Random Ramblings: (scroll down for letters and forum posts updated 17/07/08)
AA internal document regarding its own effectiveness.
"Comments On A.A. Triennial Surveys", Dec. 1990, Alcoholics Anonymous World Services (internal document)
Full document available here.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Sober Recovery Forum:
They banned me - woo hoo!!! I did ask to be removed from the membership list, but I did not ask to be banned. Sadly, I won't be able to be subjected to any more 12th Step attempts. I cannot view this forum anymore due to the ban. They're a really smart bunch over there. You should check out the forum leaders - they're like 'Mini Mes' of Bill W., despite the fact all the ones I spoke to insisted they were not members of AA or 12 Step fellowships. If anyone has any experience of this community I would love to hear from you.
UPDATE - They not only banned my user name, they then went on to ban my IP address. That is not what I asked them to do - I asked them to remove my membership and my posts, not to block me reading the forums, which non-members can do. Even if I clear the cache of my browser, I still will not be able to view them. It also means anyone sharing my network cannot view them. Must have really scared them. I am not convinced The Sober Recovery Community promotes freedom of thought, or speech for that matter.
I have decided that it would be futile to pursue this matter further - you cannot reason with the unreasonable. There are other forums out there. (Although I would love to know what terrible name I called someone in a private message. If people are going to lie, and bend the truth, there is no room for debate anymore.)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Random Writing including Letters and Posts on Forums:
How do you define 'forced'? (Posted on a forum – available here)
I believe AA is seen as a beneficial organisation by the masses but many of these people suffer from admiration prior to investigation. Regardless of whether AA does help some people or not my concern is for the 95% plus is does not help; a figure that AA came up with itself in its own Triennial Surveys 1989. I also believe that some of that 95%, if not all, could have been harmed by their membership. If someone attends AA the first thing they are instilled with is a belief that they are powerless over alcohol at all times, i.e. not only when it is their system. AA describes this as getting the person to recognise their problem, but it is not that at all; it is forcing them to take on AA’s stereotype of the alcoholic as created by Bill Wilson. If the member then chooses to depart AA having been duped by this they in turn leave without any solution. AA believes the solution is a Higher Power hence the person is powerless over alcohol at all times and thus needs a power greater than themselves to stay away from the first drink… in the Big Book this power is called God.
What was a drinking problem before they arrived is now much worse and more worrying they are left feeling they cannot do anything about it. Studies have shown that this leads to an increase in binge drinking; many have even made this a self-fulfilling prophecy. (For more information on these studies Google Dr. Brandsma at el.)All this only serves to harm the individual whilst making AA look good – the extent of the relapse is assumed to be caused because one left AA and not because of the messages one might have learned in AA. Of course I am not saying this is the case all of the time but it happens enough that the time has come for people to be warned about these things. The fact that AA sees itself as the only way to recover, only makes it worse, meaning that people who do leave are offered no alternatives, in fact AA literature states the following, “Unless each AA member follows to the best of his ability our suggested Twelve Steps to recovery, he almost certainly signs his own death warrant." (12x12, pg. 174).
I think the Orange Papers do a fantastic job in offering both criticism and an accurate history of the fellowship. I would recommend everyone read them regardless of their stance. Most people in AA tend to have only researched AA through approved literature, but those that offer a critic on it tend to have read arguments from both sides.
Kind regards,
J
Posts made on Rick Ross’ Cult Education Forum:
(Orange ended up getting invoved with this debate - more details here.)
In order to determine whether an organisation is a cult or a so-called support group, one of the most important things to consider are the barriers to exit. AA sells itself as a fellowship of men and women that help each other stay sober but that is not strictly true. Only one of the steps mentions alcohol, however 6 of them mention or refer to God. AA tells us that this can be a God of our understanding, but regardless of what you may call your Higher Power, it is irrelevant because essentially what matters is that your Higher Power tells you to go to AA and do the Steps. AA won’t tell you what your Higher Power must be but it will make sure it tells you what your Higher Power wants. Once you accept that you are powerless in Step One, and you have handed your will and your life over to the care of God in Step Three, free will no longer exists. You cannot graduate from AA – in step 10 you are told you have to repeat the Steps 1 – 9 daily, and in Step 12 you are told to carry the message, or recruit more members to AA. AA is a rehash of the Oxford Group, which believed the individual was powerless full stop. Its leader, Frank Buchman, wanted to see a fascist dictator running the world in the way he believed God saw fit. AA also holds its co-founder, Bill Wilson, as an infallible guru, which would be in keeping with the vast majority of cults. (It is also interesting to note that Scientology also has its own ‘recovery’ program called Narconon.)
