AA

[Andrew1980]

J,

You wrongly believe that exposition is criticism. My concern is those 95% that AA does not work for and those that lose their faith in AA. Do you care about them?

That doesn’t seem to be your only concern. You have several posts on here that seem to be much more critical of AA than simply saying it is because it only works for 1 in 20. In my experience, it works for anyone who actually works the program. Of course, in my case it is in reference to SA and not AA as I have never been to an AA meeting. From what I’ve seen the program has been 100% effective for atleast 15 others. I think the key is to ACTUALLY work the steps. Showing up to 1 meeting and never returning is likely included in your stats. This isn’t joining the program it is merely attending a meeting.

The 95% figure is highly biased against AA and the real % of success is much higher. Statistics are easily manipulated to show what you want them to show. In this case, the 5% success rate includes anyone who has ever went to a meeting. They can show up for one meeting, not like AA and walk out and still be included in the stats without even attempting to work the program. People who work the program show a 75% success rate. 50% walk into the program and become sober shortly thereafter and additional 25% find sobriety a few months to years down the road.

 

[Jerusha]

J,

You wrongly believe that exposition is criticism. My concern is those 95% that AA does not work for and those that lose their faith in AA. Do you care about them?

Ahhh. Thank you for the suggestion that I return. :newidea:

 

[CopticChristian]

That doesn’t seem to be your only concern. You have several posts on here that seem to be much more critical of AA than simply saying it is because it only works for 1 in 20. In my experience, it works for anyone who actually works the program. Of course, in my case it is in reference to SA and not AA as I have never been to an AA meeting. From what I’ve seen the program has been 100% effective for atleast 15 others. I think the key is to ACTUALLY work the steps. Showing up to 1 meeting and never returning is likely included in your stats. This isn’t joining the program it is merely attending a meeting.

The 95% figure is highly biased against AA and the real % of success is much higher. Statistics are easily manipulated to show what you want them to show. In this case, the 5% success rate includes anyone who has ever went to a meeting. They can show up for one meeting, not like AA and walk out and still be included in the stats without even attempting to work the program. People who work the program show a 75% success rate. 50% walk into the program and become sober shortly thereafter and additional 25% find sobriety a few months to years down the road.

Andrew,

You can dispute the 95% failure rate however do it with a study. I, and no other physician, would recommend that someone proceed to AA because of the statistics you quote. Here is the challenge. Go look and find and produce a large study that says otherwise. Your experience does not equate to a study.

Start with what we agree on. AA and the Catholic Church.

The OHCAC is Apostolic and we are not Bible Christians in the sense that we believe in the Bible alone. We believe in the Apostolic Tradition that includes the Bible…

The Catechism is divided into to sections

We Believe
We live
We aspire to a holy moral life
We Pray…

In the context of what we Believe…where do you see the Bible here with exception to “according to the Scriptures”…while anyone laughs when I say we are not Bible Christians…we are not Christians of the Bible alone…The Bible was spawned by the Church and is the child of the Church…we are Christians of the Apostolic Faith…and that produced the Bible…

We believe (I believe) in one God, the Father Almighty, maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible. And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God, and born of the Father before all ages. (God of God) light of light, true God of true God. Begotten not made, consubstantial to the Father, by whom all things were made. Who for us men and for our salvation came down from heaven. And was incarnate of the Holy Ghost and of the Virgin Mary and was made man; was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate, suffered and was buried; and the third day rose again according to the Scriptures. And ascended into heaven, sits at the right hand of the Father, and shall come again with glory to judge the living and the dead, of whose Kingdom there shall be no end. And (I believe) in the Holy Ghost, the Lord and Giver of life, who proceeds from the Father (and the Son), who together with the Father and the Son is to be adored and glorified, who spoke by the Prophets. And one holy, catholic, and apostolic Church. We confess (I confess) one baptism for the remission of sins. And we look for (I look for) the resurrection of the dead and the life of the world to come. Amen."

Can we agree on this?

