Problem of social dependence in families
Acclimatisation of families to dependence
Still about 50 years ago in the scientific literature reactions of monogynopaedium to an alcoholism have been described is a series of the adaptic stages corresponding to advance of disease. There was a term “to-alcoholism” which designated a state of relatives. Later this phenomenon began to name social dependence. Social dependence can arise not only at an alcoholism, a narcomania of one of members of monogynopaedium, but also at any other chronic event. For example, D. Meyer noted: «… it seems that social dependence can exist irrespective of an alcoholism and reflects the global tendency to be focused in a choronomic environment by loss of contact to intrinsic processes».
The more often basic mechanism of protection of monogynopaedium is negation of dependence, its scales, gravity, consequences and importance for monogynopaedium life. E.B. Isaacson has described three ground rules which have been taken over in monogynopaediums sick dependence:
- “do not trust” is a rule follows from inconstancy of home life and impossibility to expect the future;
- “do not feel” – in monogynopaediums there is a depressing of senses – both anger, and pleasure;
- “do not speak” is a rule demands to hold in “secret” everything that is bound to dependence in monogynopaedium.
Members of monogynopaedium have difficulties in expression of emotions and emotional bond achievement. The basic endured senses though and not always, the anger, shame, fault and depression are expressed. Result of they be bad skills of communications, family conflicts, “torsion” of roles (for example when children play a role of parents, caring of home life, and parents act in a role of children, that is are object of care from outside children). Low level of family competence and family unity is observed.
The patient with dependence on psychoactive materials lives in environment wedged from norm. Members of monogynopaedium are separated, do not penetrate into interests and has put each other or their attitudes are confused, based on unhealthy rules. In such monogynopaediums conservation of health of their soberly living members is impossible.
Often in these monogynopaediums the physical, sex, emotional and intellectual violence takes place. So, in Canada it has been shown that presence of alcoholic dependence at the husband twice raises probability of beating of the wife in comparison with frequency of this phenomenon in the general population. Physical violence in similar monogynopaediums note in a lineage.
The dependent behaviour of the identified patient, as a rule, propagates and on monogynopaedium as a whole. Dependence is a retried model of self-blasting behaviour to which the individual or monogynopaedium cannot neither confine, nor stop. Dependent behaviour survey as a symptom or reaction to unhealthy mutual relations with itself or others. Dependent behaviour as patient, and monogynopaediums characterise three main signs:
- ability loss freely to choose between possibility to intercept or continue such behaviour;
- continuation of unhealthy behaviour, despite fatal consequences, such as loss of health, work, the important mutual relations or freedom;
- the constant concentration reaching degrees of persistence, on the conforming dependent activity.
What is the social dependence?
Some authors survey social dependence as illness, others describe it in the form of psychologic behaviour beneficial to practice. From the point of view of the author of article, social dependence corresponds to pathological development of the person more likely. Social dependence is an excruciating state for the person (sometimes to more excruciating, than dependence on psychoactive materials). Clinical natural “companions” of social dependence: a dysthymia, alarm, depression, boundary disturbances, is passive-aggressive behaviour, psychosomatic disturbances.
Uniform short definition of social dependence is not present. As the worker it is possible to take over following definition: «socially dependent person is the one who is completely absorbed by to control behaviour of other person and not to care at all of satisfaction of own vital requirements». Social dependence in a sense is an abandoning of.
Socially dependent are:
- the people who are married or being in love mutual relations with sick dependence on psychoactive materials;
- parents sick of dependence on psychoactive materials;
- the people having of one or both parents, sick of dependence on psychoactive materials;
- the people who have grown in emotionally repressive monogynopaediums;
- the people, suffering dependence, before and after the awake season of illness.
