[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by The Ryan *
**
Sorry, I had to quote the entire thing in order to make this very small comment.
Doctor, listen, deep down, I don’t get alcoholism either. But I don’t think that’s the point. We don’t really have to understand it. Science has proven that alcoholism is really a disorder. You can’t debate that point. Not that I’m saying you are, but I get the impression that that’s where your argument is headed.
I started to write more here, but I thought against it, because I’m actually not sure where this is headed. Are you arguing against…what…alcoholism? Or is it addiction in general? Or is the problem you have just with the practices of a nonprofit organization, an organization which sponsors meetings that I’m guessing you aren’t attending?
sorry Sophie… this whole thread has meandered quite a bit, I guess. Originally it was about whether people can be forced to attend AA.
But as for my last post, maybe I wasn’t clear… if you want to know what it is I’m against, it’s AA.
Because AA tells you that you are not responsible for your drinking, and that you can’t quit on your own. And that you’ll never get better (how terribly depressing).
My point really is: if it’s not you who is the catalyst for quitting, then who is it?
Doctor Goo Fee, I’m curious why the idea that some people need the help of AA to stop drinking upsets you so. I don’t think anyone in this thread has for a moment suggested that the person who stops drinking through AA does not stop drinking by stopping drinking. You seem to be suggesting that AA keeps people sober by physically preventing them from drinking. Lots of people come to AA meetings and continue drinking. Those people are welcomed back just the same as they would had they stopped. And anyone who blames their drinking on anything other than their alcoholism is just making excuses.
Every single one of the AA steps is an action that the alcoholic, by him- or herself, has to take. No one forces them to take any action at all. But the reliance on a higher power is absolutely not an alternative to action, it is an aid to action. Those of us who follow the AA program ask our higher power to assist us in taking the actions we need to take, not to get us out of having to do what has to be done.
I myself needed AA to stop drinking, but I firmly believe that others may either not need AA or may benefit more from a different recovery program. I also firmly believe that AA is the absolute best solution for my problem. So do millions of other people; AA has been around for 66 years because it works for more people than any other treatment.
LOL, you go grrl… 
Some people are not alcoholic, and some are, some are heavy drinkers and some are not. Some people get sober in Church, some in AA, some in jail, some at work, some at home, some sitting on a stump. Some people quit drinking in all these ways who are not even alcoholic. Whoa!!! Dude !!!
Some real alcoholics try all these ways and can not get/stay sober. Some die.
What I don’t understand is why people get so upset about something no one is asking them to do. If I have someone I want to get sober {like I can make them} but I digress, someone I want to see sober {better statement yes?} and AA does not work, jail does not work, will power does not work, sitting on a stump does not work, why I might try to get in their face and tell them what “I” did about “MY” problem.
If people want to say AA is a religion and stop the courts from sending people, why not et them. No deal, they are not alcoholics and they can take the responsibility for them {the drunks} from the courts and the AA meetings. Why not? They are just playing with peoples lives. What is wrong with that?
They are the same people who will pass any law to save just one life as long as it does not affect them. I just do not get why people get so hot about this. AA does not ask for the courts to do this, accepts no money from any agency, so it surely AA must be stamped out. Makes sense to me… ( bunch of fools living sober like that…) :: sheesh :::
Okay, I didn’t quite follow this part. Are you saying that people who oppose court-ordered AA attendance should have to personally take responsibility for sobering up alcoholics?
Golly-- I should know better… the things that I’ve posted are bound to be controversial, and yet since I’m at work I can’t offer the attention to this that it deserves.
So I’ll offer a couple comments on the latest posts, go back to work now, and take up the big issues another time.
-
Geobabe-- I am not upset that “some people need the help of AA to stop drinking” I just don’t believe that anyone NEEDS AA. (that doesn’t mean they don’t need to quit, however)
-
Catbiker-- do you define REAL alcoholics like AA does? That is-- you can only be a REAL alcoholic if you attend AA the rest of your life, or if you are dead.
I don’t share that view. I believe REAL alcoholics are better off just quitting for good and being DONE with it. Rather than fretting that they’ll never get well, and going through all the cig smoking, coffee drinking and inane-phrase repeating that AAers often do.
