Remarriage

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Catholic : One Thread

Nora and Charles were married in the CAholic Church 15 years ago. For five years now Charles has been drinking heavily. Nora stuck with him until he became abusive and she was afraid for her safety and that of her children. Nora just recieved a civil divorce 2 months ago. Lately she has been wondering, "As a Catholic, is it possible for me to ever marry again, or does the Church require me to be lonely forever?" What do you say to Nora?

-- jessica weltin (jess2332@yahoo.com), April 22, 2002

Answers

I would say:

1. Help her life-long partner to find a means to battle his alcohol abuse.

2. Talk to a priest. As far as I know, the marriage validity doesn't change 10 years of valid marriage. If she and her husband freely entered into a marriage 15 years ago, she can't undo what they established validly in the eyes of God. Her actions 10 years (or even 10 minutes) into a wedding can't change the fact that they have a valid sacramental marriage.

3. Love her children.

4. Two months of separation does not mean she's emotionally gotten over 15 years of marriage.

5. Look to friends and family for support, not a new partner who would just be a crutch.

6. She should be concerned about her relationship with God.

7. Ask others to pray for her.

8. Pray

9. Pray

10. Pray

Nora and Charles are in my prayers. So are you, Jessica. Please keep me in yours.

Mateo

-- (MattElFeo@netscape.net), April 22, 2002.


Dear

I quote you:''As a Catholic, is it possible for me to ever marry again, or does the Church require me to be lonely forever?''

Is the Church requiring Nora to be lonely? Why? Can't she make friends? Does it require her remarriage, not to be lonely? It is possible to be married once more. But there's no guarantee she won't marry a second abuser. Or a third.

AND-- in the Catholic faith, her first marriage can still be HOLY. A separation doesn't mean her matrimony is necessarily dead.

What if Nora's husband were sent to war; as it happened to many women of the World War generations? When he was away fighting for her country and his; would she be lonely? Yes, of course. But would she go out to find a replacement for the absent husband?

We can say that her husband's alcoholism, regrettably, is a ''WAR'' which has separated Nora and Charles. But, until he is brought home from war in a coffin, she isn't supposed to replace him with a new husband.

That's essentially what the Catholic Church teaches us. Because it's God's Will; and we must just do His Will.

-- eugene c. chavez (chavezec@pacbell.net), April 22, 2002.


When Charles chose alcohol over his wife, HE left the marriage, in more ways than one. He has to make the decision over which is more important, and he already has, hence the divorce.

As to whether Nora gets married again, that is Nora's choice, and while it would be wrong to remarry while he is still alive, she is civilly free to do so, and she can still go to Mass every Sunday--no one is going to stop her, although she shouldn't receive Communion.

-- GT (nospam@nospam.com), April 22, 2002.


Nora can always get an annulment if she wants to stay in the Catholic Church. I would recommend that Nora attend Al-Anon meetings which have proven to be very helpful to those living with Alcohol abuse. The effects of living with an alcoholic do not go away just because one is divorced. I hope Nora is seeing a counselor. Therapy plus Al- Anon can work miracles and I believe that Al-Anon is a gift from God and He is 'present' at those meetings.

Living with an alcoholic is a nightmare and I would sugget the children attend ACOA meetings (Al-Anon for Adult Children of Alcoholics) it will 'save' their emotional lives.

I do not think that God wants anyone to stay in unhealthy, destructive marriages. Children of alcoholics suffer severe emotional damage for the rest of their lives. Walking into a room, like an ACOA meeting, with people who are coming from the same place you are, who truly understand what you are going through, or have been through, is so healing. Those meetings will lead you onto a path of peace, deeper faith in God, and give you awareness, and help you to love yourself.

May God Bless Nora and her family and may He direct her to the right path for healing.

We hear so much about the damages of smoking and there are so many anti-smoking campaigns in this country, yet nothing about alcohol which is so destructive - damages family life, destroys families, drunk drivers kill people every day, organizations are destroyed because of poor leadership due to acholism. It is a dangerous drug and it destroys.

-- Nancy (nans71@aol.com), April 22, 2002.


Nancy

Why should Nora see the AA and others? It is her former spouse who is at fault, not her. She is clean and he is the abuser and alcoholic.

-- Fred Bishop (fcbishop@globaleyes.net), April 22, 2002.



Nancy, Yours was the most kind and intelligent post I have yet seen on this list. Your comparison of so much emphasis on smoking and none regarding alcohol has been something I have also felt very strongly about. Alcohol destroys more than the physical being of the drinker. It destroys families and the emotional and spiritual health of all those connected. Cigarettes only destroy the body.

