Job: Trouble, Trouble, Trouble

Do you feel a righteous anger? Is this anger an outcry that makes you question the purpose of your existence? If you have been searching for your fit in the puzzle of existence, you are not alone. Many people cannot seem to find significance in the world. They put forth great effort and still struggle with jobs, money, relationships, and health. Feeling they deserve a better life, many look upon those more affluent or more content and angrily strike out against any perceived impediment to happiness in their way. Some even blame God.

Perceptions of injustice and of inequity are merely human understandings. The degree of any person's suffering may be evaluated by human eyes and human brains, but, very often, the causes for pitiful conditions remain unclear. Without evidence, many wonder how God could let these terrible things happen. Enter the story of Job.

Job of the Bible was a wealthy man, a community leader with ten children who was renowned for his wisdom and philanthropy. The Bible tells us that God believed Job was blameless and upright, a man who feared God and turned away from evil. (James Hatton, "Bible Study: The Book of Job," www.helium.com, March 4 2008)

But, as God praised Job, Satan confronted God, questioned Job's motives, and said that Job had reason for not fearing God. Satan continued, "He just serves you for what you do for him. You have given him riches and a family and servants. If you took these things away, he would not serve you."

"If you, God, would take away his wealth and his health," Satan conjectured, "Job would curse rather than fear you." Satan felt God could only buy a person's respect. In essence, Satan had challenged God himself.

God gave Satan permission to prove his accusation but, whatever he did, he wasn't to take Job's life. So, Satan caused certain events that took Job's herds, burned up his crops, destroyed his oldest son's house and killed all ten of his children.

Expecting Job to curse God and die, Satan was stunned when Job replied: "The Lord has given, the Lord has taken away, blessed be the name of the Lord." In all this, Job did not sin by charging God with wrongdoing.

Yet again, Satan scoffed at Job’s faith in God. "A man will give all he has for his own life,"  Satan said. "But stretch out your hand and strike his flesh and bones, and he will surely curse you to your face." God again granted Satan his wish to put Job to the test as long as he didn't kill him.

So, Satan caused poor Job to be struck with putrid sores all over his body. The fall of the house of Job was complete. How could Job persevere though God seemed to have forsaken him?

Later, Job was visited by three old friends who came to comfort him. When they found him, they were shocked and hardly recognized him covered in sores from head to toe. He was outside the city sitting among the ashes, the local dump where garbage was burned. He was alone, tormented, and confused. Job, himself, did not understand why this evil was happening to someone who had faith in God.

Job was not a victim of time and chance but a part of God’s orchestrated purpose. Job had no inkling he was the star actor in a God-directed morality play on earth. As far as Job knew, God has disappeared from his life. (Paul Kroll, "The Trial of Job," Grace Communion International, 2011)

To have suddenly come upon hard times like Job had done was construed to be a sign of the judgment of God for some secret, willful sin. His friends sat for seven days without saying a word until Job finally broke the silence.

Job's first reaction was complete denial. He has three wishes: (1) he wished he'd never been born, (2) he wished he'd died at childbirth, and (3) he wished he could die. Yet he really didn't want to die for fear of cursing God.

As Job suffered the depth of depression, his three friends told him that he was obviously under the hand of God's judgment and his best option would be to confess his sin, get right with God and wait for the blessing to return. Although at first, these friends had come to console Job, they began attacking him relentlessly as a hideous sinner. Job prayed that God would speedily intervene in his life. Still, he became weaker and weaker.

The problem was that Job's friends suspected certain sins but could not tell Job what he had done wrong. Nothing was evident, nor could it be. At this point, Job turned to bargaining as he pleaded with God to tell him what he had done wrong. God didn't answer.

Then, Job and his friends went around and around until Job becomes angry with God. Job was unaware of any wickedness on his part and yet, here he was, being punished by God. Job’s discouragement, his lashing out at God, was not disbelief, for Job never questioned God’s existence. Job knew that somewhere in the universe God must be alive. "Though he slay me, yet will I hope in him," Job cried out. (Job 13:15)

Finally, God spoke. He doesn't answer Job's question, however, He plied Job with questions, seventy questions, in fact. Questions such as the following: What do you know  about the creation of the world? What do you know about the stars and what are the names of all the stars? What about the weather? What about the animals?

Job realized God had created and sustained all things but Job didn't know how: he just trusted God to get on with running everything. Job didn't respond to God with accusations of injustice; he merely put his hand over his mouth. Speechless, he understood.

God did not condemn Job for his past anger and accusations. God only corrected Job’s misconception about His ability to rule creation.

God’s point to Job, Philip Yancey wrote in Disappointment With God, was this: "Until you know a little more about running the physical universe, Job, don’t tell me how to run the moral universe." Job now knew there was a purpose for his suffering — God’s purpose. That was quite enough for him.

