What Has Changed About Controlled Drinking?

Under the new MPU assessment criteria (4th edition, BK 4), the changes to controlled drinking have been less “revolutionary” than many rumours suggest. Nevertheless, their effect is noticeable. The requirements are now described more clearly and are therefore often stricter in practice.

What matters is no longer whether you are “somehow drinking less”. What matters is whether the change is stable, whether risk is properly managed and whether your lifestyle supports it. This is precisely where BK 4 comes in: less room for interpretation, more structure and more consequences when risk factors are present.

Key points at a glance

• Controlled drinking remains possible in principle if there is no alcohol dependence and the case concerns “misuse” rather than “addiction” (traditionally A1/A2).
• BK 4 classifies cases more readily as requiring abstinence when blood alcohol concentrations are high, offences recur or signs of addiction are apparent.
• A combination of a break from drinking followed by controlled drinking is more frequently expected to demonstrate stability.
• For testing, the formal hair EtG threshold remains 30 pg/mg, but professional opinion is moving towards stricter target values, such as “20 rather than 30” as a guide.
• Preparation carries greater weight: 3–6 months of structured psychological work, together with rules, records and relapse management, rather than a last-minute course.

Is controlled drinking still possible for an MPU under BK 4?

Yes, but only if you are not dependent and can demonstrate a stable, understandable change in behaviour with clear drinking rules, risk management and a suitable lifestyle.

What BK 4 has actually changed about controlled drinking

Many rumours suggest that “everyone now has to abstain”. That is not correct. Controlled drinking is still permitted when the prerequisites are met. However, BK 4 describes more clearly when controlled consumption remains professionally defensible. This gives assessors less discretion.

As a result, higher-risk cases are classified more quickly as requiring abstinence. This makes the requirements stricter in practice, even without an entirely new basic rule. The important point is that BK 4 shifts the focus towards plausibility and stability. It also makes it harder to “get through” on good laboratory results alone.

---

Direct contact: +49 171 4107688

Get your proof of abstinence here

By EMAIL: Kontakt@Abstinenznachweis.com

---

Rumour versus reality under BK 4

The basic principle: why controlled drinking remains possible

BK 4 retains the basic principle that not every alcohol-related case automatically requires abstinence. The decisive issue is whether alcohol dependence is present. If there is no dependence, controlled drinking can, in principle, be accepted as part of an MPU.

This applies particularly to cases that fall more within the area of “misuse”. In the professional classification, these are often the A1/A2 hypotheses. Nevertheless, simply drinking “less” is not enough. You must show that you have changed your behaviour permanently. You must also be able to explain how you will consistently avoid future risks.

The minimum reasoning assessors expect for controlled drinking

Stricter classification: why abstinence becomes more likely

BK 4 defines more precisely when controlled consumption is still plausible. This reduces the scope for interpretation, and many people affected notice the difference. Higher blood alcohol concentrations increase the assessed risk. Multiple offences further worsen the prognosis.

Signs of addiction, such as loss of control, regularly drinking because you “need it”, or drinking despite negative consequences, also weigh heavily against controlled drinking. In such circumstances, an abstinence programme is more frequently considered professionally necessary. This is not a “punishment”; it is a risk-based decision.

It means that the more concerning your history is, the more convincing your explanation must be of why controlled drinking should nevertheless work reliably.

Controlled drinking versus abstinence: typical tendencies

A drinking break followed by controlled drinking: why this combination is becoming more common

One noticeable trend is combining a break from alcohol with subsequent controlled drinking. This is new to many people, but understandable from a professional perspective. Firstly, a drinking break shows that you can give up alcohol completely. This is a strong indication against loss of control.

Secondly, it creates distance from old habits. Controlled drinking afterwards can then appear to be a conscious decision rather than “carrying on at a lower level”. The length of the break may vary. It is often a matter of several months, depending on the case. The aim remains the same: to demonstrate stability and reduce risk before controlled drinking is judged to be a viable approach.

What a drinking break is intended to demonstrate

Evidence and EtG: thresholds, target values and typical programme length

For controlled drinking, the formal hair EtG threshold remains 30 pg/mg. This is the familiar benchmark many people use. At the same time, practical expectations are becoming stricter indirectly, because a lower target value, such as 20 rather than 30, is increasingly considered “safer” professionally.

