The Deconstructing Addiction League

INTRODUCTORY INTERVIEW

The following interview explores a range of topics in relation to deconstructing addiction. It explains the overall scope of the project and the perspective that informs the league. It does not get into the specific applications of Narrative Practice that are used to undermine addiction—those practices are all contained in our workbook. The interview participants have chosen to honor the tradition of anonymity and to keep their identities private. This will demonstrate that we intend to keep all of our members’ identities protected, as there is still a stigma attached to substance use. Additionally, it confirms that there is no leader or individual whose name will become synonymous with the league. This will keep our network non-hierarchical and collectively based. 

Interviewer: To start us off, why don’t you explain (in the simplest terms) what deconstructing addiction is? Is it a movement? Is it a therapy? Is it a group? Is it a theory?

Respondent: It’s everything and more! (Laughing)

Interviewer: Everything and more, yes.

Respondent: Just kidding. It could be, it has the potential to be all of those things, right? In the simplest terms, Deconstructing Addiction means to take apart addiction. That’s the literal meaning. But for me, Deconstructing Addiction is also a way of stepping outside of the current thinking in the addictions field and offering a completely different way of responding to the issue. Part of the deconstructing approach is about having a critical perspective, not just to be different, but so that we don’t reproduce the limitations and hazards of the current models. This involves questioning what’s been taken for granted, for example, the idea that addiction is a disease. Deconstruction allows us to reflect on what the effects are of looking at it this way. Is it a useful thing? Is it problematic? From our understanding, it’s very mixed.  There are some useful things about the disease model, but there’s also a lot of problematic things. 

Interviewer: So it’s a different way of understanding.

Respondent: Yeah absolutely. For instance, instead of looking at addiction as originating in a person’s mind, body, and soul, we prefer looking at the problem as being located within the culture. This puts more emphasis on social structures and cultural traditions and how this incites addiction. If you see addiction as a problem that originates in your brain, then you’re only seeing it as an individual problem. If you locate the problem in the culture, you’re still understanding your individual relationship to the addiction, but you’re also seeing the broader context and how it affects you.  

Interviewer: So it offers you a different model for understanding the idea of addiction and questioning the concept of addiction?

Respondent: Yeah, so with the term addiction, we’re talking about a concept that for a lot of people implies pathology. So instead of using a term that implies that there is something wrong with you (that you have a disease), I would rather use a term like excessive consumption which instead refers to a type of activity that can be problematic. Is that clear? Excessive consumption is a thing that people do, it’s not a disease that resides within. I only use the term ‘addiction’ because people are familiar with it, and I keep it in quotes because I’m trying to indicate that there are some hazards with this word and I’m only using it for convenience purposes. Another thing about deconstruction is that you get into questions of power, and you can examine which systems of thought and power shape current models of healthcare and what the real effects of this are.  A critical history of this allows us to understand the not-so-glorious past of the addictions field and how things became punitive and pathologizing. This also gives us the opportunity to see how different threads of race, sexual preference, gender identity, and so on, show up in the context of addiction. This is important because various relations of domination, privilege and oppression contribute to the development of addiction. In a disease model, identity politics don’t matter. Within a deconstructing addiction approach, the politics of one’s experience is a huge factor in understanding the problem and how we can respond to it. The politics of experience can’t be neglected. Even things like drug prohibition, the real effects of this need to be understood, especially the disciplinary effects. If our culture’s response to the problem is making things worse, which it is, we need to understand this. Deconstructing Addiction is a giant step away from the punishing realities of certain forms of addiction treatment. It’s a way more humane and egalitarian approach.

Interviewer: You’ve expressed some views about a lot of the discourses which require people to look inwardly. On the other hand, you’re expressing some views about the social and cultural context that support whether we turn people’s eyes outwards instead of inwards. Have I got that correct? Would you say a little?

Respondent: I’m not saying, well the truth is, that addiction is a social problem. That would be a universal truth claim.  We’re not trying to be like the mainstream practices that will say, yes it is located in the brain and that’s the truth. We’re saying we think it’s simply more effective to locate the problem as if its origins are in the social world because the effects of looking at it this way are beneficial, and the ways that we can respond to this seem to be way more useful.

Interviewer: More about the effects of a model than the actual truth or otherwise of a model?

Respondent: Right, because we don’t know for sure. We are just employing working assumptions that guide us in this work. If you look at addiction as only an individual problem, it misses a person’s entire relationship to the world that they live in and how it affects them. Our approach looks at quality of life and how certain social factors shape one's experience for better and for worse. If you can empathize and see how an alcohol lifestyle for some people is a way out--it’s a necessary lifestyle for them to cope with being in the world the way it is currently organized, then you start to see how to respond to some of the limitations in the world that make excessive consumption a temporary solution for people in the first place. Excessive consumption is one of the most readily available options to navigate the complexities of an often harsh, unjust, alienating and disconnected world. You can’t just take this away from a person. You need to provide alternatives.

Interviewer: You speak about this as disconnection and connection.

Respondent: I do.

Interviewer: Could you say a little about that?