 

[Cat]

The more I read of this, the more I feel that it’s wrong and dangerous to spend so much time and effort trying to pull the rug out from under those who need a rug. What is the point? If the rug is truly helping them, then let them have the rug.

What is the point of filling a person’s mind with doubts and anger about an organization that has helped them? One possible result of such a debate would be for the person to give up on AA and go back to the way they were. That would be absolutely horrible, and akin to murder.

Allow people to do what works for them and stop trying to convince them that their method is wrong just because there are other methods.

If AA is NOT working for someone, then yes, certainly, inform them of other methods and recommend these methods. But don’t yank methods that are already working.

I think the important thing for ALL of us to recognize is that the Catholic Church has not condemned AA, but rather, has, to date, worked with this organization and even allows the meetings to be held in their parishes. Until the Catholic Church condemns the organization, we shouldn’t undermine it. Certainly, present other alternatives, and certainly do studies that would demonstrate that other methods work.

I don’t see the point of a study that demonstrates that AA doesn’t work. It seems to me that the logical conclusion is not, “AA doesn’t work,” but rather, “We must never underestimate the seriousness of alcoholism, and recognize that many people have an extremely difficult time overcoming their addiction and must try different methods before finally discovering what method is effective for them. The danger is that during the search for an effective method, the alcoholic may die.”

We must also not ignore that fact that Catholic Church has not endorsed AA and the 12-step method as the only method of overcoming additions. It is perfectly acceptable to try other methods and embrace these methods if they work for them, as long as those methods do not require wilful sin.

 

[AbideWithMe]

The more I read of this, the more I feel that it’s wrong and dangerous to spend so much time and effort trying to pull the rug out from under those who need a rug. What is the point? If the rug is truly helping them, then let them have the rug.

What is the point of filling a person’s mind with doubts and anger about an organization that has helped them? One possible result of such a debate would be for the person to give up on AA and go back to the way they were. That would be absolutely horrible, and akin to murder.

Allow people to do what works for them and stop trying to convince them that their method is wrong just because there are other methods.

If AA is NOT working for someone, then yes, certainly, inform them of other methods and recommend these methods. But don’t yank methods that are already working.

I think the important thing for ALL of us to recognize is that the Catholic Church has not condemned AA, but rather, has, to date, worked with this organization and even allows the meetings to be held in their parishes. Until the Catholic Church condemns the organization, we shouldn’t undermine it. Certainly, present other alternatives, and certainly do studies that would demonstrate that other methods work.

I don’t see the point of a study that demonstrates that AA doesn’t work. It seems to me that the logical conclusion is not, “AA doesn’t work,” but rather, “We must never underestimate the seriousness of alcoholism, and recognize that many people have an extremely difficult time overcoming their addiction and must try different methods before finally discovering what method is effective for them. The danger is that during the search for an effective method, the alcoholic may die.”

We must also not ignore that fact that Catholic Church has not endorsed AA and the 12-step method as the only method of overcoming additions. It is perfectly acceptable to try other methods and embrace these methods if they work for them, as long as those methods do not require wilful sin.

Very, very well said.

Why all this effort to undermine something the Catholic Church does not condemn? What if you are driving people to despair?

 

[SteveVH]

Steve,

You can accept this or believe that people drink and have problems. What is an alcoholic in the true sense? According to whom and based on what. You may want to consider contacting Reid Hester, PhD or Nancy Handmaker, PhD, in New Mexico to see if they know anyone in your area that knows about the things that work you may not have tried. I have had conversations with Nancy Handmaker and she is very nice and helpful.

I’ll tell you exactly what I think an alcoholic is in the true sense. It is a person who cannot have just one drink, or two drinks, or three drinks but basically drinks continuously until someone or something stops them.

Your theory that it is just a habit is ridiculous, with all due respect. When one stops a behavior for twenty years they are not “in the habit”. When that same person picks up a drink twenty years later it is no different than if they had been drinking for the entire twenty years. In fact it affects them as if they had been drinking for that entire twenty year period. It is devastating, physically and mentally. They must have another drink, and another, and another, until again, someone stops them.

