Why We Celebrate Pride In Recovery

Ryan E. Flinn, PhD, co-director, Mountain Plains ATTC, and Adam Viera, PhD, MPH, co-director, Peer Recovery Center of Excellence
LGBT Pride Month 2024 concept with rainbow flag. LGBTQIA Pride colorful wave background.

Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer, and Intersex (LGBTQI+)* Pride Month is celebrated annually in June to acknowledge sexual minority and gender-diverse people and their contributions to this nation (Library of Congress, 2024). Approximately 5.5% of U.S. adults (13.9 million people) identify as LGBT, with significant differences in the proportion of the population identifying as LGBTQ+ across different states, regions, and age groups (Flores & Conron, 2023). 9.5% of youth (ages 13-17) across the nation identify as LGBT (Conron, 2020). Regardless of our age or location, Pride Month can represent many things for LGBTQI+-identified people. For those of us in substance use disorder (SUD) recovery or who support others in recovery, it offers an opportunity to reflect on how we cultivate LGBTQI+ pride in our recovery communities, healthcare and service centers, and larger communities; for those of us who identify as LGBTQI+, we can reflect on how we encourage and support our community members in recovery. The origins of the Pride celebration date back to 1969, in the context of the Stonewall Uprising, as LGBTQI+-identified people of color engaged in protest to create change (Tandon & Rao, 2021). Addressing substance use disorder disparities among LGBTQI+ people will require further change in 2024 and beyond.


LGBTQ I+ Behavioral Health Equity
Health equity is a state in which “everyone has a fair and just opportunity to be as healthy as possible” (Braveman, 2022). Progress toward achieving health equity is measured and monitored through population health research, involving multidisciplinary and multilevel examinations of the prevalence, causes, and consequences of disparities in health conditions, including SUDs (Beck et al., 2024). Multiple studies have demonstrated that LGBTQI+-identified people report substance misuse, substance use consequences, and are diagnosed with SUDs at rates significantly higher than cisgender and heterosexual people (Bränström & Pachankis, 2018; Day et al., 2017; Hughto et al., 2021; McCabe et al., 2013, 2022). Subgroup differences within the LGBTQI+ population in substance use exist (e.g., between cisgender and nonbinary people relative to transgender people; Cascalheira et al., 2023). Experiences of minority stress (Meyer, 2003), such as discrimination, also explain differences between LGBTQI+ people in terms of substance misuse and related mental health concerns (Dyar et al., 2020, 2022; Katz-Wise et al., 2021; Lee et al., 2016; McCabe et al., 2010). These studies suggest that LGBTQI+ people use substances, in part, to cope with the unique stressors they encounter from others in their environment (e.g., bullying, abuse, violence, rejection), who act in harmful ways because they disapprove of LGBTQI+ people’s sexual orientations and gender identities and expressions. Thus, effective treatment must consider LGBTQI+ patients’ experiences of minority stress and address LGBTQI+ patients’ SUDs and related mental health concerns in an affirming and responsive manner (Hughto et al., 2021). This requires treatment providers and recovery support specialists to recognize that SUD recovery, and LGBTQ+ behavioral health equity, is forestalled by unchecked experiences of minority stress (Burger & Pachankis, 2024), which LGBTQ+ people face outside of and within treatment settings and recovery communities.

