AA MINORITY REPORT 2017 (revised)

Click here

Tuesday 30 September 2014

Freedom of speech?


Extracts from the aacultwatch forum (old)

Well done, I agree with you. It’s good to hear that some oldtimers in the group also agree with you too.  I think any democracy (and therefore unity in a democratic organisation) is reliant on people being able to constructively criticise its leaders (hence Tradition Nine  in AA) and their being able to constructively criticise any other destructive elements in it.  Key to this democracy and unity is the individual’s right to freedom of expression (this right and defence of it is expressed in Tradition One).  I think some good examples of this tradition in action can be found in AA Grapevine. Here’s a recent example, on the AA Grapevine 'What's On Your Mind Forum;' extracts from a reply to a newcomer’s questioning of his sponsor’s attitude:

You need to remove a defective character, your so called sponsor ................ Glad you have seen that you have outgrown the jerk and are ready to move on. Glad you joined us”  (Extracts from Burning Desire to Share, 'Catholic….', Wed, 2013-03-27 08:18)

The good thing about AA Grapevine is that you get a wide range of the varying opinions in AA. I thought I’d put the following part of my above post which is hidden from view in this post, so the links in it will be easier to access:

Another good way to air your concerns is to write them in articles to Share Magazine. You can also do this in AA Grapevine (The International journal for Alcoholics Anonymous) and the AA Grapevine “What’s On Your Mind Forum” (I’m not sure if you need to subscribe to AA Grapevine to post on the forum or not, but you could contact AA Grapevine to find out. This sort of thing is very much the topic of conversation on the forums. I’d have a look at the AA Grapevine "What's On Your Mind forum", "New to AA” section first. I think I have seen newcomers having similar experiences to yourself.

If you would like air your views in Share Magazine, here’s the link to write articles to Share Magazine: http://www.alcoholics-anonymous.org.uk/Members/Fellowship-Magazines/Share-Magazine

Link to AA Grapevine “What’s On Your Mind forum” http://www.aagrapevine.org/forums/i-say-forum

Link to AA Grapevine http://www.aagrapevine.org/

I agree with you entirely when you said “I believe we have a duty of care to protect the most vulnerable, and that means mainstream AA reaching out to the most vulnerable in the same way these extremists do.” This duty of care is a principle that runs throughout the Concepts, Traditions and guidelines.

Concept XII, Warranty Six: “..that care will be observed to respect and protect all minorities; that no action should ever be personally punitive;” and “…that our conference will be ever prudently be on guard against tyrannies great and small, whether these be found in the majority or in the minority.”

Concepts V, IX and XII can be found online in the AA Service Manual Combined with the Twelve Concepts for World Service: http://www.aa.org/pdf/products/en_bm-31.pdf and in the AA Service Handbook for Great Britain

Guideline 17, Personal Conduct matters can be found  in the AA service Handbook for Great Britain: http://www.alcoholics-anonymous.org.uk/download/1/Library/Documents/Guidelines-Handbook/Guidelines2011.pdf

I think what many don’t yet appreciate is that many newcomers who run into this type of sponsorship and don’t stay in AA, carry a negative message about their bad AA experience to their counsellors, doctors, friends, family. This has resulted in AA being accused of using cult like and bullying methods by some health professionals and this has been reported in national press. The Washington Post article on today’s aacultwatch blog (Fri 22nd March) about the controversy that is going on in AA is another example of how this fundamentalist neo Oxford Group/ Big Book Study cult is splitting AA and damaging public relations. Maybe if there was more awareness of the harmful effect this cult is having on AA public relations, then more people in AA might be more concerned and then be more actively involved in protecting newcomers and AA itself.”

Comment: You're best bet if you really want to sound off (and avoid excessive censorship) is What's On Your Mind (the US based forum): http://www.aagrapevine.org/forums/i-say-forum. They don't seem to have a problem with members airing their views even if they don't fit with the 'conventional wisdom' current in AA unlike GB which shut down the only official AA forum we had (conference questions) because (and we quote): "The 2013 forum seemed to encourage the wrong type of debate [we kid you not!] and does not encourage unity especially on a public facing site which could bring AA into disrepute." - the "wrong type of debate" being anything which had not been reduced to its most absolutely anodyne form prior to publication (see Share magazine for plentiful examples of the latter style). 

Cheers

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)

PS To use “comment” system simply click on the relevant tab below this article and sign in. All comments go through a moderation stage

PPS For new aacultwatch forum see here. Have your say!