I, on the other hand, can have a drink or two or ten and could care less whether I ever have another. There is a difference, Doctor, between me and my wife. I have witnessed the entire progression of an alcoholic woman since she was 15 until now, 40 years later. Yes, there is a difference between an alcoholic and a problem drinker. My wife is not a weak woman, nor is her charactar flawed. She simply cannot drink because she cannot stop and I mean this from a physical perspective. You should watch an alcoholic detox sometime. Many of them die during this process. It is a true addiction, not simply a habit. I am no saint. In my college years I drank a lot with my buddies and on a regular basis. I would even say it was a habit, of sorts, yet I can put it down and never pick it up again. There is a difference and your theory is just wrong, in my opinion.

I will, however, check out those you referenced. I would do anything to help my wife, but right now I thank God for AA.

 

[CopticChristian]

I’ll tell you exactly what I think an alcoholic is in the true sense. It is a person who cannot have just one drink, or two drinks, or three drinks but basically drinks continuously until someone or something stops them.

Your theory that it is just a habit is ridiculous, with all due respect. When one stops a behavior for twenty years they are not “in the habit”. When that same person picks up a drink twenty years later it is no different than if they had been drinking for the entire twenty years. In fact it affects them as if they had been drinking for that entire twenty year period. It is devastating, physically and mentally. They must have another drink, and another, and another, until again, someone stops them.

I, on the other hand, can have a drink or two or ten and could care less whether I ever have another. There is a difference, Doctor, between me and my wife. I have witnessed the entire progression of an alcoholic woman since she was 15 until now, 40 years later. Yes, there is a difference between an alcoholic and a problem drinker. My wife is not a weak woman, nor is her charactar flawed. She simply cannot drink because she cannot stop and I mean this from a physical perspective. You should watch an alcoholic detox sometime. Many of them die during this process. It is a true addiction, not simply a habit. I am no saint. In my college years I drank a lot with my buddies and on a regular basis. I would even say it was a habit, of sorts, yet I can put it down and never pick it up again. There is a difference and your theory is just wrong, in my opinion.

I will, however, check out those you referenced. I would do anything to help my wife, but right now I thank God for AA.

Steve,

I have witnessed all of this and more. I understand your experience. You disagree. I would pray that your wife finds help. Nothing more be said.

I would be happy to call Nancy Handmaker, Phd or Reid Hester, Phd on your behalf. I have spoken with them before. They may know someone in your area. This is not to be considered medical advice as this is prohibited on this site however to get you a name or two would not be considered advice. PM me if you choose to do that.

 

[CopticChristian]

The more I read of this, the more I feel that it’s wrong and dangerous to spend so much time and effort trying to pull the rug out from under those who need a rug. What is the point? If the rug is truly helping them, then let them have the rug.

What is the point of filling a person’s mind with doubts and anger about an organization that has helped them? One possible result of such a debate would be for the person to give up on AA and go back to the way they were. That would be absolutely horrible, and akin to murder.

Allow people to do what works for them and stop trying to convince them that their method is wrong just because there are other methods.

If AA is NOT working for someone, then yes, certainly, inform them of other methods and recommend these methods. But don’t yank methods that are already working.

I think the important thing for ALL of us to recognize is that the Catholic Church has not condemned AA, but rather, has, to date, worked with this organization and even allows the meetings to be held in their parishes. Until the Catholic Church condemns the organization, we shouldn’t undermine it. Certainly, present other alternatives, and certainly do studies that would demonstrate that other methods work.

I don’t see the point of a study that demonstrates that AA doesn’t work. It seems to me that the logical conclusion is not, “AA doesn’t work,” but rather, “We must never underestimate the seriousness of alcoholism, and recognize that many people have an extremely difficult time overcoming their addiction and must try different methods before finally discovering what method is effective for them. The danger is that during the search for an effective method, the alcoholic may die.”

