Ask Your Doctor About Ricochet
Is Ricochet distracting you from your job? You might have web addiction. An IBM employee who got sacked for improper internet use at work has filed a $5 million wrongful-termination suit because, of course, he's a victim of web-addiction.
Business Week cites attorneys who say that "recognition by a court that Internet abuse is an uncontrollable addiction, and not just a bad habit, could redefine the condition as a psychological impairment worthy of protection under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). That in turn would have far-reaching ramifications for how companies deal with workplace Internet use and abuse. For starters, businesses could be compelled to allow medical leave, provide counseling to, or make other accommodations for employees who can't control Internet use..."
I plan to take this one step further and simply claim to be a compulsive reader. I'll demand that my employer make accomodation for all my reading -- whether it be online or just opening up a copy of War and Peace at my desk ("no problem, boss, I'll get to that memo in a couple weeks...").
On second thought, ask your lawyer about Ricochet. (h/t Overlawyered)
- Comment (13)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (2)
Comments :
Oct '10
Re: Ask Your Doctor About Ricochet
If I am self-employed and suffer this condition, can I sue myself under the ADA?
Jun '10
Re: Ask Your Doctor About Ricochet
Woe betide the man who, while surfing the Internet, eats Twinkies.
May '10
Re: Ask Your Doctor About Ricochet
I once had an interesting discussion with a practicing psychologist about the merits of Alcoholics Anonymous. By presenting alcoholism as a disease, the group helps individuals to overcome the overwhelming shame that discourages reform.
If we assume that alcoholism is not truly a disease, is the lie acceptable? My friend thought so. I disagreed. A person should overcome shame by acknowledging truth, facing one's guilt and accepting mercy.
Mental addiction is much the same regardless of the attraction. That includes physiological effects. But how much are we willing to bend the truth to help people who screw up their own lives?
Edited on Jan 13, 2011 at 10:30amAug '10
Re: Ask Your Doctor About Ricochet
Uhh... I hate to point this out, but "Ask your doctor about Ricochet" sounds like the tagline for the latest ED prescription.
Jul '10
Re: Ask Your Doctor About Ricochet
I watched "The Social Network" the other night. A salient feature of Facebook is that it is highly addictive.
Ricochet is way worse. I haven't looked at my Facebook page in months.
Jul '10
Re: Ask Your Doctor About Ricochet
Aaron Miller:
Mental addiction is much the same regardless of the attraction. That includes physiological effects. But how much are we willing to bend the truth to help people who screw up their own lives? · Jan 13 at 10:25am
Edited on Jan 13 at 10:30 am
With all due respect, Aaron, I would suggest that you read up on the disease theory of addiction. There does seem to be something inherent in the brains of certain people that pre-disposes them to addiction, whether it be alcohol, drugs or porn.
When I used to do skydiving - a highly addictive activity - I was bemused by how many of my fellow jumpers were recovering alcoholics and drug addicts. Seems that jumping out of an airplane stimulates a massive flood of certain brain chemicals that have very much the same effects as opiates.
They even had their own brotherhood; "Friends of Bill W. Skydivers".
Edited on Jan 13, 2011 at 10:39amMay '10
Re: Ask Your Doctor About Ricochet
I was gonna check Ricochet for new posts and get back to work, but I guess I'll just keep on browsing.
Edited on Jan 13, 2011 at 10:45amAug '10
Re: Ask Your Doctor About Ricochet
Aaron Miller:
If we assume that alcoholism is not truly a disease, is the lie acceptable? My friend thought so. I disagreed. A person should overcome shame by acknowledging truth, facing one's guilt and accepting mercy.
Should, perhaps, but often won't. In which case, let's make the best of it and do what works, practically speaking.
Quite a bit, actually -- at least on the personal level.
I don't know about you, but my family is chock-full of members who need help from other family members, and who are, by all lived experience, also incapable of acknowledging the terrible truth about themselves. If we didn't help these family members despite their delusions, they'd just become someone else's problem.
As Miss Manners so frequently points out, there is often less than we think to be gained in trying to get others to acknowledge the truth.
Oct '10
Re: Ask Your Doctor About Ricochet
Mark Wilson: I was gonna check Ricochet for new posts and get back to work, but I guess I'll just keep on browsing. · Jan 13 at 10:45am
Edited on Jan 13 at 10:45 am
Know a good lawyer?
Re: Ask Your Doctor About Ricochet
Kenneth
With all due respect, Aaron, I would suggest that you read up on the disease theory of addiction. There does seem to be something inherent in the brains of certain people that pre-disposes them to addiction, whether it be alcohol, drugs or porn.
I agree -- and indeed, based on the Business Week write-up, it would seem that the employee might have had a porn addiction (it just so happened that he was using the net to view the porn). I think "internet addiction" is a fig leaf devised by some plaintiff's lawyers to cover up less savory terms such as "porn addiction" and "gambling addiction."
I think the bigger problem is the legal infrastructure built up around "disabilities" because of the ADA. It creates a one-size-fits-all system of entitlements for anyone who qualifies as "disabled." Richard's post on the ADA's horrible legacy is, I think, instructive on that point.
Jul '10
Re: Ask Your Doctor About Ricochet
Adam Freedman
Kenneth
I agree -- and indeed, based on the Business Week write-up, it would seem that the employee might have had a porn addiction (it just so happened that he was using the net to view the porn). I think "internet addiction" is a fig leaf devised by some plaintiff's lawyers to cover up less savory terms such as "porn addiction" and "gambling addiction."
I think the bigger problem is the legal infrastructure built up around "disabilities" because of the ADA. It creates a one-size-fits-all system of entitlements for anyone who qualifies as "disabled." Richard's post on the ADA's horrible legacy is, I think, instructive on that point. · Jan 13 at 11:23am
The ADA was a toxic product of George H.W. Bush's compassionate conservatism. Persuaded by a Congressman whose family member was physically disabled, he pushed for passage of a bill that purported to usher in a Utopia in which that which God had wrought could be banished by the dictates of government.
It's hard to over-state the damage the Bush dynasty has done.
Jun '10
Re: Ask Your Doctor About Ricochet
I'm a self-employed lawyer, so what do I do? Not only sue myself, but represent both sides in the case? The cognitive dissonance is overwhelming.
It's also a zero-sum game, in that the plaintiff, defendant, and both attorneys are the same person. If only Philip Dick were still alive--he'd make a great story out of it.
Edited on Jan 13, 2011 at 11:36amMay '10
Re: Ask Your Doctor About Ricochet
Lust, rage, vanity... many problems can be associated with genetic predispositions. That's good reason to avoid judging people's hearts, but not reason to dismiss individual responsibility altogether. I'm not entirely against the AA's methods. I do reject utter fatalism, however. We are responsible even for our accidents and innocent mistakes.
The point is that Adam's joke about demanding time off for reading isn't a far cry from the truth. The target of addiction is largely irrelevant. Predisposition to addiction in general is the problem in question, and employers have no responsibility to tolerate it... especially when the condition was not apparent at the time of hiring.
This is about the difference between justice and charity. One should be free to choose whether or not to be charitable. Employers should share that freedom. Justice is less often subject to the free will of individuals. The ADA involves an implicit assertion that providing employment for the weakest members of our society is a matter of justice.