Respondent: Yes, the connection part, this is what I think is really inspiring. What I like about our approach is that you’re saying that we need to make the world a better place to fix this issue.  Let’s try to make the world around us a less alienating place, a more connected place, where our workplaces aren’t demeaning and demoralizing and humiliating, or soul-crushing. These things all lead to anxiety, depression and addiction. Let’s say they don’t. Let’s say these things really are in the brain, which I do not believe, and I think it’s dangerous to view those things as just originating from the brain.  But when you see quality of life as a real thing that affects people, then responding to it just seems so much more interesting to me and useful. 

I’m not just talking about consumer capitalism and how that affects people, or the workplace and hierarchies and all that stuff and even the nuclear family. We could go down the line of ways of relating to one another that are limited that cause pain, that cause isolation, and disconnection. But when you say, hey look, maybe our culture is causing us pain. Maybe our social relations are generally impoverished, what about that? This provides a clear direction for change. It shows us that warm hospitality, meaningful joining with one another, a sense of belonging, ways to connect; these things are often absent in the world and this has to change.  In the case of hospitality, the fact that in the broader culture people need to have a few beers to open up, and to really have fun with one another, it’s like really... is that all we’ve got? Don’t get me wrong, social lubricants are hugely important, but can’t we find other social lubricants besides alcohol and other drugs? Can’t we find other ways for people to experience themselves in stimulating and playful ways socially without relying on a substance? Right now, alcohol and other drugs seem to be the only effective vehicle for this. Drugs have a monopoly on hospitality and connection.

Interviewer: It sounds like quite a transformative approach.

Respondent: I hope so.

Interviewer: At a societal level as well as a personal level. It sounds as though you’re inviting people into a place or position where maybe they, I don’t know if you use the term recovery, but where their relationship to what might be called recovery actually makes a societal contribution?

Respondent: Exactly, it’s this idea of making substance-free connection desirable to anybody, that's part of what deconstructing addiction is. I mean, going back to your original question. Deconstructing addiction is just saying if we can create a context where people have fun, where they play, and they experience joy and pleasure without alcohol and other drugs at the center. That this is deconstructing addiction. Excessive consumption is a cultural practice, and by not engaging in it, and by finding other ways to play, this is what’s transformative.

Interviewer: Right, yeah. Would you say it’s a cultural practice, but also a culturally supported practice? I’m thinking about a lot of the social messages that people receive and the structures that are set up in a way that actually support the practice of excessive consumption, and how some of those may need to change.

Respondent: Yes, I mean look, no one here is saying that people shouldn’t drink, use drugs or whatever, it’s not about that. It’s just providing a different context for fun and good times to take place. For me, I am abstinent from all substances, and there are plenty of people who that’s relevant for, right? But even for people who are able to moderate their drug use, isn’t it also important to have other things available that they can access that are fun? If we can find a new means of connection, something that’s desirable to potentially anyone, then even the people who aren’t looking to change their lifestyle to abstinence can at least reduce their frequency of use by showing up for our events. This can have really positive effects. 

Interviewer: Yeah, because that question of moderation is quite a contentious one, isn’t it, in conversations about addiction and excessive consumption?

Respondent: Oh yeah, well that’s the thing. The most readily available model is an abstinence model, which was the only thing available to me when I was looking for help. I was really disturbed by this. And this is still a problem because it forces people to go in only one direction which limits the ways of responding to the issue. The fact that most treatment centers and community-based resources only offer an abstinence approach is an atrocity. The treatment centers should definitely offer moderation options to people and harm reduction. I think what’s contributed to this monopoly, is that the first approach that firmly established itself was an abstinence model. And within this model, there was a theory of alcoholism that explained to people that if you can’t control your drinking, it means you are an alcoholic. And subsequently, if you are an alcoholic it means that your body has an allergy to alcohol, and just like having an allergy to shellfish or something, the only way to remedy this situation is to stop consuming the thing that is causing the problem. So the starting point for dealing with this issue became abstinence, and any other approaches that would involve moderation would be seen as futile because of the allergy metaphor. Having said all of this, I don’t think you can blindly say to a person that it’s up to them to choose what they want and that you can definitely help them achieve moderation of use because it can’t be known in advance what’s going to work for a person. I believe a process of experimentation, in a context where there is support, can help people determine what’s right for them.  When I was first looking to get help the last thing I wanted to do was go the abstinence route, and since there was nothing else around, I kept using drugs. It’s a shame because I was in serious danger for about two years. Had there been another option to choose from I might not have faced such life-threatening circumstances. I had so many near-death experiences during this time that I really should be dead. That’s not the only bad thing that happened. I almost went to prison. In my country, the amount of drugs that I was doing every day for my personal use was considered to be of drug trafficking weight. I could have gone to prison for drug trafficking when in reality I was only buying drugs for myself. When the police arrested me for purchasing drugs, they only found my small stash. I hid the larger stash under the seat in the cop van. Had they found the bigger stash I could have easily done ten years. This is just one of the many problems with a system that punishes so-called addicts. People go to prison for victimless crimes.

Interviewer: These are pretty significant flaws, aren’t they, of the way that we’re understanding use and consumption and addiction?   I think that’s one of the things that you speak about quite a lot in your writing is the criminalization of consumption and excessive consumption.