We must also not ignore that fact that Catholic Church has not endorsed AA and the 12-step method as the only method of overcoming additions. It is perfectly acceptable to try other methods and embrace these methods if they work for them, as long as those methods do not require wilful sin.

Cat,

pull the rug from under somebody/something also pull the rug from under somebody’s feet
to suddenly take away help or support from someone, or to suddenly do something which causes many problems for them The school pulled the rug from under the basketball team by making them pay to practise in the school gymnasium.

Explain your view of the rug and the notion that there are problems with discussing

Morally neutral Addiction/Recovery

and

Sin and Salvation

As Jesus Christ the Bearer of Water of Life suggests…discussion is discussion.

 

[CopticChristian]

Very, very well said.

Why all this effort to undermine something the Catholic Church does not condemn? What if you are driving people to despair?

Abide,

Where do you see facts as undermining anything?

AA has no better than a 5% success rate and is ranked 37/48 on a scale of methods that have been investigated as methods that work. This is fact.

Bill Wilson was saved in Calvary Chapel. Dr. Silkworth says that Bill Wilson needed the great physician, Christ. This is fact.

AA is built on the model of Methodism. This is fact.

AA requires you to correct your character defects/sins, this is fact.

Where is the undermining?

The poll asks “Is AA a bad thing”…I cannot recall in any of my postings addressing that as a judgement…it is good…it is bad…

I believe that it works for those that it works for however it is a one size fits all and for those that it does not work for there are better and other methods. I have seen many lose their faith. I have seen hypocricy, people die, people fail, men solicit weak women…and I never said it was bad…I in fact spoke against Python suggesting that AA was filled with people looking for sex…as this is not what AA stands for…

I did not start the poll…and the poll is public…and not all agree…

How is someone driven to despair, willingly, knowingly, coming to a computer and reading…?

 

[SteveVH]

Steve,

I have witnessed all of this and more. I understand your experience. You disagree. I would pray that your wife finds help. Nothing more be said.

I would be happy to call Nancy Handmaker, Phd or Reid Hester, Phd on your behalf. I have spoken with them before. They may know someone in your area. This is not to be considered medical advice as this is prohibited on this site however to get you a name or two would not be considered advice. PM me if you choose to do that.

That is very gracious of you and I will take you up on your offer.

God bless you.

 

[jesuspsr]

Am I not worth being saved by AA, if it’s been working for me for several years now? Am, I not the least of my brother to be saved? Am I that less % not worth it? Should’nt you be happy and supportive of the few that have been saved? Something is terribly wrong with you. A little humility goes a long ways and you my friend have none. I will pray for you.

Merry Christmas everyone.

jesus g

 

[AbideWithMe]

Abide,

AA has no better than a 5% success rate and is ranked 37/48 on a scale of methods that have been investigated as methods that work. This is fact.

Coptic–Who says this is a fact? I’m not any sort of expert on AA, and I haven’t read this whole thread. But in looking for where you were getting what you’re calling a fact, I googled “AA success rate” and easily came up with recent articles from Scientific American and The LA Times that thoroughly contradicted your numbers.

In Googling “AA success rate 5%”, one of the articles which I read was from thefix.com about a number of variously designed studies of AA. One study found that AA, cognitive therapy, and behavior modification all had similar rates of success. IIRC, AA’s rate was the highest, at around 59%. (I’m sleepy, so I’ll re-read the article tomorrow to be sure I’m saying this accurately.)

The article quoted that study of three methods as saying,“It was the initial decision to get better that determined a person’s chance of success.” It also said that the method of help seemed to be less important than that decision to seek help. That’s why I think you are undermining people without being aware of the effect you may have. People need to feel confidence in whatever method of help they choose to pursue. AA undeniably helps people; for many people in need of help, it inspires confidence that they can be helped; you, however, keep bringing up this falsely dismal success rate as a supposed “fact”.

