Although the Weiner case seems silly and although rehab may indeed be the only remaining solution to his political problems, it poses difficult questions for people who genuinely struggle with addictions. If anyone can go to rehab when his actions lead to public humiliation, is rehab still a medical treatment or does it become some form of absolution? If it’s a ritual expiation, doesn’t that mean it should be punitive? And doesn’t that make addiction a sin rather than a disease?

If every time someone behaves like a jerk and the reason behind it is addiction, doesn’t that mean addiction is just an excuse for bad behavior?

As a former heroin and cocaine addict, I’ve thought about this a great deal. I did some pretty stupid things while I was using. But so did a lot of my college-age peers who had no such excuse for their behavior. However, I persisted in those risky behaviors for longer, in a more extreme fashion and with greater intensity. What I’ve learned from my experience and from the research is that addiction can impair your ability to make appropriate decisions. Note that I said impair — not eliminate…

Consequently, cases like Weiner’s force us to ask: does a sex addict become “addicted” only when he gets caught or when a society or partner objects to his behavior? Is his desire compulsive only when it actually results in negative consequences, or would he still be a “sex addict” if he’d stopped when he got bored, before he was caught? Or, do we think that a truly sex-addicted Weiner couldn’t have gotten bored, and that his sex addiction was nipped in the bud, before it blossomed into real-life affairs?