LGBTQI+ Experiences in Treatment and Recovery
A large study of adults who identify as being in SUD recovery suggests over 11% of the US recovery population identify as sexual minorities (Haik et al., 2022) and a recent study found that sexual minority people utilize recovery community centers in ways that are similar to heterosexuals (Bernier et al., 2024). Yet research suggests that the experiences of LGBTQI+ people in recovery communities can be mixed. For instance, LGBTQ+ people who participate in Twelve Step recovery groups reported forming beneficial connections with other Twelve Step members but also indicate experience bullying, marginalization, and even violence in some meetings (McGeough et al., 2023). LGBTQI+ people who have sought professional SUD treatment services have also reported witnessing and experiencing a range of negative and hurtful behaviors from peers in recovery and even from treatment staff, including “name-calling, denial of services, misgendering, lack of intervention in peer bullying, and assumptions about participants’ sexuality” (Paschen-Wolff et al., 2024). These experiences were reported as distressing, and triggering a desire to use substances to cope, yet LGBTQI+ people also identify having a number of valuable experiences in treatment such as forming relationships with other LGBTQI+ peers in recovery, witnessing openly LGBTQI+ treatment staff advocating for equity, and receiving treatment services that were holistic in nature and responsive to their unique needs as LGBTQI+ people (Paschen-Wolff et al., 2024). Finally, research has also documented efforts to make recovery housing more inclusive and responsive to the needs of LGBTQ+ people (Mericle, Carrico, et al., 2019; Mericle et al., 2020; Mericle, Hemberg, et al., 2019). These trends in designing LGBTQI+-affirming spaces for SUD recovery will require continued support and investment from the LGBTQ+ and recovery communities, and effective allyship from providers.

Effective Allyship for LGBTQI+ People in Recovery
There are a number of actions you can take – whether you identify as LGBTQI+, in recovery, both, or neither – to support LGBTQI+ people in recovery and advance LGBTQI+ behavioral health equity.

  1. Study to increase your awareness, knowledge, and skills in working with LGBTQI+ people. Many resources exist which can support your increased awareness and knowledge of issues impacting LGBTQI+ people and enhance your skills in providing effective services to this population. In addition to offerings by regional ATTCs and other TTCs, SAMHSA maintains a page of resources to support your knowledge about LGBTQI+ people. The Center of Excellence on LGBTQ+ Behavioral Health Equity serves as a hub for training and technical assistance related to LGBTQI+ people. Nonprofit organizations such as The Trevor Project and Faces & Voices of Recovery offer resources dedicated to LGBTQI+ people. Professional organizations, such as the American Psychological Association, offer resources and opportunities for collaboration and community. Other organizations focused on LGBTQI+ health include the Association of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender Addiction Professionals and Their Allies and GLMA: Health Professionals Advancing LGBTQ+ Equality.
  2. Recognize and celebrate LGBTQI+ people’s strengths and resources. LGBTQI+ people utilize their cultural strengths and resources to overcome prejudice, discrimination, and structural stigma (e.g., heterosexism, cissexism). Amid times of struggle (e.g., COVID-19 pandemic) LGBTQ+ people identify their strengths to include engagement in activism; being authentic, proud, and visible; engaging in strategies to enhance collective and intergenerational resilience; attending to their mental health; and supporting others in their communities, including those experiencing multiple forms of marginalization (Abreu et al., 2023). LGBTQ+ communities of color provide their members with safety, acceptance, support, and access to shared resources (Hudson & Romanelli, 2019). Transgender youth adults of color identify their use of creativity to support identity development and community resilience (Pease et al., 2024). You can name and celebrate LGBTQI+ people’s strengths as you support them in SUD recovery.
  3. Advocate to change policies and procedures that perpetuate minority stress. Relatively simple changes can be taken by healthcare providers and healthcare systems to welcome LGBTQI+ patients. Recovery-focused settings, such as recovery housing, can also be designed to be affirming and supportive of LGBTQI+ people’s identities (Mericle et al., 2019). All of us can affirm the importance of LGBTI+ community organizations, events, and program, which research indicates may be protective against substance use in LGBTQI+ youth (Watson et al., 2020), and support the continued operation of these programs and events in our communities.
  4. Support and participate in research and evaluation to increase evidence-based interventions for LGBTQI+ people. Despite the need for SUD services, LGBTQI-specific SUD interventions are few (Kidd et al., 2022). Additionally, most of what is known about SUD treatment for sexual and gender minorities are based on studies of cisgender, sexual minority (e.g., gay, bisexual) men (Kidd et al., 2022). Healthcare systems can partner with research and evaluation experts to collect high-quality information on sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, and health service utilization and health outcomes among LGBTQI+ patients. More research is needed which utilizes an intersectional lens to consider LGBTQI+ people’s needs for SUD prevention, treatment, and recovery support services
  5. Be patient. You will not undo the effects of centuries of homophobia, transphobia, and heterocentrism overnight. Mistrust of health and social services remains an understandable reaction by LGBTQI+ people given the pathologization of their identities by medical and mental health professionals (Marrow, 2023) and experiences of discrimination they have faced in seeking care (Casey et al., 2019; Henriquez et al., 2021; Howard et al., 2019). The creation of LGBTQI+ safe spaces require allowing the time and space for LGBTQI+ individuals to judge for themselves when and how services are acceptable for their use and who is most appropriate to deliver those services. Your reputation as a healthcare or social service provider or organization matters and is built over time.

