• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Alcoholics Anonymous - Thumbs Up or Thumbs Down?

Up or Down?

  • Thumbs Up

    Votes: 31 68.9%
  • Thumbs Down

    Votes: 14 31.1%

  • Total voters
    45
AA and psychiatric meds:

Anyone have an opinion on this? I just got off the phone with my sponsor, whom wants me off my meds entirely - he says:

1) Psychiatry can "shove it"

2) When I go to AA meetings all "pilled up," I'm not really living and not really sober

3) I need to talk to my doctor - if he does not agree with pulling me off my meds entirely, I should find another doctor

4) He said I sounded drunk on the phone, like I was on drugs (which technically speaking, that's what psychiatric meds are)

Sponsor has a point - will say that. When I spoke to him just now, my speech was slurred and my thinking process was very slow, having just woken up from a deep nap the instant he called (waking me up).

I'm still waking up right now and my mind clearer. But, a few minutes ago, I was out of it. My life has more or less been this way since they put me on meds initially. It takes me several hours to fully wake up in the morning these days, for instance (and that's only, lol, after I've had about five cups of coffee).

Thanks - will look forward to replies. :)

There isn't a whole lot I feel comfortable saying. No one knows what drugs have been prescribed (and you shouldn't say), and even if we did can't possibly comment on whether they were appropriately prescribed. My only comment is I'd hesitate to take medical advice from an AA sponsor unless he's also your health care provider, and the advice "psychiatry can shove it" just might kill someone who needs psychiatric help, including medication.

I volunteer for a charity that takes in homeless people, and it's 12 step based. 98% or so are addicted. Our FIRST priority for many new residents is getting them psychiatric care and back on appropriate meds. And the founder is one of those old timers, tough love types, etc. But what he knows from nearly 3 decades of treating low bottom drunks and addicts is you can't get them sober and teach them how to live as responsible citizens if there is an untreated mental illness. Treating that mental illness is therefore critical - nothing good long term is possible unless and until that is done. So knowing only what you've said, I think the advice you got from your sponsor was HIGHLY irresponsible. I hope we are missing a big part of the story.

So I'd highly recommend your last comment in point 3) - don't ignore medical advice, but certainly if you're not comfortable on your current drugs, find another provider for second or third opinions.
 
Have you ever derived income from counselling people about their alcohol/drug addictions (outside of AA)?

Yes or no, please. No 12 page dissertation...just yes or no, please.

Firstly, I'll respond in any way I choose. Secondly, I thought you were leaving. And thirdly, why do you want to know?
 
I want to stress that for people whom can quit alcohol/drugs on their own, - without AA - you are my heroes and all the more power to you.

As an addict/alcoholic and a "mentally ill" person as well, I am finding AA to be very helpful lately. AA is giving me the tools (a road map, that is) to be happy, joyous and free - I'm for all intents and purposes an "atheist," but call GOD Good Orderly Direction. That basic concept is helping me get through the steps.

I have exactly one week sober now. I haven't felt this good in years and just landed a good job yesterday (as a direct result of working the steps). All AA wants to do is give me a good life - and get me out of the sheer hell I was living in. I'm meeting girls as well, though am going to focus on my recovery first - girls are a "danger zone" for me, as I always seem to go for the ones whom are sick (mentally). I tend to attract needy girls whom are clingy and obsessive - borderline stalkers. I don't need that. I hope - one day - to find a nice girl via AA, especially one who has been sober for a number of years and has her head screwed on straight. I don't want any more relationships that purely revolve around sex - I just want someone who cares and share hugs and stuff with. Someone to hold and cuddle with, in other words.

Congratulations on one week of sobriety. That's great.

Anyway, I intend to keep going to AA, one day at a time. I do have a question for anyone whom cares to answer at this point: "AA maintains anonymity at the level of press, radio and film." Does this forum count as "press?" I mean, am I jeopardizing my sobriety by continuing to post here? Because if I am, I don't want to do that.

DP is not considered "press". You are not jeopardizing your sobriety by posting here unless you find that posting here is causing you issues that might affect your sobriety.

AA also "has no opinion on outside issues." In other words, they are non-political, from what I gather that means. So, am I endangering my sobriety by continuing to post in a debate forum? - when the literature says to "resign from the debating society and quit bothering myself with what came first - the chicken or the egg."

Anyone whom cares to respond to that is welcome to do so. Thanks in advance.

In the meantime, I will either ask my sponsor this stuff and/or bring it up in a meeting.

Thanks for reading.

You are not jeopardizing your sobriety by posting here and discussing politics. The one thing you cannot do is say, "I believe in such-and-such political position because AA supports it". Individuals are, of course, allowed to have political positions, but AA as a whole, does not.

Hope that helps.
 
