Is AA a cult? Is AA a total fraud?

[Gorgo]

Yes, you've told me that unless you make up fantasies about the world, that you are dead. That's where I learned that you think so little of yourself. That is no insult. That is caring about you. I'm telling you that you do not need to do that to yourself.

I didn't mean that you were forcing yourself, necessarily. I was talking about the courts forcing 12-step religion onto people. I was talking about theists in general. If you don't subscribe to that, if you think that atheists can run for office and teach children in schools and be regular people, I'm glad for you. You're unlike a lot of people, and you're right, that was dumb of me to lump you in with them. I thought your post supported this kind of behavior as you didn't say anything against it, and you told me you felt sorry for me.

[Gorgo]

You don't really believe in a ruler of the universe (god) then? You don't believe that god intervenes in people's lives at all? No heaven, no hell, then?

\

Originally posted by PatrickHenry, I have a HOPE and a confidence in God for the future and a resurrection to eternity with Him. But I have no visions or other supernatural knowledge. I live my life from day to day, some good-some not so good.

[PatrickHenry]

Gorgo. What you characterize as a fantasy is something you have never been inside of. My mind. Your perceptions and mine are different. You deny the life of the spirit to anyone based on your lack of understanding, or should I say personal experience? Compared to my dead former life, yes, I am alive inside now. But to explain it is like trying to explain the sights of the world to a blind person.

I do not seek your destruction or any harm to you or your rights. Run for office, teach children in schools, live a normal life? No opposition from me. I dislike having my views shouted down and grant the same respect to others. I may not [SIZE=2]vote[/SIZE] for you, if I feel your values are inconsistent with mine. I may, as a parent, ask that you not use a position as a teacher to push atheist views on my children. Our present debate apparently revolves around your desire to crush my assertions of an inner life of the spirit. One that has value to me.

My observation of your posts on volconvo leads to a conclusion that you will go to great lengths in attempting to disprove God. I believe you hate the very concept. In a free market place of ideas you have your soapbox; I have mine. No proof on the issue can ever be conclusive. Hence, I rarely choose to debate it.

Really believe in God? Yes, I do. See my bio, unchanged since it was placed there 5 months ago. Heaven and hell, yes they await. I know God intervenes, from my own and others experience. We have no need to argue these points. I can accept that you are a good person who regards these beliefs as unproven bunk. Can you accept me as a person with an inner life you can't understand? Or must you characterize me as a loony with a fantasy life? Never having been in my mind, you must admit you don't really know...

Back to the "force" issue on the twelve-step. I think it is harmful two ways. As Dan says above, his view was negative when forced to attend by the judge. I think that a bad attitude towards God brought about by the legal system results in harm to the person's inner life. I also think that required attendance at AA, which acknowledges God, by a government entity violates the establishment of religion clause of the 1st Amendment. For judges to do this in DUI cases is likely unconstitutional.

I would like to see drunk drivers punished severely for their murderous acts of negligence. There is too much death on the road and much is related to DUI. A harsh sentence for the first offense may get the person's attention before it results in tragedy. DUI is a serious felony. A one year jail term for first offense wuold not be too much.

However as Dan clearly relates above, alcoholics as a group are known for having poor judgement. Driving REQUIRES good judgement. Shoot, even knowing the level of your own impairment takes judgement. Government has not done a good job managing the DUI crisis. Pragmatic solutions have been slow and spotty. The whole issue needs attention as a health care crisis for the general population, threatened by drunk drivers.

The drunks themselves are a different issue. Dan's personal insights into the issue are thought provoking and heartfelt. No one wants to see lives destroyed by substance abuse. Even the liquor companies are not seeking harm to the users. They just want to sell their wares. If there are alternatives to AA with good results, then they should be promoted. If I understand the argument thus far, no one has proven OR disproven the results for AA, for the simple reason that anonymity prevents followup. However there IS evidence: the thousands(maybe millions) of testimonies by those it has helped. Scientifically admissible? No. But worthy of your campaign of opposition--I don't think so...

