Clarity Statements (approved version)
 

I received The NA Way Magazine in the mail today (written 16 September 2001). As I browsed through it, I stopped to read the response from H&I Slim. In it was a reference to “clarity statements� used in Narcotics Anonymous meetings and H&I panel presentations. I would like to express my opinion as to why I believe these statements are inappropriate and contradict the spiritual principles in many of our traditions

Let me begin by saying I feel our First Tradition calls on each individual member to overlook the differences that may divide us, such as language, and focus on our common identity as unified members of a greater whole. Tradition One does not justify what one could define as self-righteous attempts to shoehorn members into certain beliefs about the propriety or impropriety of particular language. Our common welfare hinges not so much on our ability to impose uniformity as on every individual member’s willingness to surrender any defect standing in the way of unconditional acceptance

These “clarity statements� are often adopted in the name of group conscience, but the essay on Tradition Two in our Basic Text tells us that “true spiritual principles are never in conflict; they complement each other. The spiritual conscience of a group will never contradict any of our traditions.� The will of our ultimate authority ought to be expressed through this conscience—not the will of a few more popular individuals who may attempt to disguise political motives as spiritual ones.

The Basic Text tells us that our reaction to drugs is what makes us addicts, not what we used. The Third Tradition tells us that our desire to stop using is what makes us members, not what we say. It is not our job to pressure other members to talk or act “correctly.� We teach by example, welcoming others as they comfortably come to their own understanding of recovery, in God’s time.

Tradition Four speaks of group autonomy. With that autonomy comes a great measure of freedom, but this freedom does not come at the expense of principles embodied in other traditions. As stated in our Basic Text, when a contradiction exists between group autonomy and another tradition, “we have slipped away from our principles.�

Our message, as spoken of in our Fifth Tradition, ought to express love and focus our collective energy through the spirit of encouragement, patience, tolerance, and acceptance of all members at any phase in their development. To criticize, correct, reject, categorize, or disapprove of other members’ language is to carry a message of fear. If ever our message might be “blurred,� it would be as a result of the latter.

Many clarity statements borrow the name of Narcotics Anonymous and carry with them an implied blanket endorsement. To me, having served on a literature committee in NA and experienced some of the laborious efforts put into every piece of approved literature in our fellowship, these statements are very disturbing. These statements have not gone through this process of approval in NA. Consequently, groups and committees displaying, printing, and reading these statements are themselves contradicting our Sixth Tradition through the endorsement of an opinion, not the principles of NA.

What is the purpose of such clarity statements? To edit the language used by our members in communicating their experience, strength, and hope? Or could it be a self-righteous, misguided “control� issue, an attempt to organize NA, as such? Could this have the effect of creating a top-down bureaucracy dictating to our members, making our members responsible for serving the will of their service committees rather than the other way around? Remember our Ninth Tradition: “NA, as such, ought never be organized, but we may create service boards or committees directly responsible to those they serve.�

So, then, what is NA’s opinion of the “sober alcoholic� member? Answer: NA has no opinion. NA does not endorse language or concepts of addiction tied to specific drugs—but neither does NA oppose them. That is the simplicity of Tradition Ten. NA stands neutral on these issues, neither endorsing nor opposing. Therefore, groups and committees using statements opposing causes—language, in particular—are also in opposition to Tradition Ten.

We hear it said, over and over, that in recovery “we teach by example.� I have found that when an ideal or concept is repeated throughout a lesson, it ought to be given special consideration. The concept of “teaching by example� allows our fellowship to practice creative freedom while at the same time removing any threat of self-righteousness. This spiritual concept, taught in our Eleventh Tradition, is neither practiced nor encouraged through the implementation of clarity statements. The example of each member’s recovery and our success as a fellowship speaks for itself. This success is sufficient attraction to Narcotics Anonymous, making it unnecessary for us to promote any part of our program.

