When did Alcoholism become a disability?

[Andarvi]

Everyone who so casually talks about alcoholism as being a choice or saying that the individual as the option to quit seemingly at will must not know any alcoholics. Addiction to alcohol is extremely difficult to quit, just like all addictions, moreso than many of them, and even if one wants to and has the will to do so they may not have the physicial ability at that time to do so. Shit, if I worked in close quarters and had jurisdiction over the hiring process I wouldn't hire smokers either. Fuck their constant smoke breaks throughout the day and the fact they often smell like absolute shit, bad enough to distract me.

Of course I am not advocating hiring a raging alcoholic either because if they are bad enough then there is no way its not going to negatively impact their work. However if one had the credentials and was showing some sort of progress towards rehabilitation, whether it be counseling and such, and was a seemingly good person, I'd definately consider giving them a chance.

Addiction is a funny thing. I have a friend that's been smoking for about as long as I have. But, while he is in no way dependent on nicotine, I chain smoke all the time and have a hard time not doing so.

Indeed. Curious, has he ever tried to quit? I mean, even the addicted smokers (like yourself) know that its terrible for you. At least if you are addicted its not as simple as saying "ok, im gonna stop" and then just do it. Liking cigarettes is one thing, but if you dont consider yourself addicted and smoke like you are, thats crazy with all the stuff we know these days.

[Andarvi]

Fact: Being an alcoholic would dramatically affect your performance at work. This is the only thing the employer cares about by putting that on there.

Show some respect for the people who struggle with it and don't nitpick about labels.

Yes it would affect work performance, and people that struggle with it should be given all the support in the world, that's not in question. But I fail to see how it can be labeled as a disability. My grandfather had three bi-passes and a double bi-pass before he passed away a few years back, and also had diabetes. With the combo of diabetes and that he couldn't walk long distances due to his heart condition, he was allowed a handicapped parking permit to make things easier for him. That would make him disabled, as he wasn't able to do certain things he once could. How does being an alcoholic require the same special attention that say a person with a heart condition requires? Or someone missing a limb? Someone paralyzed and in a wheelchair?

Well, if you drink enough, you could be on par with a mental retardation handicap, I guess. Or maybe being drunk shares some symptoms with a psychological disorder and impairment of balance, coordination, alertness, etc.

If someone who hasn't drank a drop of alcohol naturally acts the way someone does when drunk (with all accompanying impairments), then they'd be considered handicapped.

The only difference is, for an alcoholic, it's self-induced and a product of free-will and conscious choice, and is therefore unforgivable.

I will agree if the alcoholic at hand is not making any effort at hand to get better. Its not as black and white with alcoholism.

[archibaldcrane]

Most AA-style "recovering" alcoholics are indoctrinated with the idea that you never fully are healed from alcohol addiction, and will continue to call themselves alcoholics even years after they had their last drink, as a reminder of how easy it is to fall back into the symptoms of the addiction.

Just because you identify as an alcoholic doesn't mean you drink anymore.

Also, while alcoholism is self-inflicted, once you have it you show physical symptons of the illness just like any other disability. To say that someone who is dependent on daily alcohol consumption to not feel sick and shaky is clearly saying they are "disabled". Not all disabilities are the same.

[Gafgarionn]

Everyone who so casually talks about alcoholism as being a choice or saying that the individual as the option to quit seemingly at will must not know any alcoholics. Addiction to alcohol is extremely difficult to quit, just like all addictions, moreso than many of them, and even if one wants to and has the will to do so they may not have the physicial ability at that time to do so. Shit, if I worked in close quarters and had jurisdiction over the hiring process I wouldn't hire smokers either. Fuck their constant smoke breaks throughout the day and the fact they often smell like absolute shit, bad enough to distract me.

Of course I am not advocating hiring a raging alcoholic either because if they are bad enough then there is no way its not going to negatively impact their work. However if one had the credentials and was showing some sort of progress towards rehabilitation, whether it be counseling and such, and was a seemingly good person, I'd definately consider giving them a chance.

Addiction is a funny thing. I have a friend that's been smoking for about as long as I have. But, while he is in no way dependent on nicotine, I chain smoke all the time and have a hard time not doing so.

Indeed. Curious, has he ever tried to quit? I mean, even the addicted smokers (like yourself) know that its terrible for you. At least if you are addicted its not as simple as saying "ok, im gonna stop" and then just do it. Liking cigarettes is one thing, but if you dont consider yourself addicted and smoke like you are, thats crazy with all the stuff we know these days.