AA and psychiatric meds:

Anyone have an opinion on this? I just got off the phone with my sponsor, whom wants me off my meds entirely - he says:

1) Psychiatry can "shove it"

2) When I go to AA meetings all "pilled up," I'm not really living and not really sober

3) I need to talk to my doctor - if he does not agree with pulling me off my meds entirely, I should find another doctor

4) He said I sounded drunk on the phone, like I was on drugs (which technically speaking, that's what psychiatric meds are)

Sponsor has a point - will say that. When I spoke to him just now, my speech was slurred and my thinking process was very slow, having just woken up from a deep nap the instant he called (waking me up).

I'm still waking up right now and my mind clearer. But, a few minutes ago, I was out of it. My life has more or less been this way since they put me on meds initially. It takes me several hours to fully wake up in the morning these days, for instance (and that's only, lol, after I've had about five cups of coffee).

Thanks - will look forward to replies. :)

There is no conflict between AA and psychiatric meds... unless the meds are potentially addictive. Many addicts also suffer from depression, anxiety, OCD, or other psychological disorders and medication can be very helpful for these issues. Without them, the potential for relapse may be higher. I know many recovering addicts who regularly take SSRI's for example. When it comes to meds that are potentially addictive, that is a bit trickier. Some say "OK" if one is under a strict doctor's care, and others would say "no way". It is important that you tell your doctor that you are an addict so he can choose your meds and adjust them accordingly. One thing... I can't stand black and white thinking. Things tend not to be like that. I'd suggest talking to your doctor about this.
 
AA and psychiatric meds:

Anyone have an opinion on this? I just got off the phone with my sponsor, whom wants me off my meds entirely - he says:

1) Psychiatry can "shove it"

2) When I go to AA meetings all "pilled up," I'm not really living and not really sober

3) I need to talk to my doctor - if he does not agree with pulling me off my meds entirely, I should find another doctor

4) He said I sounded drunk on the phone, like I was on drugs (which technically speaking, that's what psychiatric meds are)

Sponsor has a point - will say that. When I spoke to him just now, my speech was slurred and my thinking process was very slow, having just woken up from a deep nap the instant he called (waking me up).

I'm still waking up right now and my mind clearer. But, a few minutes ago, I was out of it. My life has more or less been this way since they put me on meds initially. It takes me several hours to fully wake up in the morning these days, for instance (and that's only, lol, after I've had about five cups of coffee).

Thanks - will look forward to replies. :)

Sponsors really shouldn't be telling you what meds to take. Your sponsor probably isn't a doctor. Like somebody else said, we don't know what you're taking and you don't need to/shouldn't say, but not taking your meds could greatly decrease the possibility of your life and sobriety going smoothly. I'm assuming you didn't doctor shop until you found a script of fentanyl. Sponsors are great for keeping you with the program, but they shouldn't be the ones making the program.

Both inside and outside of AA there is a lot of misinformation. I know a bipolar guy who was told to go off his meds by some sober peers. The good news is that he didn't relapse. The bad news is that the cops found him naked walking somebody else's dog at dawn and during his stay in jail he started taking his meds again. I'm guessing that the individuals who offered that helpful advice are no longer telling people that "psychiatry can shove it."
 
Sponsors really shouldn't be telling you what meds to take. Your sponsor probably isn't a doctor. Like somebody else said, we don't know what you're taking and you don't need to/shouldn't say, but not taking your meds could greatly decrease the possibility of your life and sobriety going smoothly. I'm assuming you didn't doctor shop until you found a script of fentanyl. Sponsors are great for keeping you with the program, but they shouldn't be the ones making the program.

Both inside and outside of AA there is a lot of misinformation. I know a bipolar guy who was told to go off his meds by some sober peers. The good news is that he didn't relapse. The bad news is that the cops found him naked walking somebody else's dog at dawn and during his stay in jail he started taking his meds again. I'm guessing that the individuals who offered that helpful advice are no longer telling people that "psychiatry can shove it."

In bold. I CANNOT stress what Mustachio said enough. No one should tell someone how to run their program. Not even one's sponsor. People are there to help keep one within one's program of sobriety, but not to dictate how that program should look. Many of the negative comments that I have read in this thread about AA were concerning AA meetings or individuals who tried to dictate what each person's program should look like... and it they didn't follow that to the letter, they were treated poorly. That's not how AA is supposed to work and I would avoid meetings and people like that like the plague.
 
Have you ever derived income from counselling people about their alcohol/drug addictions (outside of AA)?

Yes or no, please. No 12 page dissertation...just yes or no, please.

Referring to the VA--I am the son of a Veteran who is now gone.
Have any of their Psychiatrists, Psychologists, Counselors, Nurses, etc. ever derived money from counselling people about their alcohol/drug addictions?

Are you aware of how big a component AA/Al ANON and all of the other A's and ANON's are in the Mental Health Clinics in the VA?
Would you deny these payments to Professionals who help these Soldiers, Veterans, and their Family Members?

