Sponsoring a drug addict.
Member
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Miami, FL
Posts: 1,701
This is so strange and different from my experience with these programs. My first sponsor had me interview with his sponsor first who was a real old-timer with 30some years sober. He said that if Bill W had started AA today, he would have called it Addicts Anonymous because addiction is addiction, whether to alcohol or anything else. He felt the only reason it started off as it did was because other drugs were less available so alcohol addiction dominated.
And he agreed with the common wisdom that one should attend meeting of more than one fellowship.
You do hear alcohol referred to all the time in other fellowships without anyone getting up in arms as Jimhere pointed out. It is only AA where people feel the need to be circumspect about mentioning other drugs (unless spoken of in conjunction with alcohol).
I understand that alcohol is different because it is the only legal drug and available anywhere at anytime. But isn't this a social difference? If alcohol addiction is different in kind from other addiction, than is not marijuana addiction different from vicodin addiction and isn't that different from meth addiction? Yet somehow, in NA people with different addictions with vastly different social profiles manage to work together.
If you think that alcoholics need their own specialized program, doesn't it follow that every drug needs its own fellowship? If you think that alcohol is so different, should you be recommending NA since it would follow that any addict needs that same "singleness of purpose?" Wouldn't you advocate for CA, CMA, MA etc. instead and warn that a catch-all program like NA is as ineffective as you think an AA would be if non-drinkers attended?
And he agreed with the common wisdom that one should attend meeting of more than one fellowship.
You do hear alcohol referred to all the time in other fellowships without anyone getting up in arms as Jimhere pointed out. It is only AA where people feel the need to be circumspect about mentioning other drugs (unless spoken of in conjunction with alcohol).
I understand that alcohol is different because it is the only legal drug and available anywhere at anytime. But isn't this a social difference? If alcohol addiction is different in kind from other addiction, than is not marijuana addiction different from vicodin addiction and isn't that different from meth addiction? Yet somehow, in NA people with different addictions with vastly different social profiles manage to work together.
If you think that alcoholics need their own specialized program, doesn't it follow that every drug needs its own fellowship? If you think that alcohol is so different, should you be recommending NA since it would follow that any addict needs that same "singleness of purpose?" Wouldn't you advocate for CA, CMA, MA etc. instead and warn that a catch-all program like NA is as ineffective as you think an AA would be if non-drinkers attended?
Member
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: london, england
Posts: 184
tradtion 3, states that " the only requirement for membership is a desire to stop using cocaine and all other mind altering substances", we think that all substances are drugs (including alcohol), we try to encompass all drugs as we do all addicts.
we also believe the solution is in the big book as that is the original source.
our primary purpose is to carry the message to addicts, including (pills, dope, speed, heroin, coke, upers, downers, prescription drugs and alcohol).
our membership is growing at an incredible rate, mainly from ex NA.
i was at a district meeting last nite and just this month we started another 14 groups.
NA, doesnt work for me because theres no solution, non stop moaning, and lets do a step a year!!. not because they use the blanket approach.
every addict i send there comes out of a meeting and says they found a home.
god bless
we also believe the solution is in the big book as that is the original source.
our primary purpose is to carry the message to addicts, including (pills, dope, speed, heroin, coke, upers, downers, prescription drugs and alcohol).
our membership is growing at an incredible rate, mainly from ex NA.
i was at a district meeting last nite and just this month we started another 14 groups.
NA, doesnt work for me because theres no solution, non stop moaning, and lets do a step a year!!. not because they use the blanket approach.
every addict i send there comes out of a meeting and says they found a home.
god bless
Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 3,095
Originally Posted by tricky164 
why cant you alcoholics get your head around the fact that if there was no alcohol you 'would' use.
Today, I see it as a spiritual principle that I don't have to change AA to suit me. I accept it for what it is. I have to change me to best serve that group if I wish to be a part of it. I don't have to be a part of it. Like Jim illustrated, if I feel that AA is no longer serving a purpose I can feel good about, I am free to do my own thing. What I am not free to do is expect AA to change for me.
Well, I guess I am free to have that expectation. I'm also free for the frustration that goes with it.
Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Pugetopolis
Posts: 2,384
Originally Posted by miamifella
This is so strange and different from my experience with these programs. My first sponsor had me interview with his sponsor first who was a real old-timer with 30some years sober. He said that if Bill W had started AA today, he would have called it Addicts Anonymous because addiction is addiction, whether to alcohol or anything else. He felt the only reason it started off as it did was because other drugs were less available so alcohol addiction dominated.
And he agreed with the common wisdom that one should attend meeting of more than one fellowship.
You do hear alcohol referred to all the time in other fellowships without anyone getting up in arms as Jimhere pointed out. It is only AA where people feel the need to be circumspect about mentioning other drugs (unless spoken of in conjunction with alcohol).