Conclusion
By recognizing and affirming the importance of Pride Month and using this time to reflect on how to better support LGBTQI+ people living with SUDs and other mental health disorders, everyone can contribute to increasing LGBTQI+ behavioral health equity and serving as effective allies to LGBTQI+ people in recovery. Reach out to your regional SAMHSA-funded Addiction Technology Transfer Center, the SAMHSA-funded Peer Recovery Center of Excellence, and the SAMHSA-funded Center of Excellence on LGBTQI+ Behavioral Health Equity for further support in implementing LGBTQI+ affirming practices, policies, and procedures in your treatment or service setting.

*The authors of this article have chosen to use the acronym LGBTQI+ since it is consistent with SAMHSA’s Office of Behavioral Health Equity. The authors also note the omission of two-spirit as an identity that is often included within the acronym. In specific instances where studies are being cited, the acronym used matches what used in the study.

Author Biographies
Ryan E. Flinn, PhD, is an Assistant Professor at the University of North Dakota. Their scholarship aims to address the syndemic of trauma, substance use, and legal system involvement by promoting mental health and substance use disorder recovery. They currently co-direct the SAMHSA-funded Mountain Plains Addiction Technology Transfer Center (Region 8) and direct Region 8’s Opioid Response Network - Technical Assistance team.

Adam Viera, PhD, MPH, is a Research Assistant Professor with the University of Missouri Kansas City, serving as a director with the Collaborative Center to Advance Health Services. In this role, he acts as the co-director of the SAMHSA-funded Peer Recovery Center of Excellence. His long-term goals are to continue to build the selection of evidence-based harm reduction and recovery support interventions to address substance use and related health issues and to support their implementation across the United States.

References

Abreu, R. L., Gonzalez, K. A., Arora, S., Sostre, J. P., Lockett, G. M., Mosley, D. V.  (2023).’Coming Together after Tragedy Reaffirms the Strong Sense of Community and Pride We Have:’ LGBTQ People Find Strength in Community and Cultural Values during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Psychology of Sexual Orientation and Gender Diversity, 10(1), 140–49. https://doi.org/10.1037/sgd0000516

Beck, A. F., Unaka, N. I., & Kahn, R. S. (2024). A Road Map for Population Health and Health Equity Research. JAMA Pediatrics. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapediatrics.2024.1550

Bernier, L. B., Foley, J. D., Salomaa, A. C., Scheer, J. R., Kelly, J., Hoeppner, B., & Batchelder, A. W. (2024). Examining sexual minority engagement in recovery community centers. Journal of Substance Use & Addiction Treatment, 0(0). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.josat.2024.209340

Bränström, R., & Pachankis, J. E. (2018). Sexual orientation disparities in the co-occurrence of substance use and psychological distress: A national population-based study (2008–2015). Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 53(4), 403–412. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00127-018-1491-4

Braveman, P. (2022). Defining Health Equity. Journal of the National Medical Association, 114(6), 593–600. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnma.2022.08.004