Are you aware of the countless years and tens of thousands of dollars if not more these professionals have spent to get their degrees?
Just a yes or no to these questions will suffice .
 
Last edited:
Went to a meeting tonight and shared a little - helped a couple of newcomers.

I'm about (Good Orderly Direction willing) to hit my 9th day sober. One day at a time - whomever gets up the earliest has the most time. :)

Am taking the cotton out of my ears, sticking in my mouth and listening these days. :)

My sponsor is a crusty old fart - am going to a meeting tomorrow morning (Good Orderly Direction willing). :)

Sponsor tells me to "buckle my seat belt, because I'm in for a ride." ;)

And fill all that old free time spent drinking with new activities.
Dad would always make lists the day before for the next day and review that days list each night.

I slipped with three beers a few days ago--out of the last nine--drank lots of coffee driving home and hated it--driving back roads and dodging deer.
It's certainly not the same this time around--29 yeas off--3 years on--and now trying to control it--with cigs being worse every day--but cutting back.
I can get into a too much sleep pattern being retired--also not good.
Good luck--one day at a time--one hour at a time--one event at a time--whatever works--think of what you can and WILL lose .
 
Sponsors really shouldn't be telling you what meds to take. Your sponsor probably isn't a doctor. Like somebody else said, we don't know what you're taking and you don't need to/shouldn't say, but not taking your meds could greatly decrease the possibility of your life and sobriety going smoothly. I'm assuming you didn't doctor shop until you found a script of fentanyl. Sponsors are great for keeping you with the program, but they shouldn't be the ones making the program.

Both inside and outside of AA there is a lot of misinformation. I know a bipolar guy who was told to go off his meds by some sober peers. The good news is that he didn't relapse. The bad news is that the cops found him naked walking somebody else's dog at dawn and during his stay in jail he started taking his meds again. I'm guessing that the individuals who offered that helpful advice are no longer telling people that "psychiatry can shove it."

Thanks, Mustachio. Am still waking up right now and haven't had my coffee yet, so please bear with me.

Brought this stuff up in a meeting last night. The general consensus from AA members on this was: "Talk to your doctor." So, I intend to. :)

The last time I stopped my meds, I was in my mid 20's. I pretty much stopped them cold turkey. I fired my psychiatrists/therapists and struck out on my own: "Look out world, here comes Kevin." Won't go into the details, but I soon met a couple of nice state troopers who drove me to a state hospital. Suffice to say, I think my doctor would agree that I probably will have to take some form of psychiatric medication the rest of my life, just (if nothing else) to ensure what happened to me then does not happen again. Thanks for your post/insight on this. :)

In bold. I CANNOT stress what Mustachio said enough. No one should tell someone how to run their program. Not even one's sponsor. People are there to help keep one within one's program of sobriety, but not to dictate how that program should look. Many of the negative comments that I have read in this thread about AA were concerning AA meetings or individuals who tried to dictate what each person's program should look like... and it they didn't follow that to the letter, they were treated poorly. That's not how AA is supposed to work and I would avoid meetings and people like that like the plague.

Yes, CC. Am going to print out your quoted post, as well as Mustachio's and refer to them often. I do NOT want a repeat of what I went through in Miami with that "AA" group there, if you get my drift. Thanks so much for your (and Mustachio's) valuable input! :)
 
There is no conflict between AA and psychiatric meds... unless the meds are potentially addictive. Many addicts also suffer from depression, anxiety, OCD, or other psychological disorders and medication can be very helpful for these issues. Without them, the potential for relapse may be higher. I know many recovering addicts who regularly take SSRI's for example. When it comes to meds that are potentially addictive, that is a bit trickier. Some say "OK" if one is under a strict doctor's care, and others would say "no way". It is important that you tell your doctor that you are an addict so he can choose your meds and adjust them accordingly. One thing... I can't stand black and white thinking. Things tend not to be like that. I'd suggest talking to your doctor about this.

OK - now that I've (partially) woken up and have some coffee in me, I want to briefly touch on this, before signing out for the day.

I have (had) ptsd, because of what I went through in Miami. I had already been diagnosed before I went there to that "AA group" - and yes, they took full advantage of me. Will talk to my doctor asap and tell him I'm an addict and in AA.

Doc is a good guy, so he will listen/understand.

Black and white thinking is something I can't stand, either. For, only a Sith deals in absolutes - I'm a Luke Skywalker (personality wise, anyway). Furthermore, I have yet to even begin my "jedi" training - I know nothing about nothing right now, in other words. My "destiny" is to be a "jedi knight." My moms and dads in AA will "train" me and give me all the tools I need. I don't want to fail - turn to the "dark side," that is. Even though I'm young and innocent (relatively speaking), there is always a danger that I could become the sort of tyrant I hate.

