alcoholic anonymous's message

[robtex]

I read the AA manual last year after a friend of mine told me she had been in AA for 4 years. She loaned me the book so I could understand what she was going through. I found something really curious about it. A dicotomy in theory. The book puts a very heavy emphasis on taking responsiblity for your problem and taking measures to fix it, specfically

step 1--admit you have problem
step 4 make a moral innventory of ourselves
step 8 make a list of all those harmed and be willing to make amends to them
step 9 make amends to such people except when it creates further hurt
step 10 continue to make a personal innventory when wrong and admit it

and than go 180 degrees in the opposite direction by shifiting the responsibly for ones drinking problem to God specfically,

step 2 come to believe a power greater than ourselves (ie God) can restore us to sanity
step 3 make a decision to will lives to God
step 6 we are entirely ready to have God remove all defects in character
step 7 humbly aks him (God) to remove short comings
step 11 pray and mediate with God as we understand him blah blah blah blah blah

I figure heavy drinkers are already kinda confused and giving them mixed messages can't be all that helpful but since I am not in the inner circle I may be missing the point. I am asking if yall see the dicotomy too and if so is it conflictual in recovery or instead complimentary to one another? Anybody know anyone who has done the AA thing? did they succeed or fail? By how much?

My gf brought up another point that was interesting. She said how could one take responsiblity for their actions while being anonymous as opposed to open with society?


Two footnotes, Being in social work I can tell you that only a percentage ( % unknown due to anonymous aspect) of AA goers are not volunteers. The courts mandate that DWI and others convicted of alcholic related crimes attend AA while on community supervision (probation).

Second footnote, of the three people whom I know are in the program all have slipped before but two only once and the repeat slipper transferred her addition to nicotine (cigs) and smokes them about one a week when really stressed. All three are Christians. One of those two preaches Christian morals to others One practices it in her home but does not propogate it outside the home. The last one is a Christian but keeps his beliefs to himself and does not even display a cross in his apartment.

footnotes for links used to paraphrase and qoute steps listed below.

http://groups.msn.com/SupportforYOURRecovery/aa12steps.msnw
http://www.the12steps.com/

 

[Blaphbee]

It seems as though it merely transfers the addiction from one debillitating disease to another, less obvious one, dressed in sheep's clothing.

It does so in a manner which allows the individual afflicted by the disease to seek absolution of the problem from exterior sources, rather than focus on positive self-growth and disciplinary measures.

In short, it's bullshit. It's no wonder your friends are all christians. These twelve steps absolutely reek of christian morality.

 

[river-wind]

I've alsways had a problem w/ AA for that very reason. It is quite possible to handle addition on one's own merits; IMO, by deferring to God's will in an attempt to eliminate your alcohol addition, you are mearing replacing one addiction with another, as blaphbee mentioned.

I would certainly say that a religious addition is better than a alcohol addiction when the religion requires absolute effort and help to your fellow man - your addiction is then helpful to others.
However, most of the western One God religions also have a "everyone else is going to hell" clause, which tends to lead to fear and hatred of people of other religions. Thus, a addiction to a religion which actively converts others as part of their perscribed "help", is not always worth the help it provides.

 

[robtex]

Have either of you two read the AA handbook (it is universal apparently) and if so what did you think of it?

I really really liked the first chapter. I read this book over a year ago so forgive me for not know some details but the first chapter talked about how the group was founded. It was founded by these two men, both alcoholics who decided that they were not alone and needed a support group. Both were white collar professionals and using the spirtual strength of one another overcame their chemical addiction.

Than the rest of the book goes through steps 1-12 and has a true story about how each step came about. After the 12 steps are the 12 traditions. Most of the steps are implied (but never said) to come about as an act of divine inspiration. Ie "if this had not happened this step may not be here today."

As a sidenote in the AA handbook an athiest did join after asking repeatly to enter noting one of the 12 traditions which says that aa will never turn away another alcoholic.

The sense of community was very moving for me but I am reading a book whose organization is invisible to me so I wondered how effective it was. The glaring obstacle being the one we have discussed---the feigned helpness--turn to god to drink forever thoughts that recurr in the book regularly. The first founder's didn't do that.

Do you two really feel religion is an addiciton similar to the chemcal additions of the members and if so how is that?