And finally, language specificity could never be an issue when humility is practiced through the spirit of anonymity in our Twelfth Tradition. When the principle of anonymity is squarely in place, members cannot be earmarked as “adjective addicts�; they can only be seen as simple, anonymous parts of a greater whole—they ought never be maliciously separated or distinguished from other recovering addicts. The principles of recovery that unite us ought always be paramount over the forces of personality that may divide us.

“Truly, anonymity is the spiritual foundation of all our traditions. Without it, the unity upon which personal recovery depends would dissolve in a chaos of conflicting personalities. With it, our groups are given a body of guiding principle, our Twelve Traditions, helping them join the personal strengths of their members in a fellowship that supports and nurtures the recovery of us all.� (It Works: How and Why, page 215)

andyaddict
Los Angeles

http://www.na.org/pdf/naway/en/usnaway_jan2004.pdf

Re: Clarity Statements (approved version)
 

:bad: Hey Andy... I was wondering if you made it back in after the crash. Nothing like a good clarity statement discussion to get you outta the showers back into the forum. :arms:

Re: Clarity Statements (approved version)
 

Well... I haven't posted much anywhere for a while now. Once in a while a simple cut and paste but I really don't have the time or energy to get emotionally involved in heated debates or developing essays.

Its coming to finals week and I'm ending the semister from hell. Maybe over the mild break I'll find some things more appealing to respond to. I simply noticed that one post growing like a weed in relation to the us vs them of fellowships and thought I'd get my hand up.

NAway...

andyaddict
Los Angeles

Re: Clarity Statements (approved version)
 

Could not have put it any simpler, Thanks.
later

Re: Clarity Statements (approved version)
 

andy
mack- addict here. glad to meet ya
thanks for the post-
amen
mackat

Re: Clarity Statements (approved version)
 

Yep, it's a lot clearer now.
Thanks a heap andy.

Re: Clarity Statements (approved version)
 

Love the poll! I think I was on that thread you were talking about. Thank you for the post. I think that the approved "standard" readings say everything that needs to be said.
Love, Eddie Addict

Re: Clarity Statements (approved version)
 

Andy,
Your writing on the “Clarity Statement� shows me an obvious lack of understanding of the principles involved in a 12 step fellowship whose focus is on a disease concept. Anonymity is a key to our survival both as a fellowship and as an individual, as written in the first step. Your writing is well intentioned perhaps, but misguided.
Attached is the Board of Trustees Bulletin from which some of the Clarity Statements were adapted.) There are several versions of the ‘Clarity Statement’ based on this bulletin and even more versions based on other writings. Many groups don't even use the term 'Clarity Statement' anymore, choosing instead the more unifying term 'Identity Statement'.

I think that perhaps the reason so many members don't understand it (the Clarity Statement) is because it is taken out of context. It was not meant to stand on its own, but is just a small part of a larger thought. Please read the whole piece which was written by the then sitting World Service Board of Trustees.

Available here...
http://www.na.org/bulletins/bull13-r.htm

Some comments I have come across on the “Clarity Statement by some NA members.. I have changed the names to protect their anonymity....

ADDICT ONE
The program teaches us to be open minded right from the start. Early impressions are very important to us. What we learn in the first 90 days sets the tone for our recovery for years to come. If we get the impression that all programs are the same or that NA is no different from any other fellowship then we will carry on the practice of separating substances in our minds. This keeps us in the problem of focusing on the symptoms of our disease and not dealing with the disease itself. We will think we have recovery simply through abstinence. While it may be upsetting to a newcomer to question their belief system (especially when it was enforced through a treatment center) it is in my opinion that the sooner they do this the better their chances for real recovery. The statement does this without making a newcomer feel they are being personally confronted or attacked. It is an overall statement of the principles of NA. Something ALL members need to practice.

