dwtbd

I had the wrong idea about programs too. Through societal/cultural osmosis I developed the idea that the only way to recovery was to 'do a program', but what I knew of them I didn't like and wasn't about to try.The bad part for me was the idea that 'a program' was what was ultimately going to fix what needed 'fixing' and since I was not going for it, the fixing would just not happen. My AV really used this idea and used it good or a long time.
When drinking got to the point that my inner debate revolved around either continuing to drink , even though I didn't want to, or blowing my brains out , I got desperate enough to give a program a shot, I was ready for the 'fixing'. I literally closed the gun drawer and logged on the internet to find out where to go , how to handle the anxiety that reached such point that I was feeling at the edge if not 'in' a psychotic break.
I stumbled on SR and saw mention of AVRT (here on SR in the Secular Connections forum), I learned that quitting really means only one thing, permanent abstinence, and that programs weren't the only way to get there.

Wholesome

So glad you found SR and AVRT dwtbd

dwtbd

Me too

dwtbd

and spirited too , glad You found SR too

Fusion

Thank you Dwtbd .

I just wish this thread had been posted by Zenchaser in 'Alcoholism' sub-forum, where the footfall is enormously higher than here, in the 'Recovery' sub-forum. For instance, right now, there are over 300 people viewing 'Alcoholisim' yet just 13 viewing this forum, 'Recovery'. Mmmmm.

Algorithm

The thing about the notion of using a Group of Drunks as one's Higher Power, is that presumably, alcoholics are beyond human aid when it comes to their alcoholism, as per the Big Book, pages 24-25. A group of drunks, presumably all powerless over alcohol, and without the capacity to manage their own lives, amounts to human aid. I'm not convinced that turning one's life and will over to such a Higher Power would help someone who is beyond human aid.

This doesn't bother me, personally, because AA's definition of an alcoholic is rather unique, and includes, among other things, the inability to manage one's own life, as per "How It Works" in the Big Book and Step 1.

I can understand this, but for my part, I don't mind Centered's input. To the extend that anything is truly amiss in the world of addiction recovery, I believe that it is mostly due to a lack of open discussion on the subject. As I noted previously, AA's definition of a 'real alcoholic' is unique to AA, which understands alcoholism not as sinful in and of itself, but as a manifestation (a symptom) of sin.

Jack Trimpey has been asked by many to 'tone it down' for the sake of not scaring people away from Rational Recovery and its method, AVRT. He has repeatably ignored such requests, but RR is his company, and to its credit, RR has always welcomed criticism as healthy, and they have published some of it. In other words, whatever their faults, they do not discourage 'bashing' of RR as a way to pre-empt discussion.

Wholesome

I was suicidal when I went to AA in 2010. I was drinking to get drunk every day ..... I would have to think about when was the last day that I didn't drink. I remember laying in the bath tub and staring at my wrists wishing I had the guts. I was in so much pain. I would wake up in the mornings and think if I had a gun I'd shoot myself in the face. I'd had a series of devastating events happen back to back to back in my life so even though I had a drinking problem before, those few years were the darkest. I walked into AA and bawled like a baby, I was a mess. I never finished the steps though, I couldn't get past step 4, I would try and just sob. I felt awful all the time and all I thought about was drinking to not have to feel so bad. I drank after about 4 months and continued until I became active again on SR 2 years ago and found AVRT which struck a chord but I chose to listen to my AV and tried to use AVRT to control my drinking rather than stop it. Nuts I know. I was only drinking twice a week these last 2 years but the hangovers I would give myself would last 2 days. I never felt good. Sometimes I wonder if the fact that I was able to cut myself back the way I did makes me a "real" alcoholic but then I think, ya know I've thought I had a drinking problem since 2007 and it's 2017. 10 years I've known that I don't drink like a normal person. So yeah I'd say I fit the criteria.

When I started the thread I didn't know it would evolve the way it has, but you're right it would be more effective in the alcoholism sub-forum.

Wholesome

I've always questioned anything that you can't even talk about. If you are discouraged to even talk about it then what's really going on? Why?

Anna

I have removed a couple of posts which are flaming.

Is there a point in judging and criticizing another member's recovery? I don't see one.

What is to be gained by throwing shade on another person? Nothing.

What would be gained by moving on and if necessary, putting the other member on Ignore? Peace of mind, self-respect, belief in yourself, feeling proud that you chose the high road - so many benefits.

scottmandue

I am really enjoying this thread and thank Zen for starting.

