Moderated: Why do people insist AA is not religious?/Efficacy of AA & other treatment programs

[Minoosh]

Originally Posted by The Norseman

This study seems pretty supportive of AA, though I am uncertain if AA has been properly separated from other support group mechanisms. That seems to be a serious deficit of many of these studies which purport high success rates with AA.

Absolutely correct, from a purely rational viewpoint. But if you've just escaped the clutches of a compulsion that could kill you (& others) ... well, at some point you resign from the debating society.

For me being clean for 24 hours was a a cognitive breakthrough. To oversimplify let's say the first day sober I meditated, went to my job, took a nap, ran 5 miles, went to AA, had dinner and fell asleep thinking about everything I was grateful for. That worked out so I did the same thing the next day.

Those "support group mechanisms" went by another word - people, many of whom became friends.

Originally Posted by The Norseman

At any rate, in my mind, this report is saying people who are help-seeking are more likely to achieve sobriety and combined with the other reports I commented on yesterday which basically says that a group process is critical to success, I find that so far, nothing yet says that the AA program itself is the causal factor.

As lacking in rigor as it is, I'll settle for correlation.

I didn't have such a great program, yet events in early sobriety forced me into a growth spurt and I lost a lot of baggage. The steps weren't about getting sober, they were about living sober. The wording isn't sacrosanct to me, it's the process that matters.

The willingness to ask for help may serve as a marker for other cooperative behavior.

Groups can be a secular "power greater than ourselves." A good group works on several levels - social, behavioral, cognitive. And for me, spiritual. It was a real "high" to realize that my 8 days clean might be more useful to a newcomer than the next person's 8 years. Feeling useful is very reinforcing.

My AA is an extended buddy system, not another Manson Family.

[DannyB II]

Great stuff there Minoosh and Norseman. I like where you guys are taking this discussion.
Thanks!!

[Minoosh]

Originally Posted by The Norseman

Bill Wilson, et al, have consistently made claims as to how wonderful AA works and have repeatedly lied about the success numbers over the years.

Bill Wilson said that 4 out of 5 heavy boozers ignored him.

The "et al" makes this claim harder to research, who is making the claims?

Thanks for the links!

[Minoosh]

Originally Posted by Joey McGee

How is it not completely obvious that AA is a dangerous memetic organism?

Because I'm stupid?

Originally Posted by Joey McGee

There are other groups and stories out there but what more do you want?

Name names Joey if you know it's happening.

Originally Posted by Joey McGee

the fact AA goes around telling people, especially teens etc, that they have a "disease"

AA goes around telling people? Where does it go to tell people this?

And BTW Joey I was in the media for 30 years, AA didn't try to peddle itself once.

[TheGoldcountry]

[quote=

My AA is an extended buddy system, not another Manson Family.[/QUOTE]

Minoosh, I'm not speaking for everyone, but if AA was merely an "extended buddy system", I doubt many people, such as myself, would have a problem with it. One of the things that I liked, fom the moment of my first exposure to AA, was the welcoming environment, the friendly people, and the "safe" venue to speak my mind.

But it IS religious, from the opening and closing prayers to people talking of finding Jesus. I was told by people within AA that if I didn't "take Jesus in my heart", I would fail. I was told by professionals to just "get over it" and believe in God.

NO. Sorry, this may be a good option for some, and I am sincerely happy for those who have changed their lives with AA, but I can't just "get over it".

AA pretty much proclaims that failures are attributed to the individual's unwillingness to adhere to the twelve steps. AA gets credit for success; weak and stubborn people are to blame for failure.

[Joey McGee]

Originally Posted by Minoosh

I note that the age of consent in Maryland is 16 so these old goats weren't even breaking the law.

One mom said, "She was sober for nine months, and I was so glad that I thought, whatever's happening with this group is fine by me."

Yes, something has changed. A bunch of dirty laundry got aired. Parents who abandoned their children to this group got a dose of reality.

