Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #282193 in Books
• Published on: 2006-06-25
• Released on: 2006-05-01
• Original language: English
• Number of items: 1
• Binding: Hardcover
• 165 pages

Synopsis
Theodore Dalrymple believes that almost everything people know about opiate addiction is wrong. Most flawed of all is the notion that addicts are in touch with profound mysteries of which non-addicts are ignorant. Dalrymple shows that doctors, psychologists and social workers, all of them uncritically accepting addicts' descriptions of addiction, have employed literary myths (drugs are creative and intense) in constructing an equal and opposite myth of quasi-treatment. Using evidence from literature and pharmacology and drawing on examples from his own clinical experience, Dalrymple shows that addiction is not a disease, but a response to personal and existential problems. He argues that withdrawal from opiates is not the serious medical condition, but a relatively trivial experience and says that criminality causes addiction far more often than addiction causes criminality.

Customer Reviews

no-one ever dies coming off heroin, plenty die coming off alcohol
Dalrymple's essay on the myths and deliberate lies surrounding heroin addiction is enjoyable, in parts amusing and largely accurate.

Heroin, as he suggests is a piece of cake to withdraw from, especially when compared to alcohol withdrawal. The very worst one might expect are symptoms similar to those of a nasty cold, perhaps with a bit of diarrhea thrown in. Alcoholics however, might have to contend with hallucinations, convultions and death. As a rule of thumb, no-one ever dies coming off heroin, plenty die coming off alcohol. However, it is in no-ones interest, not least the addict or the ubiquitous D & A worker to blow the gaff. Dalrymple explains why.

He also, interestingly, devotes time to methadone use as a pharmacological substitute for opiates. Has methadone killed more addicts than heroin? Perhaps it has.

I also enjoyed the examination of De Quincy and Coleridge, and their self serving descriptions of opiate use and addiction and its subsequent transference to popular culture. He thesis seems probable and is certainly intering.

However, towards the end of the book, Dalrymple seems to run out of steam. His call to shut all treatment agencies may of course be based on countless interactions with staple-faced, DM wearing, holier-than-thou 'workers', who it seems to me, after 10 years working with alcoholics, are attracted to the counter culture aspects of the work rather than anything else. And, I can understand how jaded he mnight be working with those people who, at best are a conduit for the addict (to get drugs) and are at worst actively harmful, in their idealogical "client driven" way,to their clients, their families and society at large.

But - Dalrymple either does not know of, or has not bothered to do research into agencies that do tell the addict exactly how it is. They may be few and far between, but assuredly, they do exist.