Alcoholics Anonymous and Drug Addiction

[AceBoogie]

As a child I attended many AA meetings with family members of mine, usually as a result of them not having anyone to babysit, etc. In AA they tell people that finding a 'higher power' is the only way to stay sober, claiming that addicts, 'left to their own devices' don't have the power to refuse a drug. They also claim that addiction is a disease and that once an addict puts a drug in his/her body, they become completely powerless over their behavior and thoughts, therefore the only way to stay sober is complete abstienence.

There are also a lot of interesting phrases and things repeated and regurgitated by AA members to other AA members (let go and let god, turn it over to your higher power, god gives you two ears and one mouth for a reason, take the cotton out of your ears and put it in your mouth, meeting makers make it, etc.), specifically newer members, that make all sorts of interesting claims and declarations. I am not claiming that these sayings have no truth to them. While I feel like there is some merit to AA i.e. building a support group, having people to call in times of crisis, being around like-minded individuals who share the same issue as you, therapeutic benefits, etc. I also feel like a lot of what's in AA is just straight up bullshit. I don't mean to say that I don't support anyone that goes to AA to continue going to AA, nor do I wish to send anyone astray in convincing them that 'AA doesn't work,' because that is not the case. AA DOES work for many people in many parts of the world, but is AA honestly more successful than other methods of staying sober?

I am not so much looking for scientific studies or fact because I have some research into the subject. I am more looking for everyday people's rational, logical approach to AA and what they think.

There are also a lot of interesting claims in the Big Book of AA... A lot of these claims are based on a vast misunderstanding of how things in society work, in my opinion. There is a story in the Big Book about a man who went to see Jung for his addiction and it says that even after seeing the world-renowned physician and learning the 'inner-workings of his mind' he was still not able to stay sober. So now many people in AA have this idea that therapy cannot help addicts, despite the fact that meetings, 'fellowship' (as they call it), and building a support group are all therapeutic exercises. They claim that knowing things about your mind will not allow you to stay sober, disregarding the fact that therapy is not JUST about learning the 'inner-workings' of your mind, but also about learning tools and skills to deal with and manage your mind and your thoughts, in other words, learning to change your reaction to your thoughts, i.e. your behavior.

Though you won't hear very many people actually admit it, there is this all-pervading attitude amongst AA members that AA is the ONLY WAY TO STAY SOBER. They claim that if one stays sober without AA, they are not actually sober but rather a 'dry drunk' (a dry drunk meaning someone who abstains from drugs but does nothing to change who they are or their behavior outside of drug use) because there is no way to be sober AND be happy without 'having the steps in your life.' It's as if people in AA CANNOT fathom being sober with a '12 step program,' and that anyone who is sober without the 12 steps of AA is not actually sober but rather a dry drunk. I am aware of secular based sobriety groups and have heard AA members speak of certain groups with a sort of disdain and lack of effort to even attempt to understand any other sobriety 'program' besides AA.

There are many more examples I can give but I won't bore you, as I'm sure that if you are familiar with AA in any sense you have probably heard of, even in passing, some of these phrases or ideas.

What do you guys think?

I have a hard time being on either end of the spectrum, I more so think that while AA DOES have SOME merit, there is a lot of bullshit and misinformation spread between people in 'the program.' It comes to a point where all certain people do is talk about AA and spout 'knowledge' from the Big Book as if that's all their tiny little brains can fathom. Very interesting subject, in my opinion.

[LastPoet]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YF72vvW-y3M

[John V]

Though you won't hear very many people actually admit it, there is this all-pervading attitude amongst AA members that AA is the ONLY WAY TO STAY SOBER. They claim that if one stays sober without AA, they are not actually sober but rather a 'dry drunk' (a dry drunk meaning someone who abstains from drugs but does nothing to change who they are or their behavior outside of drug use) because there is no way to be sober AND be happy without 'having the steps in your life.' It's as if people in AA CANNOT fathom being sober with a '12 step program,' and that anyone who is sober without the 12 steps of AA is not actually sober but rather a dry drunk. I am aware of secular based sobriety groups and have heard AA members speak of certain groups with a sort of disdain and lack of effort to even attempt to understand any other sobriety 'program' besides AA.

