in other more productive ways. This is surprising, as research has shown that most people with an alcohol and/or drug problem moderate their usage as a function of time and maturity far more often than choosing to abstain completely from alcohol and drugs. Research also shows that the majority of the time their lives improve as a result of moderating their behavior. This is not to say that abstinence is not a positive option-it is; but to limit the multitude of options to only one option (i.e. entering a drug treatment program) is short sighted at best and harmful, at worst.

In some of the worst cases, this intervention process is the control model on steroids. Not only is the substance user a vulnerable target, but the nave family is given a glut of misinformation, much of it specifically designed to frighten them, in the process. Each participant is labeled. For example, the mother of the substance user might be called the "enabler;" the father and/or sibling(s) may be called "co-dependent(s)" and so on. Each person is perceived to play a role in the substance user's sickness. By the time the intervention is over, massive judgments have been made all around and guilt and fear are the dominant emotions, making rational decisions nearly impossible. Guilt-ridden emotions run higher and higher and all of the intervention participants are now emotionally drained and completely at the mercy of the intervention professional. The situation is then made worse by the large sums of money that are expended getting the substance user admitted into a residential treatment program after the intervention is "successful."

There are better alternatives. Common sense, kindness and making sure to provide a way out of the misery of alcohol and drug problems remains the proven path to fulfilled lives. An unannounced ambush negates all of these qualities! Try talking with your loved one and providing them with a host of options before you hire someone who may have a profit motive over the authentic desire to help your loved one.