Obviously, NA does have an opinion regarding members on prescribed medication IN OUR MEETINGS. If you read the bulletin all the way through, you'll see that there are guidelines regarding members who are drug replacement programs. Hence, if there are NA guidleines...there is an NA opinion. This isn't an outside issue.
I agree with you, Alera, somewhat. I should've said NA has an opinion about drug replacement programs such as methadone instead of saying "prescribed medication." And the piece you're refering to that suggests members share in meetings is talking about those who "
experience disease or injury."
I, too, wish more NA members (or any addict concerned) would read Times of Illness and other NA literature, including the Basic Text. And what I'd wish more, is that they'd pay attention to the
context as well as the
content of the literature. That way, some confusion could be avoided.
The pamphlet, In Times of Illness,
is not addressing medications prescribed for drug replacement therapy. It's talking about situations where we can become ill or injured (after we get clean) and require medications for those illnesses and injuries. Even our Basic Text tells us:
"This is a program of total abstinence. There are times, however, such as the case of health problems involving surgery and/or extreme physical injury, when medication may be valid. This does not constitute a license to use. There is no safe use of drugs for us. Our bodies don't know the difference between the drugs prescribed by a physician for pain and the drugs prescribed by ourselves to get high. As addicts, our skill at self-deception will be at its peak in such situations. Often our minds will manufacture additional pain as an excuse to use....In this program of total abstinence, however, we need to feel no guilt after having taken a minimum amount of medication prescribed by an informed professional for extreme pain." - Basic Text, page 98- 99.
I, for one, understand the importance of protecting an atmosphere of recovery in our meetings so that the message isn't blurred by members under the influence. I've witnessed new members (who were on methadone) nodding in meetings. I've also heard the same members ramble incoherently when given the opportunity to share. What kind of message are they sending to those who aren't using at all? That it's okay to come to meetings and share while they're high? I don't see it as being any different than the drunk being asked to listen (instead of share) at an AA meeting.
I don't know if NA will ever view drug replacement therapy as
medical care (like that specifically referred to in the pamphlet), especially when the vast majority of the fellowship got clean without it. As LucyO said, NA isn't about tapering or substitution, and tapering or maintaining an addiction (the easier, softer way) is something NA does have an opinion about.
"Does NA have the right to limit members participation in meetings?" We believe so.