Families coping with substance abuse or addiction have a difficult time getting an addict to accept help. Statistics have shown that the best way to confront an addiction is through an intervention. Most people perceive an intervention as an incredibly hostile event that can be disastrous. This perception is often derived from what we learn from popular culture. The truth is there are several different styles of intervention. Here are the five most effective intervention strategies.
The Arise intervention is both a direct and an indirect approach to an intervention. It focuses on the entire family as a whole by figuring out how the entire family, not just the addict, can help and play a role in getting help. One study found that 83% of recovering addicts were willing to enter treatment after being confronted by this model. Arise interventions are planned ahead of time, but they are not surprises. This model can be used multiple times and is also used to deliver information to the entire family.
The Johnson model of intervention is the most commonly known intervention. Family and friends get together to call an intervention. They are expected to meet at least once before conducting the real intervention. Here the family and friends of the addict can discuss what they want to say, who is going to speak when, how long each individual gets, and what they all expect out of the intervention. This style of intervention is meant to be confrontational. Friends and family confront the addict about their addictive behavior, alcohol or drug abuse, and how it affects them. The addict will be made away that their family and friends are there to support them, but only if they choose to receive proper treatment. Addicts are also made aware that they are going to abide by new rules, boundaries, and consequences for their continued abuse of drugs or alcohol. The Johnson model of interventions purpose is to pull the addict out of their self-denial and see the problem with their addiction. In some cases this confrontation model of intervention can cause the addict to withdraw back to drug or alcohol use from the shame and pressure from the intervention.
The invitational model of intervention differs from the Johnson model in that the addict is invited to a ‘workshop’. A friend or family member extends an invitation to the addict giving them all the information about what is going to happen. The addict understands that the gathering is an intervention for their drug abuse. This style allows for the addict to choose to listen and get help, opposed to confronting them. In this style to negative results of confrontation are evaded. It should also be noted that in this style if the addict does not want to come to the workshop or refuses, then they can be forced. Regardless of their willingness they are aware of the purpose of the meeting.
The field model of intervention is a combination of the former two interventions. Where this model differs is in its flexibility. The counselor or therapist that is part of the intervention has the ability to adapt to the situation. Based on the circumstances of the intervention the mediator can move things in the best direction.
In certain situations the confrontational method of intervention is not always best. If there is a possibility of hostility, violence, or anything that would cause the harm of the addict or those involved in the intervention, then a systemic intervention would be the best option. During an addiction and recovery the most important thing to maintain is the safety of all the people around the addict, addict included. Systemic interventions show how to encourage the addict to get help. Only behaviors and interactions that encourage positive abstinence are emphasized. With thorough counseling that emphasizes addict/counselor trust building systemic interventions can get the addictive behavior to change.