 

[river-wind]

I don't think that religion *is* an addiction similar to chemical addictions, however, I think it can easily become an addiction along that vien. Esp. if the person in question has an addictive personality, and habitualy turns hobbies into obsesive addictions.

An addiction is a problem when it begins to interfere with your personal, social, and professional lives; I know many religious individuals who would fall into that catagory.

 

[Blaphbee]

In the case of monotheistic religions like Judeo-Christianity (as not all religions can be generalized so slanderously), it's more of an ideological addiction; you forever walk through life hazed, dangling a syringe filled with the words of Jesus from your temple. It prevents any sober action, contemplation, or determined resolve from manifesting itself, since the drug tells you that all earthly effort is either:

a) a sin, or
b) cosmically irrelevant, since your "real" life begins in the Kingdom of Heaven.

Thus, any time spent here on Earth is merely marking time in preparation for something that is promised in highly saccharine, intoxicating terminology, yet never truly glimpsed in reality. Don't make an effort to question, don't bother with attempts to self-actualize one's own potential, don't dare to accept death as a natural occurence. It's better over here.

To step back to one of river-wind's points, I would have to disagree that a religious addiction is somehow better than any other - no addiction is healthy, either for the individual, nor for the community he resides in. In the case of J-C, it possesses alien values to any healthy culture not of the Middle East. This is why in some regions it is taboo to solve personal problems with a machete, yet in others it is not. Different values for different people. If the foundational values of the religion are corrupt, then the person or people upholding them are even worse off than a society of heroin junkies - they believe that what they are doing is sanctioned by a higher power, in "reality", thus it is a good thing.

 

[milkweed]

I am asking if yall see the dicotomy too and if so is it conflictual in recovery or instead complimentary to one another? Anybody know anyone who has done the AA thing? did they succeed or fail? By how much?

Of the people I know who have participated in AA, most have failed in their sobriety attempts at least once, or even multiple times. One had maintained sobriety for 14 years then leapt off the wagon. Another went 17 years, fell off, quit again, fell off 4 years later and has been sober since. But one has to keep in mind what is considered “falling off the wagon” by AA standards is any drink taken, whether its one beer at home while having friends over to watch “the game” (hardly a problem) or any other, to the extreme of waking up in detox after achieving a .6 bac.

The biggest part of success in AA is wanting to stop at all costs. Then following that commitment is finding the group that fits your needs best, according to those I have been in contact with. Each group has its own dynamics, and each person attending has their own needs/strengths. AA groups have the 12 steps in common. From that point on the group “personality” runs the gamut of possibilities. That seems to be the biggest part of the success/failure ratio (according to AA ideas of success). However, finding the “right group” is sometimes easier said than done.

I read parts of one study (early 90s I think) that indicated 80% of persons drink within 5 years of completing treatment. Is that a failure? Not if that is all they have done and not brought back any additional burdens of alcohol abuse (DWI, job loss, etc), in my opinion.

The courts mandate that DWI and others convicted of alcholic related crimes attend AA while on community supervision (probation).

Some in AA do not like the court mandated part of their numbers. All too often the person attending the group is there only for that reason. Wanting to be there brings a willingness to try harder to remain sober, rather than just “do my time and I am out of here”. Does this skew the statistics of success/failure? Of course. I would imagine that in 1970, the ongoing sobriety rate of AA was much “higher” than in say, 1990 simply from the courts forcing people to attend, rather than the private choice to attend that was the norm for many years of AA.

I myself have some issue with the ideals promoted in AA/CD treatment. Its base ideas are about “you are powerless” and “an inanimate object controls you so request the higher power that appeals to you most to overcome the desires of alcohol”. I also question their methods of determining dependency/addiction.

 

[robtex]

An addiction is a problem when it begins to interfere with your personal, social, and professional lives; I know many religious individuals who would fall into that catagory.

All right riverwind clarify a little. I may have an addiction according to your definition. I study martial arts. From the time I was in college till now I have blocked off about 15-35 hrs depending on the year for study and it has definetly interferred with my personal social and professional life.

I do not force it on others (which is the big diffence that is being said between me and religion of AA), but I do not think I could seperate it from myself at this point in my life. It is part of my soul.

Knowing that do I have an addiction and is my addiction as bad as the that Christians have?

