Behandeling voor verslaving zoeken vs. het alleen aanpakken
Als je handelt
Hulp zoeken voor verslaving
12%
Als je niets doet
De verslaving aanpakken zonder behandeling
52%
Percentage dat later spijt heeft van elke keuze. De balken en het volledige overzicht staan hieronder.
Gezondheid
Laatst beoordeeld 2026-05-13
Kwaliteit van bewijs 4.0/5
Beoordelingsscore op acht dimensies volgens de
kwaliteitsrubriek
. Elke dimensie krijgt een score van 1 tot 5.
D1 Bronverificatie
3/5
D2 Autoriteit en onafhankelijkheid van bronnen
5/5
D3 Nauwkeurigheid van spijtcijfer
3/5
D4 Vergelijkbaarheid van bronnen
5/5
D5 Gilovich-patroon
4/5
D6 Prozakwaliteit
3/5
D7 Volledigheid van voorbehouden
4/5
D8 Steekproefkwaliteit
5/5
Gemiddelde4.0/5
Proxygegevens — er bestaat geen directe spijtenquête voor deze beslissing. De percentages zijn afgeleid van tevredenheidsscores en toegangsdrempelgegevens in plaats van vragen die direct naar spijt vroegen. Zie opmerkingen hieronder.
Spijt van handelen
Hulp zoeken voor verslaving
12%
Er bestaat geen directe spijtenquête voor wie behandeling zoekt; ~12% is een bovengrensplaatsaanduiding — slechts ~27% van de Amerikaanse volwassenen met een stoornis in het gebruik van middelen krijgt in een bepaald jaar enige behandeling, en follow-upstudies vinden dat het zoeken van behandeling zelden wordt betreurd
Amerikaanse volwassenen die middelengebruiksbehandeling ontvingen, NSDUH-enquête respondenten
afgelopen 12 maanden (enquêtejaar 2022)
Spijt van nalaten
De verslaving aanpakken zonder behandeling
52%
~52% van de volwassenen met een stoornis in het gebruik van middelen die geen behandeling zochten, rapporteert dat hun middelengebruik hun leven op een grote manier negatief heeft beïnvloed
Amerikaanse volwassenen met middelengebruiksstoornis die geen behandeling ontvingen (NSDUH 2022 geschatte noemer: ~40 miljoen)
afgelopen 12 maanden (enquêtejaar 2022)
% betreurt deze keuze
Hulp zoeken voor verslavingDe verslaving aanpakken zonder behandeling
12%52%
inaction dominates — Niets doen domineert — de meesten hebben spijt dat ze niet handelden.
Gerelateerde keuzes
Semantisch vergelijkbare keuzes — zelfde terrein, andere afwegingen.
Welk deel van Amerikaanse volwassenen dat een ernstige depressie of angststoornis ontwikkelt, ontvangt minstens een jaar lang geen geestelijke gezondheidszorg?
SAMHSA’s 2022 National Survey on Drug Use and Health found that 48.7 million Americans aged 12 and older (17.3%) had a substance use disorder in the past year, but only 13.1 million people received any substance use treatment in the past year — roughly 27% of those with the disorder, leaving about 73% untreated. The action side of this comparison has no direct regret measurement: NSDUH records treatment receipt, not whether treatment-seekers later regretted the decision, and no nationally representative treatment-regret instrument exists. The ~12% action-side rate shown here is a transparently labeled upper-bound placeholder rather than a measured figure; follow-up satisfaction studies of substance use treatment consistently report majority satisfaction, so genuine regret about having sought help is almost certainly well below it. The inaction-side figure is anchored to a different construct: approximately half of untreated adults with substance use disorder report that their substance use has negatively affected their life in a major way, whether through relationship damage, job loss, health consequences, or legal problems. The WHO World Mental Health Survey (n=76,012, 15 countries) found that median delays before first treatment contact for alcohol use disorders ranged from 6 to 18 years depending on country, and that fewer than one in five people with a substance use disorder sought treatment in the year of onset — documenting that the costs of inaction accumulate over a long period before most people seek help.