Burger, J., & Pachankis, J. E. (2024). State of the Science: LGBTQ-Affirmative Psychotherapy. Behavior Therapy. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beth.2024.02.011

Cascalheira, C. J., Nelson, J., Flinn, R. E., Zhao, Y., Helminen, E. C., Scheer, J. R., & Stone, A. L. (2023). High-risk polysubstance use among LGBTQ+ people who use drugs in the United States: An application of syndemic theory. The International Journal on Drug Policy, 118, 104103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugpo.2023.104103

Casey, L. S., Reisner, S. L., Findling, M. G., Blendon, R. J., Benson, J. M., Sayde, J. M., & Miller, C. (2019). Discrimination in the United States: Experiences of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer Americans. Health Services Research, 54(S2), 1454–1466. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6773.13229

Conron, K. J. (2020). LGBT Youth Population in the United States. The Williams Institute. https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/publications/lgbt-youth-pop-us/

Day, J. K., Fish, J. N., Perez-Brumer, A., Hatzenbuehler, M. L., & Russell, S. T. (2017). Transgender Youth Substance Use Disparities: Results From a Population-Based Sample. Journal of Adolescent Health, 61(6), 729–735. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2017.06.024

Dyar, C., Kaysen, D., Newcomb, M. E., & Mustanski, B. (2022). Event-level associations among minority stress, coping motives, and substance use among sexual minority women and gender diverse individuals. Addictive Behaviors, 134, 107397. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addbeh.2022.107397

Dyar, C., Sarno, E. L., Newcomb, M. E., & Whitton, S. W. (2020). Longitudinal associations between minority stress, internalizing symptoms, and substance use among sexual and gender minority individuals assigned female at birth. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 88(5), 389–401. https://doi.org/10.1037/ccp0000487

Flores, A. R., & Conron, K. J. (2023). Adult LGBT Population in the United States. The Williams Institute. https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/publications/adult-lgbt-pop-us/

Goffnett, J., & Paceley, M. S. (2020). Challenges, pride, and connection: A qualitative exploration of advice transgender youth have for other transgender youth. Journal of Gay & Lesbian Social Services, 32(3), 328–353. https://doi.org/10.1080/10538720.2020.1752874

Haik, A. K., Greene, M. C., Bergman, B. G., Abry, A. W., & Kelly, J. F. (2022). Recovery among sexual minorities in the United States population: Prevalence, characteristics, quality of life and functioning compared with heterosexual majority. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 232, 109290. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2022.109290

Henriquez, N. R., & Ahmad, N. (2021). “The Message Is You Don’t Exist”: Exploring Lived Experiences of Rural Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer/Questioning (LGBTQ) People Utilizing Health care Services. SAGE Open Nursing, 7, 23779608211051174. https://doi.org/10.1177/23779608211051174

Howard, S. D., Lee, K. L., Nathan, A. G., Wenger, H. C., Chin, M. H., & Cook, S. C. (2019). Healthcare Experiences of Transgender People of Color. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 34(10), 2068–2074. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-019-05179-0

Hudson, K. D. & Romanelli, M. (2020). “‘We Are Powerful People’: Health-Promoting Strengths of LGBTQ Communities of Color.” Qualitative Health Research, 30(8), 1156–70. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732319837572

Hughto, J. M. W., Quinn, E. K., Dunbar, M. S., Rose, A. J., Shireman, T. I., & Jasuja, G. K. (2021). Prevalence and Co-occurrence of Alcohol, Nicotine, and Other Substance Use Disorder Diagnoses Among US Transgender and Cisgender Adults. JAMA Network Open, 4(2), e2036512. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.36512

Katz-Wise, S. L., Sarda, V., Austin, S. B., & Harris, S. K. (2021). Longitudinal effects of gender minority stressors on substance use and related risk and protective factors among gender minority adolescents. PLOS ONE, 16(6), e0250500. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0250500