ADDICT TWO
It takes a lot of time to be able to carry the message of recovery, working the steps, working with new comers, going to meetings, having a power in your life, that power being able to overcome all! Turning to that power, having sincerity in prayer, and having a fellowship that practices its primary purpose is a wonderful place to be, true spiritual principles don’t conflict each other. The primary purpose is not the same, respect the fellowship you are visiting, use their books, words, and ways. Here in NA we don’t put up with the trashing of our home! Sometimes spiritual giants have to turn the tables and "raise hell�. The only thing we have to give away is our way of life, and this is how we live it. We now have a fellowship with years of experience. We don’t have to stay clean with just the little white book THINK GOD!

ADDICT THREE
I think the clarity statement is great. I think it teaches us about unity, not differences. I got clean around the time the Clarity Statement came out. It didn’t offend me. At the time I was a rebel and a "Alcoholic and a Addict". Eventually it helped me to realize, I am an addict, and I suffer from addiction, and am clean today.
So my opinion is that it is good. If I want to focus on what offends other members of the fellowship, I need not look for answers in our literature. When I want the answer to what offends other addicts, I need only look in the mirror.

ADDICT FOUR
What harm is there in clarifying what we already know to be true? Drugs come in all shapes, sizes, colors, And so too, do Addicts. All are inclusive, whether we are old-timers or newcomers. The Clarity Statement is simply to make our unity known, not to separate or distinguish one from the other. May God's Grace be with us all and guide us in our recoveries.

This is the version of the ‘Identity Statement’ that we read at my home group…..

We, the home group members, believe it helps when we use the NA language of recovery in all that we say in this meeting. That is; we prefer to refer to our disease as addiction and identify ourselves as addicts.
We refer to our time in the NA program as clean time or recovery.
We do this because with the first step of NA we have shifted the focus off any specific drug and onto the recovery process leaving us with the single focus necessary for unity.
Any labels which imply specific drugs or more than one disease dilutes that focus and some of the unity called for in NA’s first tradition is lost. This is not something we enforce; we are just letting you know what seems to work for us.

I hope that my post here will at least give some other points of view of the so-called ‘Clarity Statement’. At the very least, I am glad if it furthers some discussion on the state of NA.

Please understand that I do not believe that anyone should dictate any addict's personal program of recovery. I am well aware that there are some addict who attend more than one fellowship. I believe that whatever works for you is what works for you, but I also believe that when you are in a fellowship that has traditions, and a primary purpose and a specific message of recovery, that you follow those traditions and follow that primary purpose and respect that primary purpose.

Some one else said...."when in Rome, do as the Romans do"

Even if you don't believe in a fellowship's disease concept, at least respect it.

Peace and Hugs To You Always…
Richie

Re: Clarity Statements (approved version)
 

Just want to clarify a couple of points.

Re: the disease concept.

Narcotics Anonymous views addiction as a disease. We use a very simple, experience-oriented 'disease concept'. We do not qualify our use of the term "disease" in any medical or specialized therapeutic sense, nor do we make any attempt to persuade others of the correctness of our view. The 'disease concept' works well as an analogy by which our members can understand their condition.

The experience of our members has been that total, continuous abstinence from all drugs has provided them with a reliable foundation for recovery and personal growth.

Narcotics Anonymous views alcohol as a drug, and we find the "drug of choice" designation irrelevant to our program since we focus on the disease of addiction itself, not any particular drug or drugs.

Narcotics Anonymous makes a clear distinction, based on very different program goals, between itself and other anonymous fellowships, for instance, Alcoholics Anonymous and Cocaine Anonymous. The primary distinction is noted in our First Step; in being powerless over our addiction, not merely a specific substance.

Richie

Re: Clarity Statements (approved version)
 

I am an addict who is clean. That means I don’t use any drug including alcohol. Also including pot, heroin, cocaine, opium, codeine, LSD, speed and many others. When I am at an NA meeting and I want to identify myself so that others can identify with me , I use the lowest common denominator…..I am an addict. I don’t say I am ‘clean and sober’, or ‘clean and heroin free’, or ‘clean and relieved of my obsession to use crack’, or ‘clean and dry from pot’. I also expect others to make it easy for me to identify with them.