I understand that alcohol is different because it is the only legal drug and available anywhere at anytime. But isn't this a social difference? If alcohol addiction is different in kind from other addiction, than is not marijuana addiction different from vicodin addiction and isn't that different from meth addiction? Yet somehow, in NA people with different addictions with vastly different social profiles manage to work together.
If you think that alcoholics need their own specialized program, doesn't it follow that every drug needs its own fellowship? If you think that alcohol is so different, should you be recommending NA since it would follow that any addict needs that same "singleness of purpose?" Wouldn't you advocate for CA, CMA, MA etc. instead and warn that a catch-all program like NA is as ineffective as you think an AA would be if non-drinkers attended?
And he agreed with the common wisdom that one should attend meeting of more than one fellowship.
You do hear alcohol referred to all the time in other fellowships without anyone getting up in arms as Jimhere pointed out. It is only AA where people feel the need to be circumspect about mentioning other drugs (unless spoken of in conjunction with alcohol).
I understand that alcohol is different because it is the only legal drug and available anywhere at anytime. But isn't this a social difference? If alcohol addiction is different in kind from other addiction, than is not marijuana addiction different from vicodin addiction and isn't that different from meth addiction? Yet somehow, in NA people with different addictions with vastly different social profiles manage to work together.
If you think that alcoholics need their own specialized program, doesn't it follow that every drug needs its own fellowship? If you think that alcohol is so different, should you be recommending NA since it would follow that any addict needs that same "singleness of purpose?" Wouldn't you advocate for CA, CMA, MA etc. instead and warn that a catch-all program like NA is as ineffective as you think an AA would be if non-drinkers attended?
FYI-there was a group called Addicts Anonymous that formed in a prison in Lexington, Kentucky in the '40's, a forerunner of NA that used the Big Book. They never survived because they didn't adhere to Traditions.
As for CA and it's now all-encompassing approach, I feel that eventually it will evolve into what NA has became and what AA is moving towards, no primary purpose and all over the place and ineffective. Just my opinion of course, CA can do what it wants.
Jim
Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Southern Colorado
Posts: 1,167
Originally Posted by miamifella
He said that if Bill W had started AA today, he would have called it Addicts Anonymous because addiction is addiction, whether to alcohol or anything else.
Originally Posted by miamifella
If you think that alcoholics need their own specialized program, doesn't it follow that every drug needs its own fellowship?
Originally Posted by tricky164
i attend AA mtgs that others call a cult, (big book thumpers).
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 65
Just an update on the kid I mentioned in the first post.
He got himself a coffee commitment at an open meeting across town. He still calls me every day (I didn't ask him to do so, he just does), and he started writing his fourth step. I may just be witnessing a miracle. And for that, I'm grateful.
He got himself a coffee commitment at an open meeting across town. He still calls me every day (I didn't ask him to do so, he just does), and he started writing his fourth step. I may just be witnessing a miracle. And for that, I'm grateful.
Member
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,861
But I won't mislead them into believing that they qualify for AA membership if they have no history of alcoholism.
When anyone, anywhere reaches out we want the hand of AA to be there, that means when an addict shows up. Maybe the best thing you can do is take them to an NA meeting ( you can do more than hand them a schedule for a meeting- you really can!)
If you are so-inclined, start a CA meeting in your town. If you have no experience with drugs, hopefully the fact that you are on these boards you have experience with the Big Book. Let the fellowship grow up around you, when you sit in an AA meeting and someone with problems other than alcohol shows up, extend the hand, don't tell them they are fine in AA, that is wrong for everyone!
IDENTIFICATION!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I hear it said all the time in meetings that people today showing up in the rooms all did drugs too, that simply isn't true, there are still pure alcoholics out there, and lets not forget that perception is everything. When we mix up the message and add more to it identification become more and more exclusive, it has the reverse effect. When AA meetings become a catch-all people die needlessly.
Sorry to rant
Member
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: london, england
Posts: 184
sounds like hes up for recovery, good for him !
keithj, it was all said a bit tounge in cheek !!
mcgowdog, i love that "AA without the b,book is not AA. i used to get the hump when called a big book thumper, now i just see it as " big book thumper equals, WORKS VIGIROUS PROGRAM OF ACTION.
peace and love to you all. god bless
keithj, it was all said a bit tounge in cheek !!
mcgowdog, i love that "AA without the b,book is not AA. i used to get the hump when called a big book thumper, now i just see it as " big book thumper equals, WORKS VIGIROUS PROGRAM OF ACTION.
peace and love to you all. god bless
Laozi Old Man
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Detroit, MI
Posts: 6,665
Originally Posted by tricky164
why cant you alcoholics get your head around the fact that if there was no alcohol you 'would' use. its ok saying "i dont do drugs", and "i could take them or leave them" but your talking with the bennefit of recovery, dont do recovery, take alcohol out the way and you would use. because we like the effect, that sence of ease and comfort that comes from taking a mind altering substance.