Respondent: Well, yeah so the history of that, the war on drugs, is a very frightening history. Things are turning around a little bit these days in terms of people saying, well hey let’s not criminalize people for this, but it’s still a huge problem. Marijuana is becoming legal in a lot of the states here. I think the conversation is starting to change, which is good.  But it’s not happening quickly enough, and people are still in grave danger because, in reality, the illegal drug markets are killing people. Just last year 70,000 people died of overdoses in this country which is more deaths than American soldiers who died in the Vietnam, Iraqi, and Afghanistan wars combined, and that’s just one year.  It was like 65,000 the year before. I mean people are dying like crazy and what they don’t understand is that, in countries like Portugal and Switzerland where they’ve changed the drug policies, people are not dying. In Switzerland, they allow you to go to the doctor and get on a heroin prescription program. Since they implemented the program several years ago, there have been no overdoses because you have supervised injection, you’re doing a pharmaceutical grade, you know exactly how strong it is, and it’s unbelievable how effective this is. Most people eventually end up getting off of it, because their lives get better and they don’t want to be on it anymore. Across the board it’s just much better, the HIV rate drops, the crime rate drops - it’s proven to be completely effective. 

Same with Portugal, they’ve completely decriminalized things. Unfortunately, they haven’t made it legal for a doctor to prescribe heroin yet. And let’s be clear, I’m not saying you should be able to buy heroin in a store. But I do believe that you should be able to have a doctor prescribe it to you in the regulated ways that have proven to be effective. I think this seems to be the way to go. My country and your country (Australia) do not allow for this at present, and it contributes to more people dying in the opioid crisis and all of that. It also puts the drug market in the hands of armed gangs who for them to stay at the top, need to intimidate everybody and this includes killing lots of people to maintain their position. It’s all about economics. Prohibition creates a dangerous underworld. The more this war on drugs lasts, the more casualties there are, including the collateral damage of innocent people stuck in the crosshairs. It’s just so sad how the whole thing is going. 

But sorry, I got sidetracked from your abstinence and moderation question. Right now there is a monopoly in the United States and it’s all about abstinence. If you go to a treatment center here, it’s pretty much the only thing that you’ll have access to. I really believe there should be more options at all levels. As far as the Deconstructing Addiction League goes, I hate to say it, but the insider groups that deal specifically with substance use revision are geared toward living an abstinence-based lifestyle. In the future, it’s possible for somebody to take our ideas and create a group with a different name, where people can explore harm reduction techniques, moderation of use and self-regulation. For me personally, it’s a super dangerous proposition because it would be life-threatening for me to engage in any practices of moderation and to even be involved with conversations around it. It would be too tempting and it’s not worth the risk for me. I also don’t want to put the other group member’s abstinence in danger either.

Interviewer: Right, yeah.

Respondent: But I think there really should be a place for moderation conversations, self-regulation and all that. Just not with the Deconstructing Addiction League, unfortunately. At least not at this time.

Interviewer: Yeah, I’m just thinking that more people would feel invited into conversations about consumption if they’re not thinking that, well, I’m going to be told that it’s either abstinence or you’re on your own. For some people, abstinence is just not somewhere they’re going to go, and it would be a shame for them not to get any support. Whereas, it sounds as though you’re suggesting creating a space for something in between.

Respondent: Well, right, because even if you’re trying to moderate your use, there are times when you won’t be using. In those times that you won’t be using wouldn’t it be great to connect with a bunch of people who are trying to have fun without drugs? That’s why there is definitely a space. It’s not an either-or thing, you don’t have to be committed to abstinence to be a part of the deconstructing addiction league. Now, as far as the insider groups go, the ones that meet to talk about resisting cravings and working those things out then yes, those conversations will be with groups of people who are trying to abstain from using. Those conversations won’t include everybody, unfortunately, but our larger social events are for everybody.

Interviewer: Okay yeah. As you’re talking, something that keeps cropping up often and I’m finding it really, really interesting because when I think about ideas that I’ve come across in my own life around addiction, around recovery and around treatment models. The word fun doesn’t normally come into it, but I’m hearing the words like fun and joy and it’s refreshing.

Respondent: And even pleasure, right? How about pleasure?

Interviewer: Right, yeah. This sounds like a much more appealing conversation than some of the ones that I’ve been aware of in the past.

Respondent: Yeah.

Interviewer: Tell me more about how you see fun and pleasure and joy being part of this one?

Respondent: When I was first saying to myself, okay, look, I need to change my relationship to drugs and alcohol. I thought it’s too bad that it’s come to this, but okay. Now if I could just connect with something that offered a new way to have fun. A conversation that started with, okay so you’re not going to use drugs anymore, but don’t worry about it because you’re going to discover a whole new way to have fun and to experience great pleasure in life. If that was the starting point for conversation I would’ve been like yeah let's do this. A lot of us don’t like being told what to do. I was coming from a very rebellious, party-centered, fun, artistic, place and I loved it. Who wants to change all of that? Who wants to just be all serious? Look at me I’m going to read books and drink tea and that’s going to be my fun and I’m going to go to a group and work seriously on my issues. Like that sounds like a lot of fun? Like I’d rather shoot myself than do that, I’m sorry, but I would, and I actually love reading and tea (laughing). To me, when I started out on this journey I was like, hey, why isn’t anybody talking about what we do for fun? This is important to me. That’s why the central organizing principle for the Deconstructing Addiction League is how to enjoy life in the absence of alcohol and other drugs. That is our experiment. That is our project.