I have dealt with numerous clients where alcohol has been a problem and have always recommended Al Anon for spouses and children. So many folks do not realize that alcoholism doesn't just affect the alcoholic it is a family illness and touches each member of the group. All need treatment. Joan

-- Joan Storey (godessss@mindspring.com), April 22, 2002.


Dear Fred, If you read my post, you will see that I did not suggest that Nora go to AA (Alcoholics Anonymus). I suggested that she go to Al-Anon (a program for relatives and friends of Alcholics - anyone living with an alcoholic or whose lives have been damaged because of someone else's drinking) That, dear Fred, is why I suggested Nora to to such a meeting and her children go to ACOA meetings.

I do know, Fred, what I am talking about and consider myself an expert on the subect. Obviously, thank God, you are not familiar with the disease.

I have seen many lives destroyed because of someone else's drinking and if I can do anything to help those dealing with that problem, I will. If you have any questions about any of these programs, or about the disease itself, I would be glad to answer them for you.

-- Nancy (Nancy (nans71@aol.com),), April 22, 2002.


The late John Cardinal O'Connor, bless his dear soul, my dear friend and a very good priest and one of the best human beings ever to walk this earth....and brillant, absolutely brillant, was going to spend his retirement years ministering to those whose lives have been damaged by alcohol. Unfortunately, he got sick and never got to live out his commitment to do that.

He wrote several columns about it in the Catholic New Yorker. He also acknowledged that alcoholism is rampant among priests. That is another problem that must be addressed in our church. Many parishes are being run by alcoholic pastors, sad to say, but true. Some of the smartest, nicest, kindest, and most religious people are know suffer from the disease of alcoholism. So, like gay priest who have a disorder, there are many priests who have a disorder known as alcoholism. Nuns also suffer from the disease which leads me to the question, Why? Why are so many of our religious suffering from depression and alcoholism? Why have so many nuns left the convent? Why have so many priests left the priesthood. I do hope all of these issues are addressed. They can no longer be denied. I love my church, love being catholic, but that does not mean that I do not recognize that there is a serious problem in the church (at least in America) a problem that runs deeper than child abuse and we can no longer deny the truth. This is not catholic bashing, it is merely accepting reality. I do hope that once and for all our Cardinals address all the issues. I hope that we come out of this scandal, wiser, healthier, holier and the cleansing of the soul of our church, results in a more beautiful church than we ever had before. May the Holy Spirit give our Cardinals the gift of wisdom during their meetings with the Pope. May God Bless them all and bless our holy church.

-- Nancy (Nancy (Nancy (nans71@aol.com),),), April 22, 2002.


I would also like to add that we must pray for our good priests and support them. They need our support; they need to know that we still love them and encourage them. They are suffering now and some are so depressed and sad over this current situation.

A very sad thing happened the other day. A teenager missed his bus and was going to be late for school. He asked his parish priest who was nearby if he would drive him to school. The priest had to say no and felt so sad about that. Up until now he would never say no to a child in need. It is so sad that we have come to this and we have our hierarchy to thank for that. Our Youth Minister has resigned from his position in the CYO. How can I work with teenagers now, work in a program where kids come to me with delicate questions, and come to me for advice about problems in their relationships? I used to give the kids a hug, or a pat on the back to encourage them when they were feeling down or moody about something over teenage problems. I can no longer do that and it is very sad, indeed because these kids were "my" family - were the kids I never had. The kids miss him terribly and we are praying that he will come back, but how can he? He was such an inspiration to the kids and such a good role model for them. He played basketball with them and soft ball, came on outings with us. He will continue to do our youth masses but it will never be the same. Father John has given up a ministry that was his heart and soul and what a loss it will be for these kids who so desperately needed a Fr. John in their lives.

-- Nancy (Nancy (nans71@aol.com),),),), April 22, 2002.


I realize my last post has nothing to do with the subject of the this thread, alcoholism - don't know how I got onto that subject. Maybe it is because I was thinking about the kids that Fr.John worked with and helped - lots of them come from abusive homes and the Youth program is so good for them and Fr. John was so good for them - some of the kids had drinking problems (16 and 17 years old with drinking problems, can you imagine?) They come from homes where dads or moms drink. Please remember these kids in your prayes and remember Fr. John as well - please pray that he will reconsider his decision because the kids need him so much.