Monday 29 September 2014

Our Experience Has Taught Us, November, 1956, Bill W




Cheers

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)


PS For AA Minority Report 2013 click here

Sunday 28 September 2014

An alternative to AA's “20 Questions”: You know you're a drunkard when … (contd)


You try to buddy up to the arresting officer by offering him a drink from the open container between your knees

You've tried to lay down on the ceiling

Bouncers have a special headlock named after you

Your best friends and worst enemies are all bartenders

Your dentist is afraid to drill in your mouth for fear of an unexpected spark

 
Cheerio

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)

The AA Member – Medications and Other Drugs (concluded)



Extract: (our observations in red print)

Some A.A. members share their experiences with drugs:

Alcoholics Anonymous is a program for alcoholics who seek freedom from alcohol. It is not a program aimed at drug addiction. However, some [Note the use of the word “some” ie. not 'all' AA member misuse prescription drugs] A.A. members have misused or abused drugs, often as a substitute for alcohol, in such a manner as to threaten the achievement and maintenance of sobriety. This has caused many A.A. members to be concerned with the misuse of drugs.

The following stories are from A.A.s who have used drugs, ranging from marijuana to painkillers, and discovered the alcoholic’s ['some' alcoholics] tendency to became dependent on other drugs. Fortunately they were able to find their way to sobriety in A.A., free from mind altering drugs.”

See above pamphlet for individual histories.

(our emphases)

Coming soon: aacultwatch's commentary on the Twelve Steps and Twelve Traditions – a piece of AA conference approved literature much reviled in cult circles! You'll see why soon enough!

Cheers

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)

Saturday 27 September 2014

Whatever happened to the AA Circle and Triangle? Lost it? Careless or stupid? Or maybe we just sold out! (contd)


Extracts from the aacultwatch forum (old)

Box 4-5-9 August-September 1993 pp. 5-6
 
“‘Letting Go' of the Circle and Triangle As A Legal Mark

A triangle, enclosed within a circle, has long been recognized as one symbol of Alcoholics Anonymous. Yet, both the triangle and the circle are among the earliest spiritual signs known to man. To ancient Egyptians, the triangle was a sign of creative intellect; to the Greeks, it meant wisdom. In general, it represents an upward yearning after higher knowledge or spiritual realm.

At the International Convention celebrating AA.'s 20th anniversary, a circle enclosing a triangle was accepted as the symbol of Alcoholics Anonymous. "The circle," Bill told the A.A.s gathered in St. Louis, "stands for the whole world of A.A., and the triangle stands for

A.A.'s Three Legacies of Recovery, Unity and Service. Within our wonderful new world, we have found freedom from our fatal obsession. . . . "

The symbol was registered as an official A.A. mark in 1955, and was freely used by various A.A. entities, which worked very well for a while. However, by the mid-1900s, there was a growing concern by the members of the Fellowship on the use of the circle and triangle by outside organizations. In keeping with A.A.'s Sixth Tradition, that Alcoholics Anonymous “. . . ought never endorse, finance or lend the A.A. name to any related facility or outside enterprise . .. ", A.A. World Services began efforts in 1986 to prevent the use of the circle and triangle by outside entities, including novelty manufacturers, publishers and treatment facilities. The policy was undertaken with restraint, and only after all attempts at persuasion and conciliation had failed were legal actions considered. In fact, of approximately 170 unauthorized users contacted, only two suits were filed, both of which were settled at a very early stage.

By early 1990, some members of the Fellowship seemed to be saying two things: "we want medallions with our circle and triangle," while others were saying, "we don't want our symbol aligned with non A.A. purposes." The desire of some A.A. members for anniversary chips was addressed by the A.A. World Services and Grapevine Boards in October 1990, when they considered the possibility of producing medallions. The boards felt that tokens and medallions were unrelated to our primary purpose of carrying the A.A. message, and that the matter should be given a thorough airing at the Conference in order to seek a group conscience from the Fellowship. The essence of this decision was relayed to the 1991 General Service Conference in the A.A.W.S. Board's report

The 1992 General Service Conference began to confront the dilemma by hearing presentations on why we should or should not produce medallions, and the responsibility of A.A.W.S. to protect our trademarks and copyrights from uses that might suggest affiliation with outside sources. The result was a Conference Advisory Action for the General Service Board to undertake a feasibility study on the possible method by which sobriety chips might be made available to the Fellowship, followed by a report to an ad hoc. committee of 1993 Conference delegates.

Following lengthy considerations, the ad hoc committee presented their report and recommendations to the 1993 Conference. After discussion, the Conference approved two of five recommendations that: 1) the use of sobriety chips/medallions is a matter of local autonomy and not one on which the Conference should record a definite position; and 2) it is not appropriate for A.A. World Services or the Grapevine to produce or license the production of sobriety chips/medallions.

Among the considerations in the ad hoc committee's report were the implications of continuing to protect A.A.'s trademarks from use by outside organizations through legal means.  Coincidentally, the A.A.W.S. Board had begun to consider recent developments, culminating in recognition that the prospects of increasingly costly and lengthy litigation, the uncertainty of success, and the diversions from AA.'s primary purpose were too great to justify continuing the protection effort of the circle and triangle. During the post-Conference meeting of the General Service Board, the trustees accepted A.A.W.S.'s recommendation to discontinue protecting the circle and triangle symbol as one of our registered marks. By early June, the General Service Board reached substantial unanimity in support of A.A.W.S.'s statement that, consistent with our original purpose lo avoid the suggestion of association or affiliation with outside goods and services, Alcoholics Anonymous World Services Inc. will phase out the "official" or "legal" use of the circle and triangle symbol. A.A.W.S. will continue to resist unauthorized use of our other marks and any attempts to publish A.A. literature without permission.