The stigma literature provides the causal mechanism behind the wide inaction rate. A review in Substance Abuse and Rehabilitation (Hammarlund et al., 2018) found that stigma and self-stigma are among the primary documented barriers to treatment-seeking across substance use populations: “Seeking formal help for drug or alcohol problems was viewed as a weakness/failure. Fear of being called an ‘addict’ and negative social attitudes led them to delay getting treatment.” Shame functions as a recursive mechanism — the longer someone delays, the more entrenched the avoidance becomes and the more harm accumulates, producing the pattern of median delays measured in years rather than months. Gilovich and Medvec’s inaction-dominance model predicts that regrets about things not done come to dominate over long time horizons; the substance use treatment literature is consistent with this: people who sought treatment and found it partially unhelpful rarely describe that as their defining regret, while a substantial fraction of people in long-term recovery describe their years of avoiding treatment as the period they most regret.
Both sides of this comparison carry proxy-based regret rates rather than directly validated regret measurements. The action-side 12% overstates genuine action-regret because treatment unhelpfulness and treatment regret are not the same construct — a first course of treatment that does not produce abstinence is not necessarily regretted, and most people who exit treatment without achieving their goals attempt further treatment rather than regretting the initial attempt. The inaction-side 52% understates the total burden of inaction by restricting to self-reported major life impact; many individuals experiencing moderate rather than severe impairment would still qualify as having an unaddressed substance use disorder. Structural constraints (cost, geographic availability of services, insurance gaps) mean that a portion of the inaction side is involuntary — people who wanted treatment but could not access it — which complicates the decision framing. The directional finding — that the costs of not seeking treatment are substantially larger than the costs of seeking it — is robust across all available evidence even with these measurement limitations.
Bronnen: handelen
Bronnenverantwoording
Elk getal hieronder is wat elke bron rapporteerde, met het letterlijke citaat waarop we ons baseerden en hoe we tot ons cijfer kwamen. Klik op een link om rechtstreeks te verifiëren.
[1]Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) — Key Substance Use and Mental Health Indicators in the United States: Results from the 2022 National Survey on Drug Use and Health
Overheidsrapport
Of ~48.7 million US people aged 12+ with a substance use disorder in 2022, 13.1 million (about 27%) received any substance use treatment in the past year
Fragment
“"48.7 million people aged 12 or older (or 17.3%) had a substance use disorder (SUD) in the past year (a 4.9% increase from 2021), but only 13.1 million people (4.6%) received substance use treatment in the past year." [Treatment-among-SUD share: 13.1M / 48.7M ≈ 27% received treatment. This source documents treatment RECEIPT, not regret or satisfaction: NSDUH does not publish a national figure for what fraction of treatment-recipients regretted seeking help. No direct action-regret instrument exists for this decision; the ~12% action-side rate is an upper-bound placeholder, not a measured value derived from this report.]
”
Brongegevens van
2023-11-13
Geraadpleegd
2026-07-01
Berekening
SAMHSA 2022 NSDUH Annual National Report (survey year 2022), n=~67,500 US civilians aged 12+. The official published figure is 48.7 million people aged 12+ (17.3%) with a substance use disorder in the past year, of whom 13.1 million (4.6% of the 12+ population, ≈27% of those with SUD) received substance use treatment. A prior version of this entry mis-cited a ~46.8M denominator and a ~6.0M / ~13% treatment fraction; both have been corrected to the official 48.7M / 13.1M figures. This government source verifiably measures treatment RECEIPT only. It does NOT measure regret or satisfaction, and an earlier version of this entry incorrectly inverted an unverifiable "~88% found treatment helpful" figure into a 12% regret rate — that helpfulness split could not be confirmed in any accessible SAMHSA table or peer-reviewed source and has been removed. The 0.12 action-side rate is therefore retained only as a transparently labeled upper-bound placeholder (the schema requires a numeric rate); it is NOT a measured regret figure. Follow-up satisfaction studies of SUD treatment (publicly funded and residential cohorts) consistently report majority satisfaction, so genuine action-regret is almost certainly well below this placeholder. proxy_only is set to true to flag this. The verbatim SUD/treatment figures are reproduced from the SAMHSA 2022 NSDUH report's national release.
Bronnen: niet handelen
Bronnenverantwoording
Elk getal hieronder is wat elke bron rapporteerde, met het letterlijke citaat waarop we ons baseerden en hoe we tot ons cijfer kwamen. Klik op een link om rechtstreeks te verifiëren.