[Gorgo]

Actually, there are millions who claim to have been helped by homeopathy. Is it still quackery, and should it still be stopped? Yes. From what I've been able to see so far, 12-step is the same kind of quackery.

[Gorgo]

There is no reasonable evidence for the existence of god(s) or spirit(s).

No offense to you, I say this out of empathy. I've been there, and you do not need to think so little of yourself.

Originally posted by PatrickHenry, Gorgo. What you characterize as a fantasy is something you have never been inside of. My mind. Your perceptions and mine are different. You deny the life of the spirit to anyone based on your lack of understanding, or should I say personal experience? Compared to my dead former life, yes, I am alive inside now. But to explain it is like trying to explain the sights of the world to a blind person.

[gr8fuldaniel]

Originally posted by Gorgo, Anyway, what they claim is not science. By your own admission, there is no way to count successes or failures in an anonymous organization...

It is possible to count success's, just not failures. I use that term failure, loosely because a drunk is just doing what comes naturally for him/her, because they dont show up to be counted, they drop out of society. They live outside the walls of community are often imprisoned (which may or may not put their condition into remission or dormancy). We also have folks that are less than honest about their sobriety. They are welcome too. Imagine that, a drunk who lied about drinking, whats this world coming to? Alcoholism never just "goes away", untreated alcoholism does push-ups in our sleep. What criteria are we looking for when you talk about success we need to consider the many different sections of 12 step recovery.
1)Open meetings/closed meetings
2)Recovery Homes
3)professional 12 step programs (which is against AA traditions)
4)court ordered
5)Court optioned (1 year jail, or 90 day recovery)
6)Only those participants who have sponsors
7)Only those participants who go to meetings every day, once a week, once a year
8)Include H and I programs (Hospitals and Intitutions)
9)Some folks think its ok to use pot or heroin, yet keep their sobriety date, because thats a different disease. Do we count them as success's? I dont. Even though they havent gotten drunk, they have not been sober. There are actually thousands of people in NA, who think they can drink, even though alcohol is a drug (Thats another program, who AA doesnt have an opinion about).

...that doesn't care about results, but only pushing their religion.

We care about results, We have found a solution to the drink problem, and we want to share it. As for pushing religion; We dont promote any religion. Individually, we are not necessarily religous, but God/HP loves us just the same. Big Book Chapter 4, pg. 45, 2nd paragraph

Lack of power, that was our dillema. We had to find a power by which we could live, and it had to be a power greater than ourselves, Obviously. But where and how were we to find this Power? Well, that's exactly what this book is about. Its main object is to enable you to find a Power greater than yourself which will solve your problem. That means we have written a book which we believe to be spiritual as well as moral. And it means, of course, that we are going to talk about God. Here difficulty arises with agnostics. Many times we talk to a new man and watch his hope rise as we discuss his alcoholic problems and explain our fellowship. But his face falls when we speak of spiritual matters, especially when we mention God, for we have re-opened a subject which our man thought he had neatly evaded or entirely ignored. We know how he feels. We have shared his honest doubt and prejudice. Some of us have been violently anti-religious. To others, the word "God" brought up a particular idea of Him with which someone had tried to impress them during childhood. Perhaps we rejected this particular conception because it seemed inadequate. With that rejection we imagined we had abandoned the God idea entirely. We were bothered with the thought that faith and dependence upon a Power beyond ourselves was somewhat weak, even cowardly. We looked upon this world of warring individuals, warring theological systems, and inexplicable calamity, with deep skepticism. We looked askance at many individuals who claimed to be godly. How could a Supreme Being have anything to do with it all? And who could comprehend a Supreme Being anyhow? Yet, in other moments, we found ourselves thinking, when enchanted by a starlit night, "Who, then, make all this?" There was a feeling of awe and wonder, but it was fleeting and soon lost. Yes, we of agnostic temperament have had these thoughts and experiences. Let us make haste to reassure you. We found that as soon as we were able to lay aside prejudice and express even a willingness to believe in a Power greater than ourselves, we commenced to get results, even though it was impossible for any of us to fully define or comprehend that Power, which is God. Much to our relief, we discovered we did not need to consider another's conception of God. Our own conception, however inadequate, was sufficient to make the approach and to effect a contact with Him. As soon as we admitted the possible existence of a Creative Intelligence, a Spirit of the Universe underlying the totality of things, we began to be possessed of a new sense of power and direction, provided we took other simple steps. We found that God does not make too hard terms with those who seek Him. To us, the Realm of Spirit is broad, roomy, all inclusive; never exclusive or forbidding to those who earnestly seek. It is open, we believe, to all men.

