Drug use ambivalence

Using the drug use ambivalence technique with those drug users who are in remission.

I have been using this technique now for some time. I have developed it over a number of years and kind of did not realise that until I spoke with my supervisee the other day and she raised some concerns.

It is a two chair exercise where the client sits in a chair and experiences that part of their personality - either the FC or AC.



I have used it recently with two women who had been clean for some time but they had both expressed some concern about relapse. They were fine doing the FC chair and gave the usual responses of why they do not want to use - their lives are better, healthier, save money and so forth.



When asked to go to the AC chair both expressed an instant strong fear reaction. One woman even stated,

“That bit does not exist..... if it does exist it is only very tiny”.

After a bit of discussion she stated that she did not want to acknowledge that it existed because then she might use again. Indeed we had spent a good deal of time in the previous weeks discussing the idea of relapse and she was quite open about it. She was fully aware in her Adult about her desire to use drugs again but to actually experience that part of self was an entirely different thing. Her statement about it not existing or only being very small was highly incongruent. This however does show the difference between her Adult being aware of her desire to use again and her first hand experience of that part of her personality that wants to use. Which supports the validity of this technique.



However this raises an interesting question, What was she actually scared of? Does the bigger fear reaction mean the more likelihood of relapse or the closer the person is to a relapse.

Or it may simply mean that the person is scared of relapse even if they are not at any great risk of doing so.

I do not know the answer to that question. However my supervisee expressed some concern at this technique. She reported that by asking the person to experience the part of self that wants to use drugs may in fact increase the likelihood of them doing so. Another interesting proposal and one that I do not agree with.

The fear reaction, along with the reluctance to ‘be’ that part, (with one person even denying its very existence) means that she had repressed that part of her personality. She had become unintegrated in that way. She had locked away this part of her personality and kept it hidden from her conscious.



Psychological theory states that the more you integrate parts of the personality the less trouble they will be. By keeping it unintegrated the more likelihood there is that she will relapse. By experiencing it and integrating it, the less problematic it remains in the personality.

Also with her being the AC part of self it allows me to relate to it directly. This is a most important thing to do. Whilst sitting in the AC chair I can dialogue directly with it. Thus we have the opportunity to develop some relational contact. It allows us the option of building up some kind of relationship. This is a very good thing as it allows the AC to stop feeling so isolated. It defuses it and people are always in better psychological shape when they feel they are in some kind of relational contact with others.

Any time I come across some kind of self destructive aspect in a client my first goal is to establish some kind of relational contact with it.

Graffiti