When I was invited a few years back to speak about addiction—and how it contributed to the loss of my law license and my eventual incarceration—my first response was immediate and certain:
I was not addicted.
In my mind, addiction meant substances: alcohol, prescription medication, and illicit drugs. If none of those were present, addiction could not possibly apply to me.
That assumption was wrong.
What I now understand, through personal reckoning and years of working with legal professionals, is that addiction takes two primary forms: addiction to substances and addiction to behaviors. While substance use disorders are widely recognized, diagnosed, and discussed, behavioral addictions are far more difficult to detect—and far easier to justify, especially in high-performing professions like law.
What Is Addiction—Clinically and Practically?
Addiction is not defined solely by what is consumed, but by how a behavior or substance is used to regulate internal states such as stress, fear, insecurity, or emotional discomfort.
Clinically, addiction is generally understood to involve:
Compulsive engagement despite negative consequences
Impaired control over the behavior or substance
Craving or psychological dependence
Continued use to relieve distress or achieve emotional relief
Diminished awareness of long-term consequences
Importantly, the American Medical Association (AMA) and the American Society of Addiction Medicine (ASAM)recognize substance use disorder as a chronic brain disease involving reward, motivation, memory, and self-regulation systems (ASAM, 2011).
Behavioral addictions, however, occupy a far more ambiguous space.
The Gap: Behavioral Addictions and the Law
At present, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5-TR) recognizes only Gambling Disorder as a diagnosable behavioral addiction (American Psychiatric Association, 2022). Other compulsive behaviors—such as work addiction, compulsive achievement, or addiction to success—are not formally classified, despite extensive research linking them to similar neurological reward pathways involving dopamine.
This distinction matters.
Behavioral addictions are:
Socially rewarded rather than stigmatized
Often framed as “drive,” “ambition,” or “dedication”
Easily rationalized through professional pressure
Much harder to identify than substance abuse
Unlike substance addiction, there is no clear external marker—no smell of alcohol, no failed drug test, no obvious impairment. Instead, behavioral addiction hides behind productivity, accolades, and perceived success.
Compulsive Striving in the Legal Profession
My addiction was not to substances. It was to success itself.
I was addicted to:
Money
Recognition
Titles and accolades
External validation
A carefully constructed image of success
And, yes, even the drama that comes with always needing more
In hindsight, this pattern fits what researchers describe as compulsive striving—a behavioral loop where achievement becomes the primary means of emotional regulation.
This addiction did not manifest suddenly. It unfolded quietly, over time, through incremental decisions that were logically justified.
This is where addiction becomes especially dangerous for attorneys.
Lawyers are trained to rationalize, defend, and justify. When decision-making is driven by an unrecognized addiction—whether to success, image, or control—ethical erosion rarely feels reckless. It feels necessary.
“I’ll fix it later.”
“This is how the system works.”
“I don’t have a choice right now.”
Addiction thrives in justification. And justification dulls ethical awareness.
Wanting More Is Not the Problem
It is essential to distinguish ambition from addiction.
Wanting more is deeply human. Human progress exists because we sought more—food, safety, innovation, adaptation. Ambition is not a flaw; it is often what draws people to the legal profession.
The problem arises when desire is paired with an unregulated nervous system.
Chronic stress, sleep deprivation, and constant urgency push the brain into survival mode. Under these conditions:
Judgment narrows
Risk assessment weakens
Dopamine-driven rewards (wins, money, praise, status) become emotional regulation tools
Long-term consequences lose salience
Neuroscience research shows that under sustained stress, the prefrontal cortex—responsible for ethical reasoning and impulse control—functions less effectively, while reward-seeking behaviors increase (Arnsten, 2009).
At that point, ambition becomes compulsive rather than conscious.
Why Lawyers Are Particularly Vulnerable
The legal profession normalizes:
Chronic exhaustion
High-stakes pressure
Perfectionism and fear of mistakes
Silence around vulnerability
Identity fused with performance
Within this environment, behavioral addiction can masquerade as professionalism. Compulsive striving can look like commitment. Ethical compromises rarely appear dramatic; they appear incremental.
This is how blind spots form—not from lack of character, but from lack of regulation and awareness.
Regulation Is the Missing Skill
The solution is not to eliminate ambition, drive, or the desire for success. It is to develop nervous system and emotional regulation—skills rarely taught in legal education.
When regulation is present:
Wanting more becomes intentional, not compulsive
Success becomes sustainable rather than consuming
Ethical decision-making improves under pressure
Professional identity is no longer dependent on constant external validation
Unchecked drive can dismantle careers. Regulated drive can become a sustainable superpower.
A Question Worth Asking
The most important question is not “Do I want more?”
It is:
Why do I want more?
What am I using it to regulate—fear, insecurity, exhaustion, emptiness?
What decisions am I justifying in its name?
Wanting more from fear and lack leads to very different outcomes than wanting more from purpose and alignment.
Recognizing that difference early is not weakness.
It is ethical responsibility.
References
American Psychiatric Association. (2022). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (5th ed., text rev.; DSM-5-TR).
American Society of Addiction Medicine (ASAM). (2011). Definition of Addiction.
Arnsten, A. F. T. (2009). Stress signalling pathways that impair prefrontal cortex structure and function. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 10(6), 410–422.
Grant, J. E., Potenza, M. N., Weinstein, A., & Gorelick, D. A. (2010). Introduction to behavioral addictions. The American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse, 36(5), 233–241.
Sinha, R. (2008). Chronic stress, drug use, and vulnerability to addiction. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1141, 105–130.
