Second stage recovery from addiction.

The second stage of recovery from using drugs, after realizing you need help, is called the transition stage.  The transition begins with the downward spiral at the end of the drinking, and/or drug using stage. It includes the acute trauma of “hitting bottom” which may include being violently ill, tremors, restlessness, and hallucinations.  This continues into the earliest steps of abstinence and recovery. In the transition stage, family dynamics are changing almost constantly, which can make it the most traumatic stage in recovery.

Alcoholism

Although active alcoholism is unstable and dangerous, there is the illusion of structure. The family members have had time to grow used to the unhealthy family system. The alcoholic family is cushioned from much of their pain by denial, which allows them to endure recurring hardships. During transition, however, denial starts to crack, and the reality that was kept at bay now begins to intrude into the family’s perceptions. What was accepted as normal is revealed to be unhealthy, and the small comforts that the family members created for themselves are shown to be illusions. Each member is torn between the painful light of the "comforting” darkness of denial.

In the transition stage of recovery, the habitual system of substance use collapses while the family desperately tries to keep the family unity in place. The family members want to save this crumbling structure because throughout the addict’s using stage each individual’s entire focus  has been to keep the dysfunctional system in place at the cost of their own wants and needs (e.g. avoiding conflicts with the addict, keeping the peace, and avoiding other people).

However, in order to survive the chaos of transition, each member must go against their instincts and let the system fall. Each must reach outside the family for help and support; this is also painful, since each individual has to overcome the deep belief that reaching out is a betrayal of the family.

Because of the heightened and ongoing state of crisis that characterizes the transition stage, a map can be a vital tool for surviving the journey through the treacherous landscape.

Recovery is a slow process that demands a lot of faith and patience. Things often get worse before they get better, and it’s crucial that you are able to make it through. In reality, pain and discomfort in the recovery process is part of the healing process but difficult steps along the path to recovery.

It’s important to understand why, even though you just made a change for the better, life suddenly got a whole lot worse.

Active use of alcohol and/or other substances demands that family members maintain a subtle balance between denial (the behaviour is only bad once-in-awhile, and I can make him/her change over time) and reality (you can’t make another person change). As long as the behaviour stays within its acceptable limits, the denial can grow with it. This balance can remain in place for a long time.

Nevertheless, when there is a break in the normal course of events - whether from an external cause like driving under the influence, or accident, or internal cause like a family member moving out – the balance is lost and the cracks start to form in the denial.

Since recovery is a developmental process, each stage has a number of tasks that must be fulfilled before you can move on to the next stage. The following are the tasks of the transitional stage:

*Break denial.

*Begin to challenge your core beliefs.

*Realize that family life is out of control.

*Hit bottom and surrender.

*Accept the reality that you have addiction problems and the loss of control.

*Enlist supports outside the family (community self-help groups, therapy).

*Shift focus from the system of support groups to individuals who begin detachment from groups and use individual recovery.

*Allow the addiction system to collapse.

*Learn new abstinent behaviours and thinking.

Healthy growth is about discovering your inner spirit and finding your own individual path. This can only be done by listening to yourself. Patience is the key. You will get there in time, but you can only reconnect with others after you have taken responsibility for your own life.

The journey does not always seem to be moving forward but the work continues. In mountain climbing, you often have a hammer in a lot of ropes to move up to the next plateau. In great measure, the days are spent hanging ropes, while at night you return to the base camp – but not the bottom of the mountain – to sleep. One day the ropes reach the next plateau, and you pack up your camp and climb the ropes, pulling them up behind you. When you reach the plateau you set up your new camp, and the next day the climb continues from that higher plateau. So goes recovery: even the days spend apparently going nowhere are crucial parts of the journey.   

