Can I just rant about something?

[StaceyinLA]

This may be sensitive to some, so I want to apologize in advance if I say anything that comes across as being insensitive to someone who has dealt with drug use or addicts, etc.

 

I happened to watch "the last hours of Anna Nicole Smith," the other night, and it made me think about something that just really bothered/bothers me. How do you see someone in the condition she was in (spiking fevers up to 105, erratic behaviors, etc.), that is basically in your care, and NOT get them care, even if they say they don't want it? And how do you watch them guzzle pain/sleeping meds from a bottle, and KNOW they have an issue with this, and never deny them the meds or get them help?

 

She certainly isn't the first or last famous person who has had a number of prescription drugs in her body, but how in the world do these caretakers and bodyguards live with themselves? They have GOT to know they are dealing with people who have terrible addictions. How in the world do they just sit back and let these downward spirals begin?

 

Let me clarify that I realize you can't always stop people from doing things, but at some point you think you'd at least make an attempt to either intervene, or at least get help.

 

Again, this is just a rant, and I could be off-base, but for some reason it really got to me watching this because even though she basically lived out of control, I think her death (at least at that time) could've been prevented if someone would've just stepped up.

[ErinE]

I think it's tough to find someone who has the ability to take control without taking advantage and the funds to fight the addict's protest. I saw a few episodes of Smith's show and it seemed pretty clear she was surrounded by unhealthy influences. It's a spiral. Make bad decisions, alienate stable loved ones, surround yourself with unstable people who help you make more bad decisions. Given Smith's background, she may never have had emotionally or financially stable loved ones. Not everyone has a family willing or able to put up with the challenge of helping an addict.

 

Britney Spears is an example where there was an intervention that appears successful. Her parents had the funds and emotional stability to fight for their daughter while she worked against her own best interests. I think she's still under conservatorship so it's tough to say whether she'll maintain her equilibrium on her own.

 

In the few cases in my own experience where intervention appears successful, the addict repeatedly hurt the family over years if not decades before finally overcoming his or her addictions. It takes great strength to open yourself to that pain.

[dirty ethel rackham]

I agree with you here.  But, many people who are addicts alienate the people who would be willing to help.  They banish them from their lives and only allow "yes" people to have access to them.  Often, these "yes" people are pretty messed up themselves and really don't know how to handle a crisis.  People who are lousy at "adulting."  Sometimes, it is their management that isolates their "talent" from people who care because those caring people would have influence over them and pull them away from their unscrupulous managers. 

 

I think I have watched too many "Behind the Music" episodes. 

[Seasider]

I agree with you here. But, many people who are addicts alienate the people who would be willing to help. They banish them from their lives and only allow "yes" people to have access to them. Often, these "yes" people are pretty messed up themselves and really don't know how to handle a crisis. People who are lousy at "adulting." Sometimes, it is their management that isolates their "talent" from people who care because those caring people would have influence over them and pull them away from their unscrupulous managers.

 

I think I have watched too many "Behind the Music" episodes.

They can have strong codependent ties with their "yes person." IME, the yes person intentionally, strategically isolated the addict from family and friends that could intervene.

[LucyStoner]

I've pleaded with police and medical professionals to hold my mentally ill, drug addicted brother so he can go from detox to drug treatment. His ex-wife did the same. Before either of us, my parents pleaded with judges, doctors, and police officers. Very rarely have they held him for more than a few hours or a day at most. He's racked up ER visits, DUIs and DV arrests, and many social workers and prosecutors have recommended chemical dependency programs for him, but in the end, he's always managed to weasel his way out of it. He might say he will go. To the judge's face. But when push comes to shove, he won't and enforcement, even of court orders in a family law case, is bizarrely lax.

 

There is truly no saving people from themselves.

 

Also, don't assume the people who would be inclined to help have all been iced out by the addict or the yes-men types. Sometimes the responsible adults have burnt out and cut our losses.

 

I have nothing whatsoever to do with my brother except as it relates to the time that I spend taking care of his kids. And even then, that's limited to logistics AND ONLY EVER IN TEXTS. I do not communicate with him over the phone, and other than a nod and us each saying "Hey there," I don't speak to him when I see him. I made the decision years ago that all I can do is be there for the kids, on terms that work for me and insulate my sons and family from his toxicity. I have held firm to that, and that will not change unless I see that he gets real help. He's going to have to want to do that for himself.