Also, not neccessarly to Riverwind but anyone, what is the difference between an addition and a way of life is you fit religion in as an addiction?

Milk you really know your stuff about AA. Why is that? Does AA have a lot of influence in your area. Great point about measuring success in increments instead of all or none.

I noticed a lot of athiest opinions on here (me unitarian) and I have to ask is your problem with AA their gnostic viewpoints, their inclusion of their viewpoints in treatment, the helpless factor pointed out in the orignial post or a combo/all three of the above?

 

[river-wind]

But if you were to find something else that you liked better would you be able to stop martial arts, and do that other thing? I guess my little definition was pretty simplified; anything that you do could be considered as an interference with something else; there are only so many hours in the day. My job interferes with my sleep schedule, but I wouldn't consider my job to be an addiction. If I could afford to quit, I certainly would.
I'm closer to being addicted to ownership. Money, and therefore a job, follows.

I wouldn't consider your MA practice an addiction until you wanted to do other things, but were regularly at MA events - wishing you weren't there, unable to make yourself leave.
Proper definition of an addiction:
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=addiction
Proper definition of the abuse of a drug (vs use):
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=drug abuse

just substitute anything into those definitions in place of "drug", and the definition pplies. Some things I'm openly addicted to, but I don't abuse: food, sleep, air, women.

In the case of religion, there can be someone who lives a religious life; that's religion use. There can be an addiction there, but it isn't necessarily detrimental. However, there can be a person who uses religion to escape from reality, who doesn't make their own choices or take responsibility in life for their actions. They are addicted to religion, and are abusing it.


also, what style of MA do you practice?

 

[robtex]

river wasnt' arguing..but i figured i could throw my hobby out as a hypothical because it fit the parameters prescribed in your earlier post. Got an even more comprehensive def out of the hypothical so happy ending.

Maybe people can be addicted to a service instead of a physical product. I know so little about psychology and biology that i am so totally unqualified to have an opinon on this one so excuse me for not offering an uneducated opinion.

Applying it to AA though. If, and it seems that they are, opinons are congruent that religion does not enhance the empowerment steps of the AA program but instead detracts from them if they were taken out---ie seperation of aa and gnostism completely would the program be stronger (shorter duration or stronger results) or would it be weaker because sprituality--religious spirtualty which is so central to the lives of many AA people and such a large section of the world and an inseperable aspect of their personal lives be removed making the sobriety even more difficult than with the aid of religion?

Is there any programs with a better success rate, or even moderate success rate, that are completely devoid or religious spirtuality? Actually ya know, i was wondering is their a tax shelter or tax breaks for rehabs that use religion in their program?

To answer your question about ma riverwind, i started martial arts in 1985 and have been more on than off. I studied tae kwon do for 5 years aikido for 4 years wing chun for about one year and jujutsu for about 12 years. Japanese jujutsu. I use to post all the time on a forum called abudokan.com but it does not exist anymore.

 

[milkweed]

Milk you really know your stuff about AA. Why is that? Does AA have a lot of influence in your area. Great point about measuring success in increments instead of all or none.

In short, yes AA has been an influence in my area for many years.

Is there any programs with a better success rate, or even moderate success rate, that are completely devoid or religious spirtuality? Actually ya know, i was wondering is their a tax shelter or tax breaks for rehabs that use religion in their program?

Actually, it seems so if your not too picky on total abstention. http://www.habitsmart.com/cntrldnk.html

Another brief commentary: http://www.peele.net/lib/latimes031490.html

Some repetition here: http://www.astrocyte-design.com/pseudoscience/alcoholism.html

I am pretty sure all certified Alcohol/Drug treatment facilities can qualify for non-profit status, but not all choose to due to various rules/regulations in that arena. They fall under medical facility if I remember right. I am unsure who does the certification process or what it involves. This should be fairly easy to google for an answer.

 

[robtex]

Based on the direction of this thread could AA work if it adopted another religion as its anchor...for instance

1) ismalmic
2) hindu
3) pagen

or if it went to a secular stance and exlcuded religion from its agenda?

 

[Mystech]

Based on the direction of this thread could AA work if it adopted another religion as its anchor...for instance

1) ismalmic
2) hindu
3) pagen

or if it went to a secular stance and exlcuded religion from its agenda?