The Dominican and Franciscan Orders (History with good intent)

Dominic, the father of the Dominican order, was the founder of the Inquisition and the first Inquisitor-General that had become part of the Roman tradition. This was confirmed by historians of the Order, and by quoting a bull of Innocent III appointing him Inquisitor-General. However, no tradition of the Church rests on a single and narrow basis. There is no doubt that Dominic devoted the best years of his life combating heresy, and when a heretic was deaf to persuasion, he would cheerfully stand by the pyre and see him burned, like any other Zealous missionary of the time; in this he was no more prominent than hundreds of others. Furthermore, he had nothing to do with the organized work in this direction. From the year 1215, when he laid the foundation of his Order, he was engrossed in it to the exclusion of all other objects, and was obliged to forego his cherished design of ending his days as a missionary to Persia. It was not until more than ten years after his death that such an institution as the papal Inquisition can be said to have existed.

                                                                                                    
                                         St. Dominic founder of the Dominican Order

A similar legendary halo exaggerates the exclusive glory, claimed by the Order, of organizing and perfecting the Inquisition. The bulls of Gregory IX alleged in support of the assertion are simply special orders of individual Dominican provincials to give authority to their brethren who were naturally suited for the purpose to the duty of preaching against heresy, and examining heretics and prosecuting their defenders.

The fact is that there was no formal confiding of the Inquisition to the Dominicans any more than there was any formal founding of the Inquisition itself. As the institution gradually assumed shape and organization in the effort to find some effectual means to force heretics out from hiding, the Dominicans were the readiest instrument at hand, especially as they professed the functions of preaching and converting as their primary business. As conversion became less, the object and persecution became the main business of the Inquisition, the Franciscans were equally useful, and the honours of the organization were divided between them.

                              St. Francis founder of the Franciscans

Still, the earliest inquisitors were unquestionably Dominicans. After the settlement, between Raymond of Toulouse and St. Louis, the removal of heresy in the Albigensian territories was seriously undertaken. The Dominicans were sent for to work under the direction of the bishops. In northern France the business gradually fell almost exclusively into their hand. In Aragon, as early as 1232, they were recommended to the Archbishop of Tarragona as fitting instruments for the Inquisition, and in April 1238, Gregory IX appointed the provincials of the Dominicans as inquisitors for the kingdom, and by 1249 the institution was entrusted to them.

                                                       Gregory IX

Eventually, southern France was divided between them and the Franciscans. The western portion was given to the Dominicans and the remainder was under the charge of the Franciscans. In 1254, Italy was formally divided between the Dominicans and Franciscans by Innocent IV. However, the boundaries of their respective jurisdictions caused early hatred and mutual rivalry between the two which led to perpetual scandal and danger to the Church. So strong was the hostility between the two Orders that Clement IV established the rule that there should be a distance of at least 3,000 feet between their respective possessions - “a regulation which only led to new and more intricate disputes.” 

                                                   Pope Clement IV
These two religious groups of the Mendicant Orders undoubtedly aided in postponing a revolution for which the world was not ready. Though the self-denial of their earlier days was too rear and destructive to be preserved, they soon committed acts that were a common part of the social order around them.  Yet their work had not been altogether lost. They had brought afresh to human minds some of the forgotten truths of the Gospel, and had taught them to view their duties to their fellows from a higher plane.

How well they recognized and appreciated their own service is shown by the story, common to the legend of both Orders. It tells that while the founders Dominic and Francis were waiting the approval of Innocent III, a holy man had a vision in which he saw Christ brandishing three darts with which to destroy the world, and the Virgin inquiring his purpose. Then said Christ, “This world is full of pride, avarice, and lust; I have borne with it too long, and with these darts will I consume it.” The Virgin fell on her knees and interceded for man, but in vain, until she revealed to him that she had two faithful servants who would reduce it to his dominion. Then Christ desired to see the champions; she showed him Dominic and Francis, and he was content. The pious author of the story could hardly have foreseen in 1627 Urban VIII would be obliged to deprive the Friars of their dearly prized immunity, and to subject them to episcopal jurisdiction, in the hope of restraining them from seducing their spiritual daughters in the confessional (The Inquisition of the Middle Ages, p.142)
 Innocent III           Urban VIII