If AA did not instill the belief in newcomers that it has the only solution to the problem of alcoholism or addiction, then that would go someway to dispel these concerns. However, due to its Traditions, change cannot happen and the program is seen as flawless which is backed up by the slogan, ‘The program knows everything, you know nothing.’ Going back to the barriers to exit point, if AA tells people it is the only way and you have to go to meetings and work the steps for the rest of your life, where is the choice? In the 12 Steps and 12 Traditions Bill Wilson even goes so far as to say:
Unless each A.A. member follows to the best of his ability our suggested Twelve Steps to recovery, he almost certainly signs his own death warrant. His drunkenness and dissolution are not penalties inflicted by people in authority; they result from his personal disobedience to spiritual principles. (Twelve Steps and Twelve Traditions, Bill Wilson, page 174.)
I think that speaks for itself – do it our way or die… may as well put a gun to someone’s head. Anyone who goes to AA will either go there, or be sent there, to deal with their drinking problems, but they will soon find themselves embroiled in a program of conversion designed to get the newcomer to believe in Bill Wilson’s and Frank Buchman’s way of life.
Kind regards,
JNext Post:
Colter writes, “I would bet that most people in AA don't know who Frank Buchman was and would only be interested in the principles that AA borrowed from the Oxford movement.....”
That is the typical response I hear from most people in AA and a very common tactic employed by its members not only to defend the ‘program’ but also to promote it; you choose to ignore anything negative and get your magnifying glasses out and pinpoint only the positive aspects of AA. This only adds to my concern that AA may indeed be a cult because it attempts to remove itself from the kind of scrutiny afforded any other institution, and most frighteningly one that claims to save the lives of its members. I might also add that the reason most people in AA are not interested in the truth is because if they ceased to protect themselves from it, would it not be the case that their ‘faith’ in the program, the very thing they AA insists is cornerstone of their lives, would crumble? I can see why no one in AA would dare look into Frank Buchman, the Oxford Group, and soul surgery (The five C’s of which the 12 Steps were evidently lifted from). Frank Buchman was clearly a fascist who also supported Hitler which is well documented. Anyone that says the following is clearly deluded -
"I thank Heaven for a man like Adolf Hitler" - available here
But having been a member of AA for 9 years and used all the very same tactics Colter is using I can understand them. The most important thing an AA member can do is distract his/her audience when faced with any form of criticism by attempting to reduce the individual rather than acknowledging a point and attempting to defend it rationally. Colter gives us an example of this in the following comment:“What is disturbing is that people who, for whatever reason decide not to get help in AA ,are not content to just leave but launch out on a campaign complete with web sites and a following to slander AA in the most vicious way proving the very contention that AA makes, that being that alcoholics are generally selfish immature people.”
If this proves the kind of fact you use to base your judgments on then you inadvertently prove another point of mine; AA decides its own facts. How does setting up a website prove that I am either selfish or immature? I am not saying I am neither of those things, all I ask is how setting up a website proves such a thing? That is like saying someone who wants to talk about the damage or side-effects of a drug prescribed to them is selfish and immature. I am not going to insult the members of this forum by dwelling on this point any longer.
I am in a rush but I want to deal with one other point before I go - Colter said:“There is nothing anywhere in AA literature which takes such an approach in the context that you presented it. I only know of instances where damaged relationships with others are the focus. Situations where a grudge may exist and one could benefit from fist seeing if they themselves had any part to play in the matter but certainly not rape. “
Selfishness, self-centeredness! That, we think, is the root of our troubles. Driven by a hundred forms of fear, self-delusion, self-seeking, and self-pity, we step on the toes of our fellows and they retaliate. Sometimes they hurt us, seemingly without provocation, but we invariably find that at some time in the past we have made decisions based on self which later placed us in a position to be hurt. (William Wilson, Chapter 5, Alcoholics Anonymous.)