-- Nancy ((Nancy (nans71@aol.com),),),), April 22, 2002.


NANCY-- re-read your post, You said for Nora to see AA. Charles IS the alcoholic. What is it that I missed and furthermore, I do have some familiarity with alcoholism as I have been dry now for 8 years, and almost lost my job because of it, and have very good friends who have to still battle with the bottle to this day. THANK YOU.

-- Fred Bishop (fcbishop@globaleyes.net), April 22, 2002.

No, Fred. You need to read Nancy's post. She did not mention AA, but Al-Anon, which is different.


Jessica, you have received excellent advice from Mateo and Eugene. They omitted only one thing, which I will get to in a moment.


Hi, Nancy.
You seem like a very nice person, and I agree with much of what you said. However, you gave an improper piece of advice to Jessica -- or, should I say, you did not phrase a reasonable idea properly. You stated: "Nora can always get an annulment if she wants to stay in the Catholic Church."

It's not proper to say that someone "can always get an annulment."

First, one should speak of a Decree of Nullity, because no one (not even the pope) can "annul" a valid marriage. No one can take something that really exists, and make it into something null -- which is what the word "annulment" means. Rather, via a Decree of Nullity, a Church tribunal determines and formally states the fact that no valid marriage existed from the very wedding day onward, despite the ceremony and outward appearances. But by no means is a Decree of Nullity guaranteed to anyone -- and thus the impropriety of saying that someone "can always get an annulment."

Now what Mateo and Gene did not mention is this ... A divorced Catholic (Nora), after becoming informed about the concept of validity and invalidity in marriage, may wonder if perhaps her union was not valid from the wedding day. She has the right, then, to ask her parish pastor to help her put into written form a petition asking that the tribunal examine her case. If the tribunal, after weighing all the evidence, decides to issue a Decree of Nullity, Nora will be free to marry for the first time in her life, because she was never married (in the eyes of God) to Charles.

Although you mentioned, Jessica, that "Charles has been drinking heavily" for five years (of fifteen years with Nora), the tribunal may determine that he was already an alcoholic (or otherwise impaired) on the wedding day, leaving him unable to give valid consent to a sacramental marriage. I believe that this would be grounds for issuing a Decree of Nullity.

Nancy, you mentioned this: "I do not think that God wants anyone to stay in unhealthy, destructive marriages. Children of alcoholics suffer severe emotional damage for the rest of their lives."

The Catholic Church does tell us that one spouse is permitted (and often is obliged) to separate from the other when abusive, especially violent, behavior occurs. Some people mistakenly think that the Church tells spouses to hang in there, no matter what. (Some individual priests may give that bad advice, but not the Church herself.)

Nancy, you also wrote: "We hear so much about the damages of smoking and there are so many anti-smoking campaigns in this country, yet nothing about alcohol which is so destructive ..."
"Nothing about alcohol"??? You must not be in contact with the same media that I am, because I find the opposite to be true -- more anti-alcohol publicity than anti-smoking.

Nancy, you replied to Fred as follows: "I do know, Fred, what I am talking about and consider myself an expert on the subect. Obviously, thank God, you are not familiar with the disease."
Whoa! That turned my head, because I think that Fred told us, some weeks ago, that he is a recovering alcoholic. Do I recall correctly, Fred? [Sorry, if I don't.]


Hello, GT. You wrote: "As to whether Nora gets married again, that is Nora's choice, and while it would be wrong to remarry while he is still alive, she is civilly free to do so, and she can still go to Mass every Sunday -- no one is going to stop her, although she shouldn't receive Communion."

Technically speaking, your answer is almost correct. [The only technical error is that, according to divine revelation, it is impossible to "remarry" until a spouse dies.] So, technically, your answer is nearly correct, but it is an insufficient answer for a Catholic to give Jessica on a Catholic forum. Jessica and Nora are already aware of what Nora "is civilly free to do." They didn't need to read that. Instead, they came to a Catholic forum to learn the whole truth, from a religious point of view. A Catholic giving an answer like yours is obliged to add other words that you left out. Here is what you needed to say too:
-- It would be wrong for Nora to attempt remarriage, because the resultant relationship would be adulterous. Each act of adultery is a mortal sin that could result in a person losing her soul for all eternity.
-- Though Nora can and should continue to attend Mass, she must not [rather than "should not"] receive Communion, because this would be a sacrilege, the worst of all forms of mortal sin.

God bless you.
John

-- (jfgecik@hotmail.com), April 22, 2002.