- If AA has ever saved even ONE persons life (which I’m sure it has) then it has done a good thing. Some people need, or feel they need mystisism in their lives. I just hope that these people can eventually realize that it is they and only they that can determine what substances enter their bodies (not a “higher power”)
Being realistic is a good thing.
Some of us do NEED AA. Not everyone does. I have seen enough people go back to drinking when they decided they didn’t need to go to meetings any more to believe that the disease I have is absolutely incurable. It is treatable, however, and the treatment that works for me, and for a lot of others, is AA. I look on AA meetings as the medicine I take to keep my disease in remission. It is ultimately up to me whether I drink again or not, but my chances of survival are a lot better with the program than without it.
It sounds to me like you are either misunderstanding what you are being told by AA members, or have encountered some with particularly misguided opinions. Have you read the Big Book? That is the AA program. Anything else you hear either in or out of a meeting is just one person’s opinion.
To hijack my own thread, here is an interesting letter from a former alchoholic written to Rational Recovery (from this page: http://rational.org/Horror.AA.html )partly to thank them, and partly to share the scary things he discovered attending AA. A little long, but I hope it enlightens some folks who, like most Americans, have simply never questioned the AA system.
Dear Rational Recovery,
I am not much of a writer, and I know you have heard this identical sentiment thousands of times, but thanks for saving my life. I had a drinking problem, and wont go into all the little things I could try to blame it on. Of course, once I started to get scared about how hard it seemed to be to stop, I started getting steered toward AA. It seemed to be the only game in town. I attended maybe 30 meetings, and each left me depressed and confused. I felt like I was being forced to join a cult. I got pressured to have a sponsor. I went to different meetings to see if they were different, and they are. Some are better than others, but I still just “wasn’t getting it.” I went to shrinks. One put me on Prozac. I took myself off after three months. Heck, adding substances to my system was my problem, not my solution. While messing around with AA, I would stop drinking, go through a couple miserable days, then start to feel better, and promptly fall off the wagon, or “relapse.” They told me relapse was expected, and even normal. That was not what I wanted.
I knew that I would never get past that first step. To be honest to my own self? I didn’t want to admit I was “powerless” over some stupid poisonous liquid? Admit that my life was “unmanageable?” This “surrender” stuff was not only foreign to me, it was totally unacceptable. I had a real dilemma. But I kept “coming back.”
Then one day in a chat room online I heard about Rational Recovery, so I did a web search and started reading. Within maybe 30 minutes, I felt like jumping up and down and yelling '" I am not crazy! I am not the only one in the world who thinks that AA crap is for losers." I knew I was never going to voluntarily let someone else run my life. I needed someone to sit me down and slap me in the face, and say “Your problem is simple: you drink too much alcohol and can’t handle it, so knock it of!” The solution is not a bunch of steps, or surrendering to someone (surrender, to me, connotes giving in to an enemy). The solution is simply to quit drinking. Simply do not lift that alcohol, pour it in your mouth, and swallow it. Just do not do that any more.
Your approach reset me to the point where I didn’t drink that night, knowing I was due for my two days and nights of cold sweats, insomnia, shakes, messed up stomach, etc. But this time it was different. I knew I was not going to drink again. Handling “the Beast” is like telling a kid he can’t have shrimp for dinner because he’s allergic to it. Sorry, “Beast,” but you ain’t getting no alcohol.
Since this change in my approach and attitude, and results (I haven’t even come close to having a drink, in something like a year) I have sometimes come across other people who are struggling with accepting AA, and I have pointed maybe a half dozen or so toward RR. In the chat rooms the AA hard-core are really militant, and close minded. Its almost amusing. I sometimes paraphrase one of your lines, “What are you going to do about your drinking?” So many, many times, I get the response, “Well, I want to quit,” and it’s so obvious they know they will drink again. I tell them that the difference between RR and AA is that AA is for those who “want to quit” or have been ordered to quit, and RR is for those who have decided to quit.
The AA people are starting to hate me. They can’t even talk intelligently about their program. They can only parrot what has been drilled into them. I tell them that everyone is entitled to an opinion, and AA will be happy to issue yours to you. RR works for the ones that still insist on thinking for themselves.
