Yeah, I felt the need to step back too. Another one with some not-quite-resolved issues, obviously.
Glad Mr. B is doing better.
This from eoe jogged forth an idea that I wanted to get down (only just got a minute to do so):
eoe wrote:Being an ex-smoker, it's the same as Chai's restaurant experience. My stepchildren smoke, all three of them, and when they come to the house, we hang out on the patio, have a glass of wine or a beer and I watch them smoke, sometimes enviously, remembering when it was good, taking that first deep drag, and I want one and try to imagine having "just one" but...I don't dare try. I don't dare.
I'm less aware of smokers turning into monsters because of smoking than alcoholics turning into monsters because of drinking. And I think that's a central disconnect in this discussion. My objection to an alcoholic simply taking a drink -- just that -- is much more how I would react to a smoker who quits and then resumes. Too bad, it's good for your health if you stop, I'll support you if you are able to quit again because I think it's a good idea but if not, it's basically your decision.
For a lot of us, though, the "alcoholic taking a drink again" is an instantaneous leap to "monster acting monstrous" .... and that is not OK. The behaviors unleashed by drink are simply not tolerable in the way that drinking, itself, might be. Being disrespected in ways small and large, facing vehement denials that things that happened actually happened, being the target of apoplectic rage -- all of those are not easy to simply shrug and dismiss as the symptoms of an ill person. At some point, cutting off all contact to prevent the alcoholic from having a chance to inflict pain might be necessary -- but between "the alcoholic has started drinking again" and cutting off all contact, there is a lot of ambiguity and hurt.