Sorry Robtex, I'm pretty sure that only the Christian God has power over Alcohol.

 

[milkweed]

Based on the direction of this thread could AA work if it adopted another religion as its anchor...for instance

1) ismalmic
2) hindu
3) pagen

or if it went to a secular stance and exlcuded religion from its agenda?

As I understand AA, it doesnt matter what "higher power" you claim, just a higher power is needed. There is no prohibition I am aware of, for an islamic AA group, or hindu or any other "higher power" based AA group. But I think (but not sure) there is a prohibition from excluding other alcoholics from those groups because they are not islamic, hindu, etc. Its about having a group with the same goal, sobriety. Lots of alcoholics attend many different groups before finding one they feel fits them. That seems to be the real key. That and really wanting to be sober yourself, for whatever reason.

I dont think you could technically call it aa if you exclude the "higher power" aspect. And that is an important feature. Why? Because so many begin their journey to sobriety via court order. You would need the courts permission/acceptance. And there might be hassles with licensing, etc (if going into the treatment aspect). Not unobtainable, but a hassle.

<BR>&nbsp;

 

[robtex]

milkweed your posts are cool. you seem to know your aa stuff. i read the book because a christian friend was in the program. she had a cocaine problem too and i thought it be supportive to read their basic handbook and thought it was kinda flakey but i couldn't really tell my christian friend my thoughts...she is a fundamentalist and would have flipped. she assumes i am a christian because i am nice.

i am kinda lost on one point though...you say you can't technically call it aa if you exclude the higher power aspect. because many start with a court order on their aa journey. that went right over my head...why would a secular court care one way or the other about a higher power?

 

[Gravity]

Something you DON'T hear from AA and NA is their success rate . . . which is low. And a rate which is beaten by non-religious based systems.

Even if you water it down to some new-age "the universe is my higher power" -- its still passing the buck. The one answer they *won't* accept is **I** am my higher power. Sooooo - they refuse to believe that any human has enough self-control to actually change their habits/beat an addiction themselves. They must rely on some ''outside force''.

And furthermore, you never really win - you can never be a ''former" alcoholic/drug addict you spend your life in ''recovery''. And this type of negative thinking feeds on itself and helps create their high failure rate.

You are expected to replace one habit with another -- that is lifelong attendance to their meetings.

And, though certainly AA and NA have helped many people, and saved some lives - they are like a Taliban in their beliefs in that they accept the existence of *no other possible solution* to addiction problems then theirs. And as much as they refuse to believe it . . . many people truly have kicked their destructive habits simply relying on their own wisdom, research and self-control. Of course an AA/NA drone will claim such a person never really was addicted or simply is in ''denial''.

 

[milkweed]

i am kinda lost on one point though...you say you can't technically call it aa if you exclude the higher power aspect. because many start with a court order on their aa journey. that went right over my head...why would a secular court care one way or the other about a higher power?

AA is copyrighted. To call yourself an aa group, you have to at least marginally adhere to the 12 steps (if I remember right). Additionally, the court may not recognise it as "qualified" as a part of a court order. Many are specific, stating you will attend an a.a group (of your choice) once a week/month etc. People have argued with the courts and won (and lost) on that point. A parole/probation violation may not be worth the risk if its an unknown.
<br>&nbsp;

 

[milkweed]

Something you DON'T hear from AA and NA is their success rate . . . which is low. And a rate which is beaten by non-religious based systems.

True. I think around 5% maintain 5 years of sobriety. 50% drink within a year. Maybe higher. I havent seen the stats for a long time. I do know insurance is paying for less and less due to the high failure rate for long term sobriety.

And furthermore, you never really win - you can never be a ''former" alcoholic/drug addict you spend your life in ''recovery''.

Yes, that is their position on addiction.

And, though certainly AA and NA have helped many people, and saved some lives - they are like a Taliban in their beliefs in that they accept the existence of *no other possible solution* to addiction problems then theirs.

Taliban maybe a bit harsh. I think the courts getting involved pushed that on the rest of us. Power corrupts and all. Once they (treatment) received that court endorsed/medical stamp of approval (its a disease!!) they went on the power trip (we have all the answers).

And as much as they refuse to believe it . . . many people truly have kicked their destructive habits simply relying on their own wisdom, research and self-control. Of course an AA/NA drone will claim such a person never really was addicted or simply is in ''denial''.

