Don S

I think bartender and equus covered the questions thoroughly.
AA apparently has a board of trustees, "of whom seven are nonalcoholic friends of the Fellowship, and 14 are A.A. members." And none of whom appear to be listed anywhere on the AA website.
I have over 1700 posts on these forums and that's all you know about SMART? What--do you have me on 'ignore' or something?!
LOL

Gooch

Does Smart have an equivalence to Rule 62 ?

brigid

I feel that way, I take in what is enough for me right now and work on that. But I also find that later when I have explored further in different areas I have had the opportunity to second guess my initial beliefs and that has worked out in a truly wonderful experience. Sometimes I have found that my initial ideas were not fully rounded, or were short sighted, or misleading.

"Human beings are perhaps never more frightening than when they believe without doubt they are right." (I love that saying)

I am just as interseted in SMART and the other programs as AA, there just isn't quite as much literature here on them. Mind you I could use the links couldn't I. A comparison or exploration can't really hurt, I would like to see a sticky of this, monopolies worry me.

I also find the sharing and discussion of issues most beneficial on this site, these give me real thoughts and feelings to work with and explore.

love brigid

Don S

Hi, brigid,
This is a good place to start:
http://www.smartrecovery.org/resourc...clesessays.htm

Time2Surrender

That was some intresting reading. I think I will go back over to the NA forum.You guys have fun.

Mogqua

Quote:

Originally Posted by Don S

I think bartender and equus covered the questions thoroughly.

While Bartender129 gave a real good start, in no way did it cover it thoroughly,
although it was the most direct answer I've seen by a SMART member..

And pasting links have become the known rhetoric of SMART here and does not answer each question specificly and directly.
I'm sure the links are good reading (I've read them and their earlier counterparts).
But I know there are some people with computer systems and ISPs that make things like clicking through very frustrating
and might like to know some things without having to spend so much time waiting only to be booted off before they find answers or worse,
bogged down until they forget their question completely.

I'm asking for a different approach in informing everyone about SMART.
This may be some people's only place to start.

Since DON S.'s "evidence" is usually given in the form of statistics and percentages then what are thoses estimated numbers to support it?

*What is SMART's estimated membership?
(Worldwide- Face to Face)
*What is SMART's estimated efficacy rate?
(SMART only - not grouped with other 'alternatives')

*How are these numbers calculated?

That breaks the question of evidence down into two parts and
asks for the basis in the last.

And one last one to cover it:
*What other criteria constitutes evidence in SMART?

Be Well

Five

I am wondering if you really want the answers Mog.

I certainley do. Should be interesting.

Mogqua

Quote:

Originally Posted by Five

I am wondering if you really want the answers Mog.
I certainley do. Should be interesting.

I certainly do!

Be Well

equus

I'm not going to apologise for links as I have enough respect for the individual to choose whether or not to click on them - I think I had stated accurately what was inside them.

What you see as 'cut and paste' links, I see a references, what you see as needless I see as respectful. As you have no idea who I am, I don't expect you to hold an inordinate amount of trust, therefore I respect you may want to know the source for information and weigh up for yourself it's worth. To save clicking links I often paste the whole thing with a reference link at the bottom - but as I'd already gone through that whole process once with 2 of the articles I felt maybe effort should be shared!

Mog - you need some grounding in understanding empirical research, especially around sample groups, control groups, length of time needed for any valid study, numbers needed in order to evaluate statistical significance, and difficulties faced by comparing approaches. If you think this is just a means to avoid your question I would suggest you read 'Tried and True Methods' linked above, it does a fair job of explaining and was posted well in advance to this - not as an excuse to fudge it.

I'm being very serious - it is well within almost anyone's abilities to understand the issues within research and I think it does more harm than good for people to constantly seek individual studies without that understanding, stats do not stand alone - they should be referenced and sources available. There's a reason for that - a damn good one!

Don S

No recovery program that I know of measures success for the program itself. The variables involved are discussed in detail in the thread Efficacy Rates of AA, for Bubba Bob, here:
http://www.soberrecovery.com/forums/...bob-50469.html

There is a link there to an exhaustive study which outlines the difficulty of defining success:
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articl...26/ai_65803046
As I asked rhetorically there, do you define success (efficacy) by the retention rate? Or by reduced drinking (harm reduction)? Moderate drinking? Total abstinence for a certain period of time?

If anyone genuinely has trouble opening links, getting booted, and forgetting what they're doing, then I'll be happy to go in and cut and paste the relevant portions of that article.

Analysis of efficacy of any program is based on reviewing studies of the techniques used. Hester and Miller's Handbook of Alcoholism Treatment Approaches reviews the major methods. You have probably seen the summary results, which have been posted on this forum before, but I'd be happy to post them again. SMART and LifeRing use techniques based on cognitive behavioral therapy and motivational enhancement, two of the techniques considered to be most effective. There is extensive detail there of the number, type, and value of the different studies reviewed.

SMART has not yet conducted a membership study comparable to the triennial studies done by AA (and a quick look at the results AA has posted on their official web site shows that they no longer measure or publish retention rates). I suppose that one could count up the face-to-face and online meetings and guess at the attendance figures.

equus

Yes please!! I couldn't find them when I went back to save it - I think the link had gone down. I saw them the first time and thought it was incredible to get that sort of information!

By the way - this is a question about SMART. Do you think they will add to CBT, MET and REBT with other things that look promising? I noticed on the website they were looking at doing more re Family and Friends and (from memory - didn't get time to save it!) the summary results mentioned above had some interesting approaches quite high up the scale.

