AA kicks out two Toronto secular chapters

[Revoltingest]

So - in my world, AA can do what it wants, and if the government or law enforcement requires participation in some sort of AA-similar program, they need to find one that doesn't require active participation in faith based activities.

Tis gubmint which needs the kick in the arse...not AA.
But it would make sense, given AA's power & influence, for them to accommodate non-believers.
Many church based outfits provide religion-free secular services, eg, Catholic Social Services.
So I don't criticize them....I just encourage them to broaden their focus.

Note: I provide atheism-free services to my church type customers (eg, a church who was a management client, my tenants).

 

[blackout]

It's a bit more complicated than that in regards to AA.

AA says the only requirement for membership is a desire to stop drinking. That's all.

edit: Add to that they are often the only game in town for people to seek help and courts only order people to go to AA.

You also have to realize that quite often someone's "higher power" is the specific AA clubhouse a person attends, Jesus but without the Christian theology or with a heavy dose of the religious theology, Allah, a doorknob, a chair, that funny feeling you get down your spine when you say someone stepped on your grave..........seriously, everything under the sun. Given the bizarre litany of higher powers accepted as long as it keeps you sober than nothing, as in no thing, should qualify just as well.

You could always just name yourSelf, as Your Own Higher Power.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

You could always just name yourSelf, as Your Own Higher Power.

I don't think they're keen on that:

A woman member of a group that adheres to the traditional Twelve Steps puts it this way: “You need to believe in something higher than yourself. Our self got us drunk.”

 

[Kathryn]

Tis gubmint which needs the kick in the arse...not AA.
But it would make sense, given AA's power & influence, for them to accommodate non-believers.
Many church based outfits provide religion-free secular services, eg, Catholic Social Services.
So I don't criticize them....I just encourage them to broaden their focus.

Note: I provide atheism-free services to my church type customers (eg, a church who was a management client, my tenants).

Hey, look, I'm all for AA developing an alternative program for non theists, IF they choose to do so. However, since belief in a Higher Power is rather central to their program, that may prove to be a daunting task. Some might even claim it dilutes the program to the point of it being, well, not an AA program.

But that's OK - like I said, it's a free market. If there's a demand for a program which doesn't require a theist mindset, and which is equally or even more effective, someone ought to start one. But I think it's unethical to DEMAND that AA compromise one of it's basic tenets...just as I think it's unethical for anyone to be forced by a government entity to attend an AA meeting.

 

[blackout]

I don't think they're keen on that:

Your lower Self drags you down,
your higher Self lifts you up.

For a group that practices magic,
They certainly are bossy about it.

 

[Kathryn]

Yeah but it's their gig - they can be bossy if they want.

On the other hand, no one should be FORCED by any government entity to attend an AA group.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

But that's OK - like I said, it's a free market. If there's a demand for a program which doesn't require a theist mindset, and which is equally or even more effective, someone ought to start one.

People have. There are several secular sobriety organizations out there. They're growing, but they have a long way to go before they'll be anywhere near the size of AA.

But I think it's unethical to DEMAND that AA compromise one of it's basic tenets.

But it's not unethical for AA DEMAND that "We Agnostics" and "Beyond Belief" compromise their basic tenets?

AA may be within the bounds of the law on this issue, but that doesn't mean that their actions aren't hypocritical.

 

[Kathryn]

People have. There are several secular sobriety organizations out there. They're growing, but they have a long way to go before they'll be anywhere near the size of AA.


But it's not unethical for AA DEMAND that "We Agnostics" and "Beyond Belief" compromise their basic tenets?

AA may be within the bounds of the law on this issue, but that doesn't mean that their actions aren't hypocritical.

AA's not demanding your attendance - so they're not demanding you do anything.

If you JOIN A GROUP, there are going to be GROUP ACTIVITIES, and a mission statement, exercises, oaths, etc. If you don't agree with those tenets, you shouldn't join the group.

Go contribute to the attendance, and the coffers, of groups which don't have the same tenets. If there's enough demand, those groups will grow.

But it's wrong to try to force your beliefs on a group which is ESTABLISHED on other beliefs.

 

[Proper-Gander]

What does everyone else think of this? Is it appropriate for the biggest support group for recovering alcoholics to demand religious faith of its members?

It's not at all appropriate. If I may be so bold in expressing my opinion - it only changes what you're depending on. That's not what anyone needs if they want to completely break an addiction.

However, there's nothing wrong with these two groups standing alone, outside of the AA division. I assume they were de-listed as AA programs....but couldn't they be listed in the directory again as their own, separate programs?

 

[Songbird]

From the studies I've seen the success rate of all programs towards their stated goals come in with a pretty low success rate. But it's a hard thing to study because you get court appointed attendance to the spiritual programs, or in those areas that have been legally challenged a similar program such as Rational Recovery, which put in people who do not necessarily need to be there.

There are a number of different takes on addiction recovery and all appear to have low success rates when it comes to lifelong abstinence or even long term membership. I could go on about the various reasons for this but suffice it to say that addiction, even what it is, remains a complex topic.