AA is teaching me that "failure is not an option." Well, it is, but the alternative to working the steps is death (for me, that would be the case) - the thing that would happen to me if I fail in this. I don't want to die - I'm still a little scared to fail, but AA tells me that we're all in this together and I'm not alone.

One day at a time - Good Orderly Direction. Today, I feel pretty darn good - for that, I'm very grateful (both to AA AND DP). :)
 
Thanks, Mustachio. Am still waking up right now and haven't had my coffee yet, so please bear with me.

Brought this stuff up in a meeting last night. The general consensus from AA members on this was: "Talk to your doctor." So, I intend to. :)

The last time I stopped my meds, I was in my mid 20's. I pretty much stopped them cold turkey. I fired my psychiatrists/therapists and struck out on my own: "Look out world, here comes Kevin." Won't go into the details, but I soon met a couple of nice state troopers who drove me to a state hospital. Suffice to say, I think my doctor would agree that I probably will have to take some form of psychiatric medication the rest of my life, just (if nothing else) to ensure what happened to me then does not happen again. Thanks for your post/insight on this. :)



Yes, CC. Am going to print out your quoted post, as well as Mustachio's and refer to them often. I do NOT want a repeat of what I went through in Miami with that "AA" group there, if you get my drift. Thanks so much for your (and Mustachio's) valuable input! :)


I concur with the others that those of us in AA and Al-anon have some understanding and experience that can be shared. But none of us are in any position to offer you medical advice. It is a serious decision telling your doctor of your alcoholism or other addiction because that then becomes a part of your permanent medical record that may or may not create a problem for you later on. But whatever problem it creates is nowhere near as dangerous as continuing in the destructive, possibly deadly, dictates of your addiction. To break the dependency has to be your first priority, but do not think we know best about how to treat whatever else you are dealing with.

And I would like to gently say to those who think the addict is just a weak person with no will power, until you've walked a mile in another person's shoes, you have no idea what you are talking about. Alcoholics come in all races, genders, sexual orientations, shapes, and sizes, are good guys and gals, are assholes, are rich, are poor, and are everything in between. There are some who are so high functioning in their addiction that even some closest to them, including wives, children, bosses, coworkers, other associates, have no idea the depth or seriousness of the problem. My own loved one never got a DUI, was never arrested, never lost a job, was a pillar of the community and church, and was a successful manager of a business all during the worst of his addiction. Our closest friends and our children had no idea. I did but I, like any dutiful codependent, shielded and protected him from the consequences of his addition and figured I could 'fix him' if I could just find the magic bullet to do that.

Once he got sober he was the same intelligent, educated, compassionate, caring, caring guy, but just sober and therefore a more mentally, spiritually, and physically healthy one. And sadly, the folks who are assholes don't necessarily stop being assholes just because they get clean and sober. I find the majority of alcoholics though to be bright, charming, funny, and insightful people. They don't expect to be alcoholics. They don't choose to be alcoholics. They don't want to be alcoholics. Most don't believe they are alcoholic until the disease takes over so much of their life and is making their lives so miserable or it has become so difficult to manage everything that they are finally willing to reach out for help. Some never do that.

Most medical professionals liken alcoholism to an allergy that about ten percent of the people have. Such people, even when they drink conservatively and in moderation, are at risk of passing at some point over an invisible line, different for each person, into addiction. At that time most try as hard as they can to control it, but they cannot. That's what addiction does. It puts people out of control and takes their ability for choices away from them. They aren't weak. They aren't morally inferior with questionable character. They are sick. And as long as the addiction continues, they will continue to get more sick. The only way to stop it is total abstinence from the substance. And that does require courage and a willingness to change, but never think it is easy for anybody to do or that it can be accomplished simply by deciding to do it.
 
And the students are stronger as a group then as individuals. And the student, also can't do anything without the teacher. The relationship is symbiotic: each gains strength through the other.

The group can be stronger but most of the times it is a cover for the weakness of the individuals... gangs are a prime example.

The student can do plenty without the teacher... you like to claim professional knowledge well here I trump you. You are wrong. 100%

You really don't know what you are talking about, Bodi. Not at all.

Of course I actually do... but I understand.
 
I think AA has its place in helping people with addiction. However, I think that it only works on the weak minded who are also addicted to alcohol because they are weak minded. Some people just don't respond to dogma and, what seems to feel like, a religious cult like atmosphere. Most thinking people would be wary of such a thing.
 
I think AA has its place in helping people with addiction. However, I think that it only works on the weak minded who are also addicted to alcohol because they are weak minded. Some people just don't respond to dogma and, what seems to feel like, a religious cult like atmosphere. Most thinking people would be wary of such a thing.

