lucyo

i'm not sure why it was discontinued... maybe cause some see it as giving an opinion on an outside issue... even though it says 'na doesn't address the issue of caffiene nicotine and sugar, it leaves it to the individual' its still addressing the issue by having a bulletin about it?

kinda like how the clarity statement that is read in so many groups talks about 'theres no need to say addict and alcoholic, or sober, because in na we talk about addiction and recovery...' but we're saying those 'words' when we read the clarity statement.

Cathy31

What I think in red...[QUOTE=Barto;1715951]

I also glean that a strong majority feel that mind altering drugs with the exceptions of caffeine, nicotine, and prescription drugs (subject to guidelines and used as prescribed), would constitute a relapse for them. Is that the way others here see it?

I see it exactly like this. I also think regardless of what it might say or not say - i've seen it 'say' this somewhere in the literature, that quite clearly for an alcoholic to abuse illegal or prescription drugs - i.e. get high would mean re-setting their sobriety date. I.e. you are not sober if you are 'high' regardless of what you might want to call yourself!
[/QUOTE]

Barto

You do mean NA literature rather than AA literature, right? I ask because you use the word sober rather than clean.

Cathy31

No, when I'm giving my extra bit, about 'for the alcoholic' (as you referred to such in the thread, the alcoholic and drug use) then I'm referring to AA literature.

THe first part is relating to NA and directly answers your question.
\
Hope this helps :/

Gmoney

Actually, Barto, I felt we had reached a plateau long ago. I think I even mentioned that in my PM to you. No offense is taken and I hope the same for you. I was just playing along. I figured you'd get tired sooner or later...but I was wrong. LOL!!!

I'm grateful that LucyO provided qoutes straight from the literature in her response to illustrate NA's position (not mine or her's). I have refrained from doing so, except bits and pieces throughout this thread. Yet, the conclusions that can be drawn are the same because the literature says the same things throughout it. I posted Bulletin #17 on this site months ago, but obviously it was changed long before I read it.

As I also said earlier, we addicts - who are members of NA - know what we mean by "abstinence from all mood-changing, mind-altering substances." It is rather difficult to explain to those who are not NA members, but as I also said, honesty and common sense play a major part in it - as opposed to justifying, rationalizing or as Doug put it, "looking for loopholes." I still contend that our literature doesn't have to be re-written to satisfy those outside of our fellowship or anyone trying to "pin us down" to a specific (black & white) explanation.

I agree. IMO, being clean in NA isn't about social use, part-time use or occasional use of drugs. None of us can force another addict to stop using whatever they use, and we have no control over how they refer to themselves. Once again, honesty and identification are the keys to unlocking the doors of denial in regard to whether they're clean or not. In order to truly understand what's what...an addict, or potential addict, has to get inside "the circle" (see, "Our Symbol") as opposed to standing on the outside trying to figure it out. I think we pretty much all agree that "complete abstinence" doesn't include caffiene, smoking or prescriptions taken as directed.

Thanks to everyone that participated thus far!! (you too, Barto!!)

:rof

Barto

Does NA mean to include addictions other than drugs in its fold, as sex or gambling addictions, or does NA strictly deal with drug addiction? Sorry if it appears to be a dumb question, but I really don’t know the answer at this point. I would have thought drugs only, and specifically narcotics, until recently.

Barto

No offense taken. I'm not easily offended (which helps when you are as literal as I try to be). I was really just trying to get to the bottom line – if there is one. I also wanted to hear others’ perspectives, and see whether anyone had some further literature. Speaking of which, I wish I could read the entire bulletin 17. Is it around anywhere? That might provide some insight.

If you say so, I’ll assume that everyone has a general idea of their own definition of "abstinence from all … mind-altering substances." But as someone who is curious and thinking about going to an NA meeting, I want to know what that would mean for me. I mean, I know that abstinence from all drugs, or even all mind altering drugs is not precise, so I have to wonder what NA really means when it states that. Whether or not it needs to be rewritten is up to NA. I will say, though, as others have pointed out, allowing it to be self-defined seems to me that it would leave open the big door to rationalization (especially for those in early recovery).