In Philip Yancey’s words: "One bold message in the Book of Job is that you can say anything to God. Throw at him your grief, your anger, your doubt, your bitterness, your betrayal, your disappointment — he can absorb them all." God is much bigger than we are.


Job repented.  Job explained, "Surely I spoke of things I did not understand, things too wonderful for me to know." Job had been too hasty in concluding God was unjust. His new understanding was a byproduct of his suffering -- his test of faith and love. It seemed that God needed to know something about Job, and Job needed to know something about himself and about God.(Paul Kroll, "The Trial of Job," Grace Communion International, 2011)

Job repented with no certain knowledge that his situation was going to change. There, among the ashes, covered in sores Job trusted God simply because God was worthy to be feared. 

Understanding Some Lessons

1. Suffering may occur for reasons we don’t understand unless or until God reveals them to us. (John 9:1-7)

2. Trials may come because God needs to know something about a faithful servant. (Genesis 22:1-12)

3. Trials and suffering provide spiritual enrichment and build a relationship between us and God. (2 Corinthians 12:7-10; Hebrews 12:4-12; James 1:2-4; 1 Peter 4:12-19)

4. Just because Christians suffer trials or tragedies does not mean God is punishing them for some sin.

5. It is possible for humans to love God unconditionally.

Don't You Just Detest Them?

God or the justice system or our fellow man does not offer a guarantee that the playing field will be equal for us. Despite the lack of fairness inherent in living, we must carry on. This does not mean that we should restrict our views of righteous treatment or refrain from objecting to injustice. But, it does suggest that broad condemnation of groups of people is not productive nor necessarily wise. And, it certainly suggests that battering our brains out on an unmoving wall is rather fruitless.

How easy would it be to condemn a race, a religion, a profession on the actions of a few? Stereotyping those in a group of any kind is dangerous. When we do this, we lose touch with essential elements of trust. We refuse future contact and prejudge everyone in the group we hold accountable for our distress. Allowing ourselves to fall for guilt by association, we disallow the possibility of a wide range of opinion within one pool.

I was a teacher. I live in Appalachia. I have been diagnosed as clinically depressed and obsessively compulsive. How many wish to condemn these attributes and conditions? I have learned that a significant number would just as soon find faults in my condition rather than accept me as an individual. Some want to discount my opinion because I fit in those categories they detest. I see roadblocks and warning signs over and over. These impediments say "You're not like us and you're not wanted."

I accept the resistance and move along my own way in the face of those who judge. Why? I understand my weaknesses and problems are my own. I, alone, have helped create them and helped perpetuate them. I blame no one else for my existence or for my future. The Creator, other people, laws -- none of these is responsible for the stones in my pathway.

The truth of the matter is that complete justice or complete harmony or complete acceptance will never be achieved. The very fact that we are human predisposes every one of us to live among others who cannot understand us fully. Not a day goes by that another human being is not "sizing us up" or seeking an advantage to use us for his advancement. The perfect world is a gorgeous myth that exists only in our imaginations.

Long live crusaders, but long survive realists. I think a healthy dose of both philosophies insures us a sane life in an insane world. God knows I will always resist being treated unfairly; however, I have no problem with marching on -- continuing through what I perceive as an application of injustice. Life cannot be lived to its fullest if we insist on fighting every windmill blocking our paths. Likewise, to accept being a slave who remains mute in wrongful circumstances diminishes my standing. Jousts must be carefully analyzed before combat.

In the very worst cases of wrongful application, even in instances of man's inhumanity to man, an individual often rises above the group mentality to offer hope and life. Whether its Oskar Schindler in Nazi Germany or Hugh Thompson in My Lai, these people serve as models of behavior who know their immediate actions will save lives.

I attempt to conduct myself as a well-meaning individual in circumstances where group alliances prevail. In cases where a herd mentality threatens my understandings, I have the duty to question the threat and to investigate further. However, I do choose to be social, which implies that I find need for congregation. This membership does not make me, the individual, good or bad or otherwise. I am merely in the group; the group does not contain me.

People love to categorize and label others in neat, little clusters. After they take these actions, many of these same people see the need to criticize someone by attacking their aggregations. They do this because, to them, the entire group seems opposite to their beliefs. But, ask any of the antagonists and they will say, "I am doing this out of personal distaste." This means they "personally" hate groups. Shouldn't, in most cases, these disgruntled people engage the individual or the idea they hate instead of engaging the group?