Wilson does not use words like sometimes, or occasionally, he says “invariably” - he is saying anytime and everytime we are hurt we have some part to play in it. Is this not just another tactic to induce guilt in the individual, which in turn instils a need in them to confess their sins there by reinforcing their dependence on the program, or the group? The War on Self as I call it; I am nothing but WE are everything attitude - very cult like to me.
Thank you all for your responses and Colter, I send this in the spirit of debate.
JNext Post:
In the FAQ of this site the following definition of a cult is used – I would like to tell you how I think AA, NA and treatment centres fall into these brackets:
Psychiatrist Robert Jay Lifton, who wrote the definitive book about thought reform (often called "brainwashing") also wrote a paper about cult formation. Lifton defined a cult as having the following three characteristics:
1. A charismatic leader, who increasingly becomes an object of worship as the general principles that may have originally sustained the group lose power.
Despite the fact that both of AA’s co-founders are now dead they are still held in an infallible light, and the words they uttered and wrote are treated like gospel. The first 164 pages of the Big Book of Alcoholics Anonymous have never been edited and I doubt they ever will. Bill Wilson and Dr Bob had their faults, both in their conduct and their ideology but to acknowledge these in any meeting or approved literature is frowned upon. Anyone wishing to challenge the program is swiftly silenced in meetings, and any negative experience expressed openly in the rooms is seen as dissent by other members. The mere fact that the program is regarded as faultless and thus not subject to improvement, is an assault on the possible growth we might achieve as a society by taking on board new theories and evidence about addiction. The slogan “If it ain’ broke, don’t fix it” adds to the kind of stagnation AA promotes. If something ain’t broke, that does not mean it can’t be improved – otherwise we’d all still be watching television in black and white! If one rejects AA and its principles AA is at pains to offer any form of alternative treatment simply because it believes it is the only way in which to recover. The Big Book, written by Bill Wilson, is often thumped and worshiped like a bible; there is even a slogan designed to silence anyone who wants to doubt a principle – “it’s in the Big Book.”
I would also add that although AA has no recognised leaders, within meetings old-timers set the rules with subtle mechanisms. At the same time a sponsor becomes a revered leader to many AAs. It is very hard to maintain a relationship with a sponsor whose advice you do not consistently take on board. In Step Three where members are told to hand their will and their lives over to the care of God, what they are really being asked to do is hand their will and their lives over to AA and its program of ‘recovery’ written by its charismatic co-founder, Bill Wilson. They get away with this by reassuring us no one is going to tell us what to believe in, but they will tell us how to interpret the will of whatever we choose to make our Higher Power. It would be better if they just told us what to believe in and be open about what the process of conversion really involves.
2. A process [is in use] call[ed] coercive persuasion or thought reform.
Slogans, which are effectively tools against individual thought, are used so often in AA it is bordering on embarrassing. Ones like “Take the cotton wool out of your ears and stick it in your mouth” or “K.I.S.S – Keep it Simple, Stupid,” spring to mind. AA can’t make anyone do anything, but it sure as hell can use subtle tactics to make an individual feel very uncomfortable. The 3rd Tradition which states, “The only requirement for membership is a desire to stop drinking,” is misleading to say the least. Any questioning of the program is met with accusations of denial, and suggestions that one is a ‘dry drunk.’ If we went to AA to get sober, with a desire to stop drinking, it seems a little odd that AA has not only redefined the alcoholic, but also sobriety now. Surely that would also point to the fact that this is not a self-help group to help the problem drinker solve their problem, but rather one of thought reform. If not drinking is not enough, hence the ‘dry drunk’ notion, does that not mean members must also go through some kind of thought reform to be accepted? They will tell us that the Steps are but suggestions, yet all over the literature it is made very clear we must practice them or we sign our ‘own death warrant.’ Another slogan I would like to introduce at this point is “N.U.T.S. – Not Using The Steps!” Treatment centres have the right to effectively detain an individual and the coercive nature and practices used to break ‘denial’ are in breach of many human rights. When I went to my first treatment centre at 19 for heroin addiction, I told them I was not an alcoholic because I had not really drunk – I did not mix heroin with alcohol for obvious reasons – until I admitted I had drunk lots and lots and that the consequences were horrific, I was not accepted as a member of my peers; I am ashamed to say I had to lie about the amounts I drank and increase them in order to feel a part of the unit and to get them to stop calling me a liar. What about another slogan, “Don’t Drink and Don’t Think!” That again, is designed to stop the individual thinking for themselves and is a war on the individuality of the person it is aimed at. What about the fact that Bill Wilson even advises people to hold off from mentioning God to the new recruit in the Big Book chapter, Working With Others? In this section I would also like to bring to the fray the fact that once you leave AA or cease to go to meetings no one in AA wants anything to do with you unless they are trying to coerce you back to a meeting. Anyone who has anything against AA is shunned, and members get very very defensive indeed. Note that recently one member contacted me accusing me of effectively being responsible for the death of someone who watched one of my videos.