The Catholic Church not only does not condemn AA, some Catholic Churches host meetings. Leave it be. Again, I’m no expert on AA, but I know Catholic spiritual directors who use it for their directees, and I trust their experience and judgment on AA.

This is one of my usual barely awake posts…sorry if I’m incoherent.

 

[Mgray82]

Am I not worth being saved by AA, if it’s been working for me for several years now? Am, I not the least of my brother to be saved? Am I that less % not worth it? Should’nt you be happy and supportive of the few that have been saved? Something is terribly wrong with you. A little humility goes a long ways and you my friend have none. I will pray for you.

Merry Christmas everyone.

jesus g

Yet another really awesome post.

Thanks!

 

[CopticChristian]

Coptic–Who says this is a fact? I’m not any sort of expert on AA, and I haven’t read this whole thread. But in looking for where you were getting what you’re calling a fact, I googled “AA success rate” and easily came up with recent articles from Scientific American and The LA Times that thoroughly contradicted your numbers.

In Googling “AA success rate 5%”, one of the articles which I read was from thefix.com about a number of variously designed studies of AA. One study found that AA, cognitive therapy, and behavior modification all had similar rates of success. IIRC, AA’s rate was the highest, at around 59%. (I’m sleepy, so I’ll re-read the article tomorrow to be sure I’m saying this accurately.)

The article quoted that study of three methods as saying,“It was the initial decision to get better that determined a person’s chance of success.” It also said that the method of help seemed to be less important than that decision to seek help. That’s why I think you are undermining people without being aware of the effect you may have. People need to feel confidence in whatever method of help they choose to pursue. AA undeniably helps people; for many people in need of help, it inspires confidence that they can be helped; you, however, keep bringing up this falsely dismal success rate as a supposed “fact”.

The Catholic Church not only does not condemn AA, some Catholic Churches host meetings. Leave it be. Again, I’m no expert on AA, but I know Catholic spiritual directors who use it for their directees, and I trust their experience and judgment on AA.

This is one of my usual barely awake posts…sorry if I’m incoherent.

Abide,

As a physician I do not seek information for statistics on what works from Google. Try the NIH website or look into reading published literature. If you read this thread I provided studies. I provided the work of Reid Hester, Phd. He points out FACT 37/48 for AA concerning methods that work…in other words there are 36 more effective methods.

I provided you the St. Jude website.

soberforever.net/current_research.cfm

and here

soberforever.net/drhanson.cfm

I posted this before…

The LA times and Scientific American are not where you find data. Show me what you found and I will tell you what it really says rather than what you think it says…

Facts are Facts

Here is a study on Physician attitudes on Faith based Treatement…

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22476161

Psychiatr Serv. 2012 Jun;63(6):597-604. doi: 10.1176/appi.ps.201100315.
Physicians’ beliefs about faith-based treatments for alcoholism.
Lawrence RE, Rasinski KA, Yoon JD, Koenig HG, Meador KG, Curlin FA.
SourceDepartment of Psychiatry, Columbia University Medical Center, 1051 Riverside Dr., Box 103, New York, NY 10032, USA. rlawrence@uchicago.edu

Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The study examined physicians’ beliefs about faith-based alcohol treatments vis-à-vis Alcoholics Anonymous, pharmacologic treatment, and residential treatment.

Who says this is a fact?

I say it is a fact and if you look at sites that publish fact like St. Jude they say it is a fact. Accept it.

 

[CopticChristian]

Yet another really awesome post.

Thanks!

Mgray,

The problem with AA is that for those it works for it becomes something that they believe works for everyone. When someone, a relative, a wife, a dear associate fails continually, drinks, is in misery and AA does not help then the problem is that the AA people keep telling people to go back to AA rather than try something else. There are in fact better methods and many that work better, in fact 36 better methods when noting that Hester ranks AA as 37/48…

While you admire your awesome posts, those in misery are indicted because the program of AA is believed to be without problems and those that fail are the problem when in reality those that fail, fail because they need help and AA can’t help them and there are other and better ways. While you feel good…look and see that there are those that found other than what you found.

stinkin-thinkin.com/why-i-left-aa-stinkin-thinkin-stories/

In my 2 years of sobriety my own personal situation and happiness has not improved even though I never feel like drinking. My rational thoughts tell me my drinking behaviour got me here and that is enough really. When I look around the rooms, even those with the strongest AA message have nothing I want. I really mean that. They sound like the meaning of life is understanding a 12 step step programme.