The triangle within a circle will, of course, always have a special meaning in the hearts and minds of A.A.s, in a symbolic sense, just as do the Serenity Prayer and slogans, which have never had any official status.”

Comment: All for the sake of a bit of plastic! Or a few pieces of junk jewellery How cheaply we are bought! But then “our troubles are of our own making” aren't they!

Cheers

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)

PS To use “comment” system simply click on the relevant tab below this article and sign in. All comments go through a moderation stage

PPS For new aacultwatch forum see here. Have your say!

Friday 26 September 2014

Bill and Bob's Excellent Adventure! (contd)


A wildly imaginative dianoetic rambling concerning the the “basic text” of Alcoholics Anonymous (viz. the Big Book) (our comments in red print)




This physician [Dr Bob] had repeatedly tried spiritual means to resolve his alcoholic dilemma but had failed. But when the broker gave him Dr. Silkworth’s description of alcoholism and its hopelessness, [Note: According to this description it was a non-alcoholic's analysis of the problem which was key to Dr Bob's breakthrough] the physician began to pursue the spiritual remedy for his malady [the 'disease' concept – see also Alcoholism, moral issue or disease?] with a willingness he had never before been able to muster. He sobered, never to drink again up to the moment of his death in1950. This seemed to prove that one alcoholic could affect another as no nonalcoholic could [but see here for a non-alcoholic's potential role in “affecting” recovery]. It also indicated that strenuous work, one alcoholic with another, was vital to permanent ['permanent' in the sense of persistent ie. NOT cured] recovery.

Hence the two men set to work almost frantically upon alcoholics arriving in the ward of the Akron City Hospital. Their very first case, a desperate one, recovered immediately and became A.A.number three [pp. 182-192]. He never had another drink. This work at Akron continued through the summer of 1935. There were many failures, but there was an occasional heartening success [see Recovery rates]. When the broker returned to New York in the fall of 1935, the first A.A. group had actually been formed, though no one realized it at the time.

A second small group promptly took shape at New York, to be followed in 1937 with the start of a third at Cleveland. Besides these, there were scattered alcoholics who had picked up the basic ideas in Akron or New York who were trying to form groups in other cities. By late 1937, the number of members having substantial sobriety time behind them was sufficient to convince the membership that a new light had entered the dark world of the alcoholic.

It was now time, the struggling groups thought, to place their message and unique experience before the world. This determination bore fruit in the spring of 1939 by the publication of this volume. The membership had then reached about 100 men and women. The fledgling society, which had been nameless, now began to be called Alcoholics Anonymous, from the title of its own book. The flying-blind period ended and A.A. entered a new phase of its pioneering time.

With the appearance of the new book a great deal began to happen. Dr. Harry Emerson Fosdick [p. 2], the noted clergyman, reviewed it with approval. In the fall of 1939 Fulton Oursler, then editor of Liberty, printed a piece in his magazine, called “Alcoholics and God.” This brought a rush of 800 frantic inquiries into the little New York office which meanwhile had been established. Each inquiry was painstakingly answered; pamphlets and books were sent out. Businessmen, travelling out of existing groups, were referred to these prospective newcomers. New groups started up and it was found, to the astonishment of everyone, that A.A.’s message could be transmitted in the mail as well as by word of mouth. By the end of 1939 it was estimated that 800 alcoholics were on their way to recovery.

In the spring of 1940, John D. Rockefeller, Jr. gave a dinner for many of his friends to which he invited A.A. members to tell their stories. News of this got on the world wires; inquiries poured in again and many people went to the bookstores to get the book “Alcoholics Anonymous.’’ By March1941 the membership had shot up to 2,000. Then Jack Alexander wrote a feature article in the Saturday Evening Post and placed such a compelling picture of A.A. before the general public that alcoholics in need of help really deluged us. By the close of 1941, A.A. numbered 8,000 members. The mushrooming process was in full swing. A.A. had become a national institution.”

(our emphases)

Coming next – Foreword to Second Edition (contd)

Cheerio

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)


Caution: This curse (sorry!!) COURSE is not to be taken as AUTHORITATIVE nor is it to be regarded as DEFINITIVE in any way. Anyone found to be according it any undue status will be reported to the appropriate authorities (ie. GSO York or whoever) who will then do …. ABSOLUTELY NOTHING! (quite rightly too we say!). Moreover any person discovered to be quoting from the aforementioned course will be TERMINATED with extreme prejudice!