Well, that’s longer than I intended. Just wanted to say thanks for steering me back to a clear path. I can take it from here. Byron
I especially liked this pat of the letter: “…the difference between RR and AA is that AA is for those who “want to quit” or have been ordered to quit, and RR is for those who have decided to quit.”
So true.
The problem I have is that AA as you describe it is absolutely alien to my experience. I’ve been to hundreds of meetings in different parts of the country and honestly haven’t felt the kind of pressure to conform that you talk about. Most of the time, when I’ve gotten beaten over the head with something, it’s because that’s what I needed. Alcoholics tend to be very headstrong and sometimes the kid gloves have to come off in order to get the message across. Alcoholism is really more of a mental illness than a physical one–there is the element of the physical addiction to the drug, but the addictive (insane) behavior continues after the drug is withdrawn. That’s why most alcoholics require ongoing treatment in the form of AA meetings. With treatment, I’m a happy, healthy, productive member of society; without it, I’m a raving, self-destructive lunatic.
To get back a bit to the OP, I think the ruling that AA is a religious organization is completely wrong. It’s a therapeutic one, albeit one with a very strong spiritual element to it.
Seven of the twelve steps of AA involve either one’s relationship with God or the need for a “spiritual awakening”. I don’t see how an organization with that much of an emphasis on God and salvation through “spiritual awakenings” can be said to be anything other than religious. It may be non-denominational. It may be ecumenical. But it is religious.
I have no more philosophical opposition to AA than I do to any other form of organized religion, and a good deal less than I do to many sorts of organized religion. My only real objection is to the state compelling citizens to participate in a religious exercise, even if it is “for their own good”, and even if the purpose thereof includes secular goals (not breaking the laws against DUI) as well as religious ones (getting right with God or the salvation of your immortal soul). If AA helps you overcome alcoholism, fine. Some people are probably helped to overcome these problems by joining a church–but that doesn’t mean the courts can or should be able to sentence anyone to get baptized in the name of Jesus Christ.
What is and what is not a disorder is a semantic debate. The disease model of addiction perpetuated and supported by AA is most certainly the subject of heated debate.
At AA’s inception the disease model was entirely a social construct with no scientific basis. It served the somewhat useful purpose of eliciting sympathy for those who drank too much. These people were sick rather than bad and needed treatment rather than condemnation.
Of course there was no treatment so AA is left in the typically schizophrenic position of offering a moral and spiritual solution to what they promote as a medical problem. The illness manifests itself in a lack of self control that must be overcome with spiritual guidance. The disease makes sufferers lie and do awful things for which they must atone if they are to be healthy. Of course, they are also perfectionists, controlers, overachievers and generally great to have around in a crisis. It is a model with all the scientific basis of horoscopes.
For some people a religious/spiritual solution to life’s problems is entirely appropriate. AA also provides a valuable introduction to an alternate lifestyle to replace the alcohol or drug centered activities the person previously engaged in. It is also a good place to meet new friends who’s lives are not dominated with using though AA members sometimes continue to be just as fixated even when they aren’t using.
The constant denial that AA is a religious solution is, I think, largely due to the belief that AA is the only solution. Yes, enlightened members will tell you it isn’t the case but the rhetoric denies this. AA tells you that if you quit without AA you will be a miserable beast known as a dry drunk.
It is a bizzarre organization who’s members consider it a strength that they can continually deny its fundamental precepts. Many have managed to gain comfort and perhaps even help from the organization while managing to avoid or ignore its contradictions but that doesn’t make them go away. For people desperate to improve their lives by actually following what AA says they need to do the rhetoric can be far more difficult to overcome. Those who fail, and AA has an attrition rate that puts macdonalds to shame, come away with only the knowledge that they are screwed. Studies have shown that previous unsuccesful exposure to AA has a negative correlation with subsequently dealing with addiction. Meanwhile AA has never been able to demonstrate any better efficacy than no treatment at all.
I have no problem with the many good people who attend AA (though I do have a prolem with the pseudoscience AA offers). They just need to be honest about what the organization is. It offers a religious solution.
AA is *absolutely[/] a religious organisation.
If you don’t “believe”, you’re allowed to say “a higher power”.