Uhhhh, No. Being "weak minded," whatever the heck that means, doesn't have a thing to do with actual addiction, and certainly a characteristic of people who overcome addiction, in AA or not, simply isn't "weak minded."

And I can't speak for all meetings of AA and NA and all the others, but the atmosphere at those I've attended isn't anything like a "religious cult like atmosphere."

Finally, "thinking people" should be "wary" of pretty much everything having to do with their health and well being, especially addiction. Many thinking people try meetings of AA in their area, and find it helps them, and so stay with it for all kinds of very good reasons. Other thinking people try it and don't see those benefits and quit going. Pretty simple stuff.

People who don't do a lot of serious thinking make broad brush generalizations and stereotypes about addicts, AA, and who is or isn't strong minded without knowing a thing about the incredibly diverse group of people from all walks of life who choose to address their addiction and live a better life, in part by attending AA.
 
OK, so I'm about to hit my 11th day of sobriety. Got a home group, but not a sponsor right now - will try to correct that in the near future. Am having a hard time tonight and have a call in to a Maine mental health/AA hotline - am waiting for a call back.

Stinkin' thinking, you know what they say.
 
Uhhhh, No. Being "weak minded," whatever the heck that means, doesn't have a thing to do with actual addiction, and certainly a characteristic of people who overcome addiction, in AA or not, simply isn't "weak minded."

And I can't speak for all meetings of AA and NA and all the others, but the atmosphere at those I've attended isn't anything like a "religious cult like atmosphere."

Finally, "thinking people" should be "wary" of pretty much everything having to do with their health and well being, especially addiction. Many thinking people try meetings of AA in their area, and find it helps them, and so stay with it for all kinds of very good reasons. Other thinking people try it and don't see those benefits and quit going. Pretty simple stuff.

People who don't do a lot of serious thinking make broad brush generalizations and stereotypes about addicts, AA, and who is or isn't strong minded without knowing a thing about the incredibly diverse group of people from all walks of life who choose to address their addiction and live a better life, in part by attending AA.

This is a great attempt to appeal to feel goodery gibberish. Feel goodery that I understand. Of course we want people who have addictions to overcome them, and we certainly don't want to put them down for doing so. But the truth is, people who have harmful addictions, have them for a reason. That is because they have an inability to deal with reality. Whatever their situation may be, they find that their addiction gives them respite from dealing with it. This is nothing to be necessarily ashamed of, but what AA tries to do is replace alcohol with a religious, cultish doma. Just look at the 12 steps and tell me that they are not religious in nature. The 2nd step alone tells you all you need to know. "Come to believe that a power greater then ourselves could restore us to sanity". Alcoholics Anonymous : Twelve Steps and Twelve Traditions. Trying to insert religious dogma into a program that is suppose to be helping these people is simply disgusting in my view. It is kind of the same tactic many Christian organizations use when they are handing out rice to starving kids in Africa and include a bible along with the aid. That is why I look at AA as help for the weak minded. Instead of dealing with the reality of their situations, and speaking frankly about it, they are taught to relinquish themsleves to a higher power in order to become "saved" from the evils of alcohol. When in reality, its not the alcohol that is the problem. I think AA programs should be completely dismantled on the grounds that they are religious organizations which are completely illegally funded by the government.
 
OK, so I'm about to hit my 11th day of sobriety. Got a home group, but not a sponsor right now - will try to correct that in the near future. Am having a hard time tonight and have a call in to a Maine mental health/AA hotline - am waiting for a call back.

Stinkin' thinking, you know what they say.

Hotline call went well - spoke to a really cool member of AA. I'm ok.

Just popped a couple of Ativan (prescribed as needed by my doctor) - going to bed and try to sleep.
 
This is an interesting article about AA. It states; "Peer-reviewed studies peg the success rate of AA somewhere between 5 and 10 percent. That is, about one of every fifteen people who enter these programs is able to become and stay sober." So not only is it cultish and religious in nature, it is also ineffective. If I took my car to a mechanic 10 times to get it fixed and he fixed it on the 10th time, I would be looking for another mechanic. I would not be funneling him business and money like our government funnels business and money to AA programs across the country. If my kid came home from school and got a passing grade for getting 1 out of 10 questions correct, I would pull him out of that school and demand it be defunded. AA is not only a proselytizing tool for religious dogma, it also gives false hope to people who really are in need of help. On top of that, the individuals who run this program are being paid for shoddy work.

http://www.salon.com/2014/03/23/the...ymous_theres_a_better_way_to_treat_addiction/

Alcoholics Anonymous is a part of our nation’s fabric. In the seventy-six years since AA was created, 12-step programs have expanded to include over three hundred different organizations, focusing on such diverse issues as smoking, shoplifting, social phobia, debt, recovery from incest, even vulgarity. All told, more than five million people recite the Serenity Prayer at meetings across the United States every year.