He has quit before for a few weeks at a time, and didn't seem to have any trouble. Meanwhile I get uber pissed off when I've been without nicotine for a couple days. It sucks, but I'm retarded for starting in the first place.

[Charla]

I don't want to argue about this today, mostly because it'd be hard to come up with information to justify any position I took, so let's just say that the causes for addiction are still being debated and leave it at that.

[Andarvi]

Everyone who so casually talks about alcoholism as being a choice or saying that the individual as the option to quit seemingly at will must not know any alcoholics. Addiction to alcohol is extremely difficult to quit, just like all addictions, moreso than many of them, and even if one wants to and has the will to do so they may not have the physicial ability at that time to do so. Shit, if I worked in close quarters and had jurisdiction over the hiring process I wouldn't hire smokers either. Fuck their constant smoke breaks throughout the day and the fact they often smell like absolute shit, bad enough to distract me.

Of course I am not advocating hiring a raging alcoholic either because if they are bad enough then there is no way its not going to negatively impact their work. However if one had the credentials and was showing some sort of progress towards rehabilitation, whether it be counseling and such, and was a seemingly good person, I'd definately consider giving them a chance.

Addiction is a funny thing. I have a friend that's been smoking for about as long as I have. But, while he is in no way dependent on nicotine, I chain smoke all the time and have a hard time not doing so.

Indeed. Curious, has he ever tried to quit? I mean, even the addicted smokers (like yourself) know that its terrible for you. At least if you are addicted its not as simple as saying "ok, im gonna stop" and then just do it. Liking cigarettes is one thing, but if you dont consider yourself addicted and smoke like you are, thats crazy with all the stuff we know these days.

He has quit before for a few weeks at a time, and didn't seem to have any trouble. Meanwhile I get uber pissed off when I've been without nicotine for a couple days. It sucks, but I'm retarded for starting in the first place.

Its never to late to try and quit as hard as it is. You will be greatful when you have lungs and arent riddled with cancer as a senior citizen.

[Xavier]

I interpreted the cave reference just fine, I don't know why people immediately jumped down your throat about it either.
___________________________________

I suppose people who have Type 2 Diabetes should be left to fend for themselves too, right? After all, if they hadn't of coped out and lived such an unhealthy life, they might not have gotten sick in the first place. (Sarcasm)

Alcoholism is a disease, but not in the traditional sense. You have to initially choose to drink, but once you've become addicted, once its taken over, its incredibly difficult to regain control. The consequences of drinking on your life (family, friends, work) and on your body (liver, etc) make you a danger and a burden to your community and the economy.

I don't see the problem in classifying alcoholism as a disease because, like other diseases, it creates a significant hurdle functioning in day to day life. If someone can't get out of bed because they have cancer, and if someone can't get out of bed because they've destroyed their body with a toxin, then they're both going to require help, regardless of the fact that I have very little compassion for the alcoholic who caused his own situation. One of the biggest differences is that, if properly cared for, you can actually rehabilitate an alcoholic and create a productive citizen again, whereas with some other diseases thats never realistically going to happen. So in the interest of actually creating a more productive society (socially, economically), everyone -should- be in favor of helping those who can be helped.

Like I said at the start, if someone contracts Type 2 Diabetes from over-consumption of unhealthy foods, are they not going to be given some sort of relief to cope with the consequences of fighting the disease? If someone becomes an alcoholic due to circumstances in their life and is unable to rehabilitate themselves on their own initiative, should they not then too be given some sort of relief to cope with the consequences of fighting the disease? As a matter of comparative logic, I don't see how either situation can be separated so far that their solutions aren't nearly identical.

And to clarify, there is very little difference between someone who acquires Type 2 Diabetes from a poor diet and someone who becomes an alcoholic from over-indulgence in alcohol. In either case, the subsequent problems in their lives are going to affect more people than just themselves, and its far better to help rehabilitate than condemn. I do not, however, believe there is no difference between someone who is, and I say this reluctantly, legitimately sick compared to someone who is sick by their own devices. The legitimately sick have my compassion, but both should have care.

[sephir]

What about sex addicts, do they have to check a box too ?

They're too busy putting something else in 'the box'

Well played...

actually it is an addiction that can result in rehab. The original drummer for GNR ended up in rehab for sex and then later for Heroin (Steve Adler was his name if I remmeber right)

[Beckwin]

Employers might want to know so that a future problem doesn't catch them completely off-guard and for sensitivity reasons. They aren't gonna hire a constantly drunk person, alcoholic or not, but they may want to know so that they aren't off guard if Joe has to leave half an hour early every other Weds for an AA meeting or so the management can take a little discretion at extra-curricular functions (no "Hey Joe, have a drink with me!" at the Christmas party).

