Originally Posted by
Gottalife 
On the other hand the problem drinker does not need to do this work, because they would have been ok regardless.
Maybe, maybe not. Problem drinkers frequently become alcoholics.
This is where correct labelling has quite serious implications.
I don't want to make this any more complicated than it need be because it might drive away someone who is already confused enough, but correct labeling as determined by whom? Oneself, an AA member, a doctor, a psychiatrist? I agree it can have serious implications. It can also have serious implications if there is a misdiagnosis. As I mentioned in an earlier post, an old timer suggested to me that I might not be bad off enough to need AA. Obviously, he was very wrong. Serious implications indeed.
When someone claiming AA membership tells me they didn't have to take the steps and therefore I wouldn't need to, not only is that not true, it is quite dangerous to me.
If you choose to believe him/her. It is also quite dangerous to others if one attempts to determine for them whether or not AA is suitable based upon a somewhat subjective determination of alcoholism. It is frequently said that only the individual can decide whether or not one is alcoholic. I've read that here at SR many times. How do you really know which is which, and how do you determine the value of the program in any case? It is mostly an individual decision as far as I can tell.
But, again, this kind of conversation starts to look too much like splitting hairs. The net result of that is nobody really "wins" anything, and people seeking help just get frustrated and move along. Plus, it's late and I'm tired and not sure I'm making sense anymore. So...I'm done.