Twelve-step programs hold a privileged place in our culture as well. The legions of “anonymous” members who comprise these groups are helped in their proselytizing mission by TV shows such as “Intervention” (now canceled), which preaches the gospel of recovery. “Going to rehab” is likewise a common refrain in music and film, where it is almost always uncritically presented as the one true hope for beating addiction. AA and rehab have even been codified into our legal system: court-mandated attendance, which began in the late 1980s, is today a staple of drug-crime policy. Every year, our state and federal governments spend over $15 billion on substance-abuse treatment for addicts, the vast majority of which are based on 12-step programs. There is only one problem: these programs almost always fail.

Peer-reviewed studies peg the success rate of AA somewhere between 5 and 10 percent. That is, about one of every fifteen people who enter these programs is able to become and stay sober. In 2006, one of the most prestigious scientific research organizations in the world, the Cochrane Collaboration, conducted a review of the many studies conducted between 1966 and 2005 and reached a stunning conclusion: “No experimental studies unequivocally demonstrated the effectiveness of AA” in treating alcoholism. This group reached the same conclusion about professional AA-oriented treatment (12-step facilitation therapy, or TSF), which is the core of virtually every alcoholism-rehabilitation program in the country.

Many people greet this finding with open hostility. After all, walk down any street in any city and you are likely to run into a dozen people who swear by AA—either from personal experience or because they know someone whose life was saved by the program. Even people who have no experience with AA may still have heard that it works or protest that 5 to 10 percent is a significant number when we’re talking about millions of people. So AA isn’t perfect, runs this thread of reasoning. Have you got anything better?
 
Last edited:
The pseudo-science of Alcoholics Anonymous: There’s a better way to treat addiction - Salon.com
There are good answers to these objections. For now, I will simply say that there are indeed better treatments for addiction—but the issues with AA’s approach run far deeper than its statistical success rate. While it’s praiseworthy that some do well in AA, the problem is that our society has followed AA’s lead in presuming that 12-step treatment is good for the other 90 percent of people with addictions.

Any substantive conversation about treatment in this country must reckon with the toll levied when a culture encourages one approach to the exclusion of all others, especially when that culture limits the treatment options for suffering people, ignores advances in understanding addiction, and excludes and even shames the great majority of people who fail in the sanctioned approach.

The AA monopoly

AA began as a nonprofessional attempt to grapple with the alcoholism of its founders. It arose and took its famous twelve steps directly from the Oxford Group, a fundamentalist religious organization founded in the early twentieth century. It came to life on the day that its founder, Bill Wilson, witnessed a “bright flash of light” in a hospital room.

Although the fledgling organization lacked any scientific backing, research, or clinical experience to support its method, AA spread like wildfire through a country desperate for hope at the end of Prohibition and in the midst of the Great Depression. It soon became immaterial whether AA worked well or worked at all: it had claimed its place as the last best hope for beating the mighty specter of addiction. It had become the indispensable treatment, the sine qua non of addiction recovery in the United States. And science looked away.

AA has managed to survive, in part, because members who become and remain sober speak and write about it regularly. This is no accident: AA’s twelfth step expressly tells members to proselytize for the organization: “Having had a spiritual awakening as the result of these

Steps, we tried to carry this message to alcoholics, and to practice these principles in all our affairs.” Adherence to this step has created a classic sampling error: because most of us hear only from the people who succeeded in the program, it is natural to conclude that they represent the whole. In reality, these members speak for an exceptionally small percentage of addicts, as we will see.

Beyond these individual proselytizing efforts, AA makes inflated claims about itself. Its foundational document, Alcoholics Anonymous (commonly referred to as the “Big Book” and a perennial best seller), spells out a confident ethos regularly endorsed by AA members:

Rarely have we seen a person fail who has thoroughly followed our path. Those who do not recover are people who cannot or will not completely give themselves to this simple program, usually men and women who are constitutionally incapable of being honest with themselves. There are such unfortunates. They are not at fault; they seem to have been born that way. They are naturally incapable of grasping and developing a manner of living which demands rigorous honesty. Their chances are less than average. There are those, too, who suffer from grave emotional and mental disorders, but many of them do recover if they have the capacity to be honest.

In other words, the program doesn’t fail; you fail.

Imagine if similar claims were made in defense of an ineffective antibiotic. Imagine dismissing millions of people who did not respond to a new form of chemotherapy as “constitutionally incapable” of properly receiving the drug. Of course, no researchers would make such claims in scientific circles—if they did, they would risk losing their standing. In professional medicine, if a treatment doesn’t work, it’s the treatment that must be scrutinized, not the patient. Not so for Alcoholics Anonymous.

Walking the twelve steps

More than anything, AA offers a comforting veneer of actionable change: it is something you can do. Twelve steps sounds like science; it feels like rigor; it has the syntax of a roadmap. Yet when we examine these twelve steps more closely, we find dubious ideas and even some potentially harmful myths.
 