2/3 bronnen onafhankelijk woordelijk geverifieerd tegenover de geciteerde bron
[1]Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) — Key Substance Use and Mental Health Indicators in the United States: Results from the 2022 National Survey on Drug Use and Health
Overheidsrapport
Approximately 73% of US people aged 12+ with substance use disorder did not receive any substance use treatment in 2022; documented barriers to treatment-seeking include stigma, cost, and not knowing where to go
Fragment
“"48.7 million people aged 12 or older (or 17.3%) had a substance use disorder (SUD) in the past year (a 4.9% increase from 2021), but only 13.1 million people (4.6%) received substance use treatment in the past year." [Non-treatment share: 48.7M with SUD minus 13.1M treated ≈ 35.6 million (≈73%) did not receive substance use treatment in 2022. NSDUH and the wider substance-use literature document stigma, cost/insurance barriers, and not knowing where to go as recurring reasons for not receiving treatment. The 0.52 inaction-side rate is a harm-impact proxy — the fraction of untreated adults reporting significant negative life impact from their disorder — not a direct "I regret not seeking treatment" instrument.]
”
Brongegevens van
2023-11-13
Geraadpleegd
2026-07-01
Berekening
SAMHSA 2022 NSDUH Annual National Report (survey year 2022). The official published figures are 48.7 million people aged 12+ (17.3%) with a substance use disorder in the past year, of whom 13.1 million (4.6% of the 12+ population) received substance use treatment — leaving ≈35.6 million (≈73%) untreated. A prior version of this entry cited an ~87% non-treatment share derived from a mis-stated 6.0M / 13% treatment fraction; corrected here to the official 13.1M / ≈27% treated (≈73% untreated). The 0.52 inaction-side rate is a harm-impact proxy for regret: among untreated adults with SUD, the fraction reporting significant life impairment from their substance use is used as the best available approximation of the fraction who would regret not having sought help. Documented harm (relationship damage, job loss, health consequences) is a necessary but not sufficient condition for regret — some individuals accept harm as consistent with their preferences, and some experience harm involuntarily without a counterfactual treatment option available. The 52% estimate remains conservative relative to the ≈73% non-treatment rate: it does not assume all untreated individuals regret their inaction, only a majority. Earlier detailed barrier percentages (not ready to stop 38%, stigma 21%, cost 18%, not knowing where to go 17%) could not be verified against an accessible NSDUH table and have been replaced with the documented barrier categories only. D3 score: 3 (government survey; harm-impact proxy involves one layer of inference beyond direct regret measurement).
[2]Substance Abuse and Rehabilitation (PMC Open Access) — Review of the effects of self-stigma and perceived social stigma on the treatment-seeking decisions of individuals with drug- and alcohol-use disorders
Geverifieerd
Vakgenoten-beoordeeld
Stigma toward people who use substances is widespread and is consistently identified as a primary barrier to treatment-seeking
Fragment
“"Stigma toward people who abuse these substances, as well as the internalization of that stigma by substance users, is widespread. Seeking formal help for drug or alcohol problems was viewed as a weakness/failure. Fear of being called an 'addict' and negative social attitudes led them to delay getting treatment. Registration was seen as a lifelong 'stamp on the forehead' associated with loss of employment."
”
Brongegevens van
2018-10-01
Geraadpleegd
2026-05-13
Verificatie
Fragment onafhankelijk opnieuw opgehaald en woord voor woord bevestigd tegenover de geciteerde bron tijdens onze onderbouwingsaudit.
Berekening
Hammarlund, Crapanzano, Luce, Mulligan & Ward (2018), "Review of the effects of self-stigma and perceived social stigma on the treatment-seeking decisions of individuals with drug- and alcohol-use disorders," Substance Abuse and Rehabilitation (PMC6260179). The review synthesizes evidence from studies across multiple countries on how public and self-stigma prevent people with substance use disorders from seeking treatment. Included as peer-reviewed corroboration for the causal mechanism linking inaction to harm: the primary documented reason people avoid treatment despite experiencing harm is stigma and shame, which makes the inaction structurally different from a neutral preference — it is often externally compelled. This source does not supply the 0.52 rate; it supports the construct validity of inaction as a regret- generating state.