Cultural underpinnings of sex victimology

We live in a society that trains and encourages females to be victims of sexual coercion and males to victimize females. In addition, it has important implications for what must be done to prevent sex victimization in its many forms.
Females are generally socialized to be passive and dependent while males are programmed to be independent and aggressive. This fundamental difference lies at the heart of sex victimization, which is primarily an act of power and control.
Most families are generally given the job of socializing children to fill prescribed gender roles and thus supply the needs of a power society…Ingrained in our present family system is the nucleus of male power and domination, No matter how often we witness the devastatingly harmful effects of this arrangement on women and children, the victims are always asked to uphold the family values and submit to abuse.
The teenage boy is quick to learn that he is expected to be the sexual aggressor. For him, it is acceptable – even “manly” – to use persuasion or trickery to seduce his prey. He is also taught (by our society, if not in his home) that females do not really know what they want, that when they say “no” they mean “maybe” they mean “yes.” He may also have heard a bit of male myths that says – in reference to some unhappy female – “what she needs is a good lay.” Given this background, it’s not surprising that what men see as being an “active, aggressive (and desirable) lover” may quickly be transformed into sexual assault in its various forms.
Most women have been taught as children not only to be passive (nice, polite, lady-like) but also to be seductive and coy. They are usually not trained to deal with physical aggression (unlike boys, whose play activities develop this capacity) but are trained to deal with sexual situations in a way that is shy, modest or reserved.  Thus the female in a situation of sexual coercion is ill prepared to act against sexual aggression. Faced with a physical threat, she often becomes psychologically paralyzed. Faced with unwanted sexual demands, and social expectations, she is likely to question what it is about her manner, dress, or behaviour that produced the attention: she blames herself and feels guilt instead of taking more positive action. This hesitancy is frequently misread, or ignored by the male, who sees it as a sign of weakness and a chance that she will give in. His past experience may prove him right: how many women “give in” in various undesired sexual situations is not known.
There are no perfect solutions that can wipe out sexual coercion, but a significant part of the problem can be addressed in two fundamental ways. First and foremost, as this discussion implies, is to change traditional gender-role socialization that puts females in the position of being vulnerable to sexual abuse. Second, in-depth attention is required to identify the conditions that push men into the “victimizer” role. Only when a clear understanding of the causes and motivations underlying coercive sex is at hand will it be possible to develop effective strategies for dealing with this problem on a large scale basis. 
In an essay titled “Raising Girls for the 21^st Century,” Emilie Buchwald (1993) makes the following suggestions for helping girls learn to know their strengths.

1.      Tell your daughters what helped you to survive growing up.
2.      Give girls your attention and approval.
3.      Teach girls to be independent.
4.      Encourage fathers to be active allies in remaking the culture.
5.      Teach girls at an early age about their bodies and their sexuality; replace sexual ignorance (and gender-linked stereotypes) with sexual knowledge, including specific facts about sexual harassment and other forms of sexual coercion.
6.      Let girls recognize that they can be part of changing our culture, and that cultures can in fact change.
7.      Enlist women mentors and role models.
8.      Find ways for girls to empower themselves through athletics and learning to play together.
9.      Teach girls to be media critical in order to avoid the undercurrent of endorsements of sexual violence in today’s movies and television.
10.  Avoid reinforcing gender stereotypes.
11.  Encourage girls to feel happy with themselves.


Boys can be taught different sexual values and attitudes if we protect them from violent entertainment (or at least help them see how the violence in our media is not an endorsement of what should happen in real life) and teach them, from childhood on, to view themselves as future nurturing, nonviolent responsible fathers.

As long as our culture enforces gender-role stereotypes that train females to be sexual victims and program males to see sexual aggression as “manly,” we will continue to have problems with sexual coercion in its many forms.