Originally Posted by pedro
If you never fell prey to the addictive behavior then you are not an addict, but once you do, then you always are, even if you learn to control it. It's fine if you don't agree, but that doesn't change the fact that this is the widely accepted POV within addiction treatment circles.
POV i.e. opinion.
To be addicted is to give yourself to something compulsively or obsessively. To be dependent on it.
If you break yourself from the dependency and stop allowing yourself to give in to a temptation, you, by very nature, are not addicted because you are resisting it. When you have sustained this behavior for a period of time, you are no longer an addict.
That's not to say temptation goes away. Certainly in the case of chemical dependency, the urge may not go away. But again, the action is what separates us from the temptation. People can relapse. I'm not saying we will never again be tempted.
But again, an addict is based on actions, not desires. If you stop giving in to your addiction, then IMHO you are not an addict.
Part of the POV of treatment circles is held to apply strict psychological monitoring and control on substance abusers. Telling them they're an addict is a more strict reminder to avoid temptation than telling them they're not. It's as much a treatment ploy as it is a point of view. And make no mistake, I understand and agree with the rationale, but it doesn't make the POV right or wrong.