In a Group

Democrats - unbearable
Republicans - so base
The Cops - just monstrous
Judges, Lawyers - bitter taste

Anglo Saxons - prejudiced
Afro Americans - using race
Spanish - illegal immigrants
Arabs - Godless disgrace

The Poor - dirty idiots
The Rich - greedy snobs
The Youth - mindless fools
The Seniors - fat old blobs

Homosexuals - disgusting
Addicts - so obnoxious
Ministers - judgmental
Atheists - preposterous

Presidents - base company men
Congress - greedy crooks
Teachers - just babysitters
Professors - outworn books

Soldiers - violent killers
Unwed Fathers - proud and boastful
Street Walkers - infectious vessels
Mailmen - all go postal

Withdraw from those with which you group
Don't hesitate to leave your friends
For the time you spend with company
Others judge a mighty worthless end

How Personal Is Pain?

Many people who suffer from substance abuse believe they have a right to treat themselves in any manner they see fit. Short of knowledge and unwilling to educate themselves, these people do not understand that their abuse creates outcomes that negatively affect other members of their family. As the demon of addiction takes complete control, they become slaves to the substances, unable to reason beyond their next fix.

I believe we must teach all ages about the possible outcomes of negative behaviors. Education must be viewed as a life-long process. Much like a criminal trying to find an "edge" to overcome detection and arrest, we must constantly develop new methods to stem problems that interfere with the good. A criminal never stops trying to be a "step ahead" to perpetuate successful crimes. We must not be willing to remain static, no matter the age, as we seek to defeat evil. Being proactive insures safety.

Those who suffer from substance abuse lose perspective of their proper roles. This is most evident in the role each plays in a family. The family suffers greatly as any one of its members experiences the effects of abuse. Continued abuse and addiction deal families knockout blows, many of which either keep the other members down for the count or maim them permanently. Many families that survive abuse face a future filled with doubt and the fears of relapse. Without extensive help, these families cannot heal.

When should a substance abuser know that he steers a life that is a potential weapon to his family? I believe the answer is very early in life. As soon as an individual takes independent actions, someone must teach him the responsibilities inherently involved. Who would allow a child to take his first spin on a bicycle without the aid of instruction, dry runs, assisted rides, a helmet, training wheels, etc.? More preparation for independent actions of any kind likely produces more favorable outcomes. And, even in case of a mishap, someone must take immediate steps to assure such a thing won't happen again... and take steps again and again if necessary.

To believe that one's actions do not affect the welfare of others is ludicrous. Even the most ruthless people desire to please the ones they love. Granted, some twist and turn the most proper intentions until they become debased; however, they usually do anything to protect their own flesh and blood.

So, why does the substance abuser often hurt those he loves? Usually by the time his molehill of use becomes a mountain of addiction, his physical and mental health have deteriorated, and he views himself hopelessly lost in his own self-destruction. His drive is the hurt and his mission is fueled by the drugs. He doesn't realize that his own pain ignites the torture of those he loves, and even if he does, he is beyond caring. In his mind, he is already a deserted island. Smiling, crying, frowning, laughing, desiring, abstaining -- all become jumbled in a search for pleasure and relief.

Therefore, I propose the family must be responsible for every child. The gang banger, the problem child, the bad seed, the runaway, the little bitch, the bully -- all are products of the family, be it conventional or one-parent or displaced or grandparent centered.

Just as importantly, the child must be taught that his life is complexly intertwined in the lives of all of those he loves. He must know that his bruise, his cut, or his pain is felt by all of those people. Call it an accident of his birth but it exists for the remainder of his life. He must know that his abuse causes terrible abuse to his family.As an integral piece of the family, he must understand the unit cannot be whole without his important participation.

Here are some ways family members who abuse substances affect others. I hope they serve as points of conversation that enlighten all.

1. Children of parents who abuse substances can suffer great risks of emotional development because parents who abuse drugs and alcohol are more likely to be involved with domestic violence, divorce, unemployment, mental illness, and legal problems.

2. Children of parents who abuse substances have a higher prevalence of depression, anxiety, eating disorders, and suicide attempts than their peers.

3. Children of parents who abuse substances are three to four times more likely to eventually engage in substance abuse themselves.

4. Children of parents who abuse substances can be neglected and/or physically abused.

5. Children of parents who abuse substances can suffer terrible quality of life as addicted caregivers often spend money otherwise allocated for rent, food, and clothing on drugs.

6. Children of parents who abuse substances can develop repression and denial as they see their parents unable to label and share the experiences of their own emotions.  

7. Children who abuse substances can increase the likelihood that younger brothers and sisters will themselves use drugs and develop drug problems simply because all the children share the same house. 

8. Children who abuse substances can create conflicts between parents and between themselves and their own brothers and sisters, especially if the drug-using child steals goods and money from the home. 

9. Children who abuse substances can cause their parents to develop codependent relationships because the parents develop self-doubt and lie to cover up.  