Kidd, J. D., Paschen-Wolff, M. M., Mericle, A. A., Caceres, B. A., Drabble, L. A., & Hughes, T. L. (2022). A scoping review of alcohol, tobacco, and other drug use treatment interventions for sexual and gender minority populations. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 133, 108539. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsat.2021.108539

Lee, J. H., Gamarel, K. E., Bryant, K. J., Zaller, N. D., & Operario, D. (2016). Discrimination, Mental Health, and Substance Use Disorders Among Sexual Minority Populations. LGBT Health, 3(4), 258–265. https://doi.org/10.1089/lgbt.2015.0135

Library of Congress. (2024). Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Queer Pride Month. https://www.loc.gov/lgbt-pride-month/about/

Marrow, E. (2023). “I hope that as our selection becomes more accurate, the number … will be very few”: The creation of assessment criteria for gender-affirming care, 1960s–1980s. Psychology of Sexual Orientation and Gender Diversity. https://doi.org/10.1037/sgd0000633

McCabe, S. E., Bostwick, W. B., Hughes, T. L., West, B. T., & Boyd, C. J. (2010). The Relationship Between Discrimination and Substance Use Disorders Among Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Adults in the United States. American Journal of Public Health, 100(10), 1946–1952. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2009.163147

McCabe, S. E., Engstrom, C. W., Kcomt, L., Evans-Polce, R., & West, B. T. (2022). Trends in Binge Drinking, Marijuana Use, Illicit Drug Use, and Polysubstance use by Sexual Identity in the United States (2006–2017). Substance Abuse, 43(1), 194–203. https://doi.org/10.1080/08897077.2021.1913696

McCabe, S. E., West, B. T., Hughes, T. L., & Boyd, C. J. (2013). Sexual Orientation and Substance Abuse Treatment Utilization in the United States: Results from a National Survey. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 44(1), 4–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsat.2012.01.007

McGeough, B. L., Paceley, M. S., Zemore, S. E., Lunn, M. R., Obedin-Maliver, J., Lubensky, M. E., & Flentje, A. (2023). Understanding the social and community support experiences of sexual and gender minority individuals in 12-Step programs. Journal of Gay & Lesbian Social Services, 35(4), 398–419. https://doi.org/10.1080/10538720.2023.2172759

Mericle, A. A., Carrico, A. W., Hemberg, J., de Guzman, R., & Stall, R. (2020). Several Common Bonds: Addressing the Needs of Gay and Bisexual Men in LGBT-Specific Recovery Housing. Journal of Homosexuality, 67(6), 793–815. https://doi.org/10.1080/00918369.2018.1555394

Mericle, A. A., Carrico, A. W., Hemberg, J., Stall, R., & Polcin, D. L. (2019). Improving recovery outcomes among MSM: The potential role of recovery housing. Journal of Substance Use, 24(2), 140–146. https://doi.org/10.1080/14659891.2018.1523966

Mericle, A. A., Hemberg, J., Stall, R., & Carrico, A. W. (2019). Pathways to recovery: Recovery housing models for men who have sex with men (MSM). Addiction Research & Theory, 27(5), 373–382. https://doi.org/10.1080/16066359.2018.1538409

Meyer, I. H. (2003). Prejudice, social stress, and mental health in lesbian, gay, and bisexual populations: Conceptual issues and research evidence. Psychological Bulletin, 129(5), 674–697. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.129.5.674

Paschen-Wolff, M. M., DeSousa, A., Paine, E. A., Hughes, T. L., & Campbell, A. N. C. (2024). Experiences of and recommendations for LGBTQ+-affirming substance use services: An exploratory qualitative descriptive study with LGBTQ+ people who use opioids and other drugs. Substance Abuse Treatment, Prevention, and Policy, 19(1), 2. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13011-023-00581-8

