Search

Background: The current emphasis among addiction treatment providers is to use person-first language, such as "a person with a substance use disorder," as a way to reduce stigma around addiction and resulting barriers to treatment. This study considers how individuals recovering from substance use feel about the terms "alcoholic" and "addict," particularly how they self-identify and whether they believe the terms carry stigma. Method: Thirty-five individuals were interviewed, recruited primarily, but not exclusively, from 12-step meetings (Alcoholics Anonymous, Narcotics Anonymous), from 3 locations throughout a rural New England state. Interviews were transcribed and coded in Atlas Ti qualitative analysis software, and a content analysis of text coded with "stigma" was conducted. Results: Some comments reflected a belief that the terms "addict" and "alcoholic" carry a stigma. However, more comments rejected the notion of these being stigmatized terms; or acknowledged the stigma but reflected the subject's lack of internalizing of any stigma. Comments reflected other themes including a sense of pride, identity and ownership when self-identifying as an addict or alcoholic. Several comments suggested that person-first language is part of a larger movement to "soften everything," without changing the underlying condition (addiction). The findings may reflect the fact that subjects were recruited from 12-step programs, where the convention is to self-identity using the terms "alcoholic" and/or "addict." Conclusions: Some individuals seeking treatment for addiction may prefer self-identifying using old-school terminology (addict, alcoholic) rather than person-first language, for a variety of reasons (eg, they do not internalize the stigma of such terms). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Little is known about what recovery means to those with chronic fatigue syndrome/myalgic encephalomyelitis, a poorly understood, disabling chronic health condition. To explore this issue, semi-structured interviews were conducted with patients reporting improvement (n = 9) and deterioration (n = 10) after a guided self-help intervention, and analyzed via "constant comparison." The meaning of recovery differed between participants—expectations for improvement and deployment of the sick role (and associated stigma) were key influences. While some saw recovery as complete freedom from symptoms, many defined it as freedom from the "sick role," with functionality prioritized. Others redefined recovery, reluctant to return to the lifestyle that may have contributed to their illness, or rejected the concept as unhelpful. Recovery is not always about eliminating all symptoms. Rather, it is a nexus between the reality of limited opportunities for full recovery, yet a strong desire to leave the illness behind and regain a sense of "normality." [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Websites advocating the benefits of eating disorders ("Pro-Ana") tend to reinforce and maintain restrictive eating and purging behaviors. Yet remarkably, no study has explored individual accounts of disengagement from these sites and the associated meanings. Using narrative inquiry, this study sought to address this gap. From the interviews of six women, two overarching storylines emerged. The first closely tied disengagement to recovery with varying positions of personal agency claimed: this ranged from enforced and unwelcomed breaks that ignited change, to a personal choice that became viable through the development of alternative social and personal identities. A strong counternarrative to "disengagement as recovery" also emerged. Here, disengagement from Pro-Ana was storied alongside a need to retain an ED lifestyle. With "recovery" being just one reason for withdrawal from Pro-Ana sites, clinicians must remain curious about the meanings individuals ascribe to this act, without assuming it represents a step toward recovery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]