10. Older children who abuse substances can deliberately introduce their younger brothers and sisters to drug use. 

11. Substance abuse by any family member can lead to loss of family possessions such as cars and homes, and it can also lead to bankruptcy. 


12. Substance abuse by any family member can lead to stress-related health problems (gastrointestinal problems, headaches, migraines, asthma) for others in the family.

13. Substance abuse by any family member can lead to a death that creates indelible scars in the family that never heal.

Sources:

Barnard, Marina. "Drugs In the Family: The Impact On Parents and Siblings." April 26, 2005.
"Family Effects of Drug Abuse." www.livestrong.com. 2011.

The Perfect Ball

The Perfect Ball

I remember when a new baseball was my world.

As I took it from its box,

I admired its unmarred ivory beauty

Feeling its perfect roundness

In my young cupped hands.

I carefully turned the white globe

Until my fingers and thumb found their place

Along the red, raised seams,

Stitched into the smooth cover of cowhide.

Then, as I lifted it to my face,

I inhaled its sweet leathery scent

Still unmasked by grass and dirt,

Unscathed of dimpled batted bruises.

Finally, I listened for the beautiful voice.

In quiet times I coaxed it to speak,

Rich engagements filled with images

Exploits of a perfect ball.

The ball spoke of

Tufted grassy outfields,

Dusty white-chalked diamonds,

Rough-cut wooden benches,

Concrete block dugouts.

The ball spoke of

Sizzling wisps of fastballs

Sweet summer swings

Catcher mitt cannonade

Reverberations of “stee—rike!”

The ball spoke of

Red hot liners

Turf-seeking missiles

Spears of tanned hands

Flagged, stinging captives

The ball spoke of

Eager extended muscles

Perfect sweet spot slugs

Long carry drives

White stars seeking empty space

The ball spoke of

Breathless flights to empty bases

Strawberry stings of hook slides

Tagging waves of foreign hands

Cushions of safety for outstretched limbs. 

In its state of simple perfection, my Baseball had no equal. No time marked its progressions through catches, throws, and hits. I could never possess all the knowledge that lay deep within its cover, and the years that I spent learning its secrets flew too quickly through my hands.

Today, I long to step onto a field and put the baseball back into action- to let it dance with its carefree grace and to return my aging body to its once youthful presence. But, I am content to find my dream world still pulled from a little cardboard box. I think human souls eternal may play baseball in their heaven since baseball was a true slice of heaven to many, like me, while on earth. 

Could Your Doctor Be On Drugs?

Yesterday I thought I would do a little reading about pain management. Using the trusty Internet, I entered the search and found many sites about the subject. One site did more than catch my eye.

Dr. David Kessler is an American pediatrician, lawyer, and administrator (both academic and governmental). He was the Commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration from November 8, 1990 to February 28, 1997. Grief.com advertises Kessler's #1 spirituality book, his appearances on "Oprah & Friends," his reports on "American Morning" on CNN, and his extensive lecture schedule.

Dr. Kessler studied medicine at Harvard, served his residency at John Hopkins, and taught at Columbia Law School. He was awarded the Public Welfare Medal from the National Academy of Sciences in 2001. Kessler is also well known for his role in the FDA's attempt to regulate cigarettes.

With such a distinguished record, I was floored to read the information on grief.com. Let me share that information in my post today.

"When morphine and other opioid analgesics are prescribed for the management of pain, the dose is sometimes raised to be sure that pain is well-controlled 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Opioids given to relieve pain generally do not lead to the development of dependence. As a disease, like cancer, progresses, more opioids may be needed to control the pain on a continuing basis. When prescribed on a regular basis in a dose sufficient to relieve pain, there is no empirically-based evidence that opioids lead to addiction." (David Kessler,"Dealing With Pain: Understanding Opioids," grief.com, 2011)

First of all, I understand Dr. Kessler qualifies his stance on opioids by using terms such as generally, prescribed, and sufficient. And, I know, given in proper circumstances with close management, these drugs do not lead to addiction. Society has specific needs for opioids as evidenced in the reference to certain cancer patients. The drugs must be prescribed; therein lies the potential for abuse.

However, "no evidence" negates my support of the Kessler's information on a site called grief.com. This seems irresponsible on Kessler's behalf without further warnings concerning the possibility of opioid addiction under a doctor's care. Is Dr. Kessler recommending prescription of opioids for psychological relief? I would hope not.

  
Brief Opioid History

About 2001-2002 Oxycontin began to openly be perceived as dangerous by clinicians and patients. Oxycontin is just a long acting preparation of oxycodone. And oxycodone is also present in more common drugs such as Percodan, Percocet, Tylox, Oxy IR.

