Soberpotamus

Article from Psychology Today - Where Science Meets the Steps,
The new science of addiction by David Sack, M.D.

SoberLeigh

Great article, SJ. Thank you.

awuh1

I have no problem with anyone rewriting, changing or following any path they choose in order to deal with their alcoholism. No one in AA is required to do anything. AA's program is suggested.

The problem I have with these groups is that they have altered versions of those suggestions (the 12 steps). By changing them, they have clearly changed the nature of "the program" and make it something quite different.

Since this change constitutes a fundamental difference and not merely a cosmetic one, why call it AA? Call it anything else, because that's what it is, something else.

If an alternate method proves to be widely successful, and it grows at even one half the rate that AA did in the beginning, there will undoubtedly be great relief that a unique name was chosen to distinguish it from the organization called Alcoholics Anonymous.

Dr. Sack ends his article by quoting AA's co-founder Bill Wilson: “The roads to recovery are many.” I could not agree more, and IMO this is as it should be. However, let's not take the sign posts for one path and place them on the road to another.

Soberpotamus

"What puzzled the agnostic groups about these decisions is that AA’s founders didn't design the 12 Steps as gospel. The list was an attempt to outline what had worked in the program for others who wanted to follow in their footsteps. In fact, according to William L. White’s encyclopedic exploration of the history of addiction treatment in the U.S., titled “Slaying the Dragon,” an original draft of the 12 Steps had much of its religious language softened by the AA membership at the time so that it might be more inclusive. An introductory sentence was also added: “Here are the steps we took which are suggested as a program of recovery.” Suggested.

In addition, AA was created with and prides itself on its bottom-up power structure. It “ought never be organized,” its Traditions state. AA members make their own decisions about their groups and are encouraged to be autonomous. “The only requirement for AA membership,” No. 3 of the 12 Traditions states, “is a desire to stop drinking.”"

anattaboy

Great stuff Jen! As always. And thanks for getting the name right in my thread.

Soberpotamus

Your name spelling? Lol!

Eddiebuckle

Thanks SJ. I am an AAer, and the thing that frustrates me to no end is hearing people say they cannot "do" AA because of the of the "God requirement."

I will happily work with any alcoholic who is honest, open, and willing. Lives are being lost because of this misconception...

awuh1

Everything you say is true Jenny, and I agree. The language was changed to be far more inclusive. In fact some of that input came from an agnostic, Jimmy B. The language was, in the end, agreed upon. This is the language that these 'agnostic' groups want to change, and what they want to read in meetings as if it is the AA program. This strikes me as dishonest.

BTW I believe the third tradition ("the only requirement for membership is a desire to stop drinking), refers to individuals, not to groups.

My question is, why is there such a strong desire to use the AA name or associate with AA if the program suggested by the agnostic groups is fundamentally different? Can't this alternative method of recovery it stand on it's own?

stephendu

Not a bad article. The "god" stuff is what made me leave aa many years ago. I hope it does continue to evolve to become more inclusive in the future. The last few paragraphs were great.

natsume

The agnostic groups I attend don't recite the 12 steps, but neither do they have a desire to change them as they exist. It is my strong impression that most agnostic groups are not out to "change the steps" but they do want to vastly enlarge the thinking and the approaches to working the 12-steps. There are spiritual principles behind each step that work, and are a solution and a way out for many/most of those that give them a try. The assumption is that the program works, without the need for the Judeo-Christian god of the early culture of original AA. It is a fact that many use the program as is, but must "translate" the "God" parts to accommodate their own beliefs, or lack of beliefs. It is also a fact that many have to hide or mask this in meetings or face censure, or at best, the condescending attitude that essentially tells "unbelievers" "stick with us, we were once like like you, you'll get there".

My "rigorously honest" truth is that my own brand and understanding of spirituality lies outside of the judeo christian paradigm. And yet, the steps are steeped in it. The claim is made that AA is not a religious program, and yet we hold hands and recite the words of Jesus Christ at the end of most meetings in my area.

The agnostic meetings create a safe space for members to be rigorously honest. For me, it is a breath of fresh air. I sometimes hear things in these meetings that I don't agree with, and I thank the universe that there is a space for somebody to be honest without fear of censure or "correction".

Isn't this thing about honesty, open mindedness, and willingness? Sometimes AA "wisdom" seems to tell us that these spiritual principles are the path to "God". I see them as the path to sober, authentic living.