We're talking about Midtown group here. Your statements here are unbelievably outrageous. I asked you to explain them and you have declined. You can't explain them. I refuse to communicate about this any longer.

Stories of the Midtown Group of Alcoholics Anonymous

[Minoosh]

Originally Posted by Joey McGee

Nothing has changed except for a lot of people realized AA was a dangerous cult (often benign, usually just a moderately stupid and harmful

So something did change.

Originally Posted by Joey McGee

Why is it possible for an AA group to turn into a cult in the 2000s?

Why is it possible for any group to turn into a cult?

Originally Posted by Joey McGee

It allows for delusional wish-thinking or kooky ideas that are basically ways you trick your mind into a state of serenity/healing/well-being. People are using the program as a blueprint to launch themselves into a manufactured altered consciousness that over time helps lead to changes in the brain which is what really needs to happen.

So it works?

Originally Posted by Joey McGee

No self-respecting freethinker is going to stand-by watching well-meaning people addicted to the program ..

Get thee to a meeting Joey, they need you out there

Originally Posted by Joey McGee

Besides, when you actually use reality and clear thinking (think cognitive behavioral therapy) you're more likely to live a happy life because you adapt to reality, not escape from reality.

Evidence?

[TheGoldcountry]

"And BTW Joey I was in the media for 30 years, AA didn't try to peddle itself once."

Minoosh, AA doesn't have to. People who have never been there, read about it, or understand it are more than willing to act as though AA and 12 step programs are the Holy Grail of substance abuse problems. My generation, and the ones after, have been raised to automatically trust and blindly follow AA as a cure-all.

[Minoosh]

Originally Posted by Joey McGee

Your statements here are unbelievably outrageous.

Were they factually incorrect?

[Hallo Alfie]

Originally Posted by TheGoldcountry

NO. Sorry, this may be a good option for some, and I am sincerely happy for those who have changed their lives with AA, but I can't just "get over it".

So AA didn't work for you? Something else did presumably? May I ask what you did?

Originally Posted by TheGoldcountry

AA pretty much proclaims that failures are attributed to the individual's unwillingness to adhere to the twelve steps. AA gets credit for success; weak and stubborn people are to blame for failure.

Nope. Nowhere have I ever heard that weak and stubborn people are to blame.

Originally Posted by Minoosh

Evidence?

I would like to see his information on CBT too.

Notwithstanding the fact that much of what happens in AA, with sponsors and the steps is in fact a form of CBT.

Ironic, no?

[Minoosh]

Originally Posted by TheGoldcountry

My generation, and the ones after, have been raised to automatically trust and blindly follow AA as a cure-all.

Who raised you this way? The Overlords?

Drop-in center collects dollar bills, conquers world.

[Joey McGee]

http://aacultwatch.co.uk

Quote:

This site has been set up by members of Alcoholics Anonymous who are concerned about the development of a movement in AA that we refer to as a cult.

It is our view that this cult has as its aims the control of AA in Great Britain and the promulgation of its own version of the recovery program that is both a corruption of the message and the spirit of the Fellowship.

There are a lot of Christian groups that do cult deprogramming. I mean obviously Christianity has always been a cult so that's kind of a ridiculous situation but at least they are helping end the wanton abuse. This to me is similar. But their site and existence is interesting.

Of course when it comes to the United States they consider "Back to Basics" meetings to be cults. Well, no surprise there.

[TheGoldcountry]

Most people (in America, I have no exposure to other countries) are trained to think that AA is the ultimate answer. Not necessary, perhaps, but undeniably effective for "extreme" cases.

The main argument for this, of course, is that it does work for some. Who can argue with that? Someone was alcoholic, now they are not. Alcoholics know it is not that that simple, but to someone outside, AA was the "gift from God". The concept that the alcoholic was willing to change at that point is lost.

I have other issues to address, but I would rather start small, before expanding.