Well; crud.
I believe in neither. I believe it was my own stupid fault to start boozing. I * never * blamed anyone but myself.
I know however; Once I had the right anti-depressiva, I quit drinking.
I’ve been following the 12 steps for one and a half years.
When I was tired by some “leader of the evening’s” sense of power, or the complete ignoring of former AAers who couldn’t make it on their own, but since they had no desire to undergo the weekly ego-bashing, they could just drink themselves to death,- I stopped going.
When I was “dry” for 5 years - on my own, with the right medicine-, I went back to my old group with cakes and pies to celebrate.
Bad idea.
You’re not supposed to make it on your own. Better have a “backfall” every time, but STAY with the AA.
There isn’t such a thing as RR here, which is a pity, cause the only thing *good * about the AA is the opportunity to talk with other boozers and try to figure out what went wrong.
For the people with a drinking problem here, I suggest; Try talking with your own ordinary GP. It * is* possible you just need an anti-depressiva.
And for you, non drinkers; If taking Prozac is just another form of addiction I say: *:oP~~~~~.*
Note: IANAalcoholic, but I’ve worked with plenty of them in the past year and I’ve tried to educate myself on the subject.
DGF, you act as if once an alcoholic stops drinking, his problems are solved. One of them is, yes. But being an alcoholic is not just about drinking–it’s about needing to drink. It’s a complete mental and physical need that doesn’t go away when he puts the bottle down.
An alcoholic wakes up in the morning thinking about alcohol, takes a shower thinking about alcohol, drives to work thinking about alcohol, plays with his kids thinking about alcohol, goes to sleep at night thinking about alcohol. One particularly well-read alcoholic I worked with compared it to the device in Vonnegut’s “Harrison Bergeron” that made a noise every few seconds to keep people from thinking about anything else for very long.
An alcoholic can stop drinking, but that’s when a lot of the pain starts, because he still has that little voice, but doesn’t have booze to shut it up. Some people say that the voice goes away after they’ve been sober for a while. Others say it never goes away.
AA is a way to counter that voice–a place to go every day where people are saying, “You don’t have to drink.” If people can find another counter for that voice, good for them. Some find AA to be effective, and good for them also.
When you say that an alcoholic should be able to solve his problem on his own, you are essentially saying that he should be able to stop thinking about booze. Did you ever do that think as a kid where you tried not to think about a pink alligator? Admitting that you’re powerless over alcohol is like admitting that you can’t not think about a pink alligator.
I remain uncomfortable about AA’s religious overtones, and I would be careful to also offer my patients access to programs like Rational Recovery as well. But I have finally come to understand the reasoning behind the methods, and why admitting that you are powerless is not a bad thing.
Dr. J
In the other thread, I linked to this article, but it’s even more directly on point here.
AA is a good organization, that has helped many people stop drinking. However, the courts have no business mandating AA, because it does have a stated goal of changing a person’s spiritual beliefs. It is compatible with many faiths, but not with every faith (not only is it incompatible with true atheism, but it is incompatible with belief that personal responsibility must lie in the individual and cannot be turned over to God).
Besides, it’s not like this is tough for the courts to comply with. You simply tell people that they must enroll in a treatment program, while giving them a choice of which program will work for them best.
CITES OR QUOTES PLEASE??? This is a debate? Sounds more like uninformed fear to me.
NO, go read the AA big book. Read the little black squiggly parts only.
DGR, you are not an American? If not where are you from that has such a distaste for AA. AA is pretty much world wide now. {maybe I didn’t get your message right.}
There are all these statements that are just peoples opinions. I have seen no CITES for any of this, no quotes from the AA book or the 12 & 12. Why not? I thought the SDMB was better than a gossip and antadocal circle, least I always get my pp whacked when I just do that. Even here in GD. :: sigh::: things change I guess.
Question? If the ‘courts’ are this stupid in your opinion cause they are confused about church and state and about AA effectiveness and those other ideas are so good, then we need one of you to be our King, right?
Yes, perhaps a King IS needed. Because contrary to your nasty attack above, most of the people posting probably HAVE read the AA Big Book, and have plenty of experience with what the organization involves. We also have valuable experience about how what actually goes ON in the meetings varies from the schtick in the book.