Even if alcohol had disappeared for some reason I doubt that I would have gone back to the same drugs. I may have tried pills like vicodan& oxicotton but I doubt I would have been willing to buy them illegally.
Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Pugetopolis
Posts: 2,384
"our primary purpose is to carry the message to addicts, including (pills, dope, speed, heroin, coke, upers, downers, prescription drugs and alcohol)."
Right here is when it ceases to be Cocaine Anonymous and starts being everything anonymous.
Like I said, C.A. can do what it wants. But if, like Narcotics Anonymous it insists on ignoring the past experience of A.A. groups that have tried to everything to everybody, C.A. will end up in the same boat as N.A. For that matter in the same boat as most of contemporary Alcoholics Anonymous.
Right here is when it ceases to be Cocaine Anonymous and starts being everything anonymous.
Like I said, C.A. can do what it wants. But if, like Narcotics Anonymous it insists on ignoring the past experience of A.A. groups that have tried to everything to everybody, C.A. will end up in the same boat as N.A. For that matter in the same boat as most of contemporary Alcoholics Anonymous.
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 773
"Talk about everything and drink about nothing." I'll talk about my drug use if I feel like it & don't care if I offend people. Alcohol is my drug of choice though so I rarely do. AA has probably 10 times more meetings than NA in some parts of the country.
tiburon
tiburon
Member
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: london, england
Posts: 184
jim, its called cocaine anonymous, because we couldnt use addicts anonymous (AA).
im an alcoholic and and addict, this is who CA is targeted at, although we sound drug specific, we are not. our experience is that most addicts cant identify in AA (not me)
and that there is no other fellowship that uses the big book for addicts.
as some one else said earlier "we just cant have a fellowship for every individual drug as none of them would survive.
our fellowship uses all AA traditions, the b,book, 12 steps, the concepts, our fellowship is strong and unlike NA (in britain) we have learned from AA and its mistakes, (eg, turning mtgs into group therapy). our meetings concentrate on the solution not the problem, "what we suffer with and how we get well". we also do a 'back to basics' policy with the steps, all members are encouraged to complete the steps with a sponsor within 60 days, then start to sponsor others.
weather this will continue to work is in gods hands, i just hope it does, as for an addict of my type (hopeless) there is No other alternertive.
may your god go with you
im an alcoholic and and addict, this is who CA is targeted at, although we sound drug specific, we are not. our experience is that most addicts cant identify in AA (not me)
and that there is no other fellowship that uses the big book for addicts.
as some one else said earlier "we just cant have a fellowship for every individual drug as none of them would survive.
our fellowship uses all AA traditions, the b,book, 12 steps, the concepts, our fellowship is strong and unlike NA (in britain) we have learned from AA and its mistakes, (eg, turning mtgs into group therapy). our meetings concentrate on the solution not the problem, "what we suffer with and how we get well". we also do a 'back to basics' policy with the steps, all members are encouraged to complete the steps with a sponsor within 60 days, then start to sponsor others.
weather this will continue to work is in gods hands, i just hope it does, as for an addict of my type (hopeless) there is No other alternertive.
may your god go with you
Member
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,861
Guest
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Birmingham, AL
Posts: 1,924
Oh by the way....If you had not noticed my truly singular magnificence, that certain glow that was not present during my absence…? After many successful BM’s and some rather unsuccessful ones, I have returned to muddy the waters and strike fear into the hearts of evildoers.
..on a lighter note, good to be back from the streets with no name. No, I didn’t return to drinking, though I found myself wanting to emulate my new life idol, DEXTER.
Isn't a New Life fun?
..on a lighter note, good to be back from the streets with no name. No, I didn’t return to drinking, though I found myself wanting to emulate my new life idol, DEXTER.
Isn't a New Life fun?
Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Pugetopolis
Posts: 2,384
Originally Posted by tricky164
jim, its called cocaine anonymous, because we couldnt use addicts anonymous (AA).
im an alcoholic and and addict, this is who CA is targeted at, although we sound drug specific, we are not. our experience is that most addicts cant identify in AA (not me)
and that there is no other fellowship that uses the big book for addicts.
as some one else said earlier "we just cant have a fellowship for every individual drug as none of them would survive.
our fellowship uses all AA traditions, the b,book, 12 steps, the concepts, our fellowship is strong and unlike NA (in britain) we have learned from AA and its mistakes, (eg, turning mtgs into group therapy). our meetings concentrate on the solution not the problem, "what we suffer with and how we get well". we also do a 'back to basics' policy with the steps, all members are encouraged to complete the steps with a sponsor within 60 days, then start to sponsor others.
weather this will continue to work is in gods hands, i just hope it does, as for an addict of my type (hopeless) there is No other alternertive.