Thursday 25 September 2014

Alcohol research


The AA Story in Connecticut, Sapir, J, Connecticut Review on Alcoholism, Vol.8 (7), 25-28, 1957

No one can review the literature put out by Alcoholics Anonymous without being caught up in the sheer excitement of its wild fire growth both here and all over the world. Nothing else can so well make manifest the extent and desperation of the need this fellowship has been able to fill for so many.

Although the movement was born in 1935, and by 1941 had but 2,000 members, some of these belonged to pioneering groups in the Connecticut towns of Westport and Greenwich. Connecticut, thus, was in the movement almost from the beginning. When, in 1941, the Jack Alexander article in the Saturday Evening Post brought the A.A. message to millions of readers all over the country, those who wrote in from this state for help could be referred to groups within its borders. By the time Connecticut got its first clinics for the treatment of alcoholism into operation - in the late 1940's - A.A. groups were firmly established in New Haven, Hartford, Stamford, Bridgeport and other cities as well as in Westport and Greenwich, and a substantial number of native citizens of this state owed their very life, as they would themselves say, to the sobriety and active fellowship they found in the movement. Its success, together with the success of the pioneering work done by the Yale Plan Clinics, demonstrated to the Connecticut legislature that alcoholism could be arrested and alcoholics rehabilitated, and prepared the way for the granting of state support for a rehabilitation service, and the creation in 1945 of the Connecticut Commission on Alcoholism.”

Cheers

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)


PS For AA Minority Report 2013 click here

Wednesday 24 September 2014

Memorial: Bill D (He Kept the Faith), November, 1954, Bill W



Cheers

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)


PS For AA Minority Report 2013 click here

Tuesday 23 September 2014

The AA Member – Medications and Other Drugs (contd)



Extract: (our observations in red print)

Some alcoholics require medication.

We recognize that alcoholics are not immune to other diseases. Some of us have had to cope with depressions that can be suicidal; schizophrenia that sometimes requires hospitalization; bipolar disorder, and other mental and biological illnesses. Also among us are diabetics, epileptics, members with heart trouble, cancer, allergies, hypertension, and many other serious physical conditions.

Because of the difficulties that many alcoholics have with drugs, some [unqualified] members have taken the position that no one in A.A. should take any medication. While this position has undoubtedly prevented relapses for some, it has meant disaster for others [including death].

A.A. members and many of their physicians have described situations in which depressed patients have been told by A.A.s to throw away the pills, only to have depression return with all its difficulties, sometimes resulting in suicide. [see Dual Recovery AnonymousMedication and Recovery]. We have heard, too, from members with other conditions, including schizophrenia, bi-polar disorder, epilepsy and others requiring medication, that well-meaning [we would say stupid or dogma driven viz. cult members] A.A. friends [?] discourage them from taking any prescribed medication. Unfortunately, by following a layperson’s advice, the sufferers find that their conditions can return with all their previous intensity. On top of that, they feel guilty because they are convinced that “A.A. is against pills.”

It becomes clear that just as it is wrong to enable or support any alcoholic to become readdicted to any drug, it’s equally wrong to deprive any alcoholic of medication, which can alleviate or control other disabling physical and/or emotional problems.

Some A.A. members who have required medication share their experience:”

See above pamphlet for individual histories.

(our emphases)

Cheers

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)

To be continued

Monday 22 September 2014

Whatever happened to the AA Circle and Triangle? Lost it? Careless or stupid? Or maybe we just sold out!


Extracts from the aacultwatch forum (old)

Things probably were different in 1983. I don’t think there were so many self-serving writers and business people exploiting AA for their own selfish gains back then. They probably had better control over their instinctive drives for personal power, prestige, sex and money. AA held the Circle and Triangle symbol as a copyright trademark for AA World Services and AA Grapevine in 1983. Now it doesn’t in 2013. I guess there were enough old timers in 1983 who understood that their recovery included guardianship of the fellowship against self-serving business people from within and outside the fellowship; to preserve AA’s spiritual entity and therefore its unity for future generations; a responsibility and duty that was transferred to them and to each of one of us, as the new generation, to pass on to the next, by the founders in 1955. 
 
I wonder how many could have imagined in 1955 that the Circle and Triangle would no longer belong to the heart of AA just 38 years later in 1993? The symbol of AA’s identity relinquished from the Third Legacy perhaps for ever, to businesses exploiting it. In Alcoholics Anonymous Comes of Age Bill wrote:

Above us floats a banner on which is inscribed the new symbol for A.A., a circle enclosing a triangle. The circle stands for the whole world of A.A., and the triangle stands for A.A.’s Three Legacies of Recovery, Unity, and Service. Within our wonderful new world, we have found freedom from our fatal obsession. That we have chosen this particular symbol is perhaps no accident. The priests and seers of antiquity regarded the circle enclosing the triangle as a means of warding off the spirits of evil, and A.A.’s circle and triangle of Recovery, Unity and Service has certainly meant all of that and much more. (Bill W. Extract, Alcoholics Anonymous Comes of Age p 139)