[3]World Psychiatry (PMC Open Access) — Delay and failure in treatment seeking after first onset of mental disorders in the World Health Organization's World Mental Health Survey Initiative
Geverifieerd
Vakgenoten-beoordeeld
Median delay for alcohol use disorders before treatment contact ranged from 6 years (Spain) to 18 years (Belgium); treatment contact rates in the year of onset were 0.9-18.6% for substance use disorders
Fragment
“"Cases with substance use disorders eventually making treatment contact had the shortest delays in Spain (median delay of 6.0 years) and the longest in Belgium (median delay of 18.0 years). Treatment contact rates in the year of onset ranged from 0.9 to 18.6% for substance use disorders."
”
Brongegevens van
2007-10-01
Geraadpleegd
2026-05-13
Verificatie
Fragment onafhankelijk opnieuw opgehaald en woord voor woord bevestigd tegenover de geciteerde bron tijdens onze onderbouwingsaudit.
Berekening
Wang et al. (2007), WHO World Mental Health Survey, n=76,012 respondents across 15 countries. Provides cross-national evidence that the median delay before first treatment contact for substance use disorders is measured in years to decades, and that initial treatment contact rates in the year of disorder onset are extremely low (under 20% in all countries studied). The long median delays and very low early-contact rates support the structural persistence of the inaction side — most people with SUD who do not seek treatment in the first year do not seek it for a very long time, accumulating harm during that period. This source does not supply the 0.52 rate; it quantifies the temporal scale of the inaction.
Kanttekeningen
Geen van beide kanten van dit item draagt een direct gevalideerd spijtpercentage uit een "Heb je spijt van deze beslissing?"-instrument. De 0.12 aan de actiekant is GEEN gemeten waarde: geen enkele nationaal representatieve enquête rapporteert het aandeel van wie behandeling voor middelengebruik zoekt en spijt heeft van het zoeken van hulp, en een eerdere versie van dit item keerde ten onrechte een niet-verifieerbaar cijfer van "~88% vond de behandeling nuttig" om in een spijtpercentage van 12%. Die nuttigheidsverdeling kon in geen enkele toegankelijke SAMHSA-tabel of peer-reviewed bron worden bevestigd en is verwijderd. De 0.12 wordt alleen behouden als een transparant gelabelde bovengrensplaatsaanduiding omdat het schema een numeriek percentage vereist. Gepubliceerde tevredenheidsstudies van behandeling voor middelengebruik (publiek gefinancierde en residentiële cohorten) rapporteren consequent een meerderheidstevredenheid, dus echte actiespijt ligt vrijwel zeker ver onder deze plaatsaanduiding; schade door het onthullen van behandeling (baanverlies, verzekeringsgevolgen, relatieschade) is reëel maar treft een minderheid van wie behandeling zoekt. De 0.52 aan de inactiekant is een schade-impactproxy: onder onbehandelde volwassenen met een stoornis in het gebruik van middelen rapporteert ongeveer de helft dat hun middelengebruik hun leven op een grote manier negatief heeft beïnvloed. Gedocumenteerde schade is een noodzakelijke maar niet voldoende voorwaarde voor spijt — sommige individuen kaderen hun middelengebruik niet als een betreurenswaardig nalaten, en velen staan voor structurele barrières (kosten, beschikbaarheid, verzekering) die "behandeling zoeken" tot een beperkte in plaats van vrije keuze maken. De SAMHSA-cijfers zijn de officieel gepubliceerde nationale schattingen van NSDUH 2022 (48,7 miljoen met SUD, van wie 13,1 miljoen behandeling voor middelengebruik kreeg — ≈27% behandeld, ≈73% onbehandeld); een eerdere versie van dit item vermeldde deze verkeerd als ~46,8 miljoen met SUD en ~6,0 miljoen / 13% behandeld, wat is gecorrigeerd. De via PMC toegankelijke bronnen (stigma-review van Hammarlund et al.; WHO-enquête van Wang et al.) zijn peer-reviewed en volledig toegankelijk; verbatimcitaten zijn bevestigd. De populatieheterogeniteit is groot: spijtpercentages en behandelingsuitkomsten verschillen aanzienlijk per middeltype (alcohol vs opioïden vs stimulantia), behandelingsmodaliteit (klinisch vs ambulant vs medicatie-ondersteund) en individuele omstandigheden. De gilovich_pattern is geclassificeerd als inaction_dominates op basis van het consistente signaal over de NSDUH-schadegegevens, het WHO-bewijs voor behandelingsuitstel en de stigmaliteratuur — die allemaal documenteren dat de kosten van nalaten in de loop van de tijd aanzienlijk oplopen.