may your god go with you
im an alcoholic and and addict, this is who CA is targeted at, although we sound drug specific, we are not. our experience is that most addicts cant identify in AA (not me)
and that there is no other fellowship that uses the big book for addicts.
as some one else said earlier "we just cant have a fellowship for every individual drug as none of them would survive.
our fellowship uses all AA traditions, the b,book, 12 steps, the concepts, our fellowship is strong and unlike NA (in britain) we have learned from AA and its mistakes, (eg, turning mtgs into group therapy). our meetings concentrate on the solution not the problem, "what we suffer with and how we get well". we also do a 'back to basics' policy with the steps, all members are encouraged to complete the steps with a sponsor within 60 days, then start to sponsor others.
weather this will continue to work is in gods hands, i just hope it does, as for an addict of my type (hopeless) there is No other alternertive.
may your god go with you
I hope it does work, I truly do. But I remain skeptical about whether it will hold up over the long haul.
Where NA (and now it looks like CA) have failed to learn from AA is that there must be a single focus or eventually the movement ends up being ineffective.
Time will tell.
Jim
Member
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 158
Originally Posted by tricky164
our fellowship uses all AA traditions, the b,book, 12 steps, the concepts, our fellowship is strong and unlike NA (in britain) we have learned from AA and its mistakes, (eg, turning mtgs into group therapy). our meetings concentrate on the solution not the problem, "what we suffer with and how we get well". we also do a 'back to basics' policy with the steps, all members are encouraged to complete the steps with a sponsor within 60 days, then start to sponsor others.
We have two groups of low-down suffering people, all with an addiction to at least one mind-altering substance. They've all failed at fixing themselves with only self/human aid, so they all follow a proven and prescribed spiritual solution of Twelve Steps. Some work a strong program (and some don't), but amongst the ones who do, they each recognize what works and what doesn't. Most importantly, the see the real problem for what it is, apply THE solution, and by the grace of God, get sober.
Yet bound by the traditions that serve them both, each group remains separate -- two separate but equal fellowships.
What I've heard the most reading this thread is it's about identification. I can understand that. From the 20,000 foot view, this separation seems arbitrary. But I'm not at 20,000 feet -- I'm a low-down depraved alcoholic. I can identify with my fellow LDDA's. But in late 2009, can I not identify with a low-down crack addict as well?
There is a certain uniqueness of the experience of using and withdrawing from different substances. But in the end, these stories we tell and relate over are essentially the same. They're the same because they're all ugly, brutal, and most of all, they're all symptoms of the same problem.
What I keep coming back to is that the liquor (or cocaine, or whatever) was but a symptom. Hence, it's not the problem. The problem is a disconnect from the universe. From God. A lost and incomplete soul. A Spiritual Malady. Is that not the core of the program? Is that not the book?
So isn't identification with the problem -- which is universal -- more important than identification with the particular substance we chose as the false solution?
A lot of the discussion in the thread revolves around descriptions of patterns of use. That serves as solid historical record, but again, is it relevant to the solution? Living in the present, working my program, I feel my drug of choice is no longer relevant. My history does make for good war stories, which used judiciously have their purpose, but ironically they're also what a lot of meetings have devolved to. And talk therapy. Etc. Seen it, shared in it, got the funny looks. Isn't weak program the real problem, as opposed to addicts of all stripes working strong program together?
When I was in my strong-AA-based rehab, I read, studied, and spoke to the Big Book of AA with fellow alcoholics AND junkies AND methheads. I didn't think twice about it. We all had similar histories. We all suffered in the same way. We learned how to share, work the steps, and recover together. It wasn't until I got out that I learned it doesn't work that way in the clubhouses and church basements.
It's about the traditions. They're way older than me, and they're one of the foundations of the program that got me sober. But we're discussing the traditions, so: Traditions aren't by definition usually written down and numbered. Traditions generally just are. They are what has evolved and continues to evolve. They change. When they don't… there is a fine line between traditions and dogma. Dogma is the domain of religion -- what happens when traditions become set in stone. Religion is one of the things that AA doesn't need to be. Does it?
When my reaction is to defend their solidity, to almost entrench, is that a manifestation of fear?
To relate these thoughts back to the original post: I know in the end I can't help everyone. I could spend the next 40 years (God willing) working with no one but "pure alcoholics" and I surely would have my hands full. But thinking that my problem is different from "their" problem would always hinder my ability to bring the solution to anyone. Someone wrote way earlier in the thread something along the lines of "at least the addict doesn't come and pollute our AA meetings." That kind of took me aback.
I'm not trying to change AA or stir the pot per se. I'm a rather freshly-minted sober person. The book says God gave me a brain to use, so with hopefully with some intuitive thought as a guide, I'm giving the grey matter a run in the yard. Connection has kept me sober; I guess today I'm seeking understanding.
Currently Active Users Viewing this Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
