My take on enabling, in this context, is as has been said, doing for them what they should be doing for themselves, not holding them accountable for their behavior, bailing them out and picking them up when they screw up so they don't face the natural consequences of their actions. I am guilty of all of the above for all of my son's childhood and most of his adulthood. Yes, these kids have disabilities, maybe not officially, that make it difficult if not impossible for them to thrive and become independent adults. But when I was a baby, the youngest of three with a big gap between me and my older sister, I started walking later than some babies because there was always a "big kid" or adult to carry me around and so I didn't have to worry about, literally, standing on my own two feet. And when my sister was a baby, she would point and grunt at something she wanted and my mother gave it to her until her doctor said she would never learn to use words at that rate. So although we don't "allow" the addiction we facilitate it by allowing the behavior that does not force the addict to get clean or face the consequences of the addiction, just as my mother facilitated me not having to walk any time soon or my sister to not have to use language to express her needs and wants.
I can't speak for anyone else, but I would never be disdainful or judgmental about enabling behaviors, especially with our kids, grown or otherwise. It's human nature for parents to want to protect their kids from harm and difficult to let them go out on their own, knowing they will end up falling off the bike and scraping their knee until they master their riding skills. (I was never pushed to learn to ride and after two falls I gave up and that was the end of that. To this day I can't ride a bike, where if my parents had make me keep at it, I probably would have eventually)