Interviewer: Staying connected to those values and those interests and those things that matter to you and that you care about.

Respondent: Absolutely. It’s about creating a place where people will say fun matters - pleasure matters. In some of these recovery circles, pleasure is seen as this kind of negative self-serving thing, it’s almost a dirty word. It’s, oh, that’s all about you and it might even be sexual, oh no, that doesn’t fit with recovery values maybe joy is ok but not pleasure. I mean honestly, people are so scared of the word pleasure sometimes. Recovery culture is very much informed by a pleasure-negative ethos. A Christian ethic of austerity and of serving others seems to dominate the conversation. I’m not saying there isn’t a place for Christian-informed aesthetics, but there can be a huge disconnect for people coming from a rebellious celebratory drug culture into a culture of recovery. This can make getting sober a massive culture shock and a serious turn-off. It doesn’t need to be this way.

Interviewer: Sounds like a sort of policing of what you’re allowed to want in life and like in life.

Respondent: Yeah, wouldn’t want to have too much fun now would you, because the real work is what you’re doing on yourself. This is serious business, so serious, you know? Whereas, with the deconstructing approach, it’s about taking a playful approach to a deadly serious problem. A playful approach changes the tone, and it changes the culture completely within it.

Interviewer: It does, doesn’t it? How do you see that playing out? What do you see is possible for that? Do you have any vision for that?

Respondent: Oh yeah, I got ideas here, I got ‘em. Let me just start by explaining this idea of recess. Here’s why I think it’s super important. When you’re young, if you go to school, they have recess, right? Teachers say we got to let these kids out to play, otherwise they’re going to go mad. They’re going to pull their hair out, they can only last a little while without playing.  So you send them outside and they run around like maniacs and they go--Weeeeeeeeee--you know, and they are having so much fun. All they need is a little space and no one telling them what to do and they can find the fun. That’s recess, right? 

When you get older, people don’t have a recess. You go to work and then, oh maybe there’s a little meditation room because that’s like a grown-up thing. You can meditate if you’re stressed and blah-blah-blah, right? But nobody even goes in there, at least in the workplaces I’ve seen. They work for 12 hours and then you know what they do? Work’s over, now it’s time for recess, they go to the bar, they have a beer and--woooohooooo--they party! That’s recess, right? Maybe this is important to people, this idea of just letting loose, letting your hair down, playing, having fun, not having a serious agenda. Maybe it’s more important than people realize, right? Okay, so what do people do if you’re an adult and you don’t drink and you don’t have a recess, what are you going to do? Talk about your issues in the most sterile and clinical way? Is that a recess? I don’t think so.

Interviewer: It’s like detention, isn’t it?

Respondent: Yeah, yeah the whole recovery thing if it’s not done in a playful way it can be awful. It’s like the fact that you’re there can be like you’re already not doing what you want to do. It’s your second choice, right? It’s like, well, I’d rather be partying and having fun. But here’s what I think. Maybe it’s not about the substance. Maybe it’s about the connection. Maybe it’s about the joy. Maybe it’s about the recess. What if we made it about creating an atmosphere where it’s ok as an adult to just let loose? It might be about running around and just letting off steam and being really silly or it could be a quiet kind of joy, you know? What I’m talking about is helping people find the ways that fit for them where they experience a recess, a sense of joy and celebration and even pleasure, yeah.

Interviewer: Yeah that sounds wonderful. It also seems to speak very much to finding the value that people find in life as well, rather than imposing values and saying what our values should and ought to be. Whether that’s hard work or working on issues or what have you, but actually values that people really do hold and have been connected to for a long time.

Respondent: Yeah. Yeah. I mean, if you were trying to pitch deconstructing addiction to people who are struggling with substances, you could say, well there’s this group that, what they do is they have fun and they connect and they do all these crazy things and they find ways for people to find pleasure in life, finding joy in simple things or complicated things or whatever.

Interviewer: It sounds more like, I don’t know if superseding is the right word. But it sounds as though these are the alternatives for fun. Maybe it could take up more space in a person’s life so that there isn't much need for alcohol or other substances to play a part.

Respondent: Yeah, the way I see it is alcohol and other drugs are a vehicle for many things like adventure, for getting rid of inhibitions, for people to experience preferred ways of relating to themselves and others. Wow, I knock back a couple of drinks and I can really just get playful or be really honest and forthright with people and just be who I want to be. Again, I think in reality it’s not that people care so much about the alcohol and the drugs per se. It’s what the alcohol provides them with, it’s what it’s a vehicle for that counts. Even if it’s a vehicle for something that’s hard to replicate without drugs like euphoria. There are actually other ways to achieve euphoria besides substance use, there’s plenty of other things that can give you a natural rush and these things are important to lots of people. So that’s where the absent but implicit concept comes in, which is a Narrative Therapy concept. You look at the substance and you try to find what’s absent but implicit in the person’s use of substances, like what purposes were there? What was useful about it? But that has to be done carefully in conversation because you don’t want somebody to just go down memory lane and put drugs on a pedestal and be like, oh yeah it was great when I drank, I did this and it was awesome because that’s scary and can set off all kinds of cravings. The idea is to say, hey, what was your use a vehicle for, because we don’t necessarily need the drugs to get there. You obviously need something that it provided but that might not be drugs. That could be all kinds of other things. Are you looking for adventure? Are you looking for misadventure? Are you looking for… what is it, comradery? I mean, all these things that people are seeking, they can get quickly and easily in alcohol and other drugs. But unfortunately, these things aren’t readily available in the culture without it. That’s why it’s about creating a new kind of culture where people have access to these preferred ways of being in the world without the drugs.

