intention

"I'm not cross-sharing but what you said about..........

"I know I shouldn't cross-share but I just wanted to let you know that when I had that problem I did this......"


I hear this all the time in meetings. Is there any guidance anywhere about how we should be sharing? Where does the rule about cross-sharing come from?


I was in a meeting last week and someone's whole share was directed at the previous sharer telling them exactly what they had done when they were in the same situation. Their solution had nothing to do with the steps and I could see the first person was looking uncomfortable to have a spotlight on them for 5 minutes. It made me uncomfortable.

RobbyRobot

There is no exact AA directive on cross-talk sharing. Each group is free to make its own solutions regarding how its handled. It seems to be just common sense and respect for all present at the meeting that if someone has the courage to share they can feel confident that they will not be interrupted or have a criticism or opinion shared from out of the blue, however well-meaning it maybe offered, because once the cross-talk exists, the original speaker has little choice on how to respond. Even ignoring the cross-talk is a response. That kind of demanding atmosphere will put most people off, and not just the newcomers either.

Cross-talk is very often an unwelcomed and uninvited sharing.

Wolfchild

While a person is doing that, i usually just close my eyes and listen for what they are really trying to say and pray for them. If a person makes a habit of it at every meeting, i discuss it with them openly & honestly after a meeting. i normally give problems like this about thirty days to work themselves out or for God to step in and do what that person can't do for themselves. i have seen groups revise their opening statement to specifically suggest there be no "cross talking" while the meeting is taking place. i have also been in meetings where someone has interupted the person commenting on someone elses share and told them to knock it off. The only guidelines/requirements i know of, for any group, are the Twelve Traditions. Good luck with this, learn what you can, and be good to yourself!

yeahgr8

Cross talking as in interrupting or speaking out of turn, fortunately haven't seen a lot of that save for newcomers who don't know any better at the time.

But intention that's not what you meant is it, you mean someone finishing their share and the next person sharing being focussed in a personal way on what the previous person had shared...cross sharing, never heard it called that:-) I have seen this a little and one guy where i got sober was especially into doing this and has the nickname 'the counselor' hehe

If a previous person has shared something that i want to reference, so i dont have to say it all again, i'd say as soandso said in his/her share...i don't think i would mind someone giving me a response to what i said in a share providing it was pertinent to what i had said and hopefully of some use...maybe grabbing me after would be more appropriate...dunno, maybe i would be a little uncomfortable if i didn't know them?!

Boleo

I drive 35 minutes 2 days each week to attend a meeting where cross-sharing is encouraged. As far I I know there is nothing in the literature that defines this sort of thing.

It was voted on in a group conscious meeting and everyone who voted for it was aware that it would scare of some but help those who stuck it out.

shaun00

Best left to after the meeting imo..
I try not to make members uncomfortable.
otherwise in my experience its all to easy to become a game of ego.
well.....mine anyhow.

If someone shares a specific problem or stumbling block with the steps....AND i have experienced it...i will share my experience of it..

CarolD

In my home group....we voted no cross talking in
a GC maybe 10 years ago..

It's up to the person who chairs the meeting
to step in with a reminder.....usually.....
"X please talk with Y after the meeting "

then call on another member....

It's an effective way to get back to the topic.
It also encourges members to have one on one
afterwards. This can lead to more fellowshipping.

I really don't know how this came about....never bothered
to do any research because it works well for us...

Fenian_Man

In my home group, we stop interruptors immediately. Commentary on another's share is dealt with after the meeting by an old-timer or the commentator's sponsor. We had a couple of self-anointed evaluators of other's shares who had long-term abstinence themselves, but they and their cadre moved on after a group inventory process about a year ago.

Thanks for an excellent topic.

navysteve

4th tradition applies here. If the group has no opinion on cross-talk then it is not an issue for an AA vigilante to take in their hands. If the group has voted NO, then my personal opinion matters not at all, my job is to support the GC

intention

Yes, that is exactly what I mean. I have seen interuptions but they don't call that cross-share.

This cross-share term just seems to have a very broad meaning. I suppose it means what the person wants it to mean as there are no guidelines in the group. Usually it is said when the person wants to apologise prior to cross-sharing and then they start sharing about the other person's share.

intention

Thanks everyone. The group has no guidelines about what is allowed and what is not allowed but it seems to be expected that you don't refer to specific details about another person's share, unless you start your share "I don't mean to cross-share but I have just got to say this......". That's said a few times at each meeting.

Last week someone actually spent most of their share complaining about someone else's cross-share elsewhere and their share then ended up being a total contradiction of "who you see here, what you hear here, let it stay here"

If I felt that this should be a matter for group conscience, how would I go about that?

The group has never had a group conscience when I have been there other than someone saying "we've got some money left over shall we order some literature"

Wolfchild

You could open it up for discussion just like you did here. Now you are aware of other peoples experience with this and you've gained some insight about it. What has been shared here could help you to present possible solutions to your Home Group and help you in your personal recovery. i would also suggest talking with your sponsor about it and praying on the matter. i really appreciate your willingness to be of service and your desire to more effectively carry the message of recovery. Thank you!!