For starters what is 'IT' you all are referring to?

I think AA is a great program for some (it obviously IS working for a large group of people) but I also don't believe in 'one size fits all'.

For me AA isn't working, I'm thinking it is because I'm an introvert and going to meeting sucks all the energy out of me.

I'm a very religious person AND a book lover, the bible is MY number one book, but there are dozens (if not hundreds) of great authors putting out books on psychology/theology that are helping people everyday to live better lives, however when I go to a BB study I feel a little odd at the reverence they attribute to the BB.

It is also too easy for me to use the disease nomenclature to deceive those who love me and want me to get sober... hey my wife can't be mad at me because I have a disease! If you call it a mental illness most mental illnesses are a chemical imbalance and can be healed by taking drugs.

After struggling with substance abuse (I use substance abuse because alcohol is just one in a long list of drugs I have self medicated with for a few decades.) I have read a stack of book on addiction, probably been to a dozen or so counselors over the years, and gone to hundreds of AA meetings... and I still don't know what is wrong with me... but I do know that the AA dogma isn't working (sorry, no disrespect to those it is working for).

I do like AVRT

Wholesome

Hi scottmandue.

The IT in AVRT is your addiction which we call the Beast. Essentially it is your lizard brain which regulates your drive for food, air, sex and once you have abused a substance enough to get addicted that part of your brain starts to think it is essential for survival. You can hear this drive through the Addictive Voice or AV. IT's that voice that tells you drink. You've had a hard day, You deserve a drink. Your problem isn't that bad, Let's have a drink. The Beast or lower brain can only use the AV to get you to supply IT with alcohol. In AVRT (addictive voice recognition technique) we learn to recognize that voice and dissociate from it. You don't drink. Your Beast or IT drinks. If you want to learn more about it come check out the Secular Connections forum here on SR. There is a ton of good information and other people who have mastered the technique and will be able to explain it better than I have. Come join us and break free of your addiction once and for all!

dwtbd

scottmandue
I'm fairly sure you have a good idea on what IT is ( the desire for alcohol, intoxication), but like zenchaser suggested I too would recommend looking into RR/AVRT for a different perspective on how to handle IT. There are great threads here on SR in the Secular Connections forum.
wish you well and hope to see you around

soberlicious

Hi Centered,
Please understand that everything you posted is true and correct, within the context of AA and from the AA point of view. It is by no means universal truth. I'm fine with opposing view points, I only suggest you not frame your opinions as fact.
No thanks. I'm good.

Gottalife

I am so glad I joined a different AA to this. This is nothing like the AA that saved my life, or the organisation a medical expert recently decribed as "the most successful self help organisation in history", even though I don't go for the self help part.

Permanent recovery is exactly what the program is about, and it is exactly what I have been given.

As for the "real alcoholic" AA had a fairly good definition of what they mean by that, and it includes loss of control and choice. It has become popular, maybe it is a social media thing, to claim to be an alcoholic who has control and choice, and if it is challenged, it seems to cause great offense.

Reading the discussion I was hoping I might pick up something new. But really, nothing has changed. Silkworth, according the the big book, every few days would send along a candidate whom he thought could recover on a spiritual basis. That tends to indicate that there were others who could not, and I don't know what happened to them. The same thing is still happening.

So maybe the big book term "real alcoholic" could be changed to "alcoholic candidate suitable for spiritual recovery on a self selected basis through comparison of their own experience with that reported in the big book." The book either rings true or it doesn't.

After all, what is the big book but largely a catalogue of errors that lead to drinking, and some suggestions on how to avoid them. The whole thing is experience based, and it has worked pretty well for a while now, for those who want to work it.

Wholesome

Hi Gottalife. What I was trying to say in that post that it is my opinion that AA nurtures the AV with these messages of trying to control one's external environment to stay sober. HALT, triggers, resentments, God, sponsors, meetings, ism's. It's not surprising since it was founded by addicted people with AV's of their own who didn't know about the AV. Maybe if they did they would have made it different? In my opinion it's much harder to break one's addiction if it's contingent on meeting these requirements. How can anyone control all of these factors? For me it's best to say that it doesn't matter what is going on in my world there is no option to drink, and that any part of me that thinks otherwise is my addiction which is not to be entertained or listened to.

