“It
has to be seriously considered whether an A.A. group affiliated to a
website is not in fact affiliated to an individual member’s private
enterprise. Whether groups so affiliated to an outside enterprise can
call themselves A.A. groups, whether GSO and intergroups ought to
register groups so affiliated, unless the group and website are
separately incorporated, giving no implication that the two are
connected.
It
has to be considered whether it is still wise for GSO to register
groups without prior consultation with the local intergroup and
whether certain groups which operate outside the A.A. service
structure ought to be A.A. registered, when separately incorporated
companies are competitively trading off the AA name and encouraging
their own groups to operate both inside and outside AA:
Back
to Basics AA meetings list:
Competitive
public information:
Back
to Basics Foundation – (Donations accepted):
Back
to Basics merchandise:
It
has to be considered whether it is wise to register groups that are
directly or indirectly
affiliated to non-AA 12 step treatment centre programs which trade
off the A.A. name:
Kelly
Foundation, Joe McQ’s “Recovery Dynamics”:
http://www.kellyfdn.com/about.htm (Donations accepted)
“Big
Book Study” A.A. Groups:
“Big
Book study” A.A. groups directory:
Primary
Purpose group of AA (Dallas) Big Book study groups directory:
A
you-tube video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fCLXt7zzX1w
“Showcasing
the work of the Kelly Foundation and Serenity Park with our partners
in Japan: Serenity Park Japan and Serenity Program, Inc. Carrying the
message and the legacy of Joe McQ to alcoholics and addicts around
the world. Please contact the Kelly Foundation for more information:
www.kellyfdn.com”
(Featuring
the plaque of Joe McQ (Founder). Bill W, Dr, Bob. And the Twelve
Steps of Alcoholics Anonymous (Scroll available from GSO).
Joe
McQ memorials:
Charlie
P memorials:
(Donations
accepted)”
As
Bill W. States:
“That
we must, at all costs, avoid the professionalization of AA; that
simple Twelfth Step work is never to be paid for; that AAs going into
alcohol therapy should never trade on their AA connection; that there
is not, and never can be, any such thing as an ‘AA therapist’.”
(Bill W; Co-founder of A.A., A.A. Grapevine, June 1946, Language of
the Heart page 29)
"Our
membership Tradition does contain, however, one important
qualification... .....We cannot lend the AA name, even indirectly, to
other activities, however worthy. If we do so we shall become
hopelessly compromised and divided. We think that AA should offer its
experience to the whole world for whatever use can be made of it. But
not its name. Nothing can be more certain.” (Bill W. ‘Tradition
Three’, AA Grapevine 1948, Language of the Heart page 79-80)
The
new dynamics to A.A. have exposed a double headed executive and
created a situation in which neither A.A. Traditions nor warranties
of Conference are withstanding. Clearly in Today’s A.A. a group can
have another purpose or affiliation, contrary to warranty six:
“Finally,
any two or three alcoholics gathered together for sobriety may call
themselves an A.A. group provided that, as a group, they have
no other purpose or affiliation.”
There
appears to be no body ultimately responsible for ensuring that the
provision in this warranty is upheld.
There
is no clear ultimate authority of Tradition Two; neither the trustees
and GSO, nor the A.A. group Conscience appear to have clear delegated
and ultimate responsibility, since both the intergroup and GSO can
register A.A. groups.
Paradoxically,
the present authority GSO has to register groups, over and above the
intergroup conscience, serves a “tyranny of very small minorities
invested with absolute power” (Concept V) rather than the ultimate
authority of the A.A group conscience within the intergroup.
Therefore the ultimate authority in the A.A group conscience is
hamstrung. There is now a strong case for the trustees and GSO to
pass ultimate authority and responsibility for group registration
directly to the A.A. Group conscience within the intergroups.
“A.A
as such ought never be organised; but we may create service boards or
committees directly responsible to those they serve.” (Tradition
Ten)
“A
condition to be avoided at all costs is double headed business
or policy management. Authority can never be divided into equal
halves.” (Concept X)
“The
main principles of Tradition Two are crystal clear: the A.A. groups
are to be the final authority; their leaders are to be trusted with
delegated responsibilities only.” (Concept I)
While
the A.A. Service Structure deliberates, perhaps not yet adapted to
the speed of modern communication and the newfound skills of our
ubiquitous and ever perennial “promoter friend” (AA comes of Age
page 130), the disaffected victims of coercion and misrepresentation
are leaving, A.A. Is getting the public image of being a religious
cult, and intergroups are experiencing strained relationships.
Extracts
from conference question and committee responses, UK General Service
Conference 2011, Committee 4, Question 2:
“Can
Conference make suggestions on how groups and Intergroups can work
better to carry the message to the still suffering alcoholic? - There
is evidence that strained relationships between some Groups and
Intergroups could be inhibiting the effectiveness of our primary
purpose.” (AA service News 145, 2010)
“This
committee found that strained relations between some groups and
Intergroups can inhibit the effectiveness of our primary purpose…..”