[TheGoldcountry]

Who raised you this way? The Overlords? Minoosh

Minoosh, I know that you are being purposefully disingenuous, but I will respond anyway.
No, there was no organized effort for the phenomenon of AA. That doesn't mean that it didn't exist. I was raised in a generation that thought AA could do no wrong. They had known "alkys" for years; those alkys stopped drinking; therefore, AA must have done it.

Believe me, I don't think that there was any "nefarious plot" on the part of AA. I simply think that there is a huge amount of unfounded gratitude and unrealistic expectations attributed to them that the general media extends to them because they are now a "sacred cow". The official group of AA (which is admittedly small) would never have to lift a finger if there was a negative piece in the media about AA, because there are either members (who are more likely to keep quiet) or friends and family (who don't) who will.

[DannyB II]

Originally Posted by TheGoldcountry

Who raised you this way? The Overlords? Minoosh

Minoosh, I know that you are being purposefully disingenuous, but I will respond anyway.
No, there was no organized effort for the phenomenon of AA. That doesn't mean that it didn't exist. I was raised in a generation that thought AA could do no wrong. They had known "alkys" for years; those alkys stopped drinking; therefore, AA must have done it.

Believe me, I don't think that there was any "nefarious plot" on the part of AA. I simply think that there is a huge amount of unfounded gratitude and unrealistic expectations attributed to them that the general media extends to them because they are now a "sacred cow". The official group of AA (which is admittedly small) would never have to lift a finger if there was a negative piece in the media about AA, because there are either members (who are more likely to keep quiet) or friends and family (who don't) who will.

Ok, Goldmember what is all this supposed to mean. All I read was a bunch of pre-programmed responses you have heard around the sites.
What does all this mean, my man.
Too many one liners. I felt Johnny Carson was coming back.
With all due respect can you explain what all this means please. Maybe line for line below.

1. Sacred cows
2. Unfounded gratitude and unrealistic expectations
3. Nefarious plots
4. Phenomenon of AA
5. I was raised in a generation that thought AA could do no wrong.
6. The official group of AA (which is admittedly small)

[Hallo Alfie]

Originally Posted by Joey McGee

http://aacultwatch.co.uk



There are a lot of Christian groups that do cult deprogramming. I mean obviously Christianity has always been a cult so that's kind of a ridiculous situation but at least they are helping end the wanton abuse. This to me is similar. But their site and existence is interesting.

Of course when it comes to the United States they consider "Back to Basics" meetings to be cults. Well, no surprise there.

Edited by kmortis:

Removed personal comments

Meanwhile could you please outline which science based therapies AA should be directing its members to and/or incorporating into the program (the latter wont happen but I would like to know).

[TheGoldcountry]

Well, you haven't actually asked a question, but I'll try to respond:

1)There are certain social or political groups or issues that are considered politically incorrect to attack. I think AA is one of them.

2)I think sometimes alcoholics are able to help themselves. I think sometimes their friends in AA help them. In any case, if they succeed in helping themselves, outsiders often give AA credit, whether deserved or not.

3)Others have attributed malicious intent to AA. I do not. I simply question method.

4)I think AA came along in the right time and the right place. People were willing to accept alcoholism as a disease (that could be dealt with, if not cured) and the media was willing to accomodate them. Understand, this neither proves the effectiveness or intent of AA or the opposite; it merely shows that the media slowly came to accept AA, unconditionally.

5)Covered in 4, I think.

6)The "official" part of AA is admittedly small. Again, I don't think that there is any "huge plan" to indoctrinate people with AA. I just think that AA has grown so strong in the national mindset (and international mindset, if I read correctly) that people have become afraid to disagree.

I think we can all agree that if AA pushes people away because of other factors besides drinking, that it has jeopardized it's relevance as an effective program.

[TheGoldcountry]

by the way, I wasn't "preprogrammed"

if I was, I would agree with you, DannyB

[Minoosh]

Originally Posted by TheGoldcountry

... because they are now a "sacred cow".