3. Economic, sexual, and other exploitation of group members by the leader and the ruling coterie.
13th Stepping is a very common phrase used within AA – it is the process used to describe how long time members pursue their sexual interests in the newcomer. I have seen this happen on numerous occasions, and even pro-AA members who have visited my site admit that this phenomenon is deeply disturbing to them. As a straight man I was ‘hit on’ by several other men and when I was new and very vulnerable it took a lot of resolve to be able to reject their advances. The newcomer is reminded how much everyone owes AA and with that to reject any advances from its ‘senior’ members or old-timers, makes one feel mightily guilty. AA appears to escape the cult experts eye based on one criteria, and that is the fact that it has no official leader, but within its many groups ‘leaders’ do exist, despite the fact they are never labelled as such. There is a clear hierarchy which is demonstrated with terms like ‘old-timer,’ ‘newcomer,’ and sobriety time.
The barriers to exit point I have already made very clear in my previous posts – ‘Do The Steps or Die,’ ‘AA is the Last Stop on the Track.’ One other very disturbing aspect of AA is how sponsors and old-timers often tell newcomers not to take medication that has been prescribed to them by a qualified doctor – is that not akin to the kind of practices cited to describe other groups on this site as cults, like the Jehovah’s Witnesses that tell their members to avoid medical advice in the form of blood transfusions? Since when did an AA member who has no formal medical training have the right to veto the medical advice of learned and trained General Practitioners? I really hope the sensible amongst us can see how dangerous this might be. AA not only defines and diagnoses the alcoholic, whilst offering the ‘only solution’ but some of its members then miraculously become experts on medicine. You may well argue that this is a rare occurrence, but I am afraid it is not, and even if it was, does the fact that some people are so brainwashed that they decide to take the advice of a so-called spiritual advisor over that of their own proven doctor, not enough evidence to show that thought reform is rife in AA?
And last but not least you claim that AA is not destructive to the individual and that it is only other members that can be destructive to others. I beg to differ. Studies done in the US on alcoholics sent to AA by the courts show that they are FIVE times more likely to indulge in binge drinking having attended AA than those that had no treatment at all. If that is not destructive, what is? The slogan “AA can’t prevent a relapse but it can ruin one” springs to mind. If we take that apart what is that really saying? Is it not saying that once you have been to AA your drinking will get worse?
There is also experimental evidence that the A.A. doctrine of powerlessness leads to binge drinking. In a sophisticated controlled study of A.A.'s effectiveness (Brandsma et. al.), court-mandated offenders who had been sent to Alcoholics Anonymous for several months were engaging in FIVE TIMES as much binge drinking as another group of alcoholics who got no treatment at all, and the A.A. group was doing NINE TIMES as much binge drinking as another group of alcoholics who got rational behavior therapy. (Retrieved here)
My concern is that anyone who wants to question AA is not only silenced within the rooms, but also outside of them and we are reduced to people who merely want to destroy AA so that we may be allowed to justify our ‘destructive self-will.’ This is not the case at all – all I want to do is reach the truth.
Kind regards,
JBDPosted on the Narcissistic Abuse forum – they were discussing the efficacy of the 12 Steps:
I don't think 12 Step groups can be regarded as self help groups. They tell the individual that they are powerless in Step One, and in Step Three they are told they must "hand their will and their lives over to the care of God, as [they] understand Him". I think a support group might be closer to the truth, although that is debatable too.
