Free Speech Allowed

[BartR]

Dave Darwin's recent post and the energetic brouhahahah over the last two weeks from Todd's um, (almost) diatribe served to clarify some of my thinking.

When I first read Jack Trimpy's book, "Rational Recovery" apart from the excellent recovery advice (for the most part) I found myself thinking that "If these people just spent less time bashing AA and more time working on not drinking they would be better off." And when I first found LifeRing, from time to time the subject of AA would come up in the chat room, be roundly censured and lambasted, and I found myself thinking, "Why so much criticism of AA? It works for some people." In a telephone call with a Lifering member a few months ago she remarked the same thing. "What's with all the AA bad-mouthing by some of those people?"

Over time, and after musing (usually while riding my bike - I have a lot of time to think then and am undistracted) at length, I don't feel that way anymore.

First and foremost is the dirth of intellectual honesty and the tardy, syncopated and outdated philosophy. AA's inconsistency, hypocrisy and circular logic are so rampant that I'll only mention two here. I find it inconcievable that by far the most common and accepted "recovery" methodology in our society, indeed the world, is AA. Seriously, is that the best we have available to offer to help people? A system who's philosophy is based on bronze-age myths? I mean this is 2009 not 2000BCE! Further, the "big book" was written almost 80 years ago. It is hardly a modern treatment modality.

This is by far this is the biggest problem I have with AA.

Second, there is a ponderous and entrenched treatment industry out there and 90%+ of the so called "counselors" in it seem to assert that this antiquated method of treatment is the only one available. I was going to give them a pass on this because I was thinking that "maybe they just don't know there are alternatives?" But these people are supposed to be the "experts" and they have an obligation as treatment professionals to know what is available. AND TO OFFER IT!!!

AND TO OFFER IT!

[Andy W.]

I agree with what everyone has said about the "cultish" aspects of AA, which tries to rob a person of their individuality. Not to mention its emphasis on "spiritual and character shortcommings" which is designed to make people fee inadequate to deal with their own addiction.

And as mentioned by Bart, one of the problems with AA is that it is almost 80 years old and has become entrenched in the recovery marketplace, and has been accepted by people and institutions that should know better. With time and programs like LifeRing this can change.

AA is also stuck in the medical understanding of that time. (For this I recomend the book, Change Your Brain, Change Yoiur Life, by neuropsychiatrist Dr. Daniel Amens. It has some good sections on how the brain works in relation to addiction).

[Rick F.]

The concept of "deflation at depth" is a wholesale borrowing from Buchman's Oxford Groups. The technique applies to only about a third of human beings, by temperament; it can do serious damage to the other two-thirds of us -- and it does. (From the personal accounts I have read of Buchman, it seems he was a thoroughly disagreeable man to be around.)

[France]

I got sober in AA but drifted away for virtually all the reasons everyone here has touched on. But I usually refrain from AA-bashing because it's the people - many AA members and their pesky human nature - that cause the problems, not AA itself. I've read a bit of the history and Bill W sounds like a fascinating, complicated, idealistic and open-minded guy (who even tried LSD in his spiritual quest) who would probably be heartbroken by how AA has evolved and is forced on people. He painstakingly fought for Traditions that would prevent human nature from corrupting the organization, but human nature always seems to have it's ugly way.

So I try to always direct my criticisms at "a large portion of AA members" rather than at AA the organization. I have a lot of resentments towards some AA members - and even more so, the "treatment professionals" and courts who mandate attendance. As someone who did enjoy and love so much about AA in the early 80's, I blame the treatment programs/professionals for mandating AA attendance and not letting people chose for themselves (as the Traditions would have had them do - attraction not promotion). And in the process, ruining the program that was actually pretty cool when I joined.

Because once people started flooding into the meetings because they were told they had to attend, the quality of program membership went way down fast. This was the early to mid 80's (in Chicago). Before that, people crawled in on their hands and knees, were grateful to be there, respected the right of everyone else to determine the course of their lives and, in my experience at least, genuinely tried to remain humble and avoid any form of prostyletizing or promotion. But once people started pouring in from treatment programs, that all changed and the program became more dominated by human nature than the traditions, humility and wisdom. That's when I bailed.

Bottom line, AA was the first place where I heard "take what you need and leave the rest". I loved that the steps were "suggested" as a program of recovery. And that the only requirement for membership was "a desire to stop drinking". AA was the first no b.s. organization, group, institution, place - whatever - that I'd ever found.
That people have turned it into a place of considerable b.s. (at times) isn't the fault of the organization, the steps or the program itself.

[Donkey H]

I don't know a thing about how AA operates. Not on the level of how they conduct their meetings, nor how they conduct their organization. I was always a bit turned off by the religious wordings, but, in fairness, a great deal of my avoidance was because I still wanted to drink.

However, I can say that most AA members come across as crass zealots a great deal of the time. It's not just their occasional references to religion that turned me off, but it's the actual METHODOLOGY that seems religious. If you don't worship Jesus, you will go to hell, and if you don't come to AA, you will die drunk in a gutter. I find this sort of scare tactic to be unproductive.

I have even been to Lifering meetings where people have been invited to stay at the meeting, despite being under the influence. I find this sort of compassion to be not just important, but NECESSARY in my own, personal recovery. I do have mixed feelings about this, but that's a topic for another day.