Czarcasm just answered this much as I would have.
Is there any evidence that scientists, or indeed any sizable number of folks, think that AA is the “best” solution, much less “like a direct message from God On High that Must Be Kept Whole And Never Questioned”?
My impression is more that it was cheap and available. Other options, such as rehab, always existed, but cost lots of money - money that people did not have themselves, and money that insurers and governments were unwilling to part with on their behalf.
That isn’t what you were asked. Your answer would be valid enough for why someone in AA doesn’t seek out other alternatives, but you were asked for evidence that AA has directly and positively impeded any such effort.
If you have such, now would be a good time to bring it. Otherwise, its fair to assume that you don’t.
According to you the phrase is meaningless. Guess what, there are people who disagree with you. Can you tell me where, exactly, A.A. states that the whole list must be done and that you must believe in god? The problem is, you can’t. Straight from the A.A. big book.
I am not appealing to any outside force for my recovery. I am using a series of steps (while ignoring the god part) devised by a couple drunks. The power greater than myself isn’t a god, the Flying Spaghetti Monster or any other supernatural force. It is a way of thinking about life and its problems and a way of acting. Nothing more. I also use meetings, which aren’t supernatural, as method to assist in maintaining my sobriety.
A.A. was not devised by scientists. Unless some one has come out with something new, there is no science based program that reliably deals with addiction or alcoholism. The failure rates for all treatment options are pretty bad.The studies on A.A. are all over the place (see my previous link for one suggesting that attending A.A. doubles the sobriety percentages long term) but the group is very hard to study as alkies tend to not be very responsible.
Czarcasm, do you have any thoughts on the study I posted? Also, I am very sorry to hear about your FIL.
Slee
Yeah, yeah, and Revelations is all allegory.
I’m not an expert, but I think the way meetings and other AA activities are run now has probably changed over the years, even if the steps and traditions have not. There are e-meetings now, for instance.
Its rather odd that a grass roots organization whose success is based on the support of its members alone, definitely not its leadership, should somehow be responsible for the lack of research and funding by the government or others or responsible for all alcoholics in general.
Interesting enough, if New York folded its offices, AA member groups wouldn’t even notice.
Perhaps we should discontinue food banks or food stamps, because we are ameliorating the problem rather than being forced to address the problem of poverty more fundamentally.
Straight from the AA Big Book:
Can you show me where they feel their steps are optional?
What is the point of an organization pushing a 12 step program that they consider any of the steps optional? Do you really think AA feels it is a cafeteria style of therapy and participants should just pick the parts they want?
You may have done that but it doesn’t mean AA supports that view of their program.
I already posted about this:
I can’t speak much to that program but they have the blessings of the NIH.
So, it is not a complete desert out there for addiction therapy but pretty close aside from AA. While that program exists good luck finding one local to you that meets your needs.
Oh and guess what! Their meetings are free as well (with the donation hat passed around just like AA).
Now who’s arguing by anecdote? :dubious:
Smart Recovery, which as you noted is a non-12-step program, has six locations in Houston.
NIAAA alone is budgeted at a half-billion dollars per year. That research money is going somewhere. Melon’s selection of cites may be misleading and subject to caveats, but their very existence shows that research is constantly trying to review the efficacy of alcohol treatment, rather than leaving it unchallenged.
There are non-12-step programs and rehab centers all over the country, some of them taking in thousands of dollars per patient. If one of them produced identifiably better results, there would be a big economic incentive to expand and copy its model.
There, I think we’re all stuck. I wish we could say that the existing research points consistently to some particular option, but I don’t see how it does. Trial and error may be all that any person can manage.
For the love of G-d, man, don’t give them any ideas!
So how did AA get into our legal system such that states have mandated AA treatment or in our prisons where they force AA treatment?
I mean, no one is there pushing anything right? Must’ve magicked itself into state laws.
How about according to me and the New York Supreme Court? (bolding mine)
Great, but I tried to contact them by registering on their website to peruse their message board and was told they couldn’t register me at this time.
Strike 1.
The statement is pure bullshit !
Did you miss this part?
I mean, you didn’t quote it, or mention it, so I was kinda wondering if you missed it.
Why?
Proven effectiveness ? Damn, I missed that. I’d like to take back my previous post.
I was not answering a question on the effectiveness of AA so how is that relevant?
The relevant bit that we were discussing was:
“While A.A. literature declares an openness and tolerance for each participant’s personal vision of God (“as we understood Him” [Steps 3 and 11] [emphasis in the original]), the writings demonstrably express an aspiration that each member of the movement will ultimately commit to a belief in the existence of a Supreme Being of independent higher reality than humankind.”
Therein lies the problem I have been on about.
What little alternative there is is barely there at all.
AA is darn close to the only answer available if someone wants to get sober.