The pseudo-science of Alcoholics Anonymous: There’s a better way to treat addiction - Salon.com
Step 1: “We admitted we were powerless over alcohol, that our lives had become unmanageable.”

This step sounds appealing to some and grates heavily on others. The notion of declaring powerlessness is intended to evoke a sense of surrender that might give way to spiritual rebirth. Compelling as this is as a narrative device, it lacks any clinical merit or scientific backing.

Step 2: “Came to believe that a Power greater than ourselves could restore us to sanity.”

Many scholars have written about the close bond between AA and religion. This is perhaps inevitable: AA was founded as a religious organization whose design and practices hewed closely to its spiritual forerunner, the Oxford Group, whose members believed strongly in the purging of sinfulness through conversion experiences. As Bill Wilson wrote in the Big Book: “To some people we need not, and probably should not, emphasize the spiritual feature on our first approach. We might prejudice them. At the moment we are trying to put our lives in order. But this is not an end in itself. Our real purpose is to fit ourselves to be of maximum service to God.”

Religion can have a salutary effect on people in crisis, of course, and its strong emphasis on community bonds is often indispensable. But do these comforting feelings address the causes of addiction or lead to permanent recovery in any meaningful way? As we will see, the evidence is scant.

Step 3: “Made a decision to turn our will and our lives over to the care of God as we understood God.”

For an organization that has expressly denied religious standing and publicly claims a secular—even scientific—approach, it is curious that AA retains these explicit references to a spiritual power whose care might help light the way toward recovery. Even for addicts who opt to interpret this step secularly, the problem persists: why can’t this ultimate power lie within the addict?

Step 4: “Made a searching and fearless moral inventory of ourselves.”

The notion that people with addictions suffer from a failure of morality to be indexed and removed is fundamental to Alcoholics Anonymous. Yet addiction is not a moral defect, and to suggest that does a great disservice to people suffering with this disorder.

Step 5: “Admitted to God, to ourselves, and to another human being the exact nature of our wrongs.”

Step 6: “Were entirely ready to have God remove all these defects of character.”

Step 7: “Humbly asked God to remove our shortcomings.”

These steps rehash the problems of their predecessors: the religiosity, the admission of moral defectiveness, the embrace of powerlessness, and the search for a cure through divine purification. The degradation woven through these steps also seems unwittingly designed to exacerbate, rather than relieve, the humiliating feelings so common in addiction.

If moral self-flagellation could cure addiction, we could be sure there would be precious few addicts.

Step 8: “Made a list of all persons we had harmed and became willing to make amends to them all.”

Step 9: “Made direct amends to such people wherever possible, except when to do so would injure them or others.”

There is nothing inherently wrong with apologizing to those who have been harmed, directly or indirectly, by the consequences of addiction. The problem is the echo once more of the fundamentalist religious principle: that the path to recovery is to cleanse oneself of sin.

Yes, apologies can be powerful things, and there’s no question that reconciling with people can be a liberating and uplifting experience. But grounding this advice within a framework of treatment alters its timbre, transforming an elective act into one of penance.
 
This is a great attempt to appeal to feel goodery gibberish. Feel goodery that I understand. Of course we want people who have addictions to overcome them, and we certainly don't want to put them down for doing so. But the truth is, people who have harmful addictions, have them for a reason. That is because they have an inability to deal with reality. Whatever their situation may be, they find that their addiction gives them respite from dealing with it. This is nothing to be necessarily ashamed of, but what AA tries to do is replace alcohol with a religious, cultish doma. Just look at the 12 steps and tell me that they are not religious in nature. The 2nd step alone tells you all you need to know. "Come to believe that a power greater then ourselves could restore us to sanity". Alcoholics Anonymous : Twelve Steps and Twelve Traditions. Trying to insert religious dogma into a program that is suppose to be helping these people is simply disgusting in my view. It is kind of the same tactic many Christian organizations use when they are handing out rice to starving kids in Africa and include a bible along with the aid. That is why I look at AA as help for the weak minded. Instead of dealing with the reality of their situations, and speaking frankly about it, they are taught to relinquish themsleves to a higher power in order to become "saved" from the evils of alcohol. When in reality, its not the alcohol that is the problem. I think AA programs should be completely dismantled on the grounds that they are religious organizations which are completely illegally funded by the government.

This is an interesting article about AA. It states; "Peer-reviewed studies peg the success rate of AA somewhere between 5 and 10 percent. That is, about one of every fifteen people who enter these programs is able to become and stay sober." So not only is it cultish and religious in nature, it is also ineffective. If I took my car to a mechanic 10 times to get it fixed and he fixed it on the 10th time, I would be looking for another mechanic. I would not be funneling him business and money like our government funnels business and money to AA programs across the country. If my kid came home from school and got a passing grade for getting 1 out of 10 questions correct, I would pull him out of that school and demand it be defunded. AA is not only a proselytizing tool for religious dogma, it also gives false hope to people who really are in need of help. On top of that, the individuals who run this program are being paid for shoddy work.