 

I will be sad if he dies. I do anticipate that he will die prematurely, if not of an OD, due to health issues linked to how he has lived. I'm sure I will feel many emotions, but one thing I won't feel is guilt. Being an addict doesn't make him a bad person, but his behavior, attitudes, and actions make it impossible for me to allow him back into our lives. Sometimes he calls. I don't answer. I've BTDT. "Helping him" never helps him and usually hurts my family and me. The only truly helpful thing I can do is support my niece and nephew. So I do that.

 

I don't think there's anything uncommon about my experiences with my brother. People "walk away" to protect themselves and other people. That's not wrong or callous. Sometimes it's the only safe or sane thing to do.

Edited March 22, 2017 by LucyStoner

[LucyStoner]

Your language is not offensive, but it repeatedly implies that people have control over addicts that they just do not.  As such, I do think you are a little naive about how difficult it can be to "help" an addict.  It's a pat expression I suppose, but you really can't help people who don't want help.

 

Highlighting some of your comments:

 

"How do you see someone in the condition she was in... that is basically in your care, and NOT get them care, even if they say they don't want it?"

 

You can't usually force someone to get adequate treatment.  Any forced treatment is also less likely to be effective. 

 

"how do you watch them guzzle pain/sleeping meds from a bottle, and KNOW they have an issue with this, and never deny them the meds or get them help?

 

How do you think people deny addicts meds?  Addicts find, stash, steal, beg, finagle, excuse, and hide what they want.  Addicts with financial resources find even more of what they want. Most addicts are quite talented at this.  

 

"How in the world do they just sit back and let these downward spirals begin?"

 

Eh, I seriously doubt that people just sit back.  People on a downward spiral roll over the people in their way.  

 

"Let me clarify that I realize you can't always stop people from doing things, but at some point you think you'd at least make an attempt to either intervene, or at least get help."

 

It is harder than one might suppose to get involuntary treatment for an adult started.  I would say you can never stop people from doing things they are set on doing.  I am sure that for every fatal overdose there have been many prior attempts made by others to intervene or get help.  In the end, addiction is a disease that has a mortality rate.  Some people will die from it.  No matter how hard people tried to intervene or help.  

 

Also, in the particular case you mention, the caregivers and bodyguards are the addict's employees.  The addict is the one choosing them, and the addict can fire them anytime.  So people go along to get along, or as the case may be, to get their paycheck.  They aren't relatives or actual friends, they are paid for a job defined by the person with the addiction.  They are pretty limited in what they can actually do.  

[Seasider]

I would imagine in a case like ANS, with so many resources available - tons of money and people on her payroll to go get whatever she asked for - an intervention would have been extraordinarily difficult.

[Reefgazer]

I think this would be for two reasons: (1) sometimes it's hard to know where the line is between overuse and actual addiction, and (2) ultimately the adult is responsible for themselves and I have no right to intervene other than suggest they get help. This is actually the same type of question as "when do you force your parents out of their home and to some facility?" The answer isn't really clear, and ultimately, they have dominion over themselves and their own choices.

[StaceyinLA]

I've pleaded with police and medical professionals to hold my mentally ill, drug addicted brother so he can go from detox to drug treatment. His ex-wife did the same. Before either of us, my parents pleaded with judges, doctors, and police officers. Very rarely have they help him for more than a few hours or a day at most. He's racked up ER visits, DUIs and DV arrests, and many social workers and prosecutors have recommended chemical dependency programs for him, but in the end, he's always managed to weasel his way out of it. He might say he will go. To the judge's face. But when push comes to shove, he won't and enforcement, even of court orders in a family law case, is bizarrely lax.

 

There is truly no saving people from themselves.

 

Also, don't assume the people who would be inclined to help have all been iced out by the addict or the yes-men types. Sometimes the responsible adults have burnt out and cut our losses.

 

I have nothing whatsoever to do with my brother except as it relates to the time that I spend taking care of his kids. And even then, that's limited to logistics AND ONLY EVER IN TEXTS. I do not communicate with him over the phone, and other than a nod and us each saying "Hey there," I don't speak to him when I see him. I made the decision years ago that all I can do is be there for the kids, on terms that work for me and insulate my sons and family from his toxicity. I have held firm to that, and that will not change unless I see that he gets real help. He's going to have to want to do that for himself.