So you see, we arent "Pushing our religion", rather we encourage you to build on your own concept of God, or whatever you choose to call whatever power you find, that is greater than the power of your addiction. Personal powerlessness is a bummer, but must be addressed if we are to conquer our addiction.

Please show me, again, any reputable study in any reputable science journal which backs up the claim that 12-step programs are successful.

OK if we just deal with one 12 step program to keep things simpler? I qualify for others and I quit smoking using Nicotene Anonymous (8 1/2 years clean and smober), But you started this topic with "AA". I joined JAMA, so I could review their material,but its hard to navigate. Couldnt find anything pro/con 12 step success. So, I will continue to investigate.

What the excuse is that those people who don't succeed just don't try. That's not science, that's a cop-out.

Some things I cant prove scientifically. AA tries to be all inclusive, never exclusive. So we accept everyone, even those who slip over and over and over again, lest we send one man away to die, alone. Dont expect AA to come looking for you if you dont show up, Our program is for those who want it, not necessarily for those who need it. Willingness is one of the keys. Nobody is forcing any thing on anyone.

Tradition Three—The only requirement for A.A. membership is a desire to stop drinking.

We dont have lie detectors at the door to see who is sincere about recovery. We have no rolls, dont keep record of who shows up or who doesnt, we are just glad to see everyone. Another Tradition:

Nine—A.A., as such, ought never be organized; but we may create service boards or committees directly responsible to those they serve.

Makes sure we dont start policing the rooms

What your link fails to mention is that most people don't get to the "trying" stage in AA.

"Our program is meant to be suggestive only". Each member is responsible for his own recovery. We get out of it what we put into it. Looking back it was so hard for me to start getting honest with myself. Others may find that as an obstacle, as well. Openmindedness is not a common characteristic of alcoholics, it must be developed and requires a degree of humility. :) Whew, I need a break.

[Gorgo]

Okay. So, AA really doesn't do anything. The members do.

As far as science, the only double-blind study that I've seen on the subject shows very well that AA does not work. I've seen nothing to the contrary so far except some people (again, see homeopathy) say that it works for them. Anecdotal evidence is not science.

And no offense to you, you're a wonderful person it seems, but generally when people start talking about open mindedness and "spiritual" ideas, what they mean is if you don't agree with me, you're closed minded. That's been my experience.

[gr8fuldaniel]

AA does plenty, it works or the judge wouldnt suggest it to get drunks off the road. My experience has been that AA works for those who have reached a point of despair, that convinces them to let go of old ideas that no longer work. I mentioned I have 5 DUI's. I also have been arrested for public drunk about 100 times. I have destroyed every good thing in my life, time after time. I have been homeless most of my adult life. I am an alcoholic of the hopeless variety, I drank to ease the pain and shame of the day before. Personal testimony means absolutely nothing to you, I doubt scientific testimony would have much effect either. Heres the deal, when all your other options have played out, use AA as a last resort. An alcoholic is the only person who can be laying in a pool of vomit and still look down on everyone else.
The mind is like a parachute, it only works when opened. The alternative can be pretty messy.