(Committee 4, Question 2) (AA Service news 147, 2011)
With
30 certified facilities worldwide (Kelly Foundation website) and
nearly 400 treatment centres using Recovery Dynamics materials
(“Carry This Message”, Joe McQ, rear cover) indoctrinating
alcoholics in Joe McQ's hybrid A.A./Recovery Dynamics program,
alongside subtle indoctrination of A.A. members via “Joe and
Charlie” Big Book Study audio recordings, and a global affiliation
of Primary Purpose Big Book Study A.A. groups, headed by the Primary
Purpose Group of A.A. (Dallas), intergroups ought to prepare a
strategy for de-programming any confused, brainwashed newcomers who
believe they are on a dual purpose mission to educate A.A. and the
still suffering alcoholic. Moreover, Public Information committees
ought to be developing a strategy for informing the general public,
especially emphasising the fact A.A. is not a religious organisation or an alcoholism education program.
“Of
highest importance would be our relations with medicine and religion.
Under no circumstances must we get into competition with either. If
we appeared to be a new religious sect, we’d be done for. (AA
Grapevine June 1955, Language of the Heart page 150)
“Education
will not only pay off in numbers treated; it can pay off even more
handsomely in prevention… … Now who is going to do all this
education? Obviously, it is both a community job and a job for
specialists. Individually, we AAs can help, but AA as such cannot,
and should not, get directly into this field.” (Bill W. AA
Grapevine March 1958. Language of the Heart page 186-187)
“Nothing
however, could be so unfortunate for A.A.’s future as an attempt to
incorporate any of our personal theological views into A.A. teaching,
practice or tradition.” (Bill W. AA Comes of Age page 232)
“Beyond
a Higher Power, as each of us may vision him, A.A. must never, as a
society, enter the field of dogma or theology….. Lest we kill our
usefulness by being bogged down in theological contention” (Bill W.
Letter 1954, As Bill sees It page 116)
“If
we recognise religion is the province of the clergy and the practice
of medicine is for doctors, we can helpfully cooperate with both”
(Concept 12, warranty 5)
“We
have no doctrine that has to be maintained, no membership that has to
be enlarged, We have no authority that has to be supported, no
prestige, power, or pride that has to be satisfied” (Concept 12,
warranty five)
Comment:
The
problem of 'outside affiliation' has been clearly identified here -
specifically the “Back to Basics” and “Primary Purpose”
franchises (among others). Moreover the 'blurring' of the lines
between AA proper and the various enterprises (in some cases clearly
commercial) utilising the 12 Step method has led to widespread
accusations that AA itself is profiting from the recovery “industry”.
In most cases this is untrue - with the exception of literature
sales. Income from this source is utilised to subsidise the
activities of the service structure (in clear contravention of our
own traditions ie. Tradition 7). Since a proportion of these sales
go to outside agencies eg. treatment centres etc then effectively the
fellowship is being subsidised by these (again a clear breach of the
traditions). This problem has twice been acknowledged by the AA
Conference in Great Britain and on both occasions our delegates have
ducked their responsibilities. Third time lucky perhaps? Thus far
the leadership, which should have been forthcoming, is more often
than not entirely absent. It is time therefore for the groups (and
members) – and quite rightly - to take direct responsibility (and
be accountable) for the conduct of the fellowship. Inclusion in the
AA directory should be administered solely by the relevant
intergroups (ie. local Where to Finds). These local lists (and only
with the approval of the local groups) should then be submitted to
GSO for inclusion in the national register. (In this connection it
may be that the intergroup itself is compromised eg. West Kent,
Plymouth, 'Wessex Intergroup' et al, and steps may need to be taken
to ensure that these elements of the service structure are similarly
'quarantined'). Any group which has an outside affiliation should be
“delisted” and its members (qua group members) refused
participation in the AA service structure. Groups which run websites
(as argued above) should also be considered as having an outside
affiliation and treated accordingly (eg. Road to Recovery, Design for
Living etc). Additionally the service structure at every level
should take care to ensure that ALL interested parties are notified
of the “delisting” and therefore that these groups (and their
representatives) may no longer be considered as being associated in
any way with AA. All parts of the service hierarchy need to adopt a
much more active role in ensuring that AA principles, programme,
history etc (as outlined in AA conference approved literature) are
communicated clearly not only within the fellowship but also to those
agencies with which we cooperate. At the moment the message we are
sending out is mixed, and frequently communicated by people who have
little or nothing to do with AA. All of this boils down to a single
important principle
WE
ARE RESPONSIBLE …. OR ARE WE NOT!
Cheerio
The
Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)