The pseudo-science of Alcoholics Anonymous: There’s a better way to treat addiction - Salon.com



I couldn't sleep, so logged back in - am suddenly very very sleepy/tired after reading your posts - am about to snooze off and start snoring away. So, Thanks! :D
 
The group can be stronger but most of the times it is a cover for the weakness of the individuals... gangs are a prime example.

You are comparing AA to gangs? There is no comparison here. Gangs are not aimed at the good of the group AND the individual. Gangs are aimed towards the good of the leaders.

The student can do plenty without the teacher... you like to claim professional knowledge well here I trump you. You are wrong. 100%

No, you don't trump me. I have quite a bit of experience in that area, too. In a teacher-student relationship, both members are key in the learning process. I would think you would know that.

Of course I actually do... but I understand.

No, you don't.
 
I think AA has its place in helping people with addiction. However, I think that it only works on the weak minded who are also addicted to alcohol because they are weak minded. Some people just don't respond to dogma and, what seems to feel like, a religious cult like atmosphere. Most thinking people would be wary of such a thing.

This is a fairly ignorant post. Firstly, your perception that addicts are "weak-minded" is nothing but an opinion and holds no bearing in accuracy. Secondly, your perception that AA is a "religious cult like atmosphere" is also inaccurate. There are certainly some AA meetings that are more religious-based than others, but the program itself is not... not unless one chooses it to be. Oh, and the "higher power" does not have to be God. Plenty of people choose other things. If you read some of the posts by atheist AA members, you'd know that.
 
This is a great attempt to appeal to feel goodery gibberish. Feel goodery that I understand. Of course we want people who have addictions to overcome them, and we certainly don't want to put them down for doing so. But the truth is, people who have harmful addictions, have them for a reason. That is because they have an inability to deal with reality. Whatever their situation may be, they find that their addiction gives them respite from dealing with it. This is nothing to be necessarily ashamed of, but what AA tries to do is replace alcohol with a religious, cultish doma. Just look at the 12 steps and tell me that they are not religious in nature. The 2nd step alone tells you all you need to know. "Come to believe that a power greater then ourselves could restore us to sanity". Alcoholics Anonymous : Twelve Steps and Twelve Traditions. Trying to insert religious dogma into a program that is suppose to be helping these people is simply disgusting in my view. It is kind of the same tactic many Christian organizations use when they are handing out rice to starving kids in Africa and include a bible along with the aid. That is why I look at AA as help for the weak minded. Instead of dealing with the reality of their situations, and speaking frankly about it, they are taught to relinquish themsleves to a higher power in order to become "saved" from the evils of alcohol. When in reality, its not the alcohol that is the problem. I think AA programs should be completely dismantled on the grounds that they are religious organizations which are completely illegally funded by the government.

Firstly, AA is not funded by the governemnt in any way shape or form. Believing that it is demonstrates that you don't know the first thing of what you are discussing. Secondly, as I said in my previous post, the "higher power" can refer to anything one chooses. Anywhere God is mentioned, an alternative can be inserted if one chooses. AA is no more of a religious group then any other support group. Each individual group has it's own personality. Some may be more dogmatic, some more atheistic, some looser, etc... You are correct about the reason for addiction, however you are incorrect about the meaning behind that. Addiction is a coping skill. We all use coping skills to deal with difficult things. Some use coping skills that are healthy and productive. Others use some that are unhealthy and unproductive. This is not a refection on the strength or weakness of the individual, but of choices one makes.
 
This is a fairly ignorant post. Firstly, your perception that addicts are "weak-minded" is nothing but an opinion and holds no bearing in accuracy. Secondly, your perception that AA is a "religious cult like atmosphere" is also inaccurate. There are certainly some AA meetings that are more religious-based than others, but the program itself is not... not unless one chooses it to be. Oh, and the "higher power" does not have to be God. Plenty of people choose other things. If you read some of the posts by atheist AA members, you'd know that.

You can be as dismissive as you like, but only the weak minded would not see it for what it is and that its goal is religious indoctrination. I really don't know what other angle I could take in debating the obvious. Once you read the 12 steps that these programs rely on in order to graduate people to soberness. Then I would also point to the factual statistics that state that as high as 95% of the people who attend relapse. Sounds to me nearly as effective as religious dogma as well. I generally don't like to use popular sayings for fear of lacking originality, so I'll change it up a bit. If it walks like a sheep, talks like a sheep, and looks like a sheep, its probably a sheep.
 
Back
Top Bottom