Boleo

A "Group Conscious" is usually a separate meeting. Sometimes it is announced at the regular meeting when it will take place and what the outcome of the last one was.

Sometimes it takes place more more less in secret. While there are pamphlets covering the guidelines for GC not all groups conform to them.

Alcoholics Anonymous : Pamphlets

Sugah

I read this when it was first posted, then stepped back to pray on it. So, I'm responding to the OP, not anything that came after it.

I don't find abstract, transcendent sharing very helpful. Metaphors are nice for poetry and such, but when it comes to recovery, I prefer to hear the rubber-meets-the-road personal experience of someone if I toss up a topic for discussion.

Let's say the chair asks for a topic or problem relating to alcoholism and I raise my hand. I say, "I'm feeling awfully restless, irritable and discontented as I watch my kids make the same stupid mistakes I made. I know I'm powerless over them, but I'm having a hard time letting go." I want to know how someone else applied to the steps to a problem like mine! If I hear a quote from the Big Book followed by some lofty philosophical share, I might not get that I'm supposed to contextualize that in my own experience. If, instead, I hear, "I was in a situation similar when a coworker started fudging on hours, and I had to figure out if I was powerless or shrugging responsible action. Here's how I used the steps to find the spiritual answer to the problem."

How can we not cross-share? You tell me how it is with you, and I tell you how I handled a similar situation and stayed sober at the same time. I think the problem is not "cross sharing" and asking that "cross sharing" be avoided, but rather that sharing be focused on the solution to the particular problem on the table.

I am just a wee bit irritated today (recently had surgery and I've been in muumuus and flannel nightgowns for three days), so I keep that in mind when I read and wonder -- are we all part of the same AA?

Peace & Love,
Sugah

CStyle

I think you are right on Sugah.

Cross Talk in my mind is when someone interupts a persons share with commentary. (which to me is unacceptable, and usually warrants a discussion after the meeting by a hg member)

I think the real problem is when people talk "at" a person. This really bothers me and it has since day one. Many times at my hg when we have a newcomer (1st - 3rd meeting) we do a first step meeting and half our members talk "at" the person. I think this is a personal issue that irritates me, something within me that takes offense to this situation. So when I share, I share my e/s/h as it relates to the newcomer. I share what I did, not what they should do.

Oh and I love it (insert sarcasm) when people make the statements "I am not trying to offend, cross talk, be controversial," etc then they make a comment that offends, is cross talk, or is completely controversial. Bottom line is no one makes that comment without knowing what they are going to say falls into that category ....

intention

Yes, it is the sharing at the person, instead of sharing ESH relating to the person's share which made me uncomfortable.

For example someone shared they are in great pain, struggled to enter meeting and hates the idea that everyone is looking at them but know they need to share. Next share is the Chair who spends their share giving their experience in how it relates to the first share but they refer specifically to details in the first share many times, and mentioning their name over and over - 'you'll get through this' type of comments. None of the share had anything to do with the program. Then about 10 minutes later, they remembered they had a bit more advice and shared again, right back at the first person. I really thought the first person was going to run out the door, they looked so upset.


Thanks for the comments about group conscience. I am going to read up on the guidelines about them and then step back and see how things evolve.
Prayer and meditation goes without saying

freya

Pretty much all of the meetings I attend discourage cross-talk -- most of them explicitly so in the Secretary's statement. In 2 of the women's meetings I often attend, the statement explicitly states that the reason for this is in order that everyone present may feel comfortable and safe in sharing.

I also have to say, though, that, around here, the definition of "crosstalk" typically seems to be pretty narrow. I mean, I would have to directly and explicitly address my remarks to a specific individual in order for it to qualify as crosstalk; just saying, in general, how I handled a similar situation or dealt with a similar issue in my own life would not count as "crosstalk."

Finally, in most of the meetings I attend, when crosstalk is happening, the chairperson or secretary will usually speak up and say something like: "I need to remind everyone that we do not crosstalk in this meeting," and I myself have had to say something like that a few times when leading a meeting. Also, it is not unheard of for another member (often myself) to speak up and say something like: "I'm uncomfortable with the corsstalk going on here today," if the chair or secretary fails to address it.

Because of my educational background and the way I was raised, I do not feel personally threatened or unsafe when people address me directly or question me or take issue with anything I might say, nor do I feel in anyway attacked or obligated if someone gives me advice, so, for a long time, I thought the no-crosstalk idea was kind of silly and over-sensitive. But, at this point, I have heard from so many people in the rooms that, for them, it really is important to their comfort and safety and, thus, to their ability to feel that they can share openly and honestly, that I tend to believe that it is a good rule to follow...

...and, in all honesty, even for myself, it is probably for the best, because if crosstalk were to become the rule in meetings, I can easily imagine that the result would be a lot of argument and debate and hurt feelings and wasted time, and none of that's what I go to meetings to engage in or to listen to.

freya