[Gorgo]

Judges are not science. Judges put people in prison for drug use when there is no evidence that that is a good idea. Judges do what the law tells them to. As we've seen, the law is also not science.

People quit when they're ready. None of the 12-steps tell them how to quit. More people quit on their own than quit with 12-step programs.

[gr8fuldaniel]

The Topic (Is AA a Cult? Is AA a total fraud) asks 2 questions.
Which definition of cult did you mean?

Main Entry: cult Pronunciation: 'k&lt Function: noun Usage: often attributive Etymology: French & Latin; French culte, from Latin cultus care, adoration, from colere to cultivate -- more at WHEEL 1 : formal religious veneration : WORSHIP 2 : a system of religious beliefs and ritual; also : its body of adherents 3 : a religion regarded as unorthodox or spurious; also : its body of adherents 4 : a system for the cure of disease based on dogma set forth by its promulgator <health cults> 5 a : great devotion to a person, idea, object, movement, or work (as a film or book); especially : such devotion regarded as a literary or intellectual fad b : a usually small group of people characterized by such devotion

[Gorgo]

Best question yet. I'll look at that.

The other thing that's interesting while I'm looking into all of this is the difference between the words 'disease' and 'illness' and how they're used.

Very interesting points. I can tell that you and Patrick Henry have a great deal on the ball.

[gr8fuldaniel]

You are no tenderfoot, yourself

[Gorgo]

This is off-topic, but Patrick mentioned the DUI problem. Here's another place I disagree with a lot of people. Some of these problems are self-created. With sufficient, affordable public transportation people who drink and drive repeatedly would be more easily removed from behind the wheel. Yes, some people will break any law, but this would get a lot of them off the road real quick.

I think we need to stop looking at how harshly we can punish people, since I don't see that working, and find other solutions.

[PatrickHenry]

I agree, Gorgo. The punishment aspect I mentioned was in the context of slow and spotty government response to the threat from drunk drivers. I don't regard punishment as the only or even the best solution. But drunk drivers are actually threatening innocent people. We need to get their attention. Providing alternative transportation is a workable idea if we can find a way to deny drunks access to a steering wheel. This whole issue needs public debate and a commitment to a permanent solution. Gov has done an execrable job dealing with DUI.

[Compugasm]

How about making them wear a red "D" around their neck?

[gr8fuldaniel]

Drunks are not allowed on public transportation about half the time. My experience is, drunks piss on the seats, vomit, are loud, can hurt themselves or others from losing balance when bus starts suddenly or from starting fights. You might want to check policy in your area, they have the right to refuse service to anyone. There have been busses that wouldnt even stop if they saw me.
Thank God and AA I am sober today. The world is a better place, if only from my perspective. Two more days and I'll have 10 years sobriety, Yahoo!

[Gorgo]

Well, I'm actually trying to get something done at work today, but I wanted to take the time to say thanks for sharing your story and glad you got it figured out. Lots to read here, so I may not get back at this today or tomorrow.

[Gorgo]

By the way, from what I see on the 'net, if it's true, Audrey Kishline, who started Moderation Management, quit MM and joined AA before her accident.

http://www.peele.net/debate/kishline.dui.html

As to cults, I think my original posts define what cults are and why they think AA is a cult. You haven't addressed those specific points.

[Gorgo]

http://www.rational.org/html_public_...ro_issues.html

Christine,

AMA is often cited as an authority on the matter of substance abuse, particularly as a group whose opinions on the etiology of addiction are definitive. However, AMA is not a scientific organization, but professional guild created to help its members swim in the stream of commerce. They tend to matters of ethics, policies, and professional integrity, but their charter holds them to be neither a source nor arbiter of scientific truth.

In addition to the groping errors you mention, AMA also endorsed the proposition that alcohol addiction "is" a disease in 1987, during the final session of their annual conference. Yes, by democratic vote as members were starting to head home, they established scientific fact by show of hands.