Interviewer: I think that metaphor or image if you like, that you use alcohol or substances as a vehicle to something else, is a very different understanding, isn’t it? Because a lot of the models that we have at the moment suggest that the substance is the thing. It’s the thing that is almost like the endpoint of the addiction. Whereas if you’re thinking of it as a vehicle or a gateway to something else, it’s actually a very different conceptualization, isn’t it?

Respondent: Yes, yes, so what is it a gateway to that’s life-affirming to the person? If alcohol is the primary channel for a person to experience love, if they simply remove it then they are going to suffer. Perhaps when they drink, it becomes the means to talk to their friends in a loving way. Maybe without it, they can’t access that side of themselves. Maybe alcohol allows them to open up in a certain way that enables them to give and receive a lot of love in general. If people find value in that and there isn’t a place within the abstinence model to find it then there’s going to be a struggle. If love or whatever is only found by chance, then I think people are in danger because it’ll always be tempting to say, all right, well, the only way that I know how to get these things, the only gateway is alcohol.

Interviewer: One of your commitments that you’ve made very clear to me in our conversations is that you don’t want to in any way sort of undermine or discredit other models and approaches such as AA and so forth. Could you say a little bit about what it is perhaps that you value, for instance in the AA model that connects deconstructing addiction to other forms of self-help or assistance?

Respondent: Sure yeah. I mean I see it as a kind of honoring what came before, right? AA is something that people have access to worldwide. It’s a place where you can go and get help where people will allow you to come and they’ll support you no matter what. It doesn’t technically cost anything and it’s saved millions of lives. I mean, it just has. It’s such a useful practice. There are definitely a few parallels with some of our Narrative ideas and ways of working. You’ve got practices of witness basically where a community of people are publicly acknowledging the members who are on a rite of passage and how this is formalized or structured within forums of acknowledgment. People can invite their families to come support them and celebrate with the group. There’s a lot of things that are valuable about it. If you like these ideas from deconstructing addiction it doesn’t mean you couldn’t go to an AA meeting. In fact, to the contrary, I am an active member of AA as we speak. And this can sometimes be a tricky thing, but I’ve learned to navigate it by what I call double contextualizing it. In some ways, it’s like speaking two different languages but it’s a little more complicated than maneuvering from English to French. It’s more like going from English to Mandarin. It’s more than just the language.

Interviewer: Moving between cultures.

Respondent: Yes, culture and language is such a big shift, right? I can do that and I know how to not take on the things that I find demeaning or demoralizing about AA. I just do a little dance with it, like rephrasing it in my head when necessary. I’m able to access it this way, and so for a lot of people, AA could be a lifesaver. I hope to come up with some writings that will make it easier for people who are struggling with it to navigate these differences, especially if AA is the only thing available to them. Instead of just quitting AA and trying to go it alone, these critiques could potentially enable people to access it in a new way where they could still participate in AA, but in a way where they’re being more true to themselves, to their beliefs and their ideas. Especially the ideas that are in sync with deconstructing addiction. It’s really not about trying to supplant AA at all. It’s about saying, you might need something in addition to AA, maybe you go to AA and then you join the deconstructing addiction league for more of a social connection or maybe you do all of the deconstructing addiction league and you do all of AA. Whatever works best for you. My hope is to get this league to a place where you could just join the league and it would be enough support for you and you wouldn’t need any other resources.

Interviewer: Yeah. What sort of support do you envisage?

Respondent: Yeah, so besides creating social events and stuff like that where we explore lots of good times, we will take that same atmosphere to a therapeutic space. In this therapeutic space, we will create various forums of acknowledgment where we share our knowledges of life and skills of living that can assist people on this journey away from substances. We will have themes for conversations that explore the things that are likely to trip people up, and how to prepare for difficult times and navigating life's complexities. Some of the lighter part will be a hospitality exploration. Really finding through detailed conversations which forms of hospitality have the potential to light people up. And what I mean by that is finding the thing that connects people and really gets them going. Because if you just put people in a room without alcohol, it’s like what the hell are we going to do? People don’t know what to do, so they want to have something familiar like a meeting. But as this is a social experiment, people will find some sort of playful joining practice at the top of the gathering to help them feel more comfortable. Maybe they do improv exercises. It depends on people’s preferences. If you have a performative group of people then you might do these improv warm-up exercises to get people really fired up, but if that’s too much you could do something simpler like a thumb wrestle. Something goofy but potentially bonding. Maybe you do a ministry of silly walks, where someone does a silly walk and then the next person has to copy that walk and then do one of their own and so on and so on. Maybe you have a Soul Train Dance Line and people start imitating each other’s dance moves and then they do one of their own. These are the kinds of things that you would do, believe it or not, in a therapeutic group. Like imagine if there was an AA meeting that started with a Soul Train Dance off -- I mean that would be super fun. Or maybe nobody would dig it, you have to know your audience, right? Whatever the channel, the idea is that you’re having fun just by showing up to the group. You go there for an hour or more and you leave there going, wow, all right that was an experience. It was fun and something changed with your relationship to alcohol and other drugs. The conversations were profound and useful and have stimulated my imagination about how I can live my life differently.