Yes. It appears lots of misdiagnosis occuring. And lets not forget how many of them just grow out of that part of their life, naturally.

Lots of money/time/room being wasted treating non-addicts eh? But then, most of these people providing the "diagnosis" are not medical persons (for the most part). Its become quite the industry. Treatment, degrees in colleges, aftercare, courts, cops, books, retreats, etc.


<br>&nbsp;

 

[Dick B.]

Reply: The difficulty with characterizations of A.A. is that the commentator is usually unfamiliar with A.A. history. And that is not surprising. Early A.A. as it was developed in Akron came primarily from the ideas of United Christian Endeavor as transmitted by Dr. Bob from his participation therein as a youngster. In the formative years from 1935 to 1938, A.A. was a Christian Fellowship. Its principles and practices were much like those of Christian Endeavor. Thus: Confession of Christ, conversion meetings, Bible study meetings, prayer meetings, Quiet Hour, reading of religious literature, love and service. CE did not work with drunks. That was the unique feature in Akron which added injunctions such as abstinence, hospitalization, resisting temptation. But reliance on the Creator and coming to Him through His son Jesus Christ set the stage for the recovery ingredients. Alcoholics were cured and said so. On the other hand, when Bill Wilson was commissioned to write a book about the successful program, he changed course. The original program had a 75% success rate. Wilson had accomplished little with his New York people. Nonetheless, Wilson proceeded to form a corporation, write a basic text whose primary language was taken from the teachings of Rev. Sam Shoemaker, American spokesman for the Oxford Group. Wilson added ideas from James, Jung, Silkworth, Peabody, New Thought, and New Age. And this led to the introduction of new gods, new "spirituality," and continued sickness: "Once an alcoholic, always an alcoholic." Not so in early A.A. Therefore if one does not start with this history under his or her belt, he waxes eloquent about an A.A. program far different from that in Akron or even in the original Big Book and Twelve Steps. Studying is the answer. See my 15 years of research and many published titles on the subject of early A.A. history (http://www.dickb.com/index.shtml). God Bless, Dick B., Writer, Historian, Bible student, Retired attorney, Recovered and cured AA

I read the AA manual last year after a friend of mine told me she had been in AA for 4 years. She loaned me the book so I could understand what she was going through. I found something really curious about it. A dicotomy in theory. The book puts a very heavy emphasis on taking responsiblity for your problem and taking measures to fix it, specfically

step 1--admit you have problem
step 4 make a moral innventory of ourselves
step 8 make a list of all those harmed and be willing to make amends to them
step 9 make amends to such people except when it creates further hurt
step 10 continue to make a personal innventory when wrong and admit it

and than go 180 degrees in the opposite direction by shifiting the responsibly for ones drinking problem to God specfically,

step 2 come to believe a power greater than ourselves (ie God) can restore us to sanity
step 3 make a decision to will lives to God
step 6 we are entirely ready to have God remove all defects in character
step 7 humbly aks him (God) to remove short comings
step 11 pray and mediate with God as we understand him blah blah blah blah blah

I figure heavy drinkers are already kinda confused and giving them mixed messages can't be all that helpful but since I am not in the inner circle I may be missing the point. I am asking if yall see the dicotomy too and if so is it conflictual in recovery or instead complimentary to one another? Anybody know anyone who has done the AA thing? did they succeed or fail? By how much?

My gf brought up another point that was interesting. She said how could one take responsiblity for their actions while being anonymous as opposed to open with society?


Two footnotes, Being in social work I can tell you that only a percentage ( % unknown due to anonymous aspect) of AA goers are not volunteers. The courts mandate that DWI and others convicted of alcholic related crimes attend AA while on community supervision (probation).

Second footnote, of the three people whom I know are in the program all have slipped before but two only once and the repeat slipper transferred her addition to nicotine (cigs) and smokes them about one a week when really stressed. All three are Christians. One of those two preaches Christian morals to others One practices it in her home but does not propogate it outside the home. The last one is a Christian but keeps his beliefs to himself and does not even display a cross in his apartment.

footnotes for links used to paraphrase and qoute steps listed below.

http://groups.msn.com/SupportforYOURRecovery/aa12steps.msnw
http://www.the12steps.com/