I heard a radio psychologist say she didn't believe in the concept of enabling, but didn't expand on it. So we have to surmise what she meant.

Enabling might be interpreted as doing something that keeps another person from suffering the consequences of their behavior, or rescuing them.

Is this person saying that an addict does what an addict does and nothing we do will contribute to their problem?

What are your thoughts on enabling?

__________________
InterfaithForums.com-Where your ideas and beliefs count.

I think on one side no, we can't push people into doing what they are going to do, but....yes, I do believe we can prolong their suffering by trying to "help" them. It is done out of love, but it's not true love. Instead of seeing them "perfect" , we look at others that they need something and that they are missing something.

Would we help, if we did not see need, loss or lack?

__________________
May your awareness be perfection

I think what this psychologist said (perhaps unwittingly) is she's more interested in exploring a patients reasons and history of dependant behavior instead of enabling the patient to alter their behavior, which might lead to a shorter relationship by way of recovery and no more need of her "self-serving services".

Enabling I think means; to provide or suggest the means by which an objective may be reached through the assurance of positive support, encouragement and love.

__________________
Only Love Prevails,
Don

Enabling in addiction circles means to rescue someone or prevent the addict from suffering consequences of their behavior. This was the context in which the psychologist made the statement. It appeared she was saying we can't cause an addict to use their substance.

__________________
InterfaithForums.com-Where your ideas and beliefs count.

I can see both sides of this one. On the one hand, certain things can prolong the addiction (giving a drug addict money, for example). On the other hand, no one can say for sure. If someone gives an addict money, they may actually save the person, who might have gotten shot trying to steal the money from someone.

We also don't know what purpose may be behind the relationship - maybe both the addict and the enabler have to go through a particular lesson together. So who knows?

I think this is what could be called a non-answer.

I think we can enable people in all sorts of ways, some positive and some negative. As parents we enable our children by teaching them right from wrong and how to live in the world as a good and productive person. We can also be enablers in a negative sense by not allowing people to suffer the natural consequences of their actions. The example that LK used of a drug addict can be enabled when we protect them from themselves and don't allow them to experience the natural consequences of addiction. But we can also enable them in a positive light by helping them to get the help that they need to recover from addiciton. Enabling is a matter of perspective and how we use it to create change or not.

This may be a non-answer but it is one that is very sensitive to what people can go through.

Frankly, I like your answer better: Enabling can be both positive and negative. And there's probably alot of gray area inbetween!

The tough part, then, would be knowing ahead of time when to help and when to let go.

correct.