Hi guys,

John, you covered most of the bases; but I wanted to add something regarding GT's advice.

GT, you wrote:

"As to whether Nora gets married again, that is Nora's choice, and while it would be wrong to remarry while he is still alive, she is civilly free to do so, and she can still go to Mass every Sunday -- no one is going to stop her, although she shouldn't receive Communion."

I want to underline that we don't take communion when we are conscious of mortal sin. For Catholics, mortal sins are sins are so contrary to God's law that they cause us to lose our eternal salvation. I won't go into the the situations that mitigate the seriousness of a sin, but someone who lives in a non-sacramental 2nd marriage is living in adultery (biblically speaking).

When we attend Mass, an important goal is to give us the grace and courage to return to the holy life that God wants for us. The ultimate rejection of this sin (of a civil remarriage) would be to live a celibate life in order to return to a state of Grace. A civil 2nd marriage sets her up for a lot of pain, because it isn't a single act that is sinful...the nature of her lifestyle is sinful.

"Mark 10:12 - and if she divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery."

(Also, look at how Jesus interacts with the Samaritan woman in John Chapter 4:7-42)

At the risk of sounding trite, the typical vows of marriage go something like this:

"to have and to hold from this day forward, for better or for worse, for richer or for poorer, in sickness and in health, to love and to cherish, till death do us part."

If the Charles is a danger to Nora and her children, she should stay away from him. I wonder if she could help him (even from a distance) to seek treatment for his sickness. Am I just an idealist?

In Christ,

Mateo

-- (MattElFeo@netscape.net), April 23, 2002.


The only way Nora can help Charles is by praying for him that God directs him to go for help. No one can help an alcoholic but himself. Charles has to admit first that he has a problem and then he has to want to go for help. No one can do that for Charles. Once he admits he has a problem and then takes the necessary steps to get help, there is lots of help out there. But, Nora cannot do that for him. I will remember Charles in my prayers.

Thank you for the facts on annulment. I was too general on that subject. I don't know too much about it.

Also, Fred, I hope you know that I was not being judgemental about Alcoholics. It is a disease and I am glad you are dry now, glad you went for help. I'm sure you try to help others with the same problem. There is help and there is always hope. I thin you will agree with me Fred, that the alcoholic has to take that first step and admit he/she has a problem.

Thank you for the information on annul

-- Nancy ((Nancy (nans71@aol.com),),),),), April 23, 2002.


Nancy, you have said something that many disagree with. Not everyone thinks that alcoholism is a disease. I don't, and one reason is that alcohol is not necessary for survival (like food, where perhaps food addiction could be an issue in perhaps an infinitesimal number of people, but I doubt it).

If you choose to (and you have to make the decision yourself, no one can do it for you) you can stop drinking, and yes it will be rough, but you won't die without alcohol. Nobody forces alcohol down your throat (or forces you to smoke cigarettes) except you. (That is a general you, not a personal you, by the way). I think that current thinking considering alcoholism to be a disease provides a crutch that has done more harm than good to people trying to get out from it.

And then, is each act adultery, or is the second marriage considered one act? It seems that in the Samaritan woman's case, there were only 6 (?) separate cases (you have had 5, and the one you are living with now is not your husband), if I read it correctly. And the "asking for a degree of nullility" is still not going to erase the fact that she was married (since the church seems to recognize all valid state/other religions marriages.

-- GT (nospam@nospam.com), April 23, 2002.



GT

Trust me, Nancy is correct. It is a desiese and it affects people in many ways. Until the victim realizes this he is hooked thinking it is OK. Until something drastic happens he will drink himself to death literally. Counselling and LOVE from those who really care is the only avenue we have to get control. It took a supervisor of mine to shake me up and quit. It is the best thing to happen in my life. Mine was caused by years of deep depression. It is still with me to this day as I have to take anti-depressants to keep me from it all. BTW I also quit smoking at that time also due to lung problems. Man that was a bummer to overcome in a short time.

-- Fred Bishop (fcbishop@globaleyes.net), April 23, 2002.


I think it is a problem, but it is a self-inflicted one, like compulsive gambling. Every time something is labeled "a disease" in this country, more people get it, and more people make money off it in more ways than one. I cite ADD and ADHD as examples in the schools.

I have a friend who quit both drinking and smoking. He goes to AA and Smokenders meetings almost daily, and has been going for over 20 years.

-- GT (nospam@nospam.com), April 23, 2002.