Now this symbol belongs to the self-serving business people. No longer the symbol of Recovery Unity and Service once used by AA World Services and AA Grapevine, but the symbol of exploitation put up by any self-serving businessman who wishes to combine his business with AA. Sometimes it can be seen double on the internet, promoting RV (Recreational Vehicle) Parks (a.k.a. Caravan sites in UK): two circles with revolving triangles, (See post above) or embossed in the background of an RV website with the slogan “ Friends of Bill W. Always Welcome.” http://www.shadycornerrvpark.com/ No real friend of Bill W. would exploit his life’s work and the fellowship in such a way. The consequence of widespread exploitation of the AA trademark by AA members and outside organisations came to a head in 1993. AA lost a valuable asset and legacy which belonged not only to the whole worldwide fellowship, but also the generations yet to come.

USA/Canada General Service Conference 1993 marks a dark day in AA history which continues to cast a shadow over AA in 2013; a day when the fellowship in USA/Canada gave up guardianship and sent a message to all businesses that AA no longer has its protective circle; that AA no longer protects itself. All who were sober longer than a couple of years in 1993 in USA/Canada bore the responsibility to provide that protective circle and the majority didn’t. It seems not many in the fellowship are willing to take that responsibility in 2013.

 AA Grapevine reported this sad day, and perhaps a significant turning point in AA history, in December 1993: the legacy of a degeneration who cared little for AA as a whole and cared little for this and future generations:


AA Grapevine  December 1993, Vol. 50 No. 7:

Around AA
Whatever Happened to the Circle and Triangle?

Have you noticed that the circle and triangle symbol no longer appears at the top of the Grapevine's Table of Contents? The decision to remove it has its roots in recent events: actions of the 1993 General Service Conference, and subsequent actions by the Board of Trustees and the directors of AA World Services.

Adopted at the 20th Anniversary International Convention in St. Louis, the circle and triangle symbol was registered as an official AA mark in 1955, and has been widely used by various AA entities. By the mid-1980s, however, it had also begun to be used by outside organizations, such as novelty manufacturers, publishers, and occasionally treatment facilities. There was growing concern in the membership of AA about this situation. Some AA members were saying "we don't want our circle and triangle aligned with non-AA purposes." In keeping with the Sixth Tradition, that AA ". . .ought never endorse, finance or lend the AA name to any related facility or outside enterprise. . .", the AA World Services board began in 1986 to contact outside entities that were using the circle and triangle in an unauthorized manner, and to take action to prevent such use of the symbol. 

AAWS implemented this policy with restraint, and did not resort to legal remedies until all attempts at persuasion and conciliation had been unsuccessful. Of about 170 unauthorized users contacted, two suits were filed, and both were settled in the very early stages.

Denying the use of the symbol to outside entities raised other problems, however. By early 1990, it was clear that some AA members very much wanted to be able to obtain medallions with "our" circle and triangle. Both the AAWS and Grapevine Corporate boards began receiving requests to produce sobriety chips and medallions, and the matter was discussed at a joint meeting of the two boards in October I990. Their consensus was that production of tokens and medallions was unrelated to our primary purpose of carrying the AA message, and they suggested that the matter be given a thorough airing at the General Service Conference in order to seek a group conscience from the Fellowship.

At the 1992 Conference, there were presentations on why we should or should not produce medallions, and on the responsibility of AAWS to protect our trademarks and copyrights. The result was a Conference Advisory Action asking the General Service Board of trustees to undertake a feasibility study on the possible methods by which sobriety chips and medallions might be made available to the Fellowship, and to report its findings to an ad hoc committee of delegates.

The ad hoc committee met prior to the 1993 Conference, for several full days of discussion and deliberation, and in turn presented its report and recommendations on the Conference floor. After discussion, the Conference approved two of five recommendations: 1) that the use of sobriety chips/medallions is a matter of local autonomy and not one on which the Conference should record a definite position; and 2) that it is not appropriate for AA World Services or the Grapevine to produce or license the production of sobriety chips/medallions.

In substance, the ad hoc committee report said: "We began to see that the issue is 'What is best for AA as a whole' and not 'Does the Fellowship want AA sobriety chips/medallions?' or 'Can AA produce sobriety chips/medallions?' The committee did not focus on the use of sobriety chips/medallions--groups and individuals are free to use them if they wish. The question is whether it is best for AA as a whole to have a sobriety chip/medallion with the AA name on it authorized and/or issued by an AA entity.

"Some of the comments made during the Traditions part of the discussion included:

"The First Tradition --At the heart of the matter is unit. . ."

"The Second Tradition --Therein lies our solution. Where is our ultimate authority and where is our center? Is it internal or external--principles arising from a power greater than people, or values of the world? We must keep in mind that this is also the place where Bill W. points out that '. . .the good is sometimes the enemy of the best.'