I think it was the third friend who committed alcoholic suicide because he believed his only options were jails, institutions, or death. They all had other options but had accepted the cult doctrine through repetitive brainwashing and the acceptance of the AA alternative reality.

Or, it could have been when my sponsor told me who I could talk to.

Or it could have been being attacked physically by mentally deranged AA members that didn’t like what I was saying.

All that matters now is that I know the truth, AA is dangerous.

I was in and out for a while.
It was difficult for me to break away.
Jack Trimpey first introduced me to the idea that AA was a cult. I think that someone in a yahoo chat room may have reccomended “The Small Book.”
It was like a veil was lifted. After years of relapse and blaming myself, I finally understood that faith healing is not a valid treatment for alcoholism.
I discussed my concerns at meetings and people did their best to convince me that I was crazy, and that I was gonna die.
I left for a while… I relapsed and went crawling back.
Tried their steps again and again.
Then I started noticing how disfunctional the whole thing was.
I was four months sober at one point, and a former sponsor (one who had insisted that I stop taking depression meds, leading directly to a suicide attempt) insisted that I needed hospitalization, because I was homeless and living in my truck.
I told him I was gonna quit smoking and he scolded me saying… “You are one xxxx up alcoholic! Next you’ll try to quit xxxx off!”
I had a job selling tickets in the hallway at a Saturday night meeting in Franklin Massachusetts. I was just outside the door in the hall when a guy approached with tears in his eyes. He asked if he could speak to me in private, so we stepped outside the door and he burst out crying, “I am bicurious and I was wonderign if you are too! I was hoping we could get together!”
On another occasion, I had been attending a mixed ALANON and AA meeting every monday night. It was a Big Book meeting with usually around a hunderd people in attendance. I had asked my mom if she’d like to come along and learn more about AA. Halfway through the meeting a guy raised his hand and began to speak. He went into gret detail about how he was having urges to have sex with his mother and what positions he’d like to get her in. My Mom was shocked.
I tried AA over and over… It never worked… They always blamed it on me… and I had little reason to doubt them.
I’ve been sober for three and a half years now without AA. Dumping the doctrine was the best thing I ever did.
I had to work real hard at deprogramming.

While you tout success and awesome postings there are postings elsewhere that do not share your sentiment…

 

[TheRealJuliane]

“Muckraking the 12 Step Industry” is the subtitle of that page.

Did you put that website together?

You deride other’s sources while putting up these sorts of sites? I can find anecdotal statements on the internet that people have been kidnapped by UFOs and impregnated with alien babies. Does that make it true? So what, so some people don’t like AA. Get off it already. Let it go. What is it to you? What’s the real issue? It’s not truth. Let people have their illusions if it helps them. You’re not saving people from destruction, AA does help a lot of people whether you can admit it or not.

From that page: If that were not bad enough, AA’s own teachings — the steps, the slogans, the protocol — encourage people to believe that they are powerless and that if they are victimized in any way, the spiritually sober thing to do is to look at their part in their own victimization: what did they do to bring it on? It teaches them that anger and resentment are the gateway to relapse and members are chided for expressing anger or harboring resentment.

That shows a very fundamental misunderstanding of the program. There is no such encouragement. There are times when one truly is powerless, but if something happens to a person, such as a crime, there is no question that the person had no part in it. Anger can be a good thing, but resentment is never healthy, and that’s my own experience which has been confirmed by years of experience. Sure people feel anger, but turning to alcohol to “treat” their anger is what the program addresses. And members would be encouraged to report any crimes to the proper authorities and not try to take vengeance themselves. Feeling their emotions but not acting out on them, that’s the key.