Interviewer: I’m envisioning over time a huge collection if you like, I don’t know if that’s the right word, of insider knowledge about how to have fun without substances.

Respondent: Yeah definitely, an archive of good times. Maybe call it ‘the arts of feeling good’. We will put it on our website and people can access it. And in our groups, we will have a storytelling tradition where people share stories of creating these good times.

Interviewer: And finding different ways of collecting those stories.

Respondent: Yeah sure exactly, for example, winter joy would be an interesting theme to archive. In certain Scandinavian countries, there is a concept related to coziness that people call koselig or hygee, and in places like Holland, they call it gezelligheid. I don’t know if you’ve heard of it, but it’s an incredibly innovative way of enjoying the company of others and nature despite the cold climate. It’s kind of this idea that cozy is at the center of the hanging out that they do together. A warmth of connection guides the activity and creates an atmosphere conducive to a strong feeling of togetherness. You would think that in Northern Norway where there’s no light in the wintertime, people would be very depressed or whatever. But for the people who evoke coziness, when they invite all their friends over and they have blankets and everybody gets under the blankets together and they have hot beverages and candles--the feeling of closeness is supposed to be incredible. And then of course there’s the beauty of the Northern Lights. Apparently, it's such a bonding experience, that many people prefer it to summer. 

This concept of Winter Joy could spark other conversations that involve people sharing their cultural traditions in ways that are meaningful and useful for others who are looking for new ways to connect. 

Creating an archive that could inform different practices of hospitality could be illuminating. Some of it could be grounded in people’s ethnicities or whatever cultural context they are in, and they could share this. The diversity of experiences could really bring innovation to people’s hanging out together. It’s all about ‘cultivating the hang’. In this way, we would want to know what people are doing in South Africa for fun and for connection. What about Turkey? Or Bali?

You have different types of archives because you have people with a broad range of interests. For instance, maybe there are people who want a mellow good time and others who want some kind of ecstatic good time. The ecstatic good time could be about doing some kind of dance or something that can channel an ecstatic experience - could be swing dancing? Maybe chanting? I don’t know, whatever people are into. But these are the good times that people could explore and then document--put in the archives. 

Interviewer: This sounds --I mean in talking about it, it’s almost like I’ve got these two different images in my mind, one is this sort of group of people sitting in plastic chairs in a circle being a bit down about things. What you’re describing sounds almost more like a meet-up than a sort of self-help group if you like.

Respondent: Yeah, so with meet-up.com, you might have a bunch of people saying, hey we want to meet up and play ping pong at Fat Cats Billiards on Friday, who wants to come? They do that and then people meet up and you know what the hospitality is? Well, the main activity is the ping pong, but the driving force of the connection is the alcohol. People are into the ping pong so they already have a reason to be there. But then you go grab a drink, and then people just mingle, right, so that’s a meet-up. Deconstructing addiction says, okay, well since we’re not going to drink, we have to be a little bit more deliberate in our hospitality because this is such an unusual thing for people. We have to make the activity fun, but we also need a bonafide way for people to connect that doesn’t seem corny. And that’s the part that takes practice to figure out. It takes skill. And that’s why it’s an experiment. Some trial and error is to be expected before figuring it out.

Interviewer: It’s almost like alcohol is so effective that people get a bit lazy about the hospitality, they don’t have to be that imaginative because the alcohol does the heavy lifting.

Respondent: That’s right, alcohol can be an effective social lubricant. We need a social lubricant too though, just not one that’s substance-based. It’s like alcohol gives you cheap and easy access to the connection, right? So we have to be a little bit more imaginative since we’re not offering alcohol. It’s harder but ultimately more rewarding to me.

Interviewer: Do you envisage people becoming people who are, I don’t like the word expert, but I can’t really necessarily think of a better word at the moment, who over time become quite skilled in hospitality so that you get new people coming in and then you’ve got these people who’ve been around this network for a long time who picked up these skills and knowledges and developed ways of creating that hospitality.

Respondent: Yes, exactly.

Interviewer: And they can mentor people through.

Respondent: Exactly, so it’s like this. You have the archives for reference from people from all different ages, interests and cultural backgrounds. Then there’s the actual therapeutic conversations in the groups that can stimulate people’s understandings of what might be fun in life. And then you have people experimenting with this either with their own friends or with the public through events. Each therapeutic group has its own style of fun and style of hospitality.  One group might be very performative, another might be very chill. Then each individual develops their own style of hospitality keeping in mind how they like to join with other people. Everyone would have their own way and it would be really great to see people getting skilled at this and sharing it.

Interviewer: Yeah, it sounds like it would be important to know what works for different people, because some people if they heard you were going to have a dance-off or whatever might be like ooh, I’m not going there.

Respondent: Right, because it’s not for them. Exactly, and they shouldn’t have to go there.