I agree that it is the responsibility of any human being to be accountable for their own behaviour. I also believe that the individual can change their behaviour without the aid of God or an HP. With that I mean, I believe an individual can take responsibility for their own life.
I really hope that we do not come to see any forms of therapy, including the 12 Steps (if you want to call them therapy), as absolutely faultless and thus allow them to stagnate and become void of any scrutiny. The result of this is that none of these therapies can be challenged, which also means they can never evolve or be improved.
I agree that we should back off the people that use these things correctly, but when I hear in 12 Step meetings that if you do not do the steps, you'll die, I get a little concerned. Considering the steps are faith based; you can't force anyone to have faith in anything. When you leave a 12 Step group for whatever reason, (it is possible to leave without relapsing), you are sentenced to a life of misery, or even death.
I am glad you managed to ditch your N - but if you were a stepper they might suggest that you stop blaming N and start doing an inventory, and looking at your own part in it. I think the box they tick in rehabs on a peer evaluation form is, "Blaming others." I totally disagree with this, but when I hear people suggesting that a program is perfect without highlighting these facts, again, it worries me.
"Sometimes they hurt us, seemingly without provocation, but we invariably find that at some time in the past we have made decisions based on self which later placed us in a position to be hurt." The AA Big Book, Chapter 5, How It Works.
Bill Wilson makes it clear in that sentence that if we are hurt by anyone it is our fault because we "invariably" did something to provoke them. I think that highlights some of the flaws in AA logic. Someone might then ask why should one then go on to make amends in the future if the only reason people harm others is in retaliation for something done to them? Do 12 Steppers never have a legitimate grievance that they are not responsible for?
I will also conclude that in many meetings I have heard people admit that that ideology is wrong, and they have been able to accept that for themselves and still "work" a program, but because so many people choose to see the fault of the individual over a program, those words, and many others, have never been removed from the Big Book of AA. In fact the first 164 pages of the Big Book have not been changed in any revisions. I think we all need to think about that when we say it is only the individual that fails a program, not the program that fails the individual. 12 Step groups do not have the right, nor the power, to remove the word victim from the dictionary, and yes, it is possible to be a victim, without playing the victim. I am bored of all the arm chair psychologists I hear using the phrase "playing the victim" to silence people. It is neither healthy, nor fair to genuine victims of wrong doing, and it does nothing but fuel their feelings of low self-esteem by adding blame to the already very real pain they feel.
I hope you are well,
JBD
I do not want to get into the personal aspects of this whole debate that appears to be being conducted with ad hominem attacks. But I would like to challenge some of the things you say in this post.
The message of AA has not stood the test of time. It is not that old, and has never really been challenged. AA remains unaccountable as a result of the Traditions. For a long time all you could do if you did not like AA was leave; that is all. However on the other hand if AA "worked" for you, then you go on to carry the message in Step 12. It is not hard to see how any program that "works" like that cannot fail in terms of PR. The Internet's growth of late has allowed people who were harmed by AA to get together and share their views, as well as allowing any neutral outsiders to read these differing opinions. As more and more come to realise that a lot of what AA says is not very healthy for the individual, AA will start to decline. If AA wants to avoid this, it needs to embrace these external challenges. I know from my experience as someone who runs and maintains a website designed to challenge the steps, that any kind of scrutiny is met with much hostility. Which leads to my next point:
Anonymity is not protected as my recent experience shows. My name was published on a 12 Step group and threats were made to "find" me by members of 12 Step fellowships. Rather than trying to make this an outside issue, I went to the official UK forum of the 12 Step fellowship involved and told them what had happened - they banned me for exposing that my anonymity had been breached and for saying that if nothing was done about it, I would do something about it. It reeks of, "Lets keep the truth out and the newcomer in." Don't people have a right to know the truth like everyone else? Before that incident I was actually trying to bridge the gap between the stepper and the non-stepper but the people running the fellowship in question answered all my points with one action, and with that one action they also just so happened to prove all my points. If you challenge this thing, or highlight any flaws in it, you are shunned. Full stop. This same fellowship World Services Board has now contacted me asking me to remove their logo from my films. I do not come here to vent any anger, but I have told you what I have to highlight a point - anonymity cannot be guaranteed, and when it is breached, no one can do anything about it because no one knows who anyone is and no one knows who to go to when something goes wrong.