The membership of AMA's American Society for Addiction Medicine (ASAM), a clanging word mixture, is composed of 99% members of Alcoholics Anonymous whose view of science is as distorted as Nazi Germany's was, i.e., the cause shapes science, and not vice versa.

I have spoken to hundreds of physicians about the same question you have raised, and it is surprising how intellectually unsophisticated physicians are across the board. There was a time when physicians were regarded as very wise men and women who carried the burden of pubic health well, but manage care and other factors have greatly diluted the integrity of American health care professionals. As their personal foundations in science and liberal education crumbled under economic and political pressures, so did their ethical traditions. I think that medicine may regain its former stature by admitting its errors in the addictions field and disciplining members involved in the marginal (quack) practice of addiction medicine. I have yet to meet someone who has been substantially helped through addiction treatment, although many display obsessive, obsequious gratitudes thereafter. I do hear from many whose conditions worsened from addiction treatment, as though their wounds had been wrapped in dirty linen. Research has show an extraordinarily high incidence of suicide following addiction treatment.

I have not inquired directly to AMA about their current opinions about alcohol and drug addiction because their opinions don't matter. Science matters, and this week the following statement was issued by the director of the National Institute on Drug Abuse, Alan Leshner:

"Your genes don't doom you to be an addict. They just make you more, or less, susceptible. We've never found one gene that keeps you from being an addict, or one that dictates you're going to be an addict." But Leshner also insists, "Addiction is a brain disease," as he points to a TV set showing how in a PET scan certain parts of the brain light up when cocaine is ingested. This is carnival side-show stuff, pure snake-oil illusions.

So I have a drinking man's body, and my wife cannot drink very much without getting nauseated. This is hardly a matter for heated scientific controversy, but the billions of dollars being released into the addiction treatment industry make it so.

I am very interested in your experience with the addiction treatment industry. Never has America been so victimized by organized crime.

Jack Trimpey

Quote by: gr8fuldaniel 1956: AMA declares alcoholism an illness

[gr8fuldaniel]

From your link:
http://www.peele.net/debate/kishline.dui.html

After forming MM in 1993 and writing Moderate Drinking in 1994 (for which Stanton wrote the introduction), Audrey announced in January of 2000 that she was returning to AA with a goal of abstinence. The accident occurred in March of this year.

Sounds like she tried a little more "Moderation Management". In AA we find success only in complete abstinence. We just dont pick up that 1st little tiny shot, no matter what comes down the pike. As soon as I introduce a molecule of alcohol to my body, its triggers an unquenchable thirst I can hardly describe. AA cannot guarantee success for everyone who enters its rooms. But if anyone will do what we did, they too can recover from a hopeless state of mind and body.From your other link:

Quote by: 2nd article I have not inquired directly to AMA about their current opinions about alcohol and drug addiction because their opinions don't matter. Science matters...

The AMA doesnt matter? Sheesh. Who does? Science, right? Is this guy saying the AMA is anti-science? Oh Brother.
Anyway, a bit further down:

I am very interested in your experience with the addiction treatment industry. Never has America been so victimized by organized crime.

Is he addressing the crime of drug trade? or is he being a smart ass and accusing the "Addiction Treatment Industry" of being organized crime? I first got sober (and am a witness to thousands of others) with the help of the "Addiction Treatment Industry". But, that is only one element in the equation. The primary element in my recovery from an insidious disease, is what happened inside me. I got humble and willing to accept help. In spite of a lifetime of beligerance, I finally asked for help.

As for AA being a cult, (I didnt go back to far in this thread, so I dont know if I am repeating myself from 7 months ago), AA does not promote any particular religion but does recommend personal spiritual growth. We pray, yes, but we all are on separate spiritual paths. We do what we want. But if we dont change, our disease, with all its perks, will take us back.
We have some basic steps we take that have helped millions before us. These are suggestions. Spiritual Suggestions, some of them are hard to do. They ask us to dig deep and to be honest, something that can be very difficult for a drunk. But that is the basis for the 1st step.