I’d still like to hear from anyone else that would contribute their thoughts, or even better, post some links to some official NA literature. But if being “clean” really comes down to either: (a) an individual definition; or (b) abstinence from all mind altering drugs other than caffeine, nicotine, and prescription drugs taken as directed; I can live with that.

I’ll just be sure to tell the folks at the NA meeting I go to that Gary W from SR told me this. LOL

And what do you mean “thank you too, Barto?” I participated, dang it! LOL.

Gmoney

I provided the link to the NA website twice during this thread (both lead to Bulletin # 17), but here it is as I posted it here at SR last July (2007).

http://www.soberrecovery.com/forums/...addiction.html

Yeah..right...you do just that. LOL!!

lucyo

we talk about 'addiction' in our first step, specifically 'drug addiction'
i believe the reason we say 'addiction' and not drug addiction in the 1st step is because using is considered a symptom of addiction.
but when you read our literature you'll see its talking about drugs.

my addiction manifests itself in other ways than just abusing drugs, particularly once i stopped using! i stopped smoking, i stopped shoplifting, overeatting is a problem off and on in my recovery. so i can theoretically apply the steps of NA as they're written to any problem i might have fairly easily.

Barto

Wait. Are you saying that you have AA literature that speaks to drug use as being part of sobriety? What literature? I don’t disagree with what you are saying about drug abuse, but I don’t know of any AA literature that addresses the issue.

As far as I know the only literature that addresses the issue of drugs (outside of Big Book stories where drug use is part of that writer's story) is the pamphlet entitled “The AA Member – Medications and Other Drugs.” And in that literature it clearly states that “AA is not a program against drugs.” Sobriety is defined as “freedom from alcohol.” I think drug use is officially an outside issue.

For your convenience:

Alcoholics Anonymous :

That said, I personally don’t take illegal drugs, or take legal drugs illegally.

Barto

I read a bunch of the NA literature online, but none addresses the issue of caffeine and nicotine except that older version of the Bulletin you cut and paste. Is that the only difference from the newer version?

Barto

Gary, I was looking for the older version of Bulletin 17. Thanks for the link though. As I said, I did do some reading – everything I could see that was relevant.

Gmoney

I don't think that older version of Bulletin # 17 is available anymore...at least that's what LucyO said. I've got a guy working on it. He says he has a copy, but it isn't online anywhere. I also understand why they retracted it. Like she said:

..as I mentioned before, it can be viewed as a 10th Tradition conflict or compromise.

Barto..did you get to read, "In Times of Illness?"

Barto

It provides guidelines that are similar to AA’s medication guidelines for avoiding a relapse into drinking.

I doubt there is much more to the older version of Bulletin 17 that is relevant though. I think NA just flat excludes caffeine and nicotine from its definition of drugs – only now it doesn’t specifically state so. Too bad. I think it should. Like Lucyo, I think it would be helpful. Of course, maybe then someone would break open some caffeine capsules and start snorting. LOL.

I don’t know where you could get pure nicotine. I did read an article that stated that seven out ten cocaine addicts thought they were injected with cocaine after being injected with nicotine. Can you believe it? Most thought it was cocaine!

Gmoney

Lol!!

Gmoney

I had to go back and read this one again...especially after visiting the SA forum recently.

Marcus

Yes. I think it is time to get to a meeting FOR SURE.

Gmoney

Lol

SugarScars

I follow a particular healing-focused lifestyle which believes any remedy at the wrong time and in the wrong amount can be a poison.

Black-and-white (or rigid) thinking is a symptom of addiction.

Untreated addicts will not be able to see the full spectrum of the rainbow: everything must be divided into "right" and "wrong", blanket statements lacking qualifiers.

This thought process is what got us all here in the first place. It's common in adolescent thought, but our brains are to continue developing into adult brains, which can process contradictions. The adolescent brain can't process contradictions. Many people begin using heavily in adolescence, and may be stuck there mentally for while,but with time and abstinence they should hopefully be able to recover from this "black-and-white" "all-or-nothing" mentality, if they choose to do so.

Those who can't get the dreaded "personality disorder" diagnoses which probably are actually just brain trauma from addiction that never healed ... But with a healing lifestyle, everyone should be able to heal in time, with patience.

LOL ... This thread is a million years old ... But for what it's worth.