"The Third Tradition --We were reminded that we are a self-correcting Fellowship. . . We felt that it is time for the whole Fellowship to get back to the simplicity and basis of our message.

"The Fourth Tradition makes it clear that we must separate the spiritual from the material. Keeping in mind that any action we take could affect AA as a whole. . .

"The fifth Tradition --The Big Book, Alcoholics Anonymous, The Twelve Steps and Twelve Traditions, AA Comes of Age, and 'The Twelve Concepts for World Service'--are the basic message, the core message of AA. Everything else is commentary on the basic message: all literature published, comments and sharing at meetings, even the Grapevine, is a sort of national commentary. Could chips/medallions be another form of commentary, another form of a pamphlet?

"The Sixth Tradition calls on us to 'divide the spiritual from the material.' Money is not a valid consideration in the question of whether or not litigation should be brought against misusers of our logo since AA is not in the business of making money. Similarly, the fear that others would be making money off our logo does not hurt the Fellowship on a fundamental level. How do we let go of this tiger we have by the tail?. . . We are at the tip of the iceberg of litigation right now. . . We went many, many years without lawsuits. To continue on this path threatens to keep our focus on money and property instead of allowing our view to widen spiritually.

"The Seventh Tradition reminds us 'Experience has often warned us that nothing can so surely destroy our spiritual heritage as futile disputes over property, money and authority.'

"The Eleventh Tradition --explicitly warns against the sensationalism that follows litigation. It is essentially negative attention and puts the Fellowship at risk.

"The Twelfth Tradition --Humility is the key, working from the internal to the external, from the smaller to the larger, from 'I' to 'We,' in a spirit of humility and trust. What course of action will keep us on the path of spirituality?. . .
"The committee spent a great length of time in the discussion of the Warranties. Warranty Five states:

"'Practically all societies and governments feel it necessary to inflict personal punishment upon individual members for violations of their beliefs, principles or laws. Because of its special situation, Alcoholics Anonymous finds this practice unnecessary. When we of AA fail to follow sound spiritual principles, alcohol cuts us down. Therefore, no humanly administered system of penalties is needed. This unique condition is an enormous advantage to us all, one on which we can fully rely and one which we should never abandon by a resort to the methods of personal attack and punishment. . . .

"'In case the AA name should be misapplied. . .it would of course be the duty of our General Service Conference to press for the discontinuance of such a practice--always short, however of public quarreling about the matter. . . . It was recognized that a public lawsuit is a public controversy, something in which our Tradition says we may not engage.'

"The chips/medallions and trademark questions were dealt with as separately as possible. The committee felt that a distinction could be drawn between the two in terms of their respective significance to AA. The trademark (logo) is the embodiment of the AA name. The significance of its shape is described in AA Comes of Age, page 139: 'The circle stands for the whole world of AA, and the triangle stands for AA's Three Legacies of Recovery, Unity, and Service. . . The priests and seers of antiquity regarded the circle enclosing the triangle as a means of warding off spirits of evil, and AA's circle and triangle of Recovery, Unity, and Service has certainly meant all of that to us and much more.'

"Medallions, on the other hand, are not universally considered an embodiment of the Fellowship as such. Many stories are told about the role that the coins play in an individual's continuing sobriety: the coins act as symbolic recognition of the length of sobriety. They are not the sobriety itself and any attempt to make medallions more than a symbol may lead perilously towards ego-inflation, self-glorification, rather than ego-deflation (see Tradition Twelve).

"The committee felt that the desire to protect the unique meaning of AA's symbol is at the foundation of litigation, as well as the fear of the trivialization of the mark. But despite the vehemence with which we feel 'ownership' of the symbol, we suspect that the belief that we (or anyone) can 'possess' the symbol is a fallacy.

 "It actually works against the foundation of the Steps that lead us to sobriety. Ownership necessarily involves control and to argue over that control through litigation takes the focus away from the fact that we are ultimately powerless. We can own the meaning of the symbol, and if someone uses die graphic, our meaning will not be diminished, as long as we keep the principles it represents in sight.

"The committee finally questioned the goals of litigation, what would actually he gained from a lawsuit. We suspect that the harm done internally as a result of litigation would be far worse than the harm others could do to our 'property" from the outside. At the base of this approach is the trust that is the foundation of AA. It is our trust that AA principles will work to protect our name, just as our trust in God is the foundation of our program and of our lives. Warranty Five says that we can '. . .confidently trust AA opinion, public opinion, and God Himself to take care of Alcoholics Anonymous. . . ."

"Concept Seven states '[The Conference] Charter itself is not a legal document. . . .it relies instead upon the force of tradition. . .for its final effectiveness.'

 "To us, the fear that the incorporation of the symbol by others outside the Fellowship would somehow detract from the significance of the symbol is really unfounded. No one outside the Fellowship can detract from AA's strength if we stick to the Steps, Traditions and Concepts, which unite us.

"The registered trademarks, service marks and logos are symbols of our spiritual Fellowship, Alcoholics Anonymous, and should be treated as such.