A bit of sacred cow I agree but one that can stand up to robust observation. I still have trouble with the passive construction tone, people "are trained to think AA is the ultimate answer." Trained by whom? You're not saying it just happened to accrue a degree of positive press; you're saying somehow society "trained" you to think this way. OK, was it parents, teachers, cops, judges, rabbis, movies? What did the training consist of? It's as if someone said "I heard Obama was Muslim" or "they say you shouldn't swim after eating." From whom did you hear it, who is they? If you're talking about your experiences I might understand, but to put it forth as a broad assertion of fact about your "generation," while offering no specifics, makes me want to examine your evidence. That's how these forums work best.

[causeandeffect]

Originally Posted by A.A. Alfie

It looks like you've found yourself a new hate group to replace stinkin thinkin.
Good for you.

Alfie, I’m glad you’ve responded in the way you have. It’s a typical knee-jerk reaction to some information you perceive as a threat to AA. It’s a reaction indicative of a fully indoctrinated, brainwashed cult member. You labeled it without even giving it a glance just as you, and some of your fellow AA apologists, have with all the information presented here. AA cult watch is a group of AA members who are concerned about certain groups in the UK that they feel are similar to Midtown. You just labeled members of AA a hate group.

[qayak]

Originally Posted by DannyB II

Nope!!! You are wrong, Alfie never said that. Trust me my friend I do pay attention to Alfie, Minoosh, Pro Bono, Nutbag and Norseman to mention a few.
I am trying a bit harder (since Norseman got on me a bit) to pay attention and quote accurately. Folks do take it seriously around here as they should.
I recommend you follow suit. Lest you find yourself in the Norseman dog house...

Care to address your error yet, DannyB? Are you trying even harder to pay closer attention now?

Quote:

Alfie - post 478: Not that many will care but, for mine, the disease concept is just fine; AA is not religious (as any religion can play) but is has a spiritual element if one cares to take it up; AA has suggested steps and the only requirement for membership is a desire to stop drinking; AA helps some but not all.
And until we find some actual 'cure' for it we need to throw as many possibilities out there as we can.

[TheGoldcountry]

Two statements for AA Alfie to ponder:

One, I never said AA didn't help me. However, there were disturbing things in AA that also pushed me away. One best thing about AA: people willing to help others and talk. If that was it, I would have no problem with AA.

Two:"Rarely have we seen a person fail who has thoroughly followed our path." What about that statement doesn't imply that the only possible answer for failure could be the inadequacy of the person? It sounds like a legal disclaimer any lawyer would be proud of. Why start someone out with that kind of statement? Why not simply "We're here to help?" This is why people here, and elsewhere, demand solid scientific answers to your claims. If AA is just a help group, then just help people. If AA proclaims itself to have incredible answers to incredibly complicated problems, you better be ready to step up. (and please, don't provide the stupid answer of "what other programs are there?" I don't know, neither do you. That has nothing to do with the question of why AA is always proclaimed as the ultimate answer.

[Minoosh]

Originally Posted by Joey McGee

We're talking about Midtown group here.

And Joey, reading that orange site, things struck me.

A young girl confided in an older woman and "left, went to meetings elsewhere, and finally got clean." Apparently those meetings did not operate like cults. The local regional group sent out warnings about possible embezzlement.

A group fan page moderator in AA sent out a letter to whistleblowers,
"Of this, I can personally guarantee; that no harm will come to her, or any like her, that have suffered what she has suffered, on my watch. On this site and in my company, I know this to be of sound reason, from which I can and will prevail, for I am always on watch.

"So please, come forward, one and all. You will not be harmed, or judged here. We need all of you to continue coming forward, either publicly or privately."

It's not true nothing was done, there was support from the insides, people were encouraged to tell their stories. The mod also sent a message, Mike you sick (expletive), I'll be watching you.

People in AA stuck up for her & others; generally steering young girls away from 60-year-old "sponsors," standing up to address these manipulators. Not a ho-hum response. Yet you omit these sorts of details. It doesn't really fit your narrative. You'll stick with "nobody did anything" and believe that to be true, while others may conclude that group members took it very seriously and acted.