In addition hydrocodone, which the DEA (Drug Enforcement Administration) lists as a Schedule III (meaning that refills of a prescription can be given) has seen an amazing increase. A couple of years ago 53% of all prescription opioids were one of the hydrocodones (e.g.Vicodin, Lortab, Lorcet).

Also, Methadone has seen a resurgence of usage as a long-acting analgesic that has largely supplanted Oxycontin in that capacity. Predictably there is now much more methadone available on the streets and the numbers of methadone deaths from over dosage has risen steadily. (Carl R. Sullivan, M.D., "Opioid Dependence," healthin30.com, July 20 2007)

Defining Opioid Dependence

The Fourth Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM-IV) of the American Psychiatric Association defines opioid dependence as "repeated use of a drug of this class to the point of causing multiple problems." The definition requires "evidence of three or more problems in the same year, including tolerance, withdrawal, use of greater amounts of opiates than intended, and use despite consequences."

Patients who do not have dependence but demonstrate repeated opioid-related difficulties with the law, impaired ability to meet obligations, use in hazardous situations, or continued use despite problems can be labeled as having abuse.

Opioid dependence is characterized by extremely unpleasant withdrawal symptoms that occur if opioid use is abruptly discontinued. The withdrawal symptoms include severe dysphoria, sweating, nausea, rhinorrea, depression, severe fatigue, vomiting, and pain. Slowly reducing the intake of opioids over days and weeks will reduce or eliminate the withdrawal symptoms. (D. Doyle, G. Hanks, I Cherney, and K. Calman, eds.,  Oxford Textbook of Palliative Medicine 3re Ed., 2004)

The acute withdrawal phase of opioid dependence is often followed by a protracted phase of depression and insomnia that can last for months. The symptoms of opioid withdrawal can also be treated with other medications, such as clonidine, antidepressants, and benzodiazepines, but with a low efficacy (D. Hermann, E. Klages, H. Welzel, K. Mann, B. Croissant B, "Low Efficacy of Non-opioid Drugs in Opioid Withdrawal Symptoms, Addict Biol., 2005)

Who Is At High Risk For Opioid Dependence?

An opioid use disorder can develop in anyone, but at least three groups are at increased risk for dependence or misuse. (Mamikon Bozoyan M.D., "Opioid Abuse and Dependence," ArmMed Network Media, www.health.am, March 3 2009)  These groups are

1. Persons with chronic pain syndromes (e.g., back, joint, and muscle disorders) who misuse their prescribed drugs,

2. Physicians, nurses, and pharmacists, primarily because of easy access to opioids. Physicians may begin use to help with sleep or to reduce stress or physical aches and pains, and then escalate doses as tolerance develops.

3. Those who buy street drugs to get high. While some of these individuals have prior histories of severe antisocial problems, most have a relatively high level of premorbid functioning. The typical person begins using opioids occasionally, often after experimenting with tobacco, then alcohol, then marijuana, and then brain depressants or stimulants. Occasional opiate use, or “chipping,” might continue for some time, and some individuals never escalate their intake to the point of developing dependence.

Increased opioid abuse coincides with a controversial U.S. campaign against undertreatment of pain that has caused an enormous increase in opioid prescriptions. Abuse of prescription opioids has grown particularly explosively during this time. The great majority of illicitly used prescription opioids are obtained from one physician, not from drug dealers. (Adrian Preda, MD, "Opioid Abuse, emedicine.medscape.com, January 11 2011)

For many, the decision to begin taking drugs is voluntary: it may have started with medicine that a doctor prescribed for serious pain, or with recreational drug use with prescription pain medications or with heroin use.

Regardless of how a person became dependent, once dependence has developed, it is considered a disease that requires treatment. And, once a person becomes addicted or dependent on a drug, he or she may find that willpower is no match for the chemical, behavioral, and psychological nature of opioid dependence.

How alarming is the fact that many health care professionals often misuse opioids? The dangers of the drugs certainly would not concern those who have developed dependence, themselves. Perhaps, this is a key to unlocking the truth about opioids -- the entire medical profession must be educated about these particular drugs and their potential for destruction. And, the entire medical profession must be held accountable for misuse of opioids. Should random drug tests be mandatory for all workers?

Once Dependent On Opioids...


Once persistent opioid use is established, severe problems are likely to develop. According to statistics from the American Medical Network, "At least 25% of habitual users die within 10 to 20 years (a mortality rate 15-fold higher than the general population) from suicide, homicide, accidents, or infectious diseases such as tuberculosis, hepatitis, or AIDS. The latter has become an epidemic among injection drug users, with an estimated 60% of these men and women carrying HIV."