I'm willing to buy into some people naturally being more predisposed to addictive behavior than others, and since casual alcohol consumption is neither illegal or really looked down in society, I don't necessarily blame people entirely for their own serious addiction problems. I don't think anyone would really look down on someone, in an employment scenario or otherwise, for being disabled from losing a lung to cancer from smoking- they'd just be conscious of the person's medical needs and show some courtesy of not smoking around them.

[Jabberwocky]

I was filling out paper work for my new job and one of the forms asked if I had any disabilities which listed a few well known disabilities. But what really caught my attention was they had Alcoholism listed. I asked the Hiring Manager if it was a joke and he told me very seriously that "Alcoholism is a very serious disease, and our company would never joke about that." I sat there and stared at him for a few minutes to see if he'll crack up or w/e but he didn't.

So now seriously is it considered a disability?

http://www.jan.wvu.edu/media/alcohol.html

Is alcoholism a disability under the ADA?

The ADA does not contain a list of medical conditions that constitute disabilities. Instead, the ADA has a general definition of disability that each person must meet. A person has a disability if he/she has a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities, a record of such an impairment, or is regarded as having such an impairment. According to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), alcoholism is an impairment. Therefore, people with alcoholism who are substantially limited in a major life activity will have a disability under the ADA. . However, even if a person with alcoholism meets the definition of disability, an employer may discipline, discharge, or deny employment to an alcoholic whose current use of alcohol adversely affects job performance or conduct to the extent that s/he is not "qualified" (EEOC, 1992).

For more information about how to determine whether a person has a disability under the ADA, visit http://www.jan.wvu.edu/corner/vol02iss04.htm.

Does an employer have to allow use of alcohol at work as an accommodation?

No. The ADA specifically provides that an employer may prohibit the use of alcohol in the workplace and require that employees not be under the influence of alcohol. The Act permits employers to ensure that the workplace is free from the use of alcohol and does not interfere with employers' programs to combat the use of alcohol (EEOC, 1992).

[Gregorio]

god dammit, otto

you have lupus.

I came in to make this joke. <3 Mitch

[fantasticdan]

And to clarify, there is very little difference between someone who acquires Type 2 Diabetes from a poor diet and someone who becomes an alcoholic from over-indulgence in alcohol.

There is a huge difference. First off, everyone NEEDS to eat, making bad choices with what you DO eat is a lot different than choosing to drink alcohol or more dangerous drugs (a completely voluntary choice), than proceeding to use them recklessly.

Secondly, virtually everyone knows the risks of alcohol by the time they are of legal age to drink it, while most adults probably don't know much about the risks of high carbohydrate/sugar diets or type 2 diabetes, let alone children who are just as susceptible(if not more so due to the prevalence of high sugar foods aimed at kids and parents), and don't have much control over what they eat.

[Andarvi]

And to clarify, there is very little difference between someone who acquires Type 2 Diabetes from a poor diet and someone who becomes an alcoholic from over-indulgence in alcohol.

There is a huge difference. First off, everyone NEEDS to eat, making bad choices with what you DO eat is a lot different than choosing to drink alcohol or more dangerous drugs (a completely voluntary choice), than proceeding to use them recklessly.

Secondly, virtually everyone knows the risks of alcohol by the time they are of legal age to drink it, while most adults probably don't know much about the risks of high carbohydrate/sugar diets or type 2 diabetes, let alone children who are just as susceptible(if not more so due to the prevalence of high sugar foods aimed at kids and parents), and don't have much control over what they eat.

Ummmmmmmm...for the most part, no.

While someone may use food as a comfort or escape, one does not become physically ADDICTED to food. However, one becomes addicted, biochemically, to alcohol. It can take a very small amount of innocent alcohol to addict some people. Food is not even close to that.

And most adults not knowing the risks when they become a serious problem is bullshit. They know. They just dont care. America is fat for a reason, and its the lack of caring.

[Ryko]

And to clarify, there is very little difference between someone who acquires Type 2 Diabetes from a poor diet and someone who becomes an alcoholic from over-indulgence in alcohol.

There is a huge difference. First off, everyone NEEDS to eat, making bad choices with what you DO eat is a lot different than choosing to drink alcohol or more dangerous drugs (a completely voluntary choice), than proceeding to use them recklessly.

