I understand your confusion, Joe. It seems to come from an understanding of statistics that is missing some key elements. You can find your associates with long term sobriety easily because you see them regularly at your meetings. This doesn't allow you to make an inference about the larger group of people seeking recovery from addiction.
An example of this fallacy is this: I have an albino squirrel in my back yard, but this doesn't mean they are common or easy to find, and a statement I might make based on my experience does not logically apply to the larger community of squirrels.

If you have issues with these statements regarding rates of success, you will do better to look for the source of those statements and try to understand them than to rail against the statements with no valid argument.

Here is a discussion of this same topic from two researchers that may provide some clarity.

Great thread.. I don't care about the statistics either, AA has changed my life for the better and I'm going to keep going back. It works if you work it..

I've read the front page articles regularly since that section was spruced up a few months back.

The name of the article - Non 12 Step Rehab Programs: A Veritable Option - is a big clue to the way it's going to lean :)

I think it would be wrong tho to make an inference from this one article that all other articles are like this.

They're not - these some very positive 12 step articles too.
I just wanted to make that clear :)

I think the articles are simply attempting to reflect the multiplicity of approaches here at SR.

D

If it makes you feel any better Joe, nobody has included me in a survey either and I don't use AA except when I hang out with you guys. I think you may be experiencing some bias because you have been in AA so long. I checked out that article and I see what you mean. To be credible a person really should include references. I think her point was to show people that their are alternatives and there are. I clicked on the authors name to get a clue were she got her stats from (I just find a 70% success rate really high because it takes some people multiple runs at it before they get it right) I found this quote from another of her articles

2. The rates of success don’t really mean much.

Again, actual relapse and success rates are probably misleading numbers. Rates of success can mean simply the percentage of people who completed the program, regardless of the clinical outcome upon completion. A success rate could also refer to a period of post-treatment sobriety. For example, the number of months after a patient completed a program that he reports he has been sober. And, patient-reported figures may be suspect. Does every patient provide truthful reports regarding their post-treatment sobriety? Probably not. If a treatment facility’s published success rates seem too good to be true, they probably are.

Or more likely to sell advertising space. Internet Brands probably either got a couple of new clients who are non 12 steps based and want to keep them happy and busy or they are planning to market toward them.
Hiring someone from Mechanical Turk or Fivver and putting the article on the front page is a very cost effective way to achieve those goals.

This is an example of an article I found today positively exploring AA and the steps

The 12 Steps and the Principles Behind Them

D

I disagree. I think her intent was to sway people entirely in her direction. Did you notice the reasons she believes people should seek alternatives other than AA? Those reasons are what most alcoholics are made of. It describes me perfectly before recovery, and just about anyone else I know who got sober in AA. It wasn't presented as a viable option, it was presented in a manner which said in it's subtext, if you're crazy and believe you have no power, go to AA. If you think otherwise and have any self respect, follow me.

I can, should, and probably will write an article stating why people might want to choose something other than AA. It would be unbiased however, and give clear reasons why one might be a better fit than the other.

I never bash other programs. I don't know anyone here in AA who does. I often however see people who admittedly don't use the 12 steps as their solution poking their heads and opinions in this forum. Why is that? I'm not hanging around their threads. I'm not trying to convince anybody that they're wrong, or I'm right. I'm not doing anything to sell AA, or discredit another program. Any praise I give to AA is in relation to healing it's allowed in my life.

On another note, I did read some articles that were a lot more positive. I don't think I ever stated that all the blogs were bad news. Didn't mean to give that impression, but I can understand why it may have seemed that way.

If anyone wants to bash the hell out of AA, it shouldn't be any of my concern. Now, I know that but I don't live it......not very well anyway. It seems even in a spiritual program where lack of power is my dilemma and I'm supposed to be practicing trust, and ultimately faith, in a power greater than myself.....I still find it necessary to not trust the process/program to much power other than myself.

Now on the other hand..... maybe all the bashing is a great thing. AA's have bitched for decades about "watered down AA" and the finger has consistently been pointed at the massive influx of treatment center folks and court ordered folks. Personally I like those ppl in meetings but that's not a minority opinion across any section of AA folks I've heard voice an opinion on the matter. Going with the majority opinion though...poor success rates would be a good thing.