Boleo

I see them as simply the path:

"Tao or Dao (/taʊ/, /daʊ/; Chinese: 道; pinyin: About this sound Dào (help·info)) is a Chinese concept signifying 'way', 'path', 'route', or sometimes more loosely, 'doctrine' or 'principle'.

Tao - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

awuh1

The groups you attend have not changed the program (the steps). The agnostic groups that were mentioned in the article (and were deleted from AA meeting lists) did change the wording in the steps. This is the difference.

I believe most members of AA have no problem at all with agnostic groups, agnostic members, not reading the steps in meetings or just about anything else. AA is an extremely tolerant place. However, I think that there are reasons for distinctions, and that distinctions merit different names. If you want to change the nature of the AA program, then don't call it AA. If you are suggesting a different program, then it's worthy of a different name.

Zencat

"For the agnostic, atheist and humanist, it can feel like a distraction from the work at hand as well as a disturbing admonishment to check their beliefs at the door." - Where Science Meets the Steps.

It became such an distraction for me that I skipped over the HP/God bits altogether. AA as a peer support group worked well enough for me. Eventually separating from AA to a more 'hands on' approach interest me. The matching of my freedom from addiction with my freedom of thought worked out to be a superb combo.

Pagekeeper

This debate boils down to the traditions. Here are the long forms of T3 & T4:


3. Our membership ought to include all who suffer from alcoholism. Hence we may refuse none who wish to recover. Nor ought A.A. membership ever depend upon money or conformity. Any two or three alcoholics gathered together for sobriety may call themselves an A.A. group, provided that, as a group, they have no other affiliation.

This seems to be the tradition that the Agnostic groups are clinging to. And they have a legitimate reason--it says any 2 or 3 alkies may call themselves an AA group, as long as they have no other affiliation.

However, T4 states any no action should affect "AA as a whole." Changing the steps qualifies for affecting AA as a whole, since it is the core of the AA program.

4. With respect to its own affairs, each A.A. group should be responsible to no other authority than its own conscience. But when its plans concern the welfare of neighboring groups also, those groups ought to be consulted. And no group,regional committee, or individual should ever take any action that might greatly affect A.A. as a whole without conferring with the Trustees of the General Service Board. On such issues our common welfare is paramount.

Districts and areas also have their own group consciences made up of AA members. If an intergroup votes that changing the steps greatly affects AA as a whole, and our common welfare is jeopardized, than agnostic meetings that change the steps may no longer qualify as AA groups. The article says the Intergroups were the decision makers in taking them off the list.

Soberpotamus

This isn't a debate. Not from my side, anyway. I always post links to articles I find interesting, appropriate, and helpful.

natsume

Unfortunately, it is a debate.

In the interests of following an honest and authentic path in recovery, I hope to be a force for inclusion and not division in my own small way.

Pagekeeper

It's fine if you just post stuff you find interesting, but that doesn't mean the article itself is objective or neutral. I wasn't basing my reply on a blue link in a grey box on a forum. I was basing it on the content of what lied therewithin. Anyway ... Groups that change the steps and call themselves AA groups have been debated for years now. It is a discussion that has gone all the way to General Service.

Agnostic groups in and of themselves are still AA groups. Just like any other specialized AA group, whether it be women's groups or men's groups or LBGT groups. The only groups in question are those that change the steps or alter the structure in such a way that it affects AA as a whole. An agnostic group does not affect AA as a whole. Neither does a women's group. A group that changes the steps does affect AA as a whole. At that point, the intergroup can take a vote, which was what happened to the groups mentioned in the article. The intergroups voted against these groups being recognized as AA because they changed the steps.

Soberpotamus

It's fine if I post anything at all within the rules of the forum.

Also, you might need to keep in mind which section of the forum you are in. This is the secular 12 step forum.

Fly N Buy

Good points with a multitude of perspectives. AA 12 steps are intended to develope a spiritual awakening which in turn allows for a complete psychic change thusly keeping one sober. Most I know don't judge if that is the spirit of the universe - however one chooses to define that.

The article is interesting - thanks SJ for the post. Hope you don't mind I popped into the secular forum

IMHO - mature intercourse in respectful manner is what the true beauty of SR!

Peace to us all
FlyN

Pagekeeper

I know which forum I am in. I've posted in here numerous times. Like I already stated, my first reply was based on the content of the article, not to you personally.

I work a secular program, so I think I qualify for the secular 12 step forum, lol.