Everyone needs to eat, but not everyone needs to eat a super sized number 3 twice a day. Indulging beyond the necessities either through apathetic choice or a desire for the unhealthy are a given in both cases. The choice to drink stuff that you know is bad for you is very much the same as the choice to chomp on grub that you damn well know is going to kill you one way or another. He did clarify that he does see a difference and as such the person with diabetes would likely get his compassion, but objectively in the care sense he was spot on.

[BerenTebogo]

Fact: Being an alcoholic would dramatically affect your performance at work. This is the only thing the employer cares about by putting that on there.

Show some respect for the people who struggle with it and don't nitpick about labels.

Wanna know how I deal with it?

Not having had a drop of alcohol in almost 23 years, despite being part of a fraternity (being hazed and forced to do hundreds of situps / wall sits for not drinking) continuing peer pressure from business and social environment and even family.

It's not hard to stick to your guns about something, and it's not hard to quit something, it's called integrity and self-control, or as south park put it a 'dis-a-prin'

[Xavier]

There is a huge difference. First off, everyone NEEDS to eat, making bad choices with what you DO eat is a lot different than choosing to drink alcohol or more dangerous drugs (a completely voluntary choice), than proceeding to use them recklessly.

But not everyone gets thirsty? First off, everyone NEEDS to drink, making bad choices with what you DO drink is no different than choosing to eat a Big Mac twice a day or 5 candy bars (a completely voluntary choice), than proceeding to over-indulge in food your body doesn't need.

Secondly, virtually everyone knows the risks of alcohol by the time they are of legal age to drink it, while most adults probably don't know much about the risks of high carbohydrate/sugar diets or type 2 diabetes, let alone children who are just as susceptible(if not more so due to the prevalence of high sugar foods aimed at kids and parents), and don't have much control over what they eat.

Secondly, virtually everyone knows that a Big Mac and a Snickers isn't a healthy meal, and is completely optional to eat, and in no way required in your daily diet to sustain a healthy life. They choose to eat unhealthy.

It doesn't make a whole lot of sense to say that one group is simply uninformed while the other is willfully harming themselves. Either a person can control what they eat -and- drink, or they can't. The person who takes to the bottle in response to difficult circumstances is no less guilty than the person who takes to the bag of chips and chocolate when dealing with stress, and each are going to produce a cost to society with their behavior. To then say two people who arrived at the same result (destruction of their body) are due different care is a bit ridiculous.

In your example : Johnny gets dumped and starts drinking alcohol to deal with the pain, Johnny is a douche who knew the risks and ignored them. Sarah gets dumped and eats nonstop chocolate, gains 75 pounds and contracts Type 2 diabetes, Sarah is a victim of her own ignorance and was only eating to stay alive.

That kind of logic is stupid. Like I said before, I don't condone over-indulgence on either side, but I'm not going to condemn the person either. I believe that alcoholism goes a step further, as your body makeup is literally changed to become dependent on the substance.

[BRP]

If you consider addiction a disability, then alcoholism will obviously be a disability. Alcoholism is especially noted because of how many health problems it grants(much like other drugs, but unlike something like MMORPG addiction). Addiction certainly has some actual negative effects on people, it isn't some trick or scam to fool people. People lives do get fucked up. Yes, it's mostly self inflicted, but the same could be said for many handicaps.

[Xavier]

Getting into a car accident and becoming paralyzed from the waist down because you ran a red light is a self inflicted injury, but nobody is going to get outraged that they get disability pay.

I agree with you on it depending if you consider an addiction a disability, and I do. I think MMO are a huge problem because they literally create people who give up significant amounts of their time to accomplish virtually nothing, and open the door to much larger health risks, with poor eatting, no exercise, bad work ethic, etc.

[Khamsin]

Getting into a car accident and becoming paralyzed from the waist down because you ran a red light is a self inflicted injury, but nobody is going to get outraged that they get disability pay.

People would if they knew the story behind the injury. You wouldn't be outraged that someone was a reckless driver and gets disability pay because of it? Especially in the case of someone purposefully running a red light?

I think MMO are a huge problem because they literally create people who give up significant amounts of their time to accomplish virtually nothing, and open the door to much larger health risks, with poor eatting, no exercise, bad work ethic, etc.

Not sure I'd consider MMO addiction a real disability, it seems a copout. You can't even get biochemically addicted to MMOs. But it could still be considered a problem, I suppose. Maybe if they legalize marijuana someday, they can use that to distract people from MMOs and make them forget about their virtual epeen. Kinda like morphine for heroine addicts.

[Einherjar]

If it were my company I'd put all sorts of things like drug addict, alcoholic, and any other type I didn't want to hire in the disabilities category. That way I can ask it without getting in trouble and not hire them cause they're alcoholics.