Hi GT,

You wrote:

"And then, is each act adultery, or is the second marriage considered one act? It seems that in the Samaritan woman's case, there were only 6 (?) separate cases (you have had 5, and the one you are living with now is not your husband), if I read it correctly."

The civil marriage ceremony isn't the real sin. Sex with someone who isn't your spouse is adultery. By your logic, you seem to be suggesting that the first person with whom you have sex is your spouse. This is an original interpretation of the passage--dare I ask for you to list a church or theologian who would support this conclusion? Do you support this conclusion?

GT wrote:

"And the "asking for a degree of nullility" is still not going to erase the fact that she was married (since the church seems to recognize all valid state/other religions marriages."

You still have the opinion that decrees (not degrees) of nullity are a Catholic Divorce. They are not. The Catholic Church has never made a global statement recognizing all marriages outside of the church. That Catholic Church does believe that the primary ministers of any marriage are the two people who marry each other. Both inside and outside the Catholic Church, there are conditions that must exist for the marriage to be valid. Others can detail these better than I.

Suffice it to say, if there's a shotgun (forced) wedding, it's invalid no matter whether inside or outside the Church. If an individual rejects the possibility of children, that fact (not the Church) nullifies the validity. The Church is simply declaring that conditions for a valid marriage were not met. Make sense?

Further, a "Decree of Nullity" cannot erase a valid marriage. If and when that is done, these people are simply abusing the Church's temporal authority. This abuse is not a victimless crime.

In Christ,

Mateo

-- (MattElFeo@netscape.net), April 23, 2002.


Fred, God Bless you and keep you under His wing. You quit drinking and smoking, now that is really tough. You are right, Fred, one who has problems with addictions need all the love and support they can get and I am glad you got that, Fred. As for depression and anti- depressants that seems to go along with alcoholism that is why I say it is a disease.

GT, you say that alcoholism is a self-inflicted disease because it is not necessary for survival? I never heard of that. Unforunately, one does not know they are alcoholic until they take their first drink and thre is nothing wrong with social drinking...Jesus turned water into wine at the Wedding when His mother, Mary asked him to, did he not?

Also, GT, alcoholisim is a genetic disease. Most children, (not all) of alcoholics become alcoholics themselves, usually the sons and usually marry alcoholics...this is not "always" the case, but has proven to be so in many cases.

It has been documented in medical journals that alcoholics have a chemical imbalance in the brain that causes one to be an alcoholic. If one has a faulty chemistry in this area they cannot drink. Fred, you are not alone as far as depression, millions of people in this country have that problem as well. I will remember you in my prayers every day Fred. You and I don't always agree on things and I hope you don't take some of my opinions personally, after all they are just opinions - unless I state facts.

God must love you very much, Fred. You have suffered much and had your own crosses to bear.

Peace, my friend.... Nancy

-- Nancy (-- Nancy (nans71@aol.com),),),),),), April 23, 2002.


Never said there was anything wrong with social drinking, but as far as I know the Bible does not consider excessive drinking a disease. When I said alcoholism is for example different from say, food related disorders, it is that you cannot quit eating food altogether (because eventually you would die), but you can quit drinking alcohol/ cigarettes. I have never heard of anyone dying from quitting drinking.

-- GT (nospam@nospam.com), April 23, 2002.

GT, I would never challenge your views without actual encounters with such issues.

I am a dual major in Biology and Psychology. People who suffer the pains of addiction, be them alcohol, drugs, shopping, gambling, eating, sexual predilictions, *are* at the mercy of a disease. For the most part, they are battling a compulsion. For the most part, they do not want, and did not seek to emerge themselves into such behavior. It is an actual illness. I have worked with the Houston Mental Health and Mental Retardation Association, and can assure you, that the experience, coupled with my education, there is reason to say that addiction *is* a disease.

Also, I take great umbrage from your ADD comment. I am an adult female, dealing with ADD. Granted, some psychiatrists abuse the diagnosis, but for the large part, ADD is valid.

Careful with your finger-pointing.

-- Melissa (holy_rhodes@earthlink.net), April 24, 2002.


I know someone with ADD--he is fine when around his father, but not his mother, so is it ADD or a discipline/organization problem? They took him off Ritalin because it made him "dopey". And that is just one child. Another child we know would easily fall into that category if his parents didn't know better--teachers routinely "refer" anstsy students to doctors, and in most cases they just need a little more physical activity and a lot less TV.

We used to call such children "busy", not "handicapped" or "learning disabled". ADD and ADHD diagnoses have gone too far when they are now an "acceptable" way for parents to get their kids extra time on college exams and so forth.