"The General Service Conference is a living entity. From the group conscience will eventually emerge an expression of the will of a loving Power greater than ourselves proven to be firmly linked to the Traditions and Warranties, keeping us safe for as long as we are needed."

The ad hoc committee report was debated on Tuesday and Thursday of Conference week, and the subject of chips and medallions came up again during a final sharing session on Friday. The chairperson of the AAWS Board made the following statement at that time: "The AAWS Board will immediately begin a thorough review of us policies regarding our marks, will do everything possible to avoid initialing litigation, and will prepare a revised policy statement to be ready for next year's Conference."

Immediately after the Conference, the General Service Board accepted AAWS's recommendation to discontinue protecting the circle and triangle symbol as one of AA's registered marks. And by early June, the trustees reached substantial unanimity in support of AAWS's statement that, to avoid the suggestion of association or affiliation with outside goods and services, AA World Services, Inc. would phase out the "official" or "legal" use of the circle and triangle.

If you're wondering how to identity Conference-approved literature in the future, it will carry the words "This is AA General Service Conference-approved literature." As pieces of literature are due for reprinting, the symbol will be deleted; and new materials will carry only the Conference-approved wording.

Like the Serenity Prayer and the slogans, which have never had official recognition, the circle and triangle will most likely continue to be used widely for many AA purposes. The difference from earlier practice is that its official use to denote Alcoholics Anonymous materials will be phased out.

(This material is adapted from the August-September issue of the GSO newsletter Box 4-5-9; portions of the ad hoc committee report are taken from the Final Report of the 1993 General Service Conference.)” http://da.aagrapevine.org/"

Comment; It would seem from the above that it's not only drunks who rationalise their stupidity! Come to think of it!  A drunk would have done a better job! It turns out we sold out for a few pieces of silver - or rather plastic!

Cheers

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)

PS To use “comment” system simply click on the relevant tab below this article and sign in. All comments go through a moderation stage

PPS For new aacultwatch forum see here. Have your say!

Sunday 21 September 2014

"Review of the effectiveness of treatment for alcohol problems"


Review of the effectiveness of treatment for alcohol problems, Raistrick D, Heather M and Godfrey C. National Treatment Agency for Substance Misuse (NHS), 2006

Extract (pp. 139-142):

12.4 Collective mutual aid

12.4.1 Alcoholics Anonymous

12.4.1.1 Context

In modern times, the first mutual aid group to be formed in the alcohol field was the Fellowship of Alcoholics Anonymous (AA), which was founded in 1935 in the USA when medical and scientific interest in alcohol problems was low. Since then, AA has been enormously successful in reaching alcohol misusers around the world and has helped many hundreds of thousands of people.

There are estimated to be two million active members of AA worldwide in nearly 99,000 groups in over 140 countries (Emrick, 2004), although the demographics of AA membership vary widely across different countries. AA have established a website in the UK: www.alcoholics-anonymous.org.uk.

It would be more accurate to describe AA as a way of life than a form of treatment. In the early days of AA, professional involvement was eschewed; later, links with the helping professions were more welcomed (Slattery et al., 2003). This topic will be returned to later.

From the treatment policy point of view, AA is an extremely cost-effective means of combating alcohol-related harm (Humphreys and Moos, 1996) and is entirely self-financing. From the individual’s point of view, it is highly accessible and offers help on a continuous, 24-hour basis. No formal treatment service can match AA for the continuity of support it offers to its new adherents.

Members of AA believe they suffer from a disease, which is present before they ever come into contact with alcohol and that results in a permanent inability to control drinking. The “disease of alcoholism” model espoused by AA is said to afflict a small minority of drinkers and cannot be cured, but only arrested by total and lifelong abstinence. Adherents believe that without such a commitment to abstinence, further drinking leads invariably to progressive deterioration, insanity or death.

The code of AA principles and practice finds expression in the Twelve Steps, supported by the Twelve Traditions (Alcoholics Anonymous World Services, 1980) (see figure 12a). The references to “a higher power” in these codes reveal the strong spiritual element in AA teaching.

A crucial feature of the AA recovery programme is the practice known as “12-Stepping” in which an established member takes responsibility for helping and advising a new recruit. This is regarded as essential to beginning the recovery of the new recruit and to maintaining the recovery of the older member. This activity is supported by regular meetings at which “recovering alcoholics” tell their personal stories and AA recruits are urged to attend these meetings almost every night at first and then on a regular basis for the rest of their lives.

In addition to its spiritual content, the social organisation of AA provides support for a new life without alcohol, together with a new self-concept and social identity. Further description and comment on AA can be found in McCrady and Delaney (1995) and Emrick (2004).

There are two organisations that provide help for families of alcohol misusers: Al-Anon for spouses and Alateen for teenage children.

12.4.2 Evidence

It has proved difficult to conduct research on the effectiveness of AA, mainly because of the anonymity upon which it properly insists and because of the
problems in forming randomised control groups.