I assume you’re suggesting that AA isn’t a religious organization, and thus it is acceptable for the courts to continue to use it as a treatment option. However, perhaps YOU should open YOUR AA Big Book, where I found the following information:
Chapter 2, page 25 of the little blue “Big Book,” has this to say:
“The central fact of our lives today is the absolute certainty that our Creator has entered into our hearts and lives in a way which is indeed miraculous. He has commended to accomplish those things for us which we could never do by ourselves.”
Even the Chapter titled “We Agnostics” (Chapter 4) seems intent on forcing God down the throat of the alcoholic who would dare remain atheist. Page 44 of Chapter 4 says,
“If, when you honestly want to, you find you cannot quit entirely, or if when drinking, you have little control over the amount you take, you are probably alcoholic. If that be the case, you may be suffering from an illness which only a spiritual experience will conquer.”
“After awhile we had to face the fact that we must find a spiritual basis of life–or else.”
And on page 45:
“Well, that’s exactly what thsi book is about. Its main object is to enable you to find a Power greater than yourself which will solve your problem.”
If you’ve ever attended 12-step meetings, you know you hear people talk about how they “used to be too smart to believe in God, but now they know better.” Or how they got respite from their disease when they “found god.” Chapter 4 takes on exactly this tone, insisting that the Agnostic should just swallow what they hear and not object, for they may find use in this subject that has been so far “neatly evaded or entirely ignored.” (from page 45.)
Now here’s something that I’ve mentioned on this message board before, and that many people who attend 12-step meetings are frustrated with: I attempted to find help within the OA organization and rather than finding help with the actual PROBLEM, I found the focus on this “Higher Power” nonsense and spirituality and religion.
As I’ve said before, the problem with someone who has an eating disorder is FOOD, not a lack of a higher power. Yes, of course I understand that for some, religion can give them the strength to overcome that problem with food or alcohol. However, for some (maybe even most) it works better to focus on the problem at hand than to join a ‘church’ that involves ZERO experts on the subject and ZERO help getting the substance off your mind and living a normal life. If you want to stop obsessing over some means you’re using to destroy yourself, sitting in a room for three hours a week (or more) trying to concentrate on coming up with a higher power, while listening to people whine about exactly the substance you do NOT want to think about is probably not the answer.
-Laura
I don’t have the big book, but I found this description of the third step:
How exactly is this compatible with a belief in absolute personal responsibility?
I’m sorry, but this makes no sense to me at all. I’m not disputing that AA is effective for certain - perhaps most - individuals. I’m saying that even if it is, it is improper for the government to require it, just as it would be improper for the government to mandate meditation classes, even if they didn’t interfere with one’s church.
Catbiker; “DGR, you are not an American? If not where are you from that has such a distaste for AA. AA is pretty much world wide now. {maybe I didn’t get your message right.}”
Were you talking to me? Or who’s DGR? I’m from Holland. I’m the one who said you’re not supposed to make it on your own, according to the AA.
I haven’t * got * cites or quotes. I didn’t think to ask for a letter announcing me dead for the AA, when I did make it on my own.
And, like I said; the AA is good for meeting other drunks willing to stop. I just have problems with the way people are treated after *leaving * the AA.
Is AA a religion based treatment plan?
** It doesn’t matter **
Treatment plans only work for individuals. Most individuals are different, some radically so, in terms of why they started drinking, why they continue to drink, or their general philosophy of life.
A sensible court system looking to maximise the outcomes would take this into account, and thus have a number of different treatment plans that were recognised and having obtained a qualified assessment of the individual would assign them to the appropriate treatment.
Is AA a religion based treatment plan?
** It attempts not to be **
It some times fails, why, because religion is about belief and perception. If a member of a group feels that an organisation is religious then, for them, it is.
General advice for life.
If you feel you have a problem, you do.
If you want to fix a problem and can’t, get professional advice from some one who knows about the problem and its possible solutions.
If you find the first professional unhelpful, try another.
I mean this is what you would do if a broken pipe were flooding your apartment every other week.
Easier said than done (sigh)
Keep safe
Britt
[Next week: Amway is it/was it a cult]