The thing is that there are a lot of people who do want it to work for them, who try it and give it their all, only to find that it doesn't work as long as they are trying to live their life with their AV still calling the shots. What if you find your faith shaken? What if you can't get to a meeting? What if you are triggered? There are too many what if's.

As far as AA's success goes, it depends on what you read and who wrote about it. I've read that it has some pretty abysmal success rates. I do agree though that for those it works for they credit it with saving their lives and transforming them, and for that reason they are incredibly loyal and grateful. I also agree with parts of it. I think taking some kind of stock as to where you are once you quit is a good thing, as well as making an amends to those who you've harmed. And of course using what you've learned to help others get well.

Gottalife

"Hi Gottalife. What I was trying to say in that post that it is my opinion that AA nurtures the AV with these messages of trying to control one's external environment to stay sober. How caHALT, triggers, resentments, God, sponsors, meetings, ism's. It's not surprising since it was founded by addicted people with AV's of their own who didn't know about the AV. Maybe if they did they would have made it different? In my opinion it's much harder to break one's addiction if it's contingent on meeting these requirements. How can anyone control all of these factors? "

Hi Zenchaser, of course they cant control all these factors and that is the fundamental basis of AAs defintion of the problem. Pages 61 and 62 of the big book talks about how our efforts at control have been a big part of the problem. HALT and triggers are not AA constructs. "Any attmept to shield that alcoholic from temptation (triggers) is doomed to failure".

Meetings/working with others has pretty solid research to back it up these days. Chances of staying sober roughly double for those helping others. (Crapes 2002)

'The thing is that there are a lot of people who do want it to work for them, who try it and give it their all, only to find that it doesn't work as long as they are trying to live their life with their AV still calling the shots. What if you find your faith shaken? What if you can't get to a meeting? What if you are triggered? There are too many what if's."

Most people who come to AA don't give it their all. They go to meetings and buy into the message of don't drink and go to meetings. They can become prisoners of the fellowship whose lives fall apart if they miss a few meetings. And they'll here a lot of treatment centre jargon about triggers and such like, and will also hear a lot of drama. That is not the AA message, but unfortunately many think it is.

Over the years I have had the privilage to work with quite a few people. With many the realtionship stalls at step four. You will see that as a common theme among relapsers here. They never got through step four. Then they say AA doesn't work, when the truth is they never tried AA, only bits of it that were not too uncomforatble. But of those I have seen honestly work all the steps and adopt the AA way of life, most recover. And when we have recovered, none of those what ifs have any effect at all. They are not relavent.

"As far as AA's success goes, it depends on what you read and who wrote about it. I've read that it has some pretty abysmal success rates. "

Yes I have read about those rates too. They are based on the idea that if someone walks in the door of a meeting, picks up a desire chip, and never returns, they are a failure. AA keeps no success statistics, but it states in the foreword to the second edition, after 20 years or so experience, that more than 50% recover. But they make an important qualification. The person actually took the steps. Bill W also wrote that around 60% of people who turned up at AA left without trying the program. Saem things seems to happen today. My experience over the years backs this up.

Even my rehab group reflected these numbers. There were ten of us all under forty. I was the youngest at 21. We were all end stage alcoholics.
When our group was discharged, two, Arthur and Len went to AA, got into the program, and are still sober today. The other eight of us went off to do our own thing. Within a few weeks the first of us was dead, in a house fire.By the end of a yeyar, I was the only one still alive, and I went to AA, worked the steps, and recovered. Never needed to drink since.

The statistical result was great for all concerned. The hospitals was 30%, very good, AAs was 100%, for those who worked the program. The seven that died also attended the weekly AA meeting while in the hospital, so probably figure as AA failures even though they never worked the program.

Being in the group that didn't continue with AA, I understand why they didn't pursue it. Like me, they couldn't connect the dots, it didn't make sense, we didn't understand the seriousness of our situation. The ones that died of course gave a very good demonstration of how serious this illness is.

Probably the too biggest facts about AA for me are that my sobriety does not depend on meetings, and that due to its spiritual approach, I have complete freedom to go anywhere and do anything. I have a 100% reliable 24/7 defence against this first drink no matter what happens.

I do like meetings however, They are my chance to give back. There are no meetings where I am at the moment, so I haven't been to one in several months. My life has not fallen apart.

