OK here's my 2 cents:
Some addicts are able to achieve a recovery in the sense that they can manage to abstain from their drug of choice. BUT so many of these people become intolerant, uptight, humorless, and obsessed with the outer trappings of virtue...ie: someone you wouldn't want as a friend, in spite of their clean living. So in the larger sense, have they REALLY recovered?
I'd say this is a hugely controversial question.
2007-09-14 05:15:49
·
answer #1
·
answered by peacetrain 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
Something controversial and pertaining to addiction. I'll have to admit, you picked a difficult one. The first topic that comes to mind is smoking. Smoking is an addiction (I know from first hand experience) however, many non-smokers view it as just a destructive pass-time that can be easily dropped. So, maybe you could try writing your essay about the controversy surrounding the addiction to smoking and how truly hard it is to quit. Or, it's a little bit off the topic of addiction but you could try something like smoker's rights. It's definitely controversial and there are many laws in place (especially in California) that diminish smoker's rights. Just some ideas. Hope this helps.
p.s. If you do want to do this as a topic, I am more than willing to give you a personal account of what it's like dealing with some of these laws, non-smokers, trying to quit, etc. Just email me through my profile.
2007-09-14 05:31:03
·
answer #2
·
answered by little_ash_2003 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Well there's controversial because the facts aren't exactly known or can be shaded, and controversial because the proposal in some way offends some of us, regardless of whether it solves the problem or not (Machiavellian policies, e.g.)
In the first case, how about the 'how addictive is pot?' debate? Data is spotty and sometimes contradictory throughout the years, plus there's the arguments that marijuana has been refined since the 60s and is stronger, that use is now coupled with other drugs more than it used to be, etc.
On the second - methadone clinics. Critics say it's government subsidizing an addiction. If you go with this one, there's some interesting stuff at the beginning of Dan Baum's 'Smoke and Mirrors' about Nixon and methadone clinics.
Good luck!
2007-09-14 10:14:49
·
answer #3
·
answered by aaron_mucciolo 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
How about court-mandated participation in an AA program as compulsory religion? That is one topic addressed on this interesting website:
http://www.addictioninfo.org/categories/Help-Yourself/Controversial-Addiction-Topics/
2007-09-14 05:15:37
·
answer #4
·
answered by RE 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
Call me clueless but I totally do not understand addiction of any kind. I guess that's like saying there is no such thing as mental illness therefore we don't need psychiatrists or psychologists.
Example; My mother took my uncle and aunt into our home to help with their addiction, they drove us out of the house.
I saw and heard the nightmare of withdrawal.
I suffered untold sexual abuse from 6 family members.
I'm still here and never once did I ever want or need to take any substance that was addictive .
When people say they became addicted because..........I say HOG WASH! People become addicted because they WANT to!
2007-09-14 05:28:34
·
answer #5
·
answered by LucySD 7
·
0⤊
2⤋
free will vs addiction... a person may need help but where is the line you draw or cross to provide help and with so many different addictions to many things who is the authority on who says what is good and what is bad..
2007-09-14 04:59:03
·
answer #6
·
answered by fire_music_bk 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
How about the use of addictive drugs by indigenous peoples, but they did not suffer from addiction?
2007-09-14 05:05:38
·
answer #7
·
answered by Xavier M 2
·
1⤊
0⤋