[Minoosh]

Originally Posted by TheGoldcountry

That has nothing to do with the question of why AA is always proclaimed as the ultimate answer.

Proclaimed by who? Ultimate compared to what? You may accuse me of quibbling but again there's unsupported hyperbole that as far as I know goes beyond what AA claimed.

"Rarely have a person fail ..." I don't see as shaming; it is an exhortation to practice the program as diligently as you can, especially in that era working the steps. But, you can read it as shaming if you like. When I've gone out and come back in I'm not met with accusations and shaming behavior and told it's my fault. If that's what other people pick up, I conclude you have either very messed-up AA going on, or that you are selectively on the lookout for cold, shaming behavior.

[TheGoldcountry]

Trained by whom?- Minoosh

I believe I get your point of your view. I can only say so many times that I don't think that there is an active movement to make people think that AA is beneficial. I think that over the years, with people recognizing their own problems, addressing their own problems, and talking with family and friends about theirs, that alcoholism has become less "taboo" (as an acceptable issue to address). At the same there to pick up a lot of credit for "solving" the problem was AA.

[TheGoldcountry]

now Minoosh, you sound like a person who puts personal, important values above "groupthink". That's all a lot of us are talking about. Putting important values above what you are "supposed to repeat".

[ProBonoShill]

Originally Posted by qayak

Care to address your error yet, DannyB? Are you trying even harder to pay closer attention now?

Care to address yours first? I've been waiting longer.

Originally Posted by qayak

The evidence supports Western medicine not CTM just like it supports AA having no effect on alcoholism.

Originally Posted by qayak

There has been no evidence provided to show that AA helped anybody . . . ever.

[qayak]

Originally Posted by ProBonoShill

Care to address yours first? I've been waiting longer.

My error?

If you think the evidence supports Chinese Traditional Medicine, or AA, please cite something to support them.

The reason you wait is because the error is in your mind.

[Hallo Alfie]

Originally Posted by causeandeffect

Alfie, I’m glad you’ve responded in the way you have. It’s a typical knee-jerk reaction to some information you perceive as a threat to AA. blah blah

Actually you are partly right, I am guilty of not looking at the link - hence my words "it looks like". I made the mistake of making the link guilty by Joey's association. My bad.

Perhaps others could be so kind as to acknowledge their errors or support their claims - I speak particularly of the science and evidence based treatments. I truly want to know what it is they know that I don't.

[TheGoldcountry]

AA Alfie, as a JREF "lurker" I have noticed that you keep asking "what is better/what programs are scientifically proven to be better".
My point, and I think many intelligent posters here share my sentiments is this: what exactly does AA do that is different than other faith based groups? and tell me specifically why this is good/bad/ or otherwise?

[Hallo Alfie]

Originally Posted by TheGoldcountry

AA Alfie, as a JREF "lurker" I have noticed that you keep asking "what is better/what programs are scientifically proven to be better".
My point, and I think many intelligent posters here share my sentiments is this: what exactly does AA do that is different than other faith based groups? and tell me specifically why this is good/bad/ or otherwise?

You might like to read the thread to locate areas already covered, I think most of what you have asked has already been addressed.

That said, I know not of other "faith based groups", perhaps you could elaborate. What do they do exactly? Give me that and I might have a point of reference at which to begin.

In the meantime, I - and many other intelligent posters - await the evidence that some constantly say is available via evidence and science. The things that some say AA should be integrating, others simply say are better treatments.

Please don't misunderstand me either, while an AA advocate, I also know it is not the only way; different strokes and all that. I will not however, stand by and watch people make outrageous, unsupported, dishonest or inaccurate statements, which is what some here are doing.

[TheGoldcountry]

Alfie, I'm sorry, at risk of banishment, I'm calling you a coward. You are very good at turning others' arguments, and very unskilled at formulating your own. I (and others) never said there was consistent treatment available elsewhere. We only question your devotion to AA. We freely admit the good points of AA. We have never said AA is all bad- nor espoused other treatment as being universally accepted or beneficial.