When I talk to others about this in the fellowships, they try to use the Traditions to suggest this is an outside issue - not at all, this happened within the fellowship and as such is an internal issue. I get the impression many members use the Traditions as a smoke screen to dismiss anything they don't want to talk about for fear it might harm their fellowship. To the contrary, and AA should know this, it is the things we choose to ignore that will eventually dominate us.
As they say actions speak louder than words and this one incident is so damaging they don't even want to acknowledge it.When I came here and posted what I felt was a fair post earlier about my feelings on the 12 Steps, I was not aware of the hostility that had been shown here. Bill W. talks of ignorance prior to investigation, but I suspect it might actually be a case of admiration prior to investigation.
I hope you are all well,
J
Letter to Agent Orange explaining why I decided to keep Blamedenial open (29/08/06):
Orange,
I hope you are well and that my last few emails have not raised the same doubt they have raised in me!!!! Just to clarify....
I wanted to write something more substantial regarding my decision to keep the site open for another year. In all honesty I never ever wanted to close the site but I felt under pressure from some people in my life, as well as by my own feelings at the time. I was under the illusion that breaking away from the dogma that is AA and all that it had instilled in me was purely a one off decision; I was mistaken.
Perhaps this is not the case for many of you, but for me it had been so deeply ingrained in me that as soon as I decided to close the site I could sense my mind was falling back into the ways of the 12 Steps. When you have believed in something for 8 years, and aspired to live up to the so-called spiritual perfection Bill Wilson makes sure we are never quite able to attain, it takes more than a mere decision to move on.
I got caught up in that whole ideology of living your life simply to better the lives of others that AA tells us is the road we must inhabit in order to be happy. I became that chameleon again, I wanted to be a creator of harmony rather than discord, to misquote Bill Wilson. It could be argued I was too hasty in my decision to set up Blamedenial and with that I was not prepared for both the reactions of the people that know me, as well as those that don't.
Most of the people in my life support what I am doing with a silent approval, and the vast majority of people that contact me through the site do so because they feel as I do.
However there has, up until recently, been a shadow of a doubt over what I am doing and the message I am sending out to people. That 'Do the Steps or Die' mentality is so very hard to shake off! Those crippling moments of self-doubt that used to spurn me to yet another meeting ate away at me begging the question, what if I am wrong about this?
During one of those bouts I set about to investigate the good things in AA, and I was met with much criticism, and understandably so. Save the fact my delivery of the questions was dire; I also felt that our cause was a hopeless one, albeit briefly. At the time I wanted to throw the towel in; to turn my back on AA and those who were in the process of retreating from it. Once I felt this, it was not hard to find reasons to justify any such action ? those reasons are all documented in the letter I posted on my site on the evening I decided to close it down.
I was also increasingly becoming conscious of the fact that I could not support all I was saying with facts. Everyone wants facts about how the program does NOT work, yet they are quite happy to have none when the script is flipped and they are asked to believe in it!
In some respects I felt like that 'newcomer' in the rooms that is swiftly silenced, but this time I was silenced by myself; by all those damn messages repeating in my mind that are carefully delivered in the rooms to quash any belief we might have in ourselves, in our will. Once I realized this I was fired up with an even greater desire to expose the 12 Steps for what they are; a war on self!
Many people in my life questioned what I was doing and hinted at the fact they believed AA helps people and who the hell am I to question something that's only purpose is to better the lives of people caught in the grips of alcoholism or addiction? As I am sure you all well know, that is a hard argument to answer to. However I have since realised that is the precise purpose of this site; to break that denial born of ignorance -- most of those people have never been to an AA meeting. Their opinions are based on that ever so dangerous PR machine that AA claims to nullify in its hypocritical 10th Tradition. When you start to label yourself an addict or alcoholic in today's 12th Step 'sold' society, you also appear to lose all right to an opinion on your own condition and its causes; you unwittingly hand your right to an opinion over to people who have never been where you are, and that, in my humble opinion, is both wrong and detrimental to the individual.
That is why Blamedenial remains open and is pleased to hear from all of you.
J
More to follow….
J can be contacted at j@blamedenial.co.uk