Obviously, to anyone who's worked the program and has experienced the promised changes, success is 100% if you DO the program......virtually nill (if you're a real alcoholic) if you just go TO the program but DO none of it. Folks looking for the softer easier way, folks who aren't ready to commit to the program, they'll not give it a shot because they'll read the so-called statictics and use it for a reason to avoid AA. That should keep a whole bunch of non-alcoholics out of meetings I'd think.......which in turn should make a bunch of AA-folks quite happy -- i'd guess.

We are all bias. I don't think you could get away from that. The best a person can do is realize that they are working under a bias. If you believe you are not you can't really take any steps to account for that.

We both inferred the authors intent by how we read it. I thought her reasons for someone choosing an alternative were good. That last paragraph was a bit editorial made to seem factual and put the other methods in a better light then AA. Without a source I choose to ignore her statistical evidence.

First, I didn't say I wasn't biased (though actually, I don't think I am :)). Said I could could write an unbiased article stating the differences.

Second, I completely disagree that her reasons for choosing an alternative were good ones. Do you know anyone, in the throws of alcoholism, that her 6 reasons don't describe? I don't.

I won't argue it anymore however, as it'll just go on and on.

I'll state this though. 2 things I think need to be considered in regard to making a choice:

1. Do you believe in any sort of higher power or god, and if not are you willing to explore the possibility.

2. Do you consider yourself more of a spiritual, emotional person - or a scientific, calculated person?

I would put a lot more thought into it and choose my words more carefully, but I'm convinced that some people have the ability to think things through and employ their mental capacities in ways that others absolutely can't. I'm from the latter group. I do much better working with faith based principles and positive action. I don't believe one way is better than the other, and I don't believe they're mutually exclusive. I do think they're good predictors however of how someone will respond to a given program.

The recovery industry is big business.

It`s not surprising some highlight the differences between what they offer and AA.

"I won't argue it anymore however, as it'll just go on and on." That's thought stopping Joe.
I have known people from this board who have actively struggled and do deeply believe in a higher power or even God as a deity. So they would answer yes and AA might be for them. The second question people some people would choose spiritual and emotional over scientific and again, AA might be for them.

I am mostly interested in your statement that you could write something unbiased. How would you go about that? It's my next project to figure out how to live with mine.

I feel that this is a false alternative being suggested here, that those who have a strong faith or spiritual nature are better suited to AA than to another recovery toolset, and that only those who live without that dimension might more effectively seek support from 12 step alternatives.

This is not true, and might represent too simplistic a view. There are many counter examples right here at SR, of those with a religious or spiritual nature who found success outside of 12 step, even after a thorough investigation of AA. There are also those without that specific spiritual nature who have found that 12 step provided their solution.

I think a better predictor of that suitability might be 'locus of control'. Do you make your own breaks or not?

I didn't say that 'only' those without a spiritual dimension are better suited for other programs. You threw that only in there, and it makes a very big difference. I believe people can recovery using any method they choose, with willingness being the most important key. If someone were to ask me which IMO would be a better fit for them the 2 points I listed are what I would discuss. I would also have to tell them that if they wanted my help specifically, I could only teach them what worked for me, which was AA. I would also take them by the hand to a RR if they so requested.

Regarding locus of control, I'd love if you elaborated a little on that. I'm interested in what other people believe makes a difference in what works and what doesn't. While I do have a belief in synchronicity, I don't think anything in life just comes to me. I work very hard at everything I do, and feel I have realistic expectations. I believe too that I am the creator of my reality. I don't know though if this is the type of thing you're referring to.

I've mentioned before on SR. that I spent a couple of years in therapy not that long ago doing some intensive CBT work. I was excited about it, read the book Mindfulness and a few others... And at the end of all my efforts, feel I gained very little from it. At the same time a friend of mine had his life turned around in a 6 month period using the same methods. His transformation seemed pretty genuine to me, too. I realized with this that he and I have lots in common, though we're wired quite differently. Our brains just seems to function in a different manner.

Would love to hear more of what others think makes one method work for someone better than another. I don't believe it's just a random thing.

Could I do that perfectly? Probably not, but I have the ability to put myself in other peoples shoes, and read my own writing with some objectivity. It's not always easy to do that, but it's not the toughest thing in the world either. I need to be most cautious when I feel provoked in some way.

Once upon a time there was a group in Cleveland that had a 90% success rate. Sound unbelievable? Not really.

Clarence Snyder was so brazen and dogmatic that he made every single member give him their full name, address and sobriety date. If they failed to show up at a meeting; he not only paid them a visit, but also smelled their breath and talked to their friends and relatives about any drunken behavior. If someone relapsed, It was meticulously documented in his blacklist of bad AA members. Needless to say he never gave a hoot about anyones anonymity. But he did keep very empirical records of who did, and who did not count as a success for a surprising number of years. He would gladly show any journalist or researcher the thousands of documents. How's that for non-anonymous?