The Fellowship of Alcoholics Anonymous claims a success rate of 65 per cent sobriety at one year or more (Alcoholics Anonymous, 1990), but this only applies to those who persevere with regular AA attendance [viz: “Of alcoholics who came to A.A. and really tried, 50 % got sober at once and remained that way; 25% sobered up after some relapses, and among the remainder, those who stayed on with A.A. showed improvement.” Alcoholics Anonymous, Foreword to Second Edition, p. xx]; as a general statement of outcome among all those who attend or are referred to AA, it must be regarded with caution.

Several studies have shown either that alcohol misusers who attend AA are more likely to recover than those who do not (Humphreys, Moos and Cohen, 1997; Ouimette, Moos and Finney, 1998) or that frequency of AA participation is positively correlated with good outcome (Connors, Tonigan and Miller, 2001). However, these studies are subject to the problem of selection bias; those who attend AA meetings, or do so more frequently, may be more motivated to solve their alcohol problem than others, while those who do not attend or drop out from AA may already have relapsed.

In the Mesa Grande (see page 44), Alcoholics Anonymous obtains a fairly high negative rating, indicating ineffectiveness. However, the studies on which this rating is based used court-referred alcohol misusers who had been mandated to attend for treatment. This is likely to underestimate the effectiveness of AA because:

Such individuals are poor prospects for success from any form of treatment [Note: consider implications for chit-system]
The involuntary nature of referral to a voluntary organisation like AA limits any conclusions that can be reached.

Kownacki and Shadish (1999) carried out a review and meta-analysis of 21 controlled studies of AA and residential treatment based on 12-Step principles, with a particular focus on their methodological quality. With regard to AA itself, there were three randomised trials and nine quasi-experimental (non-randomised) studies. They concluded:

Randomised studies yielded worse results for AA than non-randomised studies, but were biased by the selection of coerced participants
Attending conventional AA was no worse than no treatment or alternative treatment
Several components of AA seemed supported (recovering alcoholics as therapists, peer-led self-help therapy groups, teaching the 12-Step process, doing an “honest inventory”).

Although the only requirement for membership of AA is a desire to stop drinking, there are good reasons to believe it is helpful to particular kinds of individual. Of all those who initially attend AA or are referred to it by a professional worker, it is likely that only a small proportion will attend regularly (McCrady and Delaney, 1995) – the rest either attend on a spasmodic basis or drop out completely. Since those who attend regularly are likely to have a good outcome, it is important to know what kind of people they are.

In a meta-analytic review of the literature on AA, Emrick et al. (1993) found that those most likely to affiliate successfully:
Had a history of external supports to stop drinking
Were more likely to have experienced loss of control over drinking
Were more anxious about their drinking
Were obsessively involved with their drinking
Believed alcohol improved mental functioning.

It is important to note that these findings on successful AA affiliation were confined to US alcohol misusers.

Mankowski, Humphreys and Moos (2001) showed that greater involvement in 12-Step groups after discharge from formal treatment is related to the degree of compatibility between the alcohol misuser’s personal belief system and that of the mutual aid group. Tonigan, Miller and Schermer (2002) reported that atheists and agnostics were less likely to initiate and sustain AA attendance than spiritual and religious individuals and recommended that this be taken into account when encouraging AA participation.

In a survey of service users carried out in conjunction with the Scottish Health Technology Assessment Report (Slattery et al., 2003), it was found that most respondents had attended at least one meeting of AA. While all said they recognised that AA works well for many people, most felt it was not suitable for them. Those who found it beneficial, although in a minority, seemed to gain considerable support.

The results of this survey confirm the view that AA is not suited to all alcohol misusers. Some may be put off by the spiritual aspects of AA teaching and others may have difficulty in revealing the details of their personal lives to others. This argues for a range of mutual aid approaches to be made available.

There have been no controlled trials of the effectiveness of Al-Anon, but there is evidence that members show improvements in emotional adjustment through participation in the organisation (Humphreys, 2004).

Members of AA tend to do better if their spouses are affiliated to Al-Anon – however, affiliation to Al-Anon by the spouse does not appear to make alcohol misusers more likely to attend AA or to initiate formal treatment.

Hughes (1977) showed that, among teenage children of alcohol misusers, Alateen members had significantly fewer emotional problems that those in matched comparison groups.

12.4.3 Conclusions

AA appears to be effective for those alcohol misusers who are suited to it and who attend meetings regularly (IIA)
AA is a highly cost-effective means of reducing alcohol-related harm (II)
Not all alcohol misusers find the AA approach acceptable (II)
Coercive referral to AA is ineffective (IA) [see above]
Al-Anon and Alateen are effective in providing emotional support to families of AA members (IIB).”

(our emphases) (comments in red)

Cheers

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous … but no friends of the 'chit-system'!)


PS For AA Minority Report 2013 click here