 

[CopticChristian]

“Muckraking the 12 Step Industry” is the subtitle of that page.

Did you put that website together?

You deride other’s sources while putting up these sorts of sites? I can find anecdotal statements on the internet that people have been kidnapped by UFOs and impregnated with alien babies. Does that make it true? So what, so some people don’t like AA. Get off it already. Let it go. What is it to you? What’s the real issue? It’s not truth. Let people have their illusions if it helps them. You’re not saving people from destruction, AA does help a lot of people whether you can admit it or not.

RJ,

The site is the site. The comments are the comments. These comments are similar to those found in books many other forms of writing for those that failed in AA, ie 95%. AA helps some people, not all people, and to believe that it is the only way is a problem that those that go to AA tout.

If you find nothing true there then that is your perogative. Many lurking that have been to meetings may see the same thing that these people see.

Do you have a problem with viewing two sides of the same coin?

Catholics routinely deal with The Bible is the sole rule of Faith…or I am born again and these issues are dealt with by CAF in a way to show that these things are not true.

What is your problem with seeking truth? You want to take a different approach here then you do when someone says, OSAS, Soveriengty of God, Forensic Justication…well it works for some therefore let us not discuss it…

I would pray you see the similarity of dysfunctional thinking…I see you rescue Mgray when the post was addressed to Mgray…do you know about Karpman’s triangle?

Once Saved Always Saved and how those that think and believe it cling to it…

Once Diseased Always Diseased and how those that think and believe it cling to it…

Both are not true.

Do you have a problem with discussing

morally neutral language of Addiction and Recovery

vs

Sin and Salvation…?

 

[CopticChristian]

Coptic–Who says this is a fact? I’m not any sort of expert on AA, and I haven’t read this whole thread. But in looking for where you were getting what you’re calling a fact, I googled “AA success rate” and easily came up with recent articles from Scientific American and The LA Times that thoroughly contradicted your numbers.

**In Googling “AA success rate 5%”, one of the articles which I read was from thefix.com about a number of variously designed studies of AA. One study found that AA, cognitive therapy, and behavior modification all had similar rates of success. IIRC, AA’s rate was the highest, at around 59%. (I’m sleepy, so I’ll re-read the article tomorrow to be sure I’m saying this accurately.) **
The article quoted that study of three methods as saying,“It was the initial decision to get better that determined a person’s chance of success.” It also said that the method of help seemed to be less important than that decision to seek help. That’s why I think you are undermining people without being aware of the effect you may have. People need to feel confidence in whatever method of help they choose to pursue. AA undeniably helps people; for many people in need of help, it inspires confidence that they can be helped; you, however, keep bringing up this falsely dismal success rate as a supposed “fact”.

The Catholic Church not only does not condemn AA, some Catholic Churches host meetings. Leave it be. Again, I’m no expert on AA, but I know Catholic spiritual directors who use it for their directees, and I trust their experience and judgment on AA.

This is one of my usual barely awake posts…sorry if I’m incoherent.

Abide,

You chide me on my posting of fact and then you post as if fact. Here is the difference. I post nothing that I have not researched, nothing that I do not have support for, nothing that would embarass my mind and knowingly cause someone to believe something that would be other than true.

I constantly check what I say before I say it because I have a reputation and desire to produce information that is true, will be found to be true, and will be seen as credible. You can challenge the credibility and I have the data to back up my opinions. My opinions are not just experience but are balanced with experience/reason…

You post as if, incoherent and then you question and suggest that what I post may not be true. You may want to look before you post.

 

[Jerusha]

Excuse me for sarcasm, and please don’t think that I am opposed to your way of thinking. So, if alcoholism isn’t a disease, insurance won’t pay for helping people address those problems, and only the wealthy, who can afford such programs will profit, and they are those whose lives are not so dysfunctional that they can’t even hold a job, that will boost your recovery numbers.