Pease, M V., Kang, N., Oluwakemi, G., Jin, L., Bradshaw, B., & Le, T. P. (2024). “It’s like having a superpower”: Reclaiming creativity and the intersectional experiences of trans young adults of color.Journal of Counseling Psychology. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1037/cou0000737

Tandon, A., & Rao, T. S. S. (2021). Pride Parades. Journal of Psychosexual Health, 3(3). https://doi.org/10.1177/26318318211038118

Watson, R. J., Park, M., Taylor, A. B., Fish, J. N., Corliss, H. L., Eisenberg, M. E., & Saewyc, E. M. Associations Between Community-Level LGBTQ-Supportive Factors and Substance Use Among Sexual Minority Adolescents. LGBT Health, 7(2), 2–89. https://doi.org/10.1089/lgbt.2019.0205

Addiction Messenger Feature Article May 2024

Whole Person Recovery from Substance Use Disorder

By Katie Witkiewitz, PhD, Distinguished Professor of Psychology and Director of the Center on Alcohol, Substance use, And Addictions, University of New Mexico, and Jalie A. Tucker, PhD MPH, Mary F. Lane Professor of Health Education and Behavior and Director of the Center for Behavioral Economic Health Research, University of Florida
Cut out shot of anxious woman sitting in circle and talking about her mental health struggles with her peers during a group therapy session.

Abstinence has long been considered the defining feature of recovery from substance use disorder, with a focus on individual level factors associated with abstinence. This has promoted a narrow focus on the individual as the fundamental change agent in recovery (Heilig et al., 2021), and lack of consideration for the multiple pathways to recovery (Tucker & Witkiewitz, 2022), including non-abstinence recovery. Accordingly, changes in an individual’s substance use is often the primary target and behavior of concern, often to the neglect of other positive functional changes involved in recovery. Although some conventional recovery models emphasize the need for an individual to build a support system for recovery and identify high-risk situations for harmful substance use, these models have not addressed how an individual attempting recovery is situated within and dynamically influenced by broader social, community, economic, and policy forces that might make recovery more or less accessible. Greater consideration of dynamic socioecological influences on recovery is critical for understanding the process and developing multi-level interventions to promote change in multiple outcome indicators of whole person recovery.

Models of harmful substance use and recovery from substance use disorder should carefully consider individual-level factors that can be modified in conjunction with social, community, economic, and policy level factors in which harmful substance use may develop, be maintained, and ultimately resolved. These levels of influence on individual behavior are dynamically and bidirectionally changing over time, and recovery typically is not a straight linear change process. As such, any return to harmful substance use during a recovery attempt is part of a dynamic change process and offers an opportunity to learn about the multi-level factors that may be influencing the process. Change is inherently complex and multi-determined, and individuals exist within multi-layered contexts extended through time that can be more or less supportive of change.

Growing research offers numerous directions for pursuing a holistic contextualized approach to recovery. At the individual level, relatively stable characteristics, such as genetic influences, family history of substance use, adverse childhood experiences, and neurobiological factors can be a predictor of risk for developing substance use disorder and may hinder or promote recovery (Witkiewitz & Marlatt, 2004). Also at the individual level, numerous modifiable factors, such as experiences of mood and craving, self-efficacy for modifying behaviors, coping skills, and working toward future goals are associated with reductions in harmful substance-related behaviors (Sliedrecht et al., 2019).

At the broader interpersonal level, substance-free activity engagement, spending time with peers who do not participate in harmful substance use, engaging with recovery support services, and allocating time, money, energy, and other resources to substance-free activities are associated with improved functioning and reductions in harm. In general, enriched environments with substance-free rewards are associated with less substance use and related harm, and access to green spaces may improve mental well-being, reduce craving, and be associated with treatment engagement. Conversely, greater poverty and community disadvantage may reduce the probability of recovery, and ample evidence indicates that social determinants of health and policy actions affect health and well-being and, in turn, the odds of recovery. Areas with greater socioeconomic advantage, housing security, community-level income equality, and community-level access to health insurance are each associated with positive recovery outcomes (Witkiewitz & Tucker, 2024).

