Lisa Frederiksen is the author of hundreds of articles and 12 books, including her latest, "10th Anniversary Edition If You Loved Me, You'd Stop! What you really need to know when your loved one drinks too much,” and "Loved One In Treatment? Now What!” She is a national keynote speaker with over 30 years speaking experience, consultant and founder of BreakingTheCycles.com. Lisa has spent the last 19+ years studying and simplifying breakthrough research on the brain, substance use and other mental health disorders, secondhand drinking, toxic stress, trauma/ACEs and related topics.
As a man in early recovery from alcoholism, I have admitted myself to public detox facilities a number of times (Crisis Referral Unit is the politically correct euphemism), completed two month-long residential treatment programs, and lived in a structured halfway house program. I hold a Master of Arts in Medical and Scientific Journalism from Columbia University (New York) – that, I add, in case any of your readers maintain a stereotypical image of what kind of people suffer the disease of addiction. My sponsor is a high ranking doctor at Mayo Clinic.
In the course of these experiences, I have met several people who have lived in so-called “wet” public housing facilities. One man was a career anthropologist before alcohol swept his professional life away. He reached a point at which he decided to move into a wet house. He told me life there was so horrific – constant fights, furniture being thrown around, and people dying in their beds – that he decided to move out and into a sober house (where I met him). His experience illuminates one of the public arguments for wet houses – that a percentage of residents will re-think their life and embrace the recovery process.
I have also met men in detox who appear to be about the right age to be Vietnam vets who have been through much court-ordered treatment, yet are strongly against the idea of recovery. They are determined to drink as much as often as possible. Within that community, there is a culture of oral tacit knowledge about which detox facilities and jails and wet houses in which Minnesota counties have the best food, softest beds, social workers who will give out bus passes, and cash assistance dispensations that are the greatest. By word of mouth, these men collectively enable themselves to drink as much as possible – on the taxpayer’s dime.
So from a public policy standpoint, there are powerful arguments both for and against wethouses. Ultimately, if someone refuses treatment and a program of recovery, there is really nothing you can do. Though wethouses probably do increase public safety and provide basic human dignity, let’s not kid ourselves: they are a form of end-of-life care. My advice to anyone on the fence about recovery: Life will be a lot better if you just don’t take that first drink and participate in a program of recovery.
Kirk – thank you so very much for adding your thoughtful, detailed comment to this discussion. You raise excellent points, and it’s important we consider the powerful arguments both for and against.
Thanks so much for sharing these powerful arguments both for and against Wet Houses, Kirk. It’s incredibly helpful to furthering the conversations on this issue and much appreciated.