Our program tells us that “We are not interested in what or how much you used�
How does identifying oneself (at an NA meeting) as an addict AND alcoholic allow for identification to the person who has never used alcohol? How does that further our fellowships belief that we suffer from a disease and that the specific drug or drugs we used are not at the foundation of our problem, but only a manifestation of a much deeper problem?
When I say I am clean , that means just that. I don’t use anything. I don’t have to say it twice (as in clean and sober)….obviously if you are clean, then you don’t use alcohol. There are some who identify themselves as addicts and alcoholics at an NA meeting. I guess they believe that they have two different diseases. One makes them an addict and one makes them an alcoholic.

Why do you suppose that only so-called alcoholic and addicts identify themselves twice? Why don’t we hear more often, things like ; Hi I ‘m Johnny, I’m an addict and a crackhead. Or I’m an addict and a junkie or I’m an addict and a pothead or I’m an addict and anything else? And why do those who identify as ‘alcoholic and addict’ stop there? Why not Hi I’m Joe and I am an alcoholic and a pothead and a speedfreak and an overeating divorced gambling, retired, fireman and oh yeah….an addict? When we do that it makes us less anonymous...it makes us stand out more…..

To say I am an ‘alcoholic and an addict is like saying I am a carrot and a vegetable. It is redundant. If one can be ‘clean AND sober’ then it follows to reason that one can be clean but not sober. MW Dictionary defines sober as; “not addicted to intoxicating drink c : not drunk� It defines clean: : free from drug addiction

Some people believe that AA and NA are the same. They are not the same. If they were the same, we addicts would still be attending AA meetings, and there would never have been NA or any other fellowship. I don’t go to Narcotics Anonymous meetings to hear about AA or CA. If I want to hear about those places, then I will go there. AA does not need our help so badly that we need to talk about it in NA.
.
And it goes both ways I would not go to an AA meeting and speak in a manner that conflicts with their traditions.

Here is a statement from AA literature;
“Alcoholism and drug addiction are often referred to as “substance abuse� or “chemical dependency.� Alcoholics and non-alcoholics are, therefore, sometimes introduced to A.A. and encouraged to attend A.A. meetings. Anyone may attend open A.A. meetings. But only those with a drinking problem may attend closed meetings or become A.A. members. People with problems other than alcoholism are eligible for A.A. membership only if they have a drinking problem.�

Dr. Vincent Dole, for several years a trustee on the General Service Board of A.A., made the following statement: “The source of strength in A.A. is its single-mindedness. The mission of A.A. is to help alcoholics. A.A. limits what it is demanding of itself and its associates, and its success lies in its limited target.�

In NA, when we use the word "addiction" we do, in fact, mean "drug addiction." Our Third Tradition says, "The only requirement for membership is a desire to stop using." Clearly, we mean "... a desire to stop using drugs."
As a fellowship, we place much importance on the fact that we have shifted the focus of our steps off any specific drug and onto the addiction itself. We have done that by wording Step One "powerless over our addiction" rather than "powerless over drugs" or "powerless over narcotics." Any wording of Step One which named specific drugs -- or drugs at all -- would have stated the principle with much less power than our current wording does.
We must understand our First Step well enough to keep our sharing at meetings focused on the disease of addiction, not on specific drugs. That way our focus is broad enough to include all drug addicts..

Since it is true that we attempt not to focus on any particular drugs in our meetings, many members have questioned why we are called Narcotics Anonymous. Wouldn't Addicts Anonymous or Drug Addicts Anonymous have been more appropriate title?
The name of our program does seem incongruous with our philosophy and with the varied nature of our membership. In fact, when our fellowship first broke away from Alcoholics Anonymous, we called ourselves "Addicts Anonymous." Two separate fellowships, both calling themselves "AA" was not such a clean break, though. So our founders chose the name Narcotics Anonymous. At the time, "narcotics" referred to all drug categories, and so "Narcotics Anonymous" was a reasonable choice as the name of our fellowship. The original title, then, did reflect our philosophy of not being focused on a specific drug or drugs. Unfortunately, the word narcotics later became associated with a particular drug category.