 

I will be sad if he dies. I do anticipate that he will die prematurely, if not of an OD, due to health issues linked to how he has lived. I'm sure I will feel many emotions, but one thing I won't feel is guilt. Being an addict doesn't make him a bad person, but his behavior, attitudes, and actions make it impossible for me to allow him back into our lives. Sometimes he calls. I don't answer. I've BTDT. "Helping him" never helps him and usually hurts my family and me. The only truly helpful thing I can do is support my niece and nephew. So I do that.

 

I don't think there's anything uncommon about my experiences with my brother. People "walk away" to protect themselves and other people. That's not wrong or callous. Sometimes it's the only safe or sane thing to do.

Oh I absolutely agree that people have to walk away and protect themselves. I guess I just feel like in situations like this where it comes down to something that seems like life or death, someone wouldn't take control and call 911 whether the person wanted them to or not.

[StaceyinLA]

Your language is not offensive, but it repeatedly implies that people have control over addicts that they just do not. As such, I do think you are a little naive about how difficult it can be to "help" an addict. It's a pat expression I suppose, but you really can't help people who don't want help.

 

Highlighting some of your comments:

 

"How do you see someone in the condition she was in... that is basically in your care, and NOT get them care, even if they say they don't want it?"

 

You can't usually force someone to get adequate treatment. Any forced treatment is also less likely to be effective.

 

"how do you watch them guzzle pain/sleeping meds from a bottle, and KNOW they have an issue with this, and never deny them the meds or get them help?

 

How do you think people deny addicts meds? Addicts find, stash, steal, beg, finagle, excuse, and hide what they want. Addicts with financial resources find even more of what they want. Most addicts are quite talented at this.

 

"How in the world do they just sit back and let these downward spirals begin?"

 

Eh, I seriously doubt that people just sit back. People on a downward spiral roll over the people in their way.

 

"Let me clarify that I realize you can't always stop people from doing things, but at some point you think you'd at least make an attempt to either intervene, or at least get help."

 

It is harder than one might suppose to get involuntary treatment for an adult started. I would say you can never stop people from doing things they are set on doing. I am sure that for every fatal overdose there have been many prior attempts made by others to intervene or get help. In the end, addiction is a disease that has a mortality rate. Some people will die from it. No matter how hard people tried to intervene or help.

 

Also, in the particular case you mention, the caregivers and bodyguards are the addict's employees. The addict is the one choosing them, and the addict can fire them anytime. So people go along to get along, or as the case may be, to get their paycheck. They aren't relatives or actual friends, they are paid for a job defined by the person with the addiction. They are pretty limited in what they can actually do.

I do understand that in a day to day situation, you would have zero control, but this was an end of life situation with a very sick person where it would have been very easy to have 911 come (and with 105 degree fever, I feel like they'd have had zero issues taking her), and it also would've been easy to remove meds from the room and deny access because she was in such shape that she wouldn't have been able to access them.

 

I do realize and understand that in normal situations, this is likely not possible, but in one where the person is physically limited due to illness or drug use, and it's life or death, it seems you may be able to intervene. Now, whether that just delays the inevitable is anyone's guess, and I'm sure in many cases that's all it would be.

 

I also admit to not having experiences with this type of addict which is why I posted that I wasn't trying to be offensive. I know the way something seems can certainly be different than what it is.

[LucyStoner]

In that end stage, it is often the case that "saving" a life is actually just "extending" a life a bit.  I agree that people should contact emergency medical services but don't see that that is all that effective in helping people long-term.  It's just another crisis incident in a string of similar crises.  

[kroe1]

It was just a tv show. We have no idea what really happened.

 

Working in an ER for twenty years, I can tell you that one cannot tell an addict what to do. Period. I have seen addicts sign out against medical advice with severely life threatening conditions many times over the years. They usually are quite mean about it, too. But, I know nothing about the person on the tv show.

[StaceyinLA]

It was just a tv show. We have no idea what really happened.

 

Working in an ER for twenty years, I can tell you that one cannot tell an addict what to do. Period. I have seen addicts sign out against medical advice with severely life threatening conditions many times over the years. They usually are quite mean about it, too. But, I know nothing about the person on the tv show.

Yeah, it was just a show (although it was supposed to be the actual events in her last days), but the people who were with her in the hotel her last few days spoke on the show. I guess it was how they described her and the things she was doing, her fever, etc. that made me wonder how the heck you can be in that and not do something, anything, about it.