This is often not an official requirement, but it influences expectations. There is also the question of duration. Where the history is concerning, longer testing programmes may be required, for example 12 to 15 months. This particularly concerns cases involving several alcohol-related offences or elevated risk.

The important point is that test results are only one component. Without psychologically coherent progress, they rarely help on their own.

An overview of supporting evidence: the typical approach

Psychological preparation and documentation: what is now expected

BK 4 places greater emphasis on preparation not being left until the final weeks. Instead, psychological work should be structured and completed in good time. A frequently cited rule of thumb is 3 to 6 months of consistent work on your approach.

A “crash course”, by contrast, often appears superficial. Controlled drinking requires specific rules, not just good intentions. These include quantity limits, rules for particular situations and clear warning signs for stopping. Drinking records help because they make behaviour visible.

You also need to identify relapse risks honestly and manage them actively. What matters is that your daily life supports your new strategy and that you can explain this clearly during the interview.

Examples of clear controlled-drinking rules

A practical framework: when controlled drinking is realistic and when abstinence is wiser

Under BK 4, a clear-headed assessment is worthwhile. Controlled drinking is more realistic when the case does not suggest addiction. This means no dependence and no strong signs of addiction.

It helps if the offence can be explained without alcohol having been part of a daily pattern. You also need a set of rules you have already put into practice, along with examples showing how you respond at critical moments.

Abstinence is often wiser when there have been repeated incidents or very high blood alcohol concentrations. In these circumstances, a controlled-drinking plan can quickly appear to leave too little margin for safety and therefore to pose a risk to a favourable prognosis.

A quick check for deciding on your strategy

Conclusion

BK 4 does not make controlled drinking impossible, but it does make excuses impossible. Anyone choosing controlled drinking now needs to demonstrate clear, stable rules, real everyday experience and convincing risk management. A drinking break can also make a decisive difference by making self-control visible. If you are unsure, choose the more credible route rather than the “easier” one. Ultimately, that is what determines a favourable assessment.

Sources:

1. Controlled Drinking and the MPU 2026: Requirements and Prospects
2. New Edition of the Assessment Criteria (4th Edition, 2022)
3. MPU 2025 – Fourth Edition of the Assessment Criteria

---

FAQ

What has the fourth edition changed about controlled drinking?

The new assessment criteria require considerably longer and more detailed documentation of drinking behaviour over at least six to twelve months. The distinction between misuse, where controlled drinking is possible, and dependence, where abstinence is required, is also assessed more strictly.

Is a drinking diary now compulsory for the MPU?

Although it is not formally required “by law”, a complete drinking diary is almost always required in practice as essential evidence of behavioural change. Without this written documentation, it is extremely difficult to convince the assessor that controlled drinking is stable.

How many drinks are allowed with controlled drinking?

A limit of no more than one to two standard drinks per occasion and no more than two occasions per month is generally recommended. The important point is that drinking occasions must be planned in advance and must never be spontaneous.

Can everyone pass their MPU with controlled drinking?

No. People with diagnosed alcohol dependence must provide proof of abstinence. Controlled drinking is intended only for people whose alcohol misuse does not involve physical dependence.

How long must you be able to demonstrate controlled drinking?

The current criteria usually require a period of at least six months, although a year of stable behavioural change is expected in many complex cases. This period must already have been completed in full by the time of the MPU assessment.

What is the difference between controlled and moderate drinking?

Controlled drinking is a structured self-management programme with fixed goals, advance planning and documentation. Moderate drinking, on the other hand, simply describes low consumption without the strict planning and control characteristic of controlled drinking.

Do I still need liver test results with controlled drinking?

Yes. The assessor may request additional laboratory findings, such as liver tests or urine/hair EtG results, to support your statements about consumption. They provide objective confirmation that consumption is no longer high.

Why do assessors often reject controlled drinking?

This is often due to inadequate preparation or an inaccurate self-assessment of the severity of the alcohol problem. If the assessor identifies an advanced problem, controlled drinking is judged not to be a sufficiently reliable strategy.

Can you occasionally “overdo it” with controlled drinking?

No. With controlled drinking, any loss of control indicates that the strategy has failed. Credibility in the MPU depends on having observed your self-imposed limits in every documented instance.

What is the best way to start controlled drinking?

Taking part in a professional programme or coaching is recommended to learn the necessary self-control techniques. At the same time, you should start keeping a structured drinking diary immediately.