. All Narcotics Anonymous groups are bound by the principles of the Twelve Steps and Twelve Traditions of NA. Each group has but one primary purpose – to carry the message of recovery to the addict who still suffers.

From IP #2;
The NA member chosen to speak at a meeting needs to be someone who is working and living the NA program of recovery, which is the Twelve Steps and Twelve Traditions.
When speaking at an NA meeting, we should be careful to deliver a clear message of recovery by identifying ourselves as addicts recovering from the disease of addiction.

I am for anything that helps anyone stay clean and I will help anyone , anytime to stay clean. I just believe that when you are in someone’s house, that you respect it. NA members need to follow NA’s traditions and AA members need to follow AA’s traditions and vice versa. Na has but one primary purpose, and so does AA. They both work best when we follow the concepts that each stands for.

In my home group we read an Identity Statement (above post) but we leave it at that. We don’t jump down anyone’s throat, no matter what they say. We know that if they keep coming back, that one day they will understand why we read it. If questioned, I am glad to speak to anyone about it after the meeting. Our home group will always welcome you no matter how you identify yourself.

Following a program of recovery does not make it the NA way of recovery unless one follows the NA steps and traditions and participates in the fellowship of NA. It doesn’t matter to me how many different fellowships one goes to while working their own personal program of recovery. Me? I spent too many years trying to do it my way. I have made a commitment to follow the NA way. I found everything I need in NA meetings and fellowship. I don’t need to go to any other fellowship anymore. I have been to others, they just didn’t do it for me. Even when there were only a few meetings each week in my region some 20 years ago (there are 700 weekly now) , I found a way to get to an NA meeting in a town nearby. Most importantly, when I did have the occasion to be in another fellowship meeting, I did my best to follow their way of doing things, their topics of discussion, and their terminology. I did it out of respect to the other people in the room. I repeat, whatever or however we choose to implement our own personal recovery is up to each individual, but let’s not confuse our own program of recovery with the time tested and proven Narcotics Anonymous program of recovery.

Even though we do not always see eye to eye, we have at last learned how to disagree without being disagreeable.

Wishing you love and recovery,
Richie

andyaddict :biglaugh:
Los Angeles

While I agree with your points Richie, I also have to continually recheck my state of openmindedness and remember where I came from. Although, we are all ( in my opinion ) suffering from the same condition of addiction, my understanding, my perception is bound to vary by degree from others. Although we are not unique, we are individuals with a differing set of circumstances, and experiences... that is to say while many of us experience almost identical situations and feelings, the order and time frames we experience them in provides a unique, individual, and personalized growth process.

From "What Can I Do?"
This single statement has granted me more acceptance for self and others and explained to me how diversity and unity can coexist.

The poll at the beginning of this thread really made me think.. I can't answer it... or maybe I refuse to answer it.. or maybe I am just not ready to commit myself to a single choice.

The first time I heard the clarity statement, I liked it. I only saw the positive aspect of restating ( for the newcomers benefit) the obvious (to us veterans).

Then I remembered the fella who showed up at a learning day and sat in a meeting, and after identifying himslef as a cross addicted alcoholic, sharing how he really needed a meeting that day, right then and there. He said he was on his way to get loaded and had seen the NA logo on the sign in the parking lot, so he came on in. The next guy to share hit him with the disease of addiction, your not cross addicted, blah blah blah, and before he was done sharing the guy got up and stormed out. I don't know if he went to the bar or not, and if he did I can understand the resentment that helped him make the rest of the trip.

I really can see another value to the clarity statement... maybe just maybe it will remind the veteran that we don't rule, censure, or dictate behaviour or identification.

