I suppose I’d say that forcing people into “self” help somewhat defeats the purpose of “self” help. For any such program to work, the patient has to buy into it. So it would make a lot more sense for a judge to say “You must, as a condition of avoiding jail, stop drinking. We don’t care how you do it.” None of the options you suggest would have helped me, and I can’t think of any “treatment” that would work for me. It’s so much easier just to quit booze - treatment is a PITA.
Well, not everyone thinks that way. So let them figure out the best approach for themselves, just make it clear that quitting drinking is not optional.
Knowing AA is an anonymous organization would make it difficult if not impossible to keep records of who attended when, where and for how long right? The people keeping records are the treatment facilities, inpatient and outpatient, rehabs places like that. They are the experts in my mind, and if they work with alcoholics, drug addicts etc…etc… on a daily basis, I would think they know what works for most and what doesn’t. And AA works for a lot of people. Not everyone, but quite a few. It’s not that difficult to understand how it works, however, the God aspect of AA makes a lot of people turn away.
When in fact God is simply a higher power, NOT the christian God. I know quite afew agnostics, neo-pagans, atheists, humanists etc…etc… who are sober through AA. People who would not be caught dead in a church. They are not being duped by AA, they are using AA’s principles and their own interpretation to stay sober.
Oh and the 90 in 90 [90 meetings in 90 days] is designed to break habits. And in terms of human psychology it takes a while to break habits, it can be as long as 90 days. For a severe alcoholic, who needs the drink every day, a meeting with a bunch of people who have been in her shoes every day will help her get through the toughest times.
It’s difficult to understand because you cannot ascribe set parameters to why AA works for a lot of people.
Well as per Merriam Webster: 4: a system for the cure of disease based on dogma set forth by its promulgator, perhaps, but it’s not the popular conception of a cult, there’s no charismatic leader although like any social entity there are people in AA who desire to be seen as the person with all the answers. They usually do not last unless they lose their desire to be in charge.
No one is shunned for any failure to follow any rules because there are none, there are only suggestions. AA’s only goal is to help each other arrest their alcoholism. It’s worked for me for 21 years and I’m definitely not a joiner.
If you’re really interested, you’ll find that and many more answers here. But in short, their record is abismal. Or about the same as not getting any help at all.
Please produce these Alcoholics Anonymous surveys you cite Red Fury. The only one available, conducted in 2004 doesn’t have any drop out rate statistics and one might wonder how they would obtain them from people who are no longer participants.
The 2004 survey of about 7500 members does show that 36% percent of them have over 10 years of sobriety, 14% 5 - 10 years, 24% 1 - 5 years and 26% less than one years.
Those numbers seem to jibe with my personal experience. It’s also true that many many people who come in do not stay, I don’t think that necessarly speaks to effectiveness or ineffectiveness. As has been stated by PaulParkhead, first and foremost a desire to stop drinking is required. AA can’t give anyone that, it just support for those who desire a different way of life.
This makes complete sense as most of the newcomers are probably turned off by the cult like atmosphere at AA meetings.
They walk in thinking, “Hmm, I think I’d like to stop drinking.”
Then they’re they’re told to, “let go and let God.” or “Make amends to those who you did wrong to.”
They’re told to put the cotton from their ears into their mouth. Listen to the group. Come to the group every day for 90 days. Read the groups’ literature. Call the guru (sponsor).
In my personal experience with alcoholism, AA only looked sinister while I wanted to keep drinking and eventually even when I knew it would probably work I still stayed away until the pain outweighed whatever pleasure was left in using.
No personal experience, but a relative once made use of AA. He attended for about 1 year, and then left (he quit entirely). According to him, the group gave him much-needed support. He didn’t think it cultish.
Perhaps you cannot understand how insulting that underlined statement is. That’s ok, you don’t really need to understand. And my need to flame you for saying such things is quelled by my desire to help people who really want to understand.
BTW - Sponsors are people who have more time sober than you and who want to help you stay sober. They are not gurus or know-it-alls.
Also, many do not subscribe to the God part of AA, perhaps it’s detractors don’t understand this. But believing in a Christian God is not a prerequisit to participation.
RedFury - ok I just read your cites. They are the biggest crock of shit I’ve seen repudiating AA. You seem to be standing outside looking in on a subject you know very little about and shouting that what you say is correct, and people should read it and understand.
I’m happy that you live in a world where alcoholism does not affect you negatively - but to link to bullshit cites as a way to try and show others AA is bad or ineffective goes beyond misunderstanding peoples desires to stay sober, it mocks peoples attempts to do so. That’s not fighting ignorance, it’s fueling a fire that you know hurts another human being who does find AA to help.
Note the “subtle” change from Higher Power to God. Bait and switch much, Mr Wilson? Besides, what kind of “results” are you going to get from believing in something you can’t “fully define or comprehend”?
From the Orange Papers which, apparently, AA advocates refuse to read…much less refute.
I can see the problems for an atheist or agnostic in the first phrase, but making amends seems to be religion neutral. Where’s the issue in that phrase?
I don’t think it’s a cult, but as I’ve stated in other threads, I DO feel that it’s stupid for a person to keep calling themselves an alcoholic or addict when they no longer touch the stuff. It’s degrading, insulting and does nothing for self esteem. An obese person who loses all their excess weight no longer calls himself obese. A smoker who quits no longer calls themselves a smoker.
I see you calling my cite a “crock of shit” yet not a single refutation provided. Besides, it’s impossible to “read” a site with literally hundreds of links in the time-frame that I first posted it.
Lastly, as I said in my very first post, if it works for you, great. But don’t try to say it’s some sort of scientific cure for alcoholism. It isn’t. And I am not without knowledge in this area, quite the contrary actually, as I’ve had/have to deal with some close relatives suffering from the disease.
They are under specialized psychiatric care with different degrees of success.
Fact: there is no silver bullet for the treatment of alcoholism, but it’s also clear that we know much more about the disease (and the mind in general) than when Wilson wrote the steaming pile that is The Big Book.