Personal characteristics at social dependence
1. A low self-rating. It is the basic characteristic socially dependent on which all base the others. From here such feature socially dependent, as an orientation outside. These people completely depend on choronomic assessments, from mutual relations with others. Socially dependent are not able to take over compliments and a praise properly. It even can enhance at them a sense of guilt and the inadequacy. In their consciousness and a lexicon numerous obligations dominate – «I should», «you should». The low self-rating can be motive of tendency to help another. As they do not believe that can be favourite and valuable in itself they try to “earn” love and attention of others and become in monogynopaedium irreplaceable.
2. Compulsive desire to supervise life of others. Socially dependent believe that in a state to supervise all on light. The more chaotically the house situation, the is more applied efforts under its control. They think that can constrain the use of alcohol or narcotics the relatives. Socially dependent are assured that it is the best in monogynopaedium know, how events should descend, as other members of monogynopaedium should conduct themselves. For the control over others they use arrangements, threats, forcing, councils, underlining of feebleness of others («the husband without me will be gone»). They inspire another a sense of guilt («I have given all life to you, and you …») or use rasping domination and a manipulation.
Attempt to take under the control uncontrollable events result ins depressions. Impossibility to achieve the object in control questions socially dependent survey as own lesion, as loss of meaning of the life. Other outcomes of supervising behaviour socially dependent are anger.
3. Desire to salvage others. Socially dependent incur responsibility for others, are thus absolutely irresponsible concerning own well-being. They are badly fed, badly sleep, do not visit the doctor, do not know own requirements. Salvaging the patient, socially dependent only promote that it will continue to take alcohol or narcotics. Attempt to “salvage” never is possible. It only the destructive form of behaviour both for socially dependent, and for the dependent. Such “care” of others assumes incompetence, feebleness of another, disability it to do that carries out for it socially dependent close. All it gives the chance socially dependent to feel stationaryly necessary, irreplaceable.
4. Senses. Many acts socially dependent are invoked by pavor which is a basis of any dependence. At socially dependent it is pavor of interference with a reality, the pavor to be thrown, pavor of loss of the control over life, pavor of the worst. When people are in constant pavor, at them the tendency to a rigidity of a body, soul progresses. The pavor holds down a freedom in choosing.
Besides pavor, in an emotional palette socially dependent the alarm, shame, fault, prolonged despair, indignation, fury, insult, pity to itself, anger prevail also. These emotions name toxic. They are used as protection mechanisms.
One more prominent feature of emotional sphere socially dependent – an obnubilation (misting) of senses or even total failure from them, helping growth of tolerance of negative emotions. Gradually at socially dependent shipping of an emotional pain raises. Negative senses owing to the intensity can be generalised and propagate on other people. Easily there is a hatred and to itself. Concealment of shame, hatred to itself can look as arrogance and the superiority over others (it is transformation of senses).
5. Negation. Socially dependent use all forms of psychologic protection – rationalisation, minimisation, replacement, a projection and other, but more all – negation. They are inclined to ignore problems or to pretend that anything serious does not descend. For example, when parents observe a state of narcotic intoxication at the son or the daughter can explain it everything, but only not the use of narcotics. Socially dependent easily deceive itself, trust in lie, believe everything that it have told, if it corresponds to the wished. They see only that wish to see, and hear only that wish to hear. Negation helps socially dependent to live in peace illusions as the truth is very painful. To deceive itself is always the destructive process both for itself, and for others. A deceit – the form of spiritual degradation.
Socially dependent deny at itself presence of signs of social dependence. Negation prevents to ask it of the help for itself, tightens and aggravates dependence of the patient and holds all monogynopaedium in bad condition.
6. The illnesses invoked by stress. These are psychosomatic disturbances in the form of a peptic ulcer of a stomach and a duodenum, a colitis, a hypertensia, a headache, a neurocirculatory dystonia, a bronchial asthma, a tachycardia, an arrhythmia. Socially dependent are ill, as try to supervise that basically does not give in to the control (someone’s life). They work much and spend many forces for persisting. Appearance of psychosomatic diseases testifies to advance of social dependence.