My main quibble with AA is religion, which I think is inescapably interwoven with AA.

Alfie, tell me, what have you got?

[Hallo Alfie]

What have I got on what exactly?

You are asking very loose and braod questions. If you read the thread you will understand my position on religion, AA, spirituality etc. You will also learn what I do for a living and how I embrace many therapies.

Read the thread. You can call me a coward once you have recovered from your laziness.

[TheGoldcountry]

I have read through a great deal of this thread- don't assume because I am a latecomer to the discussion that I havent't read YOUR comments- what, other than what I have already unconditionally admitted was helpful to me (the community, the opportunity to share thoughts) is beneficial, outside religion, about AA?

[The Norseman]

A few questions for the pro-AAers, if you please.

1. How does Alcoholics Anonymous integrate studies done with the genetic factors that have recently come to light regarding alcohol dependence?

2. How does Alcoholics Anonymous deal with the difficulties of adolescent drinking and abuse and what programs does it suggest for early detection and prevention in children and adolescents? As a follow-up, do pro-AAers believe that a ten year old (for example) has a spiritual problem with alcohol use?

3. When lab rats become addicted to alcohol, are they in need of following spiritual principles in helping them become sober?

4. How does Alcoholics Anonymous deal with the extremely high number of dually-diagnosed (or more specifically co-occurring) people who seek help?

5. Does Alcoholics Anonymous make distinctions between men and women in relation to the severity and type of life problems that may or may not affect one gender more than another?

[Hallo Alfie]

Originally Posted by TheGoldcountry

I have read through a great deal of this thread- don't assume because I am a latecomer to the discussion that I havent't read YOUR comments- what, other than what I have already unconditionally admitted was helpful to me (the community, the opportunity to share thoughts) is beneficial, outside religion, about AA?

If you had truly read the thread you would not have to ask this question. You would also know that to suggest I believe that religion is at the core of AA (as you seem to imply here) is not what I believe.

I think I can safely assume you have not read the thread.

[TheGoldcountry]

Let me clarify specifically- I think AA can be beneficial and helpful to many people. However, the group as a whole definitely is religious, the members take it upon themselves to "indoctrinate" newer members, and this practice might ignore and unintentionally alienate others.

If you, as an individual take it upon yourself to help others, good for you. But AA as an institution has influenced people to think that it is a solution to life's problem's, and
it has become a problem. (Not the people themselves, but the philosophy)

[TheGoldcountry]

I have read this thread from the beginning. You have not always addressed the original question "Why do people insist AA is not religious?"

You have often asked "what other programs work more efficiently/better than AA?" I, and others repeatedly have said that we don't know. We simply question YOUR blind faith in something that also has not shown any quantifiable benefits, outside of blind faith.

[Hallo Alfie]

Originally Posted by The Norseman

A few questions for the pro-AAers, if you please.

1. How does Alcoholics Anonymous integrate studies done with the genetic factors that have recently come to light regarding alcohol dependence?

Studies or findings?
Assuming the latter, what findings exactly?

Originally Posted by The Norseman

2. How does Alcoholics Anonymous deal with the difficulties of adolescent drinking and abuse and what programs does it suggest for early detection and prevention in children and adolescents? As a follow-up, do pro-AAers believe that a ten year old (for example) has a spiritual problem with alcohol use?

Personally I have no idea, I have yet to meet a ten year old that identifies as an alcoholic. Hopefully someone else can field this one.

Originally Posted by The Norseman

3. When lab rats become addicted to alcohol, are they in need of following spiritual principles in helping them become sober?

I wouldn't have thought so - they are rats and are not self aware. Some of my buddhist friends might have an interesting take on this one. I would have thought that one would help them detox and take away their alcohol. Problem solved. Human beings have free will, it's a bit different don't you think?

I also think you are confusing alcoholism with alcohol dependance (and/or abuse). They are different in my minds eye.

[TheGoldcountry]

This is a long thread, so I understand your diversions, but your arguments have not always been consistent.