(respectfully snipped)
The "Disease/BS-It's A Choice" debate is always an interesting discussion, but I don't know if it's appropriate to this topic. None of us know whether or not DS was an addict. Even those of us (like me) who believe all evidence points to the fact that she was one don't KNOW and chances are we never will.
That said, I think if some law or public safety stance were implemented where admitting you are addict meant you would lose your license forever, then people would be even LESS inclined to seek help and/or treatment. I mean are all you Earth people going to tote us to meetings for the rest of our lives?
Seriously, though, I think it would be impossible. The medical community considers the disease of addiction to be chronic, progressive and incurable. That doesn't mean it can't be managed, just that it doesn't ever go away.
It doesn't seem right to tell someone who has been clean for 20 years that he can't drive (even though experience shows us that being clean for that long doesn't guarantee you'll be clean forever) just because he admits he's an addict but all the other drinking and driving addicts can have a license because they aren't about to fess up to their condition.
I think a "one drunk driving offense=license gone forever" would be a better system that would catch both addicts and non-addicts alike. Still, we will NEVER in a million years see that happen because so many people drink and drive. Frankly, from a judicial point of view and a societal point of view, we don't care all that much about loaded drivers unless they hurt someone else - and then we get all high and mighty about it. IMHO.