7. A lesion of spiritual sphere. Spirituality within the limits of the concept of social dependence is defined as quality of mutual relations with the subject (person) or object, the most important in life. Mutual relations concern the most significant and valuable with themselves, with monogynopaedium, a society and God. If at the patient in process of disease development these mutual relations and the values bound to them are driven out by attitudes with chemical, at socially dependent – patholologically variated mutual relations with a sick member of monogynopaedium.
Dependence on psychoactive materials often name illness of irresponsibility. The patient does not answer neither for consequences of the use of psychoactive material, nor for destruction of the health, for well-being in monogynopaedium, does not carry out parent duties. Socially dependent only choronomicly make impression of superresponsible people, however they are equally irresponsible concerning the state, the requirements, the health and too cannot well fulfil parent duties.
Behaviour of socially dependent people
Parents, spouses of the identified patient tensely try to perceive the patient, to cope with a problem own forces, to variate or supervise the patient and its dependent behaviour. Concentration on problems of the patient reaches anger degrees, as they of what the friend cannot think. It is more brightly expressed at mothers, than at fathers of patients with dependence. Parents remove the interests, senses and requirements on a background. They continue to sponsor the patient, to undertake useless actions on its “salvage” and not in a state neither to variate, nor to stop such behaviour. Thus they cannot satisfy properly the important requirements – to have a rest, concentrate on the interests, to visit the doctor in case of need.
Significant relatives of the patient can unintentionally and rather imperceptibly for itself encourage dependent behaviour of the partners, despite «good intentions». Thereby social dependence assumes performance of a role of the helper. The typical behaviour of the helper includes: ignoring of a problem, attempt to hide, hide, cover a problem, protection sick of dependence on consequences, a capture on itself of responsibility for alcoholic behaviour of the patient – remission from a sobering-up station or prison, payment of the lawyer or creditors, calls to the chief for work with false explanations of admissions, etc., threats and to the critic to the patient, buying of alcohol or other psychoactive materials for it, joint with the patient the use of alcohol or other self-blasting behaviour.
B. Le-Poire notice that inefficient attempts of socially dependent spouse to supervise wedged behaviour of the dependent husband actually support and sustain such behaviour. However some experts do not agree with this concept and consider that thus authors explain careful behaviour of the wife. Other authors believe that treating of the spouse of the patient within the limits of social dependence like charge of a victim.
In behaviour socially dependent noted series of paradoxes.
The first paradox: socially dependent think, as if they can supervise both the behaviour, and behaviour of the loved one, suffering dependence, more often the chemical. Actually it is chemically dependent keep control of behaviour socially dependent.
The second paradox: socially dependent subordinate the requirements to needs dependent and occupy position of a victim. Actually socially the dependent occupy a leading position and subordinate to itself the dependent person so socially dependent acts as not so much victim, how many the dictator, the offender, the persecutor.
The third paradox: socially dependent wish to stop the use of psychoactive materials, but use the award (for example, care of the patient during crisis) or punishment (indignation concerning its behaviour). Both agents (award/punishment) serve only to maintenance of habitual behaviour of the patient with dependence.
The model stress-koping-health (stress-coping-health model) is offered. According to this model assume that the problems bound to the use of psychoactive materials, are serious for relatives, leaders to strain appearance, is frequent in the form of physical and-or mental disturbances of health. The stress induces members of monogynopaedium to educe koping-strategy which would soften a strain at relatives. The koping-strategy frame, according to authors studying it, can be described three factors: an involvement (engaged), out-of-operation tolerance (tolerant_inactive), dispassionateness (withdraval).
Involvement. The spouse considers and states it in monogynopaedium that the use of alcohol or narcotics afflicts her, spoils mood. She tries to confine the use and makes certain demands. Declares that will not take over explanations concerning the use of psychoactive materials, begs to stop it, says to the husband that it is necessary to make, reports about the expectations concerning consumption of psychoactive materials.