In many natural environments, easy access to substances remains unchanged, but recovery occurs as these other environmental features shift toward offering substance-free activities and commodities that can compete with substance use. Further, factors that promote harmful substance use may not be the opposite of factors that support recovery, and factors that promote recovery are not merely the absence of factors that maintain harmful substance use. Importantly, any one factor at a given level is likely insufficient for stable behavior change, and individuals vary in the extent to which they can access recovery supports. Greater economic resources, access to substance free reinforcement, social network support for recovery goals, and availability of community recovery resources may facilitate a less difficult recovery pathway. Lack of these resources, built environments with few substance-free reinforcers, social networks supportive of harmful substance use, and systemic biases in access to social, economic, and policy resources (e.g. due to racism, sexism, and agism) will likely make recovery more difficult (Witkiewitz & Tucker, 2024).

In sum, recovery is a dynamic process that occurs in dynamically changing contexts that can support or hinder positive outcomes, leading to many individual differences in recovery pathways. Future research, treatment, and policy agendas need to address how individual, interpersonal, family system, neighborhood, community, and broader policy factors can be changed or leveraged to improve recovery outcomes. The goal is to identify what interventions and when those interventions may be most effective for shifting patterns of behavior at the individual level, taking into consideration broader contextual factors associated with transitions in behavioral choices over time. The field needs to look beyond the individual, changes in personal consumption, and treatment as the primary foci of recovery models; expand recovery definitions; and study multilevel influences on recovery. This expanded view is essential for advancing the science and practice of substance-related behavior change. Researchers, treatment providers, peer support workers, and the recovery community can support multiple pathways to recovery by holding a more expansive view of how individuals recover from substance use may take a variety of different pathways and that an individual exists within a socioecological and dynamic context that may be more or less supportive of a recovery journey.

Read more about this expanded view of recovery here: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/16066359.2024.2329580

References

Heilig, M., MacKillop, J., Martinez, D., Rehm, J., Leggio, L., & Vanderschuren, L. J. M. J. (2021). Addiction as a brain disease revised: why it still matters, and the need for consilience. Neuropsychopharmacology, 46(10), 1715–1723. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41386-020-00950-y

Sliedrecht, W., de Waart, R., Witkiewitz, K., & Roozen, H. G. (2019). Alcohol use disorder relapse factors: A systematic review. Psychiatry Research, 278, 97–115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2019.05.038

Tucker, J.A., Witkiewitz. K (2022). Dynamic pathways to recovery from alcohol use disorder: meaning and methods. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108976213

Witkiewitz, K., & Marlatt, G. A. (2004). Relapse prevention for alcohol and drug problems: that was Zen, this is Tao. The American Psychologist, 59(4), 224–235. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.59.4.224

Witkiewitz, K., & Tucker, J. A. (2024). Whole person recovery from substance use disorder: a call for research examining a dynamic behavioral ecological model of contexts supportive of recovery. Addiction Research & Theory, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1080/16066359.2024.2329580

ATTC Messenger February 2014: Video Technology for Training

test

Cross-TTC Website Advisory Group Meeting July 2023

TTC Website Administration Guide for WordPress

TTC Website Training - WordPress Introductions

SDH PDF Notes Discussion 2

SDH PDF Notes Discussion 3

SDH PDF Notes Discussion 4

SDH PDF Notes Discussion 5

Listening Session 1: Notes & Resources (PDF)

ATTC/Niatx Service Improvement Blog: September 2, 2019

Telehealth Learning Series Resources

Pandemic Response Resource Page

Telehealth Learning Series: Top 5 Billing & Reimbursement

TTC Map

TTC Postcards

TTC Style Guide Webinar

ATTC Informational One Pager

ATTC Web Banner Template

ATTC Master logos, regional logos, and National logos

HEK postcard

SDH PDF Notes Discussion 1