Interviewer: Yeah, it sounds like there’s an intention to have an inclusive culture that enables people to enjoy things in their own way.  

Respondent: Yes exactly, so that’s the thing.  Maybe the larger group practices have to be a bit broader in their appeal so as not to alienate people. Either way, we’ve got two kinds of groups. We’ve got the larger events and parties that employ deconstructing addiction-type hospitality involving alternative social lubricants and activities and whatever. We’ve got those events and everybody’s invited to them and then there’s the therapeutic groups where people are trying to revise their relationship to substances and getting support for this. You might have fun at the top of the meeting. If the group is a performative group, they might have a dance-off.  If the group is not that way inclined, they might do something quiet that bonds them, whatever works.  

Interviewer: Contribution is welcome, there isn’t an idea that this is what it is and you have to fit in, but people are coming in and actually bringing themselves and what they have to contribute.

Respondent: Yeah. Exactly, and the more options that we can come up with the better. You want people to become stimulated off the bat.  I think stimulation and comfort are two of the main things people are looking for to get through the day. At a basic level, something like television provides stimulation and comfort, probably only enough to suck you in, but not enough to really satisfy you. The same with our phones. We can have a baseline of stimulation and comfort but not really enough to sustain us or to feel good. Drugs and alcohol provide massive amounts of stimulation and comfort, and if we can’t find equal sources of stimulation and comfort, there will potentially be a feverish itch for many of us to get high. If you decide you’re going to quit drinking today, quit drugs or whatever, one of the first things to consider is how you’re going to find adequate stimulation and comfort. This might be equally important as finding food, water and shelter.

Interviewer: Stimulation and comfort are nice things to have in life aren’t they. They make life so much nicer.

Respondent: Yes, and I find that, especially at AA, sometimes there’s not enough stimulation at the meeting.  Sometimes there’s an after-the-meeting hangout that people call fellowship, where people will go out to dinner, or maybe get coffee or something like that. But that’s not actually part of the meeting, so it leaves the bonding part to chance.  I think it’s really important to think about this, because if you leave the social connection to chance, then a lot of people will by default just go home after the meeting and watch 20 hours of Netflix. That’s going to be a little stimulating, just stimulating enough to keep you in your seat, but after a while, it doesn’t feel good.  It’s not enough and it’s not really that comforting although sometimes it can be. 

Interviewer: It’s not very connecting is it?

Respondent: No it’s not. I do think that if people can find sufficient ways to be stimulated and comforted then there’s not really that much of a need for a drug.

Interviewer: Okay yeah absolutely.  Is there anything else you’d like to say about this?

Respondent: Yeah, definitely. I think it’s important to consider three particular domains of what we call preferred identity. The first domain of preferred identity that I think is important to be looking at is in your relationship to yourself. It’s about illuminating the types of things that you can do on your own that bring joy, pleasure and peace of mind. The second domain is in your relationship to your community and identifying the things you can just plug into that provide joy, stimulation, comfort etc. This could be attending a class, getting involved in a community project or anything else that is available to the public. And the third domain of preferred identity is in your relationship with either your family, your friends, your inner circle or all of the above. It’s about increasing the quality of joy you experience with the most significant people in your life. So locating these three domains, figuring out what you need more of and then raising the level of pleasure in your life in relation to this is really important. Because pleasure can be understood in terms of how often you have access to it, but mostly by the intensity of it. So maximizing the intensity of pleasure in life is an important thing for anyone changing their relationship to substances.

Interviewer: For anybody who is reading this, who do you anticipate this serving?

Respondent: It’s definitely for people who want to stop using drugs and alcohol.  That’s the initial group that I’m trying to start with the abstinence model. Then there’s going to be the wider circle for anybody who wants to find new ways of having fun without the dimension of alcohol and other drugs.  That’s part of the larger project, but I’d also like to see people bring their friends, their partners and their families around to some of the gatherings.

Interviewer: That’s a really interesting point, actually, about families.

Respondent: Yeah, because Alcoholics Anonymous has created a separate support group for family members called Alanon. Alanon is a support group for people who’ve been trampled on by their loved one’s substance use.  If you’re a family member or a partner of a substance-user, a lot of the time you are pathologized at rehab and at Alanon as an enabler or as a codependent person. Unfortunately within these models, sometimes acts of care and acts of love can be understood as a symptom of dysfunction. It’s a little sad when you think about it, it’s like saying, You loved too much, and that’s a disease. Especially because it’s a very tricky thing to know how to support someone effectively and how to not get taken advantage of. This is difficult for anyone.

Interviewer: Okay, I see.

Respondent: Yeah with that model I have to be careful how I talk about it because I want to be respectful.  The Alanon practice has been helpful for a lot of people, so I want to acknowledge that it has value and all that stuff as well. But it really can have some negative effects, and that’s what I’m referring to right now, I think that Deconstructing Addiction can counter this.  