Out-of-operation tolerance. The spouse apologises for dependent, covers its consumption or agrees that it is guilty. Cannot make decisions, it is too frightened, that something to do. Tries to contain the house so that all looked normal, or shams that all is good. Thinks of divorce, but does nothing in this respect. States threats which actually and did not think to carry out.
Dispassionateness. When the spouse is drunk or is under the influence of narcotics, abandons it, is engaged in own affairs and behaves as if the spouse here is not present. Puts itself on the first place, cares of itself. It avoids the husband how much probably. Puts interests of other members of monogynopaedium above interests of the patient. Does not refuse the interests or finds new interests.
On frequency of these styles on the first place there was an involvement, other two styles are presented among spouses with peer frequency, and differences between bunches with different socially cultural orientation (collectivist or individualist) are minimum. The basic conclusion of authors: all three styles are not healthy and result in to the expressed exhibitings social dependences at spouses. Each style requires correction.
Thus, despite some disagreements in treatment of socially dependent behaviour of relatives of the patient, all authors converge that the monogynopaedium suffers a predicted mode that the suffering model is similar in various cultures and that without a therapeutic intervention the behaviour of members of monogynopaedium sustains dependent behaviour of the patient and ruins health of socially dependent relative.
Social dependence is toxicant, but is curable
When speak about low efficacyy of treatment of the patient with dependence complain about the factor reducing this efficacyy – «the patient has returned on the same medium». Really, the medium can promote relapse. Important among other and that circumstance that the patient has returned after treatment on the same intrafamily medium.
If numerous researches invariably confirm a natural involvement of monogynopaedium into pathological process of dependence also treatment should be focused not on one patient, but also to include his family. Moreover, and dependence preventive maintenance can be more successful with monogynopaedium involving. Dependence – family illness, therefore treatment and preventive maintenance too should be family.
The psychologic help socially dependent yields a huge prize him in the form of improvement and personal growth, and also to their relatives, suffering dependence, and to children growing up in monogynopaedium. For children it is an essential element of preventive maintenance of development of dependence. It is necessary to remind that children sick of dependence compound bunch of high risk of development of dependence as from psychoactive materials, and its not chemical forms – workaholism, fanatical adherence to any activity, a hyperalimentation, love dependence.
Results of some researches have shown that monogynopaedium involving in therapy accelerates and enriches process of recover of the patient with dependence, reduces level of stress at relatives, raises level of unity of monogynopaedium. Low level of unity correlates with the worst forecast of effect of treatment.
In one of works applied model of group therapy to socially dependent persons. The program consisted of 12 sessions and the Monogynopaedium from which we descend »was called«. Rather encouraging results are received: at all clients the perception of a locus of the control was enriched, exhibitings of social dependence have decreased, positive dynamics proceeded within 6 months after the therapy terminal.
Psychosocial consultation of the women who are in partner mutual relations with men, dependent on alcohol is recommended. Consultation can pass in long-term productive psychotherapy.
There are numerous proofs of larger efficacyy of treatment of an alcoholism with involving of a social environment, in particular monogynopaediums. The monogynopaedium can as to promote recover of the patient.
The monogynopaedium should become lawful object for rendering of the specialised help at an alcoholism of one of members. The larger attention to monogynopaedium and wider social environment in maintenance of routine services to patients can help to involve patients in treatment and to sustain therapy; to enrich as an outcome of therapy of the states bound to the use of psychoactive materials, and monogynopaedium functioning; to reduce harm for members of monogynopaedium and other people, including children. The paradox consists that enough data about a role of monogynopaedium and its sufferings has collected, but the help is still oriented only on the sick individual.
In the world only in individual narcological establishments and psychologic consultations render the specialised help to socially dependent persons. It is necessary both diffusion of ideas, and preparation of experts. Self-care locomotion extends are bunches for relatives sick of dependences: It is scarlet-anon, Plank beds-cherimoyas, social dependence should take the place among the states demanding the medical and psychologic help. Social dependence is excruciating, in this sense is toxicant, but is curable.