So could that be duplicated in AA today? Not a chance. It violated pretty much every Tradition in some way or another. Remember the Traditions did not come out till 1944 and Clarence started his meeting in 1939. In order to achieve a 90% success rate today, AA would have to adopt a whole new set of traditions. Something that would chase away at least 50% of it's members.

Now, the question is: Would that be good or bad? :run

Abstinence through tyranny? Doesn't sound very "happy, joyous and free" to me. It may count as "successful" in the most limited sense of the definition, as in "not drinking," but it doesn't fit the Big Book description of sobriety very well.

Looking forward to reading the arguments for it being "good."

Joe, I found it easy to find articles about Locus of Control and Addiction. I just dumped the two terms into the google search window. My quick survey of the first page of results seem to support my feeling, that those with an external LOC were more likely to find success within AA. Those who had an internal LOC were more likely to successful with non-12 step approaches.

It may be also be interpreted that AA seeks to foster an external LOC through the 12 Steps and recourse to a Higher Power, while other recovery approaches try to do the opposite, and drive the LOC to an internal focus with the use of CBT and RET or similar tools.

Some selections from the search results:

Internal Locus of Control and Addiction Recovery

A pilot study: Locus of control and spiritual beliefs in alcoholics anonymous and smart recovery members

The Success of Alcoholics Anonymous:
Locus of Control and God's General Revelation

Which is good - better - best?

People pleasing.
Palatable.
Getting Results.

If I had a life threatening illness (which I do).
Went to a doctor for advice.
Was told that there were 3 medications available;

1. Tastes like honey. Has a 3% success rate.
2. Tastes like cough syrup. Has a 8% success rate.
3. Tastes like bottled tyranny. Has a 90% success rate.

Guess which one I would be willing to swallow? :thinkerg:

Thanks Freshstart. That's interesting stuff, though the last AA article got me dizzy :). I think there are some typos in there that make for difficult reading.

I pretty much get what they're saying, but still don't clearly see how this would be a determining factor in which program would be a better fit for someone. I'm not stating that as an argument, and I'm not opposed to what you're saying... would just like to get clear on it, because I'm really interested.

My thinking:

First, if someone is a full blown alcoholic, and ready to accept treatment, would they really even be able to identify where their LOC was? As the articles state, most drunks will blame the world, god, or anything but themselves for their problems. That doesn't mean it's really who they are. And once someone sobers up, one would hope that they would also wake up, grow up, and realize that they do have control over their lives and their destiny. I mean, to a certain extent at least. None of us can predict accidents or earthquakes.

Regarding myself, I honestly don't know where I stood when I was first hospitalized. I was a complete mental mess, and couldn't put a whole lot of sane or logical thought together. I was only capable of saying, "Yes", and, "Tell me where to go". And I'm not exaggerating.

Not long into sobriety however I started to develop all the beliefs in the following list I'll cut and paste, for the description of people with an internal LOC. And while I do admit powerlessness over alcohol and certain other things, I feel absolutely responsible for where I am, and where I'm headed.

* By feeling in control of their future the person feels motivated to take action. If this person feels like their future is out of their hands there will be no motivation to take any positive action.
* Those people who have an internal locus of control are far more likely to engage in behaviors that will improve their life.
* The individual will be willing to work hard and make sacrifices because they know that they will reap the rewards of doing so.
* They will always be on the lookout for new ways to improve their life.
* Blaming other people or life for problems tends to be an ineffective strategy. It turns the person into a passive victim instead of an active participant.
* Those individuals who feel in control are less likely to suffer from symptoms of depression. They will tend to be optimistic and view life as an adventure rather than something to be endured.
* The person is driving to do things and does not waste time with excuses to justify inaction. Success does not tend to fall from the skies – people have to make it happen.

Yet AA is a better fit for me than the other things I've explored. As a life tool anyhow.

I'd like to also add a disclaimer. When talking this stuff I realize it seem very much like confrontation. That's not my intent, and I'd really like to kick this around a bit as I truly have hope that one day we'll all find what we have in common, and then come to some really great solutions for this drinking thing. Too many people are still sick, dying, and ruining the lives of others. I think real healing will start to come to this disease (and this world) when seemingly opposing forces start joining together. Sounds corny, I know, but I believe it's the truth.