If these were the perfect words to help the oldtimer stay in touch with humility, openmindedness, and compassion, then I am all for it. If they drive one newcomer back out the door, then i'm against them.

Hi my name is Dan and I am sick. I need some help. My life is unmanageable.
Can you help me reclaim my life...

What it comes down to for this addict is one simple thing.
AA and NA haved showed me a way to prevent me from wasting away in misery. I love and respect the people in both fellowships who do service and remind me occasionnaly of the foundations and precepts these two fellowships are built upon. But in the end, crossing the t's and dotting the i's is futile if, it's going to come in the way of a sick person getting some help. So yeah, I can recognize bull$hit when I see it. Clarity of thinking is after all one of the gifts of recovery.
Peace to all of us.

If you go to any meeting you have: Who is an Addict, what is NA, Why are we here,How it Work, 12 Traditions of NA, and a reading from Just for today, also Just for Today at the end. In those readings alone does it not tell us what we need to know... Who tells us our ends are all the same, jails institutions and death, What says it doesnt matter what or how much we used, only what you want to do about your problem and how we can help. Why tell us tha after coming to NA we realized we were sick people. We suffer from a disease, that disease can be arrested at some point and recovery is then possible. HOW it works tells us 1 is too many and 1000 is never enough, and that Alchohol is is a drug. In those readings alone, after a while, the cross-addicted person will realize from addicts sharing there experience, strength and hope that they are like us.ADDICTS. When there was talk about the Clarity statements, other addicts shared there opinions about it, neg. and pos. some groups read it at meetings and some dont. Personally, What can I do, comes from the text, very suddle, and adviseable on what to do for the newcomer. Of, course that is just my opinion.

Some groups use this as a 'clarity statement'

The Twelve Steps of Narcotics Anonymous, as adapted from A.A., are the basis of our recovery program.

We have only broadened their perspective.We follow the same path with a single exception; our identification as addicts is all-inclusive with respect to any mood-changing, mind-altering substance.

Alcoholism is too limited a term for us; our problem is not a specific substance, it is a disease called addiction.

I guess it would be pretty tough to complain about that one eh??

Yeah, but, going to meetings to seek recovery, the chairs person or even the secrataries report has a statment of find a sponsor, 90 in 90 or even hit a meeting a day the 90 will take care of its self. I know for me, It was before I was even out of re-hab that I was an addict, just from the message of one addict to another, and there was no clarity statement at that time. The clarity statement is read at meetings and I still hear 'cross addicted alcoholiic' but one thing is obvious, there is always at every meeting I do attend, the theraputic value of one addict helping another, goes to say, in a meeting of 50 addicts seekng recovery the message of recovery is really never blurred by one addict saying he/she is an adict/alcoholic isit? Isnt the primary porpose to carry the message to the addict who still suffers? that message is of that you dont have to use today, and recovery is possible.

But that is the whole point...the NA message IS blurred and the above sentence proves it.

We are not in NA to carry the message of recovery...we are in NA to carry the NA message of recovery.
There are hundreds of messages of recovery, which you are entitled to practice and pass on, but don't practice them or pass them on in an NA meeting. We already have our own message and our own way of passing it on. NA has only one message of recovery and it is covered in the Twelve Steps and twelve Traditions of Narcotics Anonymous.

addict/alcoholic implies 2 separate illness, one of which is related to a specific substance.

Our whole program is based on the fact that we believe we have one disease called addiction.

How can we ever help a newcomer understand what NA is if we deny him the right to learn we believe we suffer from the disease of addiction, not the disease of alcohol (or any other drug).

Wishing you well

Richie

You guys have heard what our differences can do to unity right?
We get personal, everyone looses. Newcomers looking at this board and this thread...
Just think about that if you can. Nothing being gained by that last remark Recoveree.
Peace to all of us.

No, I said 1 addict out of 50 not having the concept of the NA recovery or way of life, saying he/she is alcohlol/addict, 1 person out of 50 saying this, The NA message is NOT blurred the person is blurred.

Ok