I would say that there are probably some valid cases, but it is not as widespread as the media would make it out to be. I saw some book the other day that claimed if you have problems keeping your house clean you might have ADD (One of the Messie's Manual books by Felton). Sure, anybody can be sidetracked--who wouldn't rather pick up a book than clean house--but that is no basis to say one has ADD.

As to the other conditions you mentioned, they all share one treatment in common that diseases don't--you can remove yourself from the problem, and no problem. Go to a dry state, like Utah, or live out in the boonies where it's 50+ miles into town so you can't go shopping. That's what I was trying to say, that diseases don't have that option--you can't just leave them behind when you go somewhere. There is an element of free will in these conditions that there is not in diseases.

-- GT (nospam@nospam.com), April 24, 2002.


GT

You can live a thousand miles from the source. Yet the problem will still persist til you get proper help. You seem to be too old fashioned to the reality that these things exist. Just because it happened years ago or you can move to another location does not mean the problem goes away. It lingers for life. I know i feel it everyday. it is nerve wracking but I survive through prayer and a patient wife to help me when I feel the need for comforting. many others do not have that luxury. I have a brother who has nervous problems due to being trapped in a ship fire of the Viet Nam coast and it still haunts him to this day. It NEVER leaves you. So how do you think one gets a desiese. it is caused as well as it is gotten prior to birth. Only understanding it helps. Ignorance magnifies it.

-- Fred Bishop (fcbishop@globaleyes.net), April 24, 2002.


But Fred, the Bible pretty much puts drunkenness (alcoholism) in the same class as adultery, etc., in other words, a sin. Is it, or not?

Once it was put in the disease category, then people (in general, not you) throw up their hands and say, "I can't help it. I'm not responsible for running down that little kid with my car because I have a disease".

That is what I object to. I think people are entitled to help for this condition, but I would stop short of defining it as a disease per se. Leaving a person because of alcoholism is not the same as leaving someone with MS, or someone who became completely paralyzed due to an accident. The latter two have no options, the former does.

-- GT (nospam@nospam.com), April 24, 2002.


GT

Now you are comparing apples with oranges here. I never said excuses for anyone to get drunk and then kill others by their ignorance to the dangers of drinking and driving. Of course anything that is done exceessively can be harmful in many ways. We need common sense here. Drinking is an illness for many. but to use Cell ohones on the highway excessively has been known to kill and it is a major issue. It is our conscience that drives us to know right from wrong in ALL cases and to realize that habits need to be controlled in some manner.

It is sad that selfishness rules heavily today. I have had several close calls while riding a motorcycle just because of a person was totally consumed with the conversation on a cell phone, or just preoccupied with the loud music on their radio.

Typically we all need to realize when it is right and when it is wrong. Todays kids are now telling us that they have rights to do as they please. WHY? Self centeredness? When I was drinking I found out that I was taking too many chances and decided that I needed to quit. Thank GOD someone did push me and got me to quit. I am sure I am not aware of the close calls that I have not seen because of it.

A desease and driving or anything that is harmful should be controlled with faith not ignorance. Sorry I know this makes little sence, but I am trying.

-- Fred Bishop (fcbishop@globaleyes.net), April 24, 2002.


GT, you write, "As to the other conditions you mentioned, they all share one treatment in common that diseases don't--you can remove yourself from the problem, and no problem."

What about the people who are dealing with the issue of over-eating as a source of comforting their pains? So we starve them to death?

Granted, I agree that ADD as a diagnosis, is abused, but for some of us, it is a valid challenge. Yes, I take Ritalin. I don't think it has been a crutch, or an "out" to placate my doctor. Since treatment, people have commented on my ability to reign in my outbursts of anger...to exercise patience over situations that would usually send me into fits...to show emotions...to feel emotions of all varieties.

Yes, the ADD/ADHD label is overly used, and it is a shame. However, as someone who used to skip from activity to activity, bored by long discussions on one topic, and found stillness difficult, I can tell you that these things are no longer challenges.

Addictions do not stem from the availability of the addiction. Addictions are born from the need to self-medicate a pain.

-- Melissa (holy_rhodes@earthlink.net), April 25, 2002.


I did make a distinction between say "food addictions" because you couldn't starve a person. Alcohol and smoking are different. My problem with ADD is that it is very easy to get labelled with it. Not everyone who has an addiction or a bad habit is in pain, either.

-- GT (nospam@nospam.com), April 25, 2002.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