 I also think that by separating the AA and Alanon conversations, it misses several opportunities for a greater connection and understanding.  For instance, when you’ve used substances, and it’s wreaked havoc on somebody else’s life, and you don’t get to hear how it’s affected them you’re missing half the conversation. Typically the conversations are only had together at rehab when the families come in and they are often encouraged to say how the person screwed up their life and the context is typically one of blame and shame. I’m obviously not talking about implementing that type of approach. That fits with the more punitive models. I would never want that kind of a conversation, but I would really like to have somebody (an outsider) come into our group and speak about the difficult time they had trying to support their loved one and then sharing the effects that this had on their life.  When done in a respectful way drug users can see, wow, there are real consequences of my use, look how it’s affected this person. I wonder how it’s affected my family?  I think separating the conversation has its benefits, but it also has limitations. If you’re an AA member and you have a family, attending meetings several days a week doesn’t leave a lot of time for family.  That’s why some of our gatherings (the ones initiated by parents) will be geared towards whole family and community connection. It’s like, bring the kids.  Everyone is going to play.  The adults are going to have fun, the kids are going to play and we’re going to do it side by side. So instead of being at separate meetings and the kids at home with a sitter you’ve got a community-friendly playspace. 

Interviewer: Yeah, and I’m wondering for someone interested in becoming involved, what sort of commitment would be key? Would you be expected to go to groups with certain regularity or have a buddy system, and those sorts of things?  

Respondent: Well the level of commitment is up to the person.  It’s the same with a lot of approaches. You determine that for yourself, so it’s an as-needed type of thing. However, I’ve noticed that unless a person immerses themselves in something for a while, it’s really hard to make these lifestyle changes stick. Because with any rite of passage, which is what this is, you are not stepping from a known and familiar world into some other known world. You are stepping into the unknown, and this can be quite disorientating and painful--filled with many ups and downs. That’s why we recommend a lot of support and definitely a buddy system. And if there's not enough Deconstructing Addiction support in your area, then making use of other community-based resources can be really useful.  I would hope that if we really get this league off the ground there would be regular options and things to show up to, so a person wouldn’t need to go anywhere else. With a disease model, because you can’t cure yourself of the disease, you are expected to show up for the rest of your life which sounds horrible. With Deconstructing Addiction, we don’t have to show up because we are sick, that’s not our thinking. But since we live in a culture of consumption, until the larger culture changes we will probably need some form of support. That’s why the support needs to be fun and engaging, not a chore, it has to be something you do because you like it.  

Interviewer: What do you say is the next step for Deconstructing Addiction?  What now?

Respondent:    The next step is to get some groups going and to structure the organization in the most egalitarian non non-commercial way. Earlier you were asking about some similarities with AA.  There’s a lot of similarities and a lot of differences. The main similarity is actually the structure of the organization and some of the traditions. The way I see the league working is very similar to AA and its traditions in terms of it being anonymous.  You have to protect people’s anonymity. This is important. People might not want to be associated with drug use past or present. That has to be respected and anonymity is good for that. Anonymity is also good because we don’t want to have leaders or spokespersons.  We won’t have role models, leaders, or someone who runs the whole show. We don’t want that. Even though there are founders, and they will have a lot of influence until the league is fully operational, but here’s the thing; the founders aren’t role models, they’re not the experts, they’re not going to speak for everybody.  Unfortunately not having a leader also limits the kind of PR we can do. I can’t go on the news and say, I want to invite people out, this is what it’s like, and get all this publicity and stuff because then I’m etched in people’s minds as the leader. We’re discouraging that, because that’s what Alcoholics Anonymous did, and it was really successful. They also set it up so that it’s not commercialized. And because of that it hasn’t gotten co-opted by commercial interests.  For almost a hundred years, it has maintained a kind of do-it-yourself (DIY) sentimentality. We want to maintain that as well.  We want to keep it as a peer-led, nonprofessional group that doesn’t really cost anything.  Yes, we might pass the hat to collect money voluntarily, but we’re not going to have dues or fees or anything like that.  There will be some literature that will cost money, but the proceeds from that will go back into the group so we can spread the word but in a non-commercial sense.  In that way, it’s going to take longer for this thing to really explode because there are no spokespeople for it and there’s no marketing.

Interviewer: Yeah, what about people who have never had any concerns about alcohol and other substances who think, hey this is really cool people having heaps of fun, I would like to be part of it?

Respondent: Yeah, they just come.

Interviewer: Could that be anybody to just come along?

Respondent: Yeah, to the larger events, you know, the parties that we throw for everybody, yeah. 

Interviewer: I think it sounds fantastic.  You got me all enthused. Have we covered everything?

Respondent:    I think we’ve covered it, but as far as the organizational aspects I’m still looking to get more clarity on exactly how to structure it.  Keeping in mind that I don’t want people to fight over power or anything like that. Having rotating service committees and stuff so that nobody takes control but yet it still runs effectively.  No-one’s going to make a name for themselves attached to this league. Do you see what I’m saying? It defuses the quest for power and the possibility for people to go in that direction. We don’t want to have this thing sponsored by Budweiser (laughs) or Facebook.

Interviewer: Yeah, it’s not quite the same, is it?

Respondent: But it is a little bit challenging in terms of how we get this out there?  Here’s another thing about being leaderless and about anonymity that is really important.  Let’s say I’m the founder, let’s say something happens with me and I ended up overdosing or something like that. Then people say, see this thing doesn’t work because look at what happened to the founder.  When you don’t have leaders, it’s about the collective and the practices. It’s not about individuals. It’s about what value this resource has to people and how effective it is on the whole.