27th September, 2006

Dr KEITH SUTER

One of the traditional activities of Wesley Mission over the centuries has been opposition to alcohol. An irony has emerged in the fight against alcohol: on the one hand, there has been a greater acceptance of it among the churches, while on the other hand there has been growing scientific concern about its dangers!

TOTAL ABSTINENCE? Keith Suter supports a no alcohol stance. PICTURE: Mike Johnson (www.sxc.hu)   "Given the increased concern about the dangerous impact of some lifestyle choices, the network believes that its total abstinence policy will eventually be vindicated."

I recently took part in Alcohol Awareness Week, a national initiative to alert people to the dangers of alcohol. I chair the NSW network that coordinates some of the events. The network is an ad hoc grouping of churches and other organisations that support a total abstinence policy on alcohol.

The network has this total abstinence policy, first, because it believes that alcohol is a dangerous drug. It is far more dangerous than the government’s official “harm minimisation” approach suggests - and so it should be treated as such.

Second, the network positions itself at the extreme end of the debate so as to draw the middle out to that end. Most people see themselves as “moderates” on most issues. The “middle” is defined by the end points. By taking such a hard line on alcohol, it forces the “moderates” out more to a tougher line than would otherwise be the case.

Given the increased concern about the dangerous impact of some lifestyle choices, the network believes that its total abstinence policy will eventually be vindicated.

This is where the irony starts to emerge. The old Methodist Church had a policy of total abstinence. The Uniting Church, created in 1977 from the Methodist, Presbyterian and Congregational Churches, does not have the same hardline attitude. Indeed, one inner-city Uniting Church Sydney parish is now licensed to sell alcohol.

On the other hand, the mounting evidence of scientific research is supporting what the mission has long argued - that alcohol is a very dangerous drug. For example, earlier this month The Australian newspaper carried a story about the research done by the professor of neurology at Sydney University, Clive Harper, about the problems that could develop from heavy alcohol use.

“There is a very blasé attitude in Australia to drinking and its hazards,” he said. “It is so culturally acceptable that people don’t realise what is happening until the organ damage is already done. That is one of the important messages to get through to the public, the organ damage that can be done through drinking excessively.”

In other words, people who think that they are handling their alcohol well, may in fact be slowly doing damage to themselves and be unaware of it. They could eventually become so ill that they will end up in a Mission facility trying to recover. But it will be too late to reverse the damage done.

Therefore the network has long argued that there should be health warnings on bottles of alcohol. This was done belatedly on packets of cigarettes and so the network believes that this equally dangerous drug should also be the subject of public health warnings.

Additionally, the network warns governments that in much the same way as there is now a lot of litigation against tobacco companies because of the health risks of smoking, so eventually there could be similar litigation over alcohol. After all, organisations like the Network have provided warnings about the dangers of alcohol and yet no action has been taken. Eventually the victims (or their next of kin) and smart lawyers will find a way of suing the alcohol companies and the governments who failed to save their citizens.

Dr Keith Suter is a consultant on social policy with Sydney's Wesley Mission.

~ www.wesleymission.org.au/pastoral/suter.asp.

FOR MORE SIGHT-SEEING, click here...