When I began the Compulsion and Recovery Research Project in 1992, I did so in response to the schism between professionals who were leaders in the addiction recovery field. Known as the D and A Debate, this schism resulted in changes in government policy, funding and service provision, causing great confusion to people suffering with addictions. It was described by the media as 'addiction treatment now a battleground'.As a family therapist specialising in addictions recovery, I became concerned about this battle between leaders in the recovery field and its impact on the community. I had experience in running halfway houses for people recovering from addictions and knew that abstinence with AA worked. I embarked on a research project which used a dialectic/narrative method inquiry method, interviewing leaders in the conflict and others who contributed progressive ideas to recovery. This process aimed at ensuring there was validity, rigour and ethics in the research process. Importantly as a result of this inquiry, I came to believe that the Drug and Alcohol Debate (D and A Debate) protagonists need not dogmatically defend their own model to the point of being in conflict, as all their treatments work, and it was valid to concede that different models work for different people in different stages of their recovery - 'whatever works works, and not to be judged by others'. (Nicotine Anonymous The Book, 1992:113) / Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:ADTP/181758 |
| Date | January 2007 |
| Creators | Adagio, Affie, University of Western Sydney, College of Health and Science, School of Biomedical and Health Sciences |
| Source Sets | Australiasian Digital Theses Program |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
Page generated in 0.0018 seconds