I know there are reasons why people are concerned with these medications but really Klonopin is one of the safer ones in the sense that it has an incredibly long half life so stays in your body and is long acting. I have taken it for a long time and have not needed to increase the dose even though you would think that by now I have tolerance. It just hasn't happened to me, but everyone has a different chemistry.

I actually do not think there is a difference between addiction and physical dependence. While I understand the reasons why people make that distinction, the definition of addiction is dependence. And many medications are addictive. Pain killers are addictive, but that doesn't mean that we should not take them, even for long periods, if there is medical necessity. And I don't think it is humane to say that if you have a substance use issue in your past you should not be allowed to take something like a pain killer. Really? You want someone to go through hip replacement without medication because they used to drink too much? Is that sound reasoning or medically responsible?

According to the DSM-5, if you have tolerance and withdrawal, meaning you are taking a med as prescribed that happens to be addictive, then you meet 2 of the necessary criteria for substance use disorder. However, in the fine print it says that this situation actually is an exception, even though the person is addicted and would need help detoxing. They just may not have the additional behavioral issues related to the substance so don't need treatment for that. Thus in the generic sense of the word, they are not "addicts." However, they are addicted. The community that believes that addiction is something intrinsic in a person and that it is a disease will completely disagree and I understand the reasons behind that. Still there should be room for different points of view on this issue.