Imperatives Now

Before prescribing an opioid analgesic, a professional should gather a complete history that elucidates patterns of life problems and any history of opioid use. If a problem with opioids is suspected, gathering further data from a relative or close friend can be helpful. Additionally, clinicians should search for physical stigmata of misuse (e.g., needle marks) and, when appropriate, screen blood or urine for opioids.

Dr. Kessler has not lied. I want to make that perfectly clear. Yet, with the terrible epidemic of prescription drug abuse and with the deadly results of opioid dependence, Dr. Kessler should reconsider the implications of his information.Without detailed warning, many people will interpret his words to mean opioids are safe drugs. Not that he believes that, but the general population of Americans who thrive on soundbites and bits of information could be at risk without heed. Grief.com? The true grief is suffered by those addicted to opioids and by those families that have been devastated due to opioid addiction.   

 

Reasoning With Lottery Dreams

The ringtailed monkey is very difficult to catch, but for the Zulus it's simple. They've been catching this agile little animal with ease for years, so the method the Zulus employ is based on their intimate knowledge of the monkey. Their trap is nothing more than a melon growing on a vine. Ringtailed monkeys love the seeds of the fruit. Knowing this, the Zulus simply cut a hole in the melon, just large enough for the monkey to insert his hand to reach the seeds inside. The monkey will stick his hand in, grab as many seeds as he can, then start to withdraw it. This it cannot do because the monkey's fist is now larger than the hole. It will pull and tug, screech and fight the melon for hours. But it can't get free of the trap unless it gives up the seeds. Meanwhile, the Zulus sneak up and nab it.

"Historically we are emerging from an era with no clear ideology, but an era in which materialism and business has expanded powerfully and internationally, and out of the vacuum two old, discredited ideologies, laissez-faire and Social Darwinism appear to be rising again in modern guise. These ideologies are still flawed; the first (contained in modern Libertarianism) vigorously promotes freedom but ignores justice and is indifferent toward democracy. The second is supported by science, is disinterested in humane values and accommodates exploitation as part of the nature of things. Is this a society of individuals rationally maximizing happiness? Among the disadvantaged, it is a political economy of hope and fear." (Julian Edney,"Greed II, www.g-r-e-e-d.com, 2005)

Yesterday, I patiently waited my turn in line at the mini-mart to pay for some gas. In front of me stood a man and his family -- a woman and a couple of young children. Judging by their very needy appearance (I realize I was making a huge leap here.), I thought the people were unfortunate victims of the cruel poverty state of Appalachia. The man checked out a six-pack of Natural Light and... began calling out the various names of the many instant lottery tickets he wished to purchase.

So, I became a witness to the dilemma faced by so many in a poor, rural environment. I believe the thinking process used by the poor, lottery-obsessed individuals is steeped in greed and in despair. Despite the odds of winning any significant amount of money, they hold a belief that lottery dollars represent their only chance to obtain significant wealth. The thinking likely follows this pattern:

Poor people are desperate.
I am poor.
Therefore, I am desperate (with a slim chance that some great stroke of luck falls into my lap).

Of course, accepting this pitiful state is nonproductive. By doing so, people convince themselves that their hope for improvement is rooted in luck, not in initiative and industry. Really, people in this state have learned to accept poverty in their lives, but they still feel the need to "invest" their limited dollars in pure speculation.

The argument may be valid, but the major premise is false. All poor people are not desperate. Many are just not satisfied with their station, and these people have interpreted their own circumstances as fateful desperation. They believe "The Man" has kept them down, and that's just "the way it is."

Simplicity and bare existence do not have to contribute to desperation. Indeed, many hard working people are poor due to various circumstances: their environment, their health, their limited abilities. Some merely prefer and accept a life that doesn't provide great riches. As long as they work to achieve this life, they are doing nothing wrong. It is not a crime to be poor, and if an individual accepts being poor as a crime or as a detriment, the individual is guilty of bad judgment.  

Harry Browne, libertarian writer and politician once stated, "There isn't any society to disapprove, to disallow, to denounce or to ostracize you. It's a myth. I wonder how many millions of lives have been tossed on the junk pile to appease an entity that never existed." In other words, strong individuals infused with a little hope  can usually, with enough effort, overcome adversities that exploit their lives. This invaluable truth is essential knowledge for living. Though more difficult to attain for those not blessed with assets at birth, success, to a large degree, lies in the realm of possibility but does require considerable effort in its acquisition.

If people truly believe more wealth equates to more happiness, they may resort to desperate measures to satisfy their thirst for "the good life." I'm not saying that buying a bunch of lottery tickets is bad or even necessarily harmful. Instead, I am saying that an individual must give education and industry significant attention: both of these will likely lead to quicker, more stable dollars. The good people with great material possessions understand this. Unfortunately, some who want money let greed lead them to unproductive, even detrimental enterprises. These people are greed-driven bad guys.