I agree, some of those who can get recovery in AA are so ignorant of the fact that each person is an individual that they end up emotionally abusing those who continue to have problems. My core problem is one that is denied by the larger society, because they refuse to believe that this country is as sick as I see it. Just the problems in the Republican party today, the day the world is supposed to end , are enough to illustrate my point. Sick religion, and prosperity theology.

 

[Cat]

Cat,

Explain your view of the rug and the notion that there are problems with discussing

Morally neutral Addiction/Recovery

and

Sin and Salvation

As Jesus Christ the Bearer of Water of Life suggests…discussion is discussion.

I don’t have a problem with discussion. What I have a problem with is tearing the rug to shreds.

Addictions are complex, and there is no “one size fits all” answer. I agree with you that for many addicts, the 12-Step Program doesn’t do anything. I am one of those–I tried Overeaters’ Anonymous for several months. It didn’t phase me. I didn’t “get it.”

BTW, habit–addition–disease–syndrome–I don’t care what you call it. It really doesn’t matter. Those of us who have it know that we have no control over this and that eventually we will die of complications of our out-of-control behavior, unless we die in an auto accident or murder or Mayan disaster first.

Many of us have conquered our problems for a while, only to return. At this moment, I have gained 20 pounds of the 80 pounds that I lost, and I am struggling to eat healthily about 50% of the time, but the other 50% is out-of-control. Also, because of my schedule, the only exercise time available to me is early morning (around 4:30 am), and I just can’t muster up the intestinal fortitude to get up so early and peddle.

Biggest Loser (tv show) demonstrates the complexity of addiction–these people have EVERYTHING that they need to lose weight: they are away from the jobs and family and all responsibilities, they have all their food supplied for them, their living expenses are covered, they have some of the most-experienced athletic trainers in the U.S., they have a state-of-the-art gym, they have constant medical supervision and all the testing that they need (no insurance worries!), they have pals undergoing the process, and they have a huge prize to go for.

And yet, many of the contestants still do not lose significant amounts of weight, and many revert to their former habits and weight within a few years after they are finished with the show.

For some people, AA works beautifully. I know such people personally. Some of the posters on this thread are such people.

My problem with your approach is this: I think it’s cruel to try to convince them that AA is a “cult” or that it is in some way harmful to their Christianity.

I know from experience that controlling my eating requires a rigid mental strength, and I do best when I allow NOTHING to get in my way and cause me to doubt myself. That’s how athletes succeed–they have no self-doubts. My family is involved with figure skating, and the skaters who win are those who take the ice with absolutely no fear, no doubts. They have complete confidence in their coaches, their programs, and their own abilities, and for many, there is also a sense of faith that God is with them and will help them.

I’ve also seen skaters who are amazing athletes fall apart during a program because of one little moment of doubt. This happened in Calgary in 1988 when Debi Thomas took the ice. One little stumble on an easy triple sow, and her whole program fell apart. You could see it in her face–she crumpled after that stumble.

People who are addicted do not have the mental strength that non-addicted people have. One of my friends at work is quite thin, and she simply can’t understand why I can’t just eat one cookie. She doesn’t want more than one cookie.

I can’t even imagine having this kind of brain.

So that’s what I’m getting at, CC. It’s fine to let people know that there are alternatives. I think that’s excellent, because I’m sure that people are reading this thread who have tried AA and failed. They need to know that there are other things for them to try.

But I’m convinced that the kind of intellectual debate and word juggling and “chess playing” that you are doing on this thread could be the beginning of a downfall for a fragile addict who has been standing on that “rug” of AA. It doesn’t take much to plant a doubt in the mind of an addict, and once the doubt is there, the addict will say, “It’s no use” and revert to their former destructive behaviors.

We must be mindful and tread carefully as we walk through the minds of others. The Bible talks about not putting a stumbling block in the way of our weaker brothers and sisters.

This isn’t a game of chess, or any kind of game. It’s life and death for addicts and their families.