What is an Intervention?
Intervention has been defined in various ways by various people, since the concept was introduced about 50 years ago. Originally, interventions were oriented around confrontation and surrender; telling the addict how his destructive behavior was affecting the family, listing his wrongdoings, and giving the addict an ultimatum as a means of motivation and forcing him to eventually “give in” to the demands of the family. Many of these earlier models, some still in practice, insist that an addict must admit to having a problem, and to his need for help, as a measure of intervention success. These models, however common their practice, have left behind a legacy of as much wreckage as they attempt to solve.
Modern day professionals are apt to say that an intervention should be oriented around the love of the family, and designed to reach the part of the addict that wants to get better, while at the same time shutting down resources so that the person is essentially left with one solution, a way out, which is giving treatment a try. I agree with this approach more or less, when it is assisted by an experienced professional.
The sole purpose of an intervention is to guide the family, the circumstances, and the addict to make his own, personal choice to enter treatment, without force, humiliation, or intimidation.
Of course, this is vastly easier and much more quickly achieved with the help of a professional interventionist. Having an objective, experienced observer provides a sounding board for the family, a neutral dumping ground, as well as a “safe” terminal for the addict. A seasoned professional can direct you, and the rest of the family, minute by minute when necessary, through the labyrinth of the addiction to get the person into treatment.
It is equally important to talk about what an intervention is not , since there are a lot of ideas floating around. For example, an intervention is not a “wake up call” to get the person to realize he has a problem, and to get him looking for answers. Addicts know they have a problem, even though they lie about it in one way or another, and if you give them the task of “researching places to get help,” then you will really be in for a treat. The reason you're having the intervention is because the individual is not ethical or honest or making good decisions, so the ethic has to be forced in and the decision needs to be made by the people who know the addict, what he will like in a facility once he's there, and what will actually work, not what the addict wants to do.
Further, an intervention is not a time to get the person to admit to having a problem. This idea is usually the result of the family's desire to get control of the person, or for some sort of emotional payoff or satisfaction on the part of the family. But admitting something to one's mother is the absolute last thing an addict wants to do. It's humiliating. It should not be a requirement or prerequisite to go to treatment. If the person goes to treatment, it should not matter what he admits to his family, and whatever he admits, or doesn't admit, to his family should not be considered a measure of how badly he actually wants help.
Also, an intervention should never be a confrontation. Confronting someone who is already combative or isolated or hostile is the quickest way to get things undone and usually just results in worsening the situation.
In summary, an intervention is not a wake-up call. It is not a stand-alone event. An intervention, by design, is a means to an end, a way to get a person into treatment. A person does not need a wakeup call, he knows he has a problem, although he may not be admitting it to you. So an intervention is not a time to “open his eyes to the realities of what he's doing.” His eyes are already open – he knows it even though he may not be saying it, but he knows it. The intervention, in other words, is not therapy . An intervention is a way to get something done, to get the person through the front doors of treatment willingly and quickly.
1 comment:
Post a Comment