In the defense of the hopeful lottery players, I understand the draw of the gamble and even the entertainment value of shooting for a wild dream. I just don't know why some people accept the desperation of their circumstances without striving for improvement. A gamble is nothing more and nothing less. An investment in the intellect, with enough equal effort from the investor, most often pays great dividends. In addition, people willing to learn establish themselves among those who receive continued returns, both financial and virtuous.

I understand and accept the quote from Julian Edney in the beginning of this post. Are we a society that rationalizes happiness? Many do base their value of existence on rationalizing happiness through the acquisition of material possessions. Of course this inevitably leads to exploitation of the poor and to injustice for those with less; however, those without wealth must avoid self-condemnation which eventually will lead to slavery.

The hopes and fears of those in Appalachia can be exposed and can be understood. It takes quite a bit of self realization to reach this point though. People who rail continually about the sad state of the environment and who repeatedly take no positive action to improve it don't even purchase a ticket in the "Better Days To Come" grand drawing. Happiness and security do have their costs just like any other asset.

The key to a better future is changing focus. Greed and materialism play major roles in the needless destruction of human lives. People consumed by greed, given the opportunity, will take everything from anyone without a thought of morality or mutual respect. The greed drives such people to feed upon others and to obtain money that satisfies their personal desires. If the focus changed to fulfilling desires of unselfish love in life, people would soon realize that true happiness cannot be purchased in a lottery.

If we are all just monkeys in a zoo, I hope I am not genetically programmed to be a ringtail. To have my greed be responsible for so much wasted time seems unthinkable. Not only that, I wouldn't like having to worry about the added risk of getting caught because of my desire for an overabundance of purely selfish rewards. The Zulus out there are constantly poised, ready to capture their prey.

Veterans and Prescription Drugs

On November 26, 2007, Veterans for Common Sense appeared on ABC News with Brian Ross highlighting the military drug abuse crisis: 
   

Veterans' advocacy groups charge that the problem of substance abuse is much greater than the Army wants to publicly acknowledge, and it's growing.  "I've met with veterans from coast to coast, and I will tell you that there is a catastrophe on the horizon," said Paul Sullivan, director of Veterans for Common Sense.

   

Three thousand fifty-seven veterans of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars were potentially diagnosed with a drug dependency from fiscal year 2005 through March 2007, according to figures provided to ABC News from the Veterans Health Administration. From 2002 through 2004, only a total of 277 veterans were diagnosed with drug dependency, the numbers show.  "The military right now can say whatever they want, but the truth on the ground is that the soldiers are in a lot of pain, emotional and physical pain, and they're turning to drugs in order to alleviate that," said Sullivan.

By estimates such as these, more than 300,000 troops have returned from Iraq or Afghanistan with PTSD, depression, traumatic brain injury or some combination of those. The Pentagon has looked to pharmacology to treat those complex problems. As a result, psychiatric drugs have been used more widely across the military than during any other war.

James Dao of The New York Times reports that those medications, along with narcotic painkillers, increasingly are being linked to a rising tide of other problems, among them drug dependency, suicide and fatal accidents. An Army report on suicide released last year documented the problem, saying one-third of the force was on at least one prescription medication.

“Prescription-drug use is on the rise,” the report said, noting that medications were involved in one-third of the record 162 suicides by active-duty soldiers in 2009. An additional 101 soldiers died accidentally from the toxic mixing of prescription drugs from 2006 to 2009. (James Dao, "Drugs Used To Treat War Veterans Pain, Depression Can Turn Deadly," The New York Times reported in Columbus Dispatch, February 13 2011)

The New York Times reviewed the cases of service members who died from what coroners said were toxic interactions of prescription drugs. All were classified as accidents, not suicides. Given the complexity of drug interactions, it’s difficult to know what killed the men, and the Pentagon declined to discuss their cases, citing confidentiality.

But there were important similarities in their stories:

1. All the men had been deployed multiple times and eventually received diagnoses of PTSD. 

2. All had five or more medications in their systems when they died, including opiate painkillers and mood-altering psychiatric drugs, but not alcohol. 

3. All had switched drugs repeatedly, hoping for better results that never arrived.
All died in their sleep.

Spending

Across all branches, spending on psychiatric drugs has more than doubled since 2001, to $280 million in 2010, according to statistics obtained from the Defense Logistics Agency by a Cornell University psychiatrist, Richard A. Friedman. A decade ago, the military came under criticism for not prescribing enough medication, particularly for pain.

