Originally Posted by
keithj 
Whenever this topic comes up (and it always comes up, lol), I think it's important in the discussion to differentiate between a pure addict and one that might be both an addict and an alcoholic (of which there are many) if they only knew the truth about themselves. Certainly in AA, we should afford someone the opportunity to learn that truth. We can do so by sharing our own experience with what the BB talks about in the Dr.'s Opionion and first 3 chapters. We aren't going to help them get to that truth by talking about their drug use, thereby enabling them to avoid the alcohol question altogether. More is required than just telling them to 'insert drug of choice' when they hear the word alcohol. All that does is prevent them from considering their potential alcohol problem, and most addicts first walking in don't consider alcohol to be a problem for them, despite continually relapsing to their DOC via an alcohol pathway.
In full support of AA's singleness of purpose and in carrying our message to others, we owe it to anyone who walks into the room to discover for themselves whether or not they belong there.
This rings very true to me. Keeping the focus on alcoholism. Jane did specifically say to me that she was going to substitute "addict" for alcoholic in the meetings and literature so she could relate, and perhaps I jumped to conclusions too quickly at the idea of that and thought, "she needs NA." Another way to approach the issue would be to suggest Jane focus on her drinking in accordance to the Dr's Opinion and the first 3 chapters.
Okay, very good. Makes sense. Thank you.