Yep, some people who find happiness in AA after the nightmare of addiction go a little overboard cheerleading for it. It's not an AA thing, it's a human thing. There are atheists here who need to think that Christians are all miserable, sexually repressed, etc. A lot of people grow out of it. Some don't.

[AceBoogie]

Though you won't hear very many people actually admit it, there is this all-pervading attitude amongst AA members that AA is the ONLY WAY TO STAY SOBER. They claim that if one stays sober without AA, they are not actually sober but rather a 'dry drunk' (a dry drunk meaning someone who abstains from drugs but does nothing to change who they are or their behavior outside of drug use) because there is no way to be sober AND be happy without 'having the steps in your life.' It's as if people in AA CANNOT fathom being sober with a '12 step program,' and that anyone who is sober without the 12 steps of AA is not actually sober but rather a dry drunk. I am aware of secular based sobriety groups and have heard AA members speak of certain groups with a sort of disdain and lack of effort to even attempt to understand any other sobriety 'program' besides AA.

Yep, some people who find happiness in AA after the nightmare of addiction go a little overboard cheerleading for it. It's not an AA thing, it's a human thing. There are atheists here who need to think that Christians are all miserable, sexually repressed, etc. A lot of people grow out of it. Some don't.

I wasn't claiming that this was strictly an AA thing, I was talking strictly about how AA members feel about people who get sober without AA. Obviously many different groups of people in society tend to think in a righteous manner about their ways of living. But yes it's interesting... AA is a nonprofit group but their whole pitch just leaves you thinking, "ok what's the catch?"

[vorlon13]

As I've noted before, my take is the 'Higher Power' thing is it's a necessary fiction for how the majority of addiction addled minds work.

Obviously, if AA works on a Catholic, a Lutheran, a Mormon, a Jew (it happens), and a Moslem, the 'Higher Power' is blasphemously ecumenical in doling out sobriety. (Religion 101 being a total mystery to the AA founders)

IIRC, Penn and Teller (among other things) were very put out over AA not keeping any records of their efficacy. After 28+ years of sobriety, I have no idea how that could possibly be done. For starters, it's Alcoholics Anonymous. Service and leadership positions will have individuals with names attached, but regulars and newcomers alike are not registered, tracked, or have to submit ID for either attendance or success.

(some meetings do take precautions regarding attendance by registered sex offenders and underage individuals simultaneously. It is entirely possible for someone to be required to attend by the court, and also required to leave if someone under 18 turns up)

The 'Bloody Mary' episode of South Park (which I love!!) ends with Randy growing a pair and being able (apparently) to control his drinking. This seems not to occur in real life very often. I think Penn and Teller went there too.

There is also quite a bit of leeway in AA doctrine. Folks quitting drinking and then developing over time the habits and the compunction to live life without alcohol vs. those having a sudden 'change of heart' (FLOABW) and
getting to 'serenity' in a short or instantaneous time.

There is also the effect of keeping the newcomers busy. 90 meetings in 90 days, for instance. You can burn up a couple hours a day on that, more in the groups that are highly social. For folks working, that time cuts right into their former drinking and drugging time.

There is also 'segregated' meetings in some regards. Some meetings are for actual alcoholics only (closed) or open to all (open). Some meetings go out of their way to accommodate the handicapped (not always possible for an organization that relies on church basements, BTW) there are women only meetings and men only meetings. Gay only meetings happens, latino, black, etc. And then smoking and non-smoking. (I've attended a meeting that is almost smoking required. It's a good meeting, but attendance can shave years off your life)

There are also meetings not listed in the Where and When (a guide to meetings in whatever city you're in). Some companies sponsor an in-house meeting for employees, some churches will have something similar available for their members. Some professions will meetings for themselves, like doctors, or lawyers.

I'm not aware of any Aryan/NAZI only meetings, LOL, but I guess it is possible.

[Jenny A]

Yep, some people who find happiness in AA after the nightmare of addiction go a little overboard cheerleading for it. It's not an AA thing, it's a human thing. There are atheists here who need to think that Christians are all miserable, sexually repressed, etc. A lot of people grow out of it. Some don't.

Five percent is hardly doing well. So cheer leading for it is a disservice to alcoholics and other addicts. But you're right that celebrating what worked for oneself is human. It's just not necessarily useful to anyone else.