A RAND study from quite a while back supported the idea that people who learn to moderate were perhaps better off than those who abstain from drinking. It's one study and I don't know if anyone has tried to replicate it.

Alcoholism and Treatment | RAND

Years ago I used to have a list of NIAAA studies and others but I don't know what I've done with them.

I've heard the same thing. I'm not familiar with this issue, so I don't know if most addicts are religious, and if they prefer religious recovery programs. I've got a painting project today, so I'm in and out, not bothering to research this. I kinda banked on Penguin looking up my claim. I see he did. Reliable almost Penguin, that guy.

 

[Songbird]

From what I've read, they don't... however, many people think that they do.

IIRC, this came from a report on 12-step programs that looked at rates of relapse by people who went through the program... but they only counted people who finished all 12 steps.

I'll have to dig up the stats, but I seem to remember that if you look at all participants of the programs - i.e. everyone who starts, regardless of whether they drop out before finishing - there are some secular programs that are somewhat more effective than the average for 12-step programs.

However, this might still be an apples-to-oranges comparison, since I don't believe that all the secular programs follow a 12-step process like AA. It could be that the difference in performance comes down to method, not whether the program is "spiritual".

I think I was one of those people.

Yeah, I'm sure it's more complex than spiritual vs. non. I don't know if the religious programs are more numerous and established and better funded, and I'm too lazy to look into it today.

 

[doppelganger]

Religious belief is the core of AA's program.

And it's about as worthless for treating alcohol addition as religious beliefs are in general for dealing with real-world problems.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effectiveness_of_Alcoholics_Anonymous

Religious beliefs can temporarily keep one's demons in check, but it doesn't heal them. And it presents the real risk of psychological and behavioral problems festering as they go untreated.

 

[doppelganger]

A RAND study from quite a while back supported the idea that people who learn to moderate were perhaps better off than those who abstain from drinking. It's one study and I don't know if anyone has tried to replicate it.

Alcoholism and Treatment | RAND

Years ago I used to have a list of NIAAA studies and others but I don't know what I've done with them.

This is what I would expect. Moralizing about and attempting total denial of a behavioral issue rarely mitigates it. It treats a symptom and not the cause.

 

[Songbird]

On a similar note, there is a heavily religious national recovery program called Teen Challenge. In my area, people are often court-ordered to pick either prison or Teen Challenge, so people are forced into religion if they want to avoid a correctional facility.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Considering the abysmal success rate of AA, I can only assume there real agenda is something other than helping people to stop drinking. Anybody I've known who has gone through such programs and stuck with them, have come out being some of the most sanctimonious, self-righteous, religious nutjobs I've encountered, so AA does accomplish something.

 

[waitasec]

Considering the abysmal success rate of AA, I can only assume there real agenda is something other than helping people to stop drinking. Anybody I've known who has gone through such programs and stuck with them, have come out being some of the most sanctimonious, self-righteous, religious nutjobs I've encountered, so AA does accomplish something.

oops...

 

[gnomon]

The success rate for all these programs that promote abstinence come in at around 3 to 7 percent. The success rate of going from problem drinker to moderate drinker is a rather hard thing to assess.

My biggest problem with AA is that it was picked up by Hazelden, the leading recovery center in the nation, and they created their recovery model based upon the 12 steps. This model became the de facto method nationwide for state agencies and courts started sending people to 12 step programs by default. The 12 steps are rather, problematic, to put it mildly and for people with mental illnesses that often get assigned to these programs the 12 steps can actually be worse than doing nothing at all. The steps are practically an ego destroyer and for mental illnesses in which the sense of self is already destroyed it's like throwing fuel in the fire.

Granted, the Minnesota model that swept recovery centers as provided by Hazelden was better than what existed before in terms of hospitalized treatment and if someone has the personality that is conducive to thriving in a social group AA can be the best program. Throw in that clubhouses act autonomously the wide variety of clubhouses makes it difficult to find a success rate while at the same time providing a greater variety of recovery options. Except, of course for the 12 steps being the core.

I personally find the 12 steps to be inane.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Even when it's emphasized at the expense of recovery from alcoholism?

A question, and I mean it in all seriousness: is AA an addiction recovery program, or an evangelism program for recovering addicts?

That's more than a little melodramatic.

AA's program is no secret and available to anyone.

This is an issue of a group trying to adjust AA's program and then complaining that AA won't let them retain the name.

No one's life is in danger.

This is just an attempt from "atheists" to change AA's program and then complain about it.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

And it's about as worthless for treating alcohol addition as religious beliefs are in general for dealing with real-world problems.

Effectiveness of Alcoholics Anonymous - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Religious beliefs can temporarily keep one's demons in check, but it doesn't heal them. And it presents the real risk of psychological and behavioral problems festering as they go untreated.

Yes. The entire 12 step program is as worthless as the religious aspect of AA.

Why someone would want to "secularize" something worthless is beyond me.

 

[Father Heathen]

Religious recovery programs only trade one mind debilitating dependency for another.