The Tried and True Methods I posted had relationship centred approaches doing well and from personal experince that approached worked the best with me and D - what can I say? it helped us lots and gave a good grounding for CBT.

I'm curious whether adding more to the arsenal at SMART would ever be on the cards?

On the Family and Friends bit - the brief write up of where family and friends can fit into smart seemed based on people's belief regarding co-dependency problems. It might sound radical but maybe if SMART produced a questionnaire for it's members to ask F&F's to fill in asking what we need it might be a very different picture.

I needed good information, good resources, people to talk to in the same situation, a place to ask questions and get respectful answers, I didn't need telling I was sick and getting it all wrong! Me and D needed good communication and to focus on positive, we also needed alot less panic about ups and downs - just consistant realism.

My own personal opinion is that F&F's can be included very productively and teamwork in couples shouldn't be under estimated or undermined.

Don S

Yes, the F&F resources are pretty slim at SMART. It's actually pretty simple to add resources to what gets used by the facilitators. If something looks promising, it can be discussed on the forums, reviewed by the board of directors, added to the training materials for facilitators, etc. It's small enough and flexible enough that meetings can be added online or f2f for specific behaviors or groups. Right now we're planning to develop online training meetings and resources for f2f facilitators, probably using live-voice online meetings, so people don't have to travel to get training. I imagine all the other recovery groups will start doing this kind of thing now that the technology is so accessible.
I'll find that chart....

Cathy31

For me SMART would never work because my disease is not logical. Writing down the ups and downs of taking a drink...well, that's just too simplistic for me.

For me it's an emotional and spiritually linked disease and why AA works for me is that it gives a spiritual solution. I think you need a HUGE program of great weight which focuses on many issues - spirtuality, honesty, self analysis, forgiveness, humility, etc etc to be able to deal with alcoholism. For me SMART does not have that weight - not nearly enough. Probably why it's not known throughout the world as a POSSIBLE solution as AA is.

To end though, how lucky are we as addicts to be able to CHOOSE our program of recovery. Doesn't matter if they are a bit light, still a choice and we should all be grateful.

Cool thread Moqqua - don't understand the outcry! I know it's been written in a genuine spirit of enquiry as the last one was.

Cathy31
x

Don S

Nice post, Cathy!
The basic idea that you'd need to accept is that you can change your beliefs and your thinking in order to change your behavior. Or at least accept the idea that they can be changed, perhaps looking outward for a source for that change. The rest is mostly techniques that help people do that, and tools for getting past the discomfort associated with early sobriety.
I'm guessing that's what people do in AA, too, to a very large degree.
If you consider spirituality to be an important part of your sobriety (and a lack of it to be an important part of why you were drinking), then AA would be a good fit. So would any of the Christian programs I posted up on the 'Alternatives' link that has been stickied, if you happen to start from that religious basis. Over on the Christian Forum, 'best' described to me the process that one would probably go through as a born-again Christian--guided bible study, modified steps, surrender/acceptance/higher power using a Christian basis. That makes perfect sense if one starts with that philosophical premise, or is willing to change one's thinking and beliefs in that direction.
There's no reason that basic SMART techniques couldn't be used to augment either the traditional 12 step or the Christian 12 step approach.

Dan

It happens every day.
And the other way around too, I'm sure.

Five

Oh so true, without the party even knowing.

Five

I cannot deny that AA has helped me see my moral nature in a more clearer light. In that respect its priceless.

SMART as a tool for progress and rational thinking and self discovery has been priceless too.

I am happy with that balance, for now!

equus

Errrrrr.. Ok - I'm coming clean! My last post was a bit of a hint, where perhaps I should have just said what I mean!

I know from the SMART website they are looking to add more for F&F's, I also found from personal experience the counsellor who worked with the strength of our relationship gave US the most help. Add in to that I noticed how well methods that included family did in the 'Tried and True' article.

It occured to me that if SMART was looking to increase what was on offer to F&F's this could be used as an opportunity to expand on CBT etc by looking into the viability of how relationships can play a positive part.
(From the post 'Tried and True Methods')

Is there any chance the Director's and Advisors would look into this while expending what they offer for families? Or that someone (ehem) well respected could suggest that?

The other observation as a partner is that I'm not alone in my first instinct to want to do something to actually help but we face a weight of opposition to that - even labelling.

I know this ain't the kind of stuff to impress the board of advisors but I remember from my riding days life can be so much more successful going with the instincts of the horse and developing even apparently negative ones into something functional. Trying to re-write those instincts leaves the horse and rider often truly broken!

It seems to me so many people come wanting to help but without a clue how to do that in a good way rather than in a way that leaves them vulnerable. The experience of working in partnership with D was so positive for both of us, once that counsellor left we had nowhere to get that help.

By the way that first approach used Task Centred Social Work, a family approach.

bartender129

Hi Cathy,
I am happy that you have found a program in AA that works for you. I wish that for everyone who searches for a solution.

But you have a very uninformed opinion of SMART Recovery. You talk about one tool, the CBA, and have determined that it is the entire program. You are not qualified to call SMART Recovery simplistic, light or to say that it doesn’t work (like you have before and never backed up your claim). The fact is you know nothing about it.

In fact I can point you to material from SMART online that addresses each and every one of your list of many issues - spirituality, honesty, self analysis, forgiveness, humility, etc etc if you are interested.

bartender129

What did I miss Mogqua?

The only things I didn’t cover were the “evidence” questions. You got some pretty good answers on those.

Now if you are looking for evidence that using the tools found at SMART Recovery can lead to lasting changes in behavior:

Here!