I suspect you are thinking of me (among others) as one of those who think all Christians are miserable and sexually repressed. I don't--though I do know Christians who are one, the other, or both of those things. Absent religion, I don't really know anyone who is very sexual repressed though not all the religious are sexually repressed.

Miserableness seems to be a common human condition with or without religion.

If religion helps some escape miserableness in the form of alcoholism or anything else, I don't see that separating them from religion makes much sense, unless they are hurting others with religion. But it's important to understand that religion is not the only escape from miserableness and proclaiming that it is, is not a healthy thing. That is what AA does with a 5% track record.

[AceBoogie]

I do agree that abstinence is probably much better of an idea than attempting 'controlled' drug use.

But I think the whole 'higher power' thing is more about ego deflation than anything, which I can also agree is a good thing, to some extent of course. However, most people in AA seem to fail to realize that ego deflation is one of the objectives of the program, and simply act on blind faith of what other 'AA's' say about certain things. AA almost wants you to become an obedient little dog because it will save your life if you 'just follow directions.' Which I think takes the whole ego deflation thing a bit too far.

Some people in AA go as far as saying, 'Don't think about it, just do it! Your best thinking is what got you here in the first place.' Which is utterly hilarious. The Big Book even talks about 'intellectuals' and how they have a hard time staying sober because they are 'too smart' for their own good. Which is also hilarious. Like I said I agree that many addicts, and normal people in general, could probably use a nice dose of ego deflation, but when you say things like, 'Intelligence will not keep you sober, quit trying to think about everything!' you are basically saying don't be intelligent and just do what we say. Some have gone as far as telling others that they will not stay sober because they are too smart for their own good. Which is ridiculous.

The whole attitude that some people in AA have tends to sort of pervade throughout the majority of members because even though some people want to say, "Hey you're full of shit," they won't because they will be told that "With that type of attitude you're not going to stay sober." And it's pretty sad. The herd mentality is dangerously reminiscent of a religion, which is not surprising since AA, though members will deny this, is a RELIGIOUS program.

I do know some Atheists in AA, and they found a way to make AA make sense for them. Basically, take what you need and leave the rest.

With that being said I do support any method that one uses to get sober. While I don't believe addiction is a disease necessarily I do think there is something different about those in society that are addicts. And I do think seeking help is a good idea.

[Chas]

Yep, some people who find happiness in AA after the nightmare of addiction go a little overboard cheerleading for it. It's not an AA thing, it's a human thing. There are atheists here who need to think that Christians are all miserable, sexually repressed, etc. A lot of people grow out of it. Some don't.

Five percent is hardly doing well. So cheer leading for it is a disservice to alcoholics and other addicts. But you're right that celebrating what worked for oneself is human. It's just not necessarily useful to anyone else.

I suspect you are thinking of me (among others) as one of those who think all Christians are miserable and sexually repressed. I don't--though I do know Christians who are one, the other, or both of those things. Absent religion, I don't really know anyone who is very sexual repressed though not all the religious are sexually repressed.

Miserableness seems to be a common human condition with or without religion.

If religion helps some escape miserableness in the form of alcoholism or anything else, I don't see that separating them from religion makes much sense, unless they are hurting others with religion. But it's important to understand that religion is not the only escape from miserableness and proclaiming that it is, is not a healthy thing. That is what AA does with a 5% track record.

What is your source for "5%"?

[Jenny A]

Five percent is hardly doing well. So cheer leading for it is a disservice to alcoholics and other addicts. But you're right that celebrating what worked for oneself is human. It's just not necessarily useful to anyone else.

I suspect you are thinking of me (among others) as one of those who think all Christians are miserable and sexually repressed. I don't--though I do know Christians who are one, the other, or both of those things. Absent religion, I don't really know anyone who is very sexual repressed though not all the religious are sexually repressed.

Miserableness seems to be a common human condition with or without religion.

If religion helps some escape miserableness in the form of alcoholism or anything else, I don't see that separating them from religion makes much sense, unless they are hurting others with religion. But it's important to understand that religion is not the only escape from miserableness and proclaiming that it is, is not a healthy thing. That is what AA does with a 5% track record.

What is your source for "5%"?

See video ^

[Chas]

What is your source for "5%"?

See video ^

Mmmm, no. Penn & Teller are not a particularly credible source for that.