Thank you for your response.

Your comment reminds me of that old saying about how pointless it is to put lipstick on a pig. Call addicts whatever you want. Call them “blah-boobians” for all I care, it’ll do nothing to change the zeitgeist.

This meme of “language impacts stigma” is, frankly, an idea I think is total nonsense, particularly with words like addict. It’s one of these ideas that people far more left-wing than me perpetuate without really thinking it through. First and foremost, as a card-carrying member of Narcotics Anonymous with almost 15 years of recovery, I resent the idea that I should somehow be ashamed of the word addict, as if the word itself was responsible for all the damage the disease caused in my life. Give me a break. I have zero issue with that word, and believe you me, I have earned my right to have an opinion about it.

I’ll tell you what does affect stigma though — criminal behaviors, overdoses, ruined lives, failed social policies, failure of the educational system, and good old-fashioned ignorance.

So no, I don’t think I will stop referring to addicts as addicts, if for no other reason than “addict” and “substance use disorder” are not synonyms. One can be an addict and never touch drugs and one can have a SUD and not be an addict.

Thanks again for taking the time to provide feedback, but we’ll have to agree to disagree on this subject.