Wholesome

That was a really thoughtful and great response Gottalife. Thanks. I do agree that AA works for some people who wholeheartedly embrace the program and I think that's wonderful. I'm really glad that it worked for you and for anyone else! I really am.

I do wish that RR was as mainstream and as available as AA because it really works too. It seems that people find it after going the AA route. If it was a common known resource it could save a lot of folks from the misery they are living in. That's what I love about SR, there's so much information about people from all over the place sharing their tools and knowledge for the common good of helping each other break their addictions.

GetSmart

giving a little bump to this one. I actually don't mind that it is somewhat hidden in the recovery folder, as it would have been knocked down to page 7 by now if it had been in one of the more visited areas.


anyway, to stay on topic, are allergies a disease? not really trying to stir the pot, it is just that whatever label you want to give it, for me at least there is a reason why I should abstain from alcohol yet struggle to do so. the majority of the population has no such trouble. so I guess like having green eyes is not a disease, it is something one inherits or maybe develops. I guess we don't develop green eyes. Maybe skin pigmentation is better since we can kill ourselves with trying to change that. I dunno. Don't do AA, have never been to a meeting, but so far have not been able to kill, or frankly even to weaken, the beast. BP has been thwarted by I don't know what. All I know is that I'm struggling with the issues brought up by this thread and certainly put myself more into the avrt camp (if we have to have camps; that sounds too much like the vocabulary of war). I do know that I have a condition that makes me different from many others, and though I didn't recognize it until much later in life (52 now), it was present from the moment I had my first drink forty years ago. I understand the need to deconstruct AA's at times dogmatic language and practice, but I do think it depends both on one's own understanding of it as well as a particular group, some being more dogmatic than others. This, of course, all coming from someone who has never stepped foot into a meeting. Seems a lot like a religion with a foundational text and various interpretations (compare Luther's "personal" relationship to God he opposed to the "only through the vessel of the priest and Catholic faith" view that began lovely wars of religion). OK I should stop there, as it is a bit rambling. Only trying to say that whether one turns to AA or AVRT, it is only a segment of the population who have any idea of what that means. Whatever you want to call it, or rationalize the need to kill the beast, the fact remains that the beast remains ever ready to strike and for me that's because I'm an alcoholic. thanks for giving me a space to explore what that means to me and find some support to arm myself against the phenomenon. I do agree that it's ridiculous the congratulations given to ex-smokers and other addicts but that the refusal to drink is still seen as a failure, not success

zerothehero

All side topics aside...

I think it is relevant to note that the DSM V (American Psychiatric Association) does not use the term alcoholism. In earlier versions they used the terms alcohol dependence and alcohol abuse, but they've even dropped the terms dependence and abuse. Regardless of the substance, the diagnosis is substance use disorder, mild, moderate, or severe (i.e. alcohol use disorder or cocaine use disorder). There are eleven criteria, and if a person meets enough of them they are considered to have a disorder, mild, moderate, or severe depending on the number of criteria met.

I like the logic behind this system. It implies that it ain't a problem unless it's a problem, and that the level of the disorder is kind of on a sliding scale. And yes, it is viewed as a mental or behavioral disorder, which is to say it is a disease, or a dis-ease. By definition, a person with substance use disorder is not entirely at ease about or due to their substance use.

It also means that a person can be in remission. The fact that it is a dis-ease does not relinquish responsibility. Heck, many people are quite responsible for their type II diabetes and possible recovery from the disease via diet, exercise, and sometimes medication. It also does not imply a permanent cure. A person who is remission from a substance use disorder is at risk of meeting criteria if use resumes, just like a person recovering from type II diabetes could suffer worsening symptoms if they decide to sit on the couch and eat donuts all day.

I no longer meet criteria for alcohol use disorder. I know that I was genetically and environmentally predisposed, but I chose to drink. And I also chose to quit drinking and starting taking better care of myself. My disease is in remission and I'm as responsible for that as I was responsible for getting myself in a pickle in the first place.

freshstart57

I will never drink again. I will never change my mind about this. I am simply done with my horrendous past of a daily fifth of cheap vodka, and the shame and the misery and the depression and anger and sickness. Done. ISM? I don't really understand the nature of the construct, and how it is specific to alcoholics and not other addicts. Any definition could as easily apply to those other addicts, or even to some folks never addicted to anything at all.

Anyway, there is stuff that needs doing, and it needs doing by me. So Imma do it! Onward!