Deadly Combinations

Thousands of troops struggle with insomnia, anxiety and chronic pain, and that combination is particularly risky to treat with medications. Pairing a pain medication such as oxycodone, a narcotic, with an anti-anxiety drug such as Xanax, a so-called benzodiazepine, amplifies the tranquilizing effects of both, doctors say.
Similarly, antidepressants such as Prozac or Celexa block liver enzymes that help break down narcotics and anxiety drugs, extending their effects.

Addiction

Here are some alarming statistics from the National Association of Drug Court Professionals, the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, the U.S. Department of Defense, the U.S. Department of Justice Bureau of Justice Statistics, and the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs:

* 1 in 4 Veterans ages 18-25 met the criteria for substance abuse disorder in 2006.

* 1.8 million Veterans of any age met the criteria for having a substance abuse disorder in 2006.

* There are 140,000 U.S. Veterans in prison, and 60% of those have a substance abuse problem.

* There are 130,000 homeless U.S. Veterans, and 75% of them suffer from substance abuse problems

Surveys show that more soldiers are struggling with prescription drug addiction — and seeking help from Army doctors and counselors. Dr. Les McFarling, who heads the Army’s substance abuse treatment program, acknowledges the increased potential for abuse. "You can put soldiers at risk when you’re managing their pain," he said.

But Barbara McDonald, a civilian social worker and Army drug abuse counselor, and other critics call the military’s approach a broken system, as likely to punish or denigrate troops as to treat their addictions. (Alan Scher Zagier, "Army's Drug Abuse Policy Under Fire," www.veteranstoday.com, January 22 2009)

McDonald, whose son is a soldier, spent 20 years as a civilian substance abuse counselor before joining the Army’s fight against drug and alcohol abuse one year ago. She has filed a workplace complaint against her supervisor and faces disciplinary action she says stems from her criticisms. Army officials have not commented.

McDonald claims that some Army doctors and counselors point to drug dependency as a sign of weakness. Since McDonald’s complaints surfaced, she is no longer allowed to see patients.

Areas of Immediate Concern

Rather than the heroin addictions many Vietnam veterans brought back with them from Southeast Asia, today's returning soldiers are more likely to be addicted to prescription medications -- the very opiates prescribed to them by the military to ease stress or pain -- or stimulants used by soldiers to remain alert in combat situations.

One of the contributing factors to the rise in veteran prescription drug dependency could be the ease with which these drugs can be obtained in the military.  Military doctors wrote almost 4 million prescriptions for pain medication in 2009, compared to less than 1 million in 2001. ("Drug Dependency Rising Among Young Veterans," www.soberliving.com, December 10 2010)

Here are some problems that beg for immediate attention: 

1. Soldiers used opiates before they went to war while a lot of them report opiates are freely available in combat areas. ( John A. Renner Jr., M.D., associate professor of psychiatry at the Boston University School of Medicine and associate chief of psychiatry at the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Boston Healthcare System)

2. Soldiers in Iraq and Afghainistan often have served multiple tours in combat areas, with extended periods of time away from family and home. (Panelists at National Center for Addiction and Substance Abuse Conference, 2009)

3. Returning veterans, although screened for addiction and mental-health problems, are reluctant to admit to problems out of fear that disclosure will affect their careers inside and outside the military. (Brigadier General Loree K. Sutton, director of the Defense Centers of Excellence for Psychological Health and Traumatic Brain Injury, part of the Defense Department's Military Health Systems)

4. Women have reported high rates of sexual abuse and rape while in combat areas, but are often reluctant to report incidents to male superiors. (Alexander Neumeister, M.D., associate professor of psychiatry at Yale University and the VA Connecticut Healthcare System)

5. Many veterans feel better about coming to an office in a strip mall or a private-practice office than to a VA hospital. The prospect of going to the VA -- which is "full of men in uniform" -- is particularly difficult for female veterans who have been sexually abused. (Monica L. Martocci, clinical director of New Directions Inc., Los Angeles, a drug and alcohol treatment and co-occurring disorders program serving homeless veterans)

6. Bureaucracy prevents soldiers from getting services. (Jim McDonough, a retired U.S. Army officer and former strategy director at the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy)

7. Neither soldiers nor their family members have the knowledge to deal with addiction once they return home, and the young vets only take what their doctors tell them to take.(Conference sponsored by the National Center for Addiction and Substance Abuse)

Looking Forward
 
Military personnel face shortages of therapists, psychologists and psychiatrists. But, medications always have been readily available. In general, the country lacks sufficient government treatment programs. Many young veterans with drug abuse problems are not referred to the treatment programs available. The Department of Defense and other government agencies have begun research into drug abuse among veterans, but the emphasis of this research is often on prevention rather than on treatment. In the meantime, many veterans will continue to suffer from prescription drug addiction and its devastating effects.