There is quite a cottage industry of A.A. public relations hacks who proselytize for A.A., while hiding their membership in A.A. and pretending to just be neutral observers who cannot help but notice that "A.A. is wonderful for alcoholics..." They routinely plant pro-A.A. articles in magazines and journals. The following article is all too typical of the pseudo-science that the A.A. true believers are foisting on the public in the name of informing the public about effective treatment for alcoholism. This article pretends to show us how spirituality helps people to recover from excessive alcohol use, but all it really does is try to sell us a lot of Alcoholics Anonymous religious dogma, superstitions, and belief in A.A. "spirituality". In the following article, the black text is the original article, and the blue text is my comments and responses.
Title: Spirituality: The key to recovery from alcoholism.
SPIRITUALITY: THE KEY TO RECOVERY FROM ALCOHOLISMThe authors suggest that a condition of "negative spirituality" underlies and sustains alcoholism, and perhaps all addictions, and that a secure recovery is not possible unless a "spiritual awakening," such as is envisioned by Alcoholics Anonymous (AA), is achieved. A broadly applicable conceptual model of spirituality is inferred from the AA 12-Step rehabilitation program.
"Negative spirituality," huh? That's just as good as Scientology's
"negative energy" that infects MEST (Matter, Energy, Space-Time) and
screws up the world. Can demon-hunters or exorcists expel that negative spirituality?
How about Buffy the Vampire Slayer?
The authors are introducing A.A. cult beliefs very rapidly. We got three just in this
first paragraph. Besides the "negative spirituality", we also got the
belief that "a secure
recovery is not possible" without a "spiritual awakening."
William G. Wilson, one of the two co-founders of A.A., wrote this in the 'bible' of
Alcoholics Anonymous, the book also named Alcoholics Anonymous,, but popularly
called The Big Book:
Neither The American Medical Association nor The American
Psychiatric Association
recognizes the existence of any disease which only a spiritual
experience will conquer,
but Alcoholics Anonymous does.
And, like the screwy Christian Science religion,
A.A. says that only God or a "Higher Power"
can cure that "spiritual disease".
Then, the authors stated that "A broadly applicable
conceptual model of spirituality is inferred from the AA 12-Step
rehabilitation program."
That sentence is loaded with implications: Alcoholics Anonymous' "Big Book" states, "Rarely have we seen a person fail who has thoroughly followed our path. Those who do not recover are people who cannot or will not completely give themselves to this simple program... "(AA World Services, 1976, p. 58). The simple program referred to is AA's twelve steps. They represent the actions taken by the founders of AA to assure their own recovery from alcoholism. AA calls its twelve steps a program of "spiritual awakening" (AA World Services, 1976, p. 60).
Yes, the authors are true believers, all right. They are quoting the
Alcoholics Anonymous Big Book as an authoritive tome on alcoholism.
Few professionals really do that, at least not in public,
because it is so stupidly and bombastically
written, not to mention the fact that it's
totally insane.
And their choice of what to quote from the Big Book is a classic — it
is one of the worst paragraphs in the whole book:
The original A.A. members did not discover that the
Twelve Steps worked to save alcoholics,
or that no "easier, softer way" would work. Bill Wilson's original
A.A. group had a horrendous relapse rate, one that
Wilson lied about.
Like most typical cults, A.A. maintains that
its guru and founder, William Griffith ('Bill') Wilson,
and his teachings are without error and faultless,
and it's just everybody else in the world who is crazy and doesn't
understand, and who fails to live up to Bill's divinely-inspired
teachings and vast wisdom...
Lastly, the authors wrote:
Again, that is deceptive. The Twelve Steps are just a rewrite of
the recruiting and indoctrination
practices of Dr. Frank Buchman's Oxford Groups cult religion.
They are not the steps taken by the founders, because Bill Wilson didn't write
them until four years after he quit drinking. A.A. may call the steps "a
program of spiritual awakening", but that isn't what they really are.
The Twelve Steps are better described as
a program of religious conversion,
or a program of thought reform
(Dr. Robert J. Lifton's terminology)
— something that brainwashes people into true believers in some cause.
THE AA REHABILITATION PROGRAM Alcoholics Anonymous is both a fellowship and a rehabilitation program. The fellowship provides alcoholics with a supportive peer group. It is designed to instill in them the level of trust necessary to risk exposing their vulnerable selves to honest examination and correction of their dysfunctional behaviors and beliefs (Kurtz, 1979). And unfortunately, that trust, that cultish instant intimacy, makes it easy for sexual predators and other sick personalities to take advantage of newcomers. Since A.A. sponsors are not licensed or examined or held accountable for their actions in any way whatsoever, it's always open season on the newcomers. And since the newcomers who just quit drinking are still shaky, confused, cloudy-headed, and vulnerable, the predators who want fresh meat have an easy time of it. It is the twelve step program, not the fellowship, which is primarily responsible for the rehabilitation of the alcoholic (AA World Services, 1976). They claim to be quoting from the Big Book again. The Twelve Steps do the magic, huh, and not the fellowship? (Where? Which page says that? I have never found a page in the Big Book that says that.) Does that mean that we can all quit going to A.A. meetings now? This study investigated the spiritual implications of AA's twelve step program in an attempt to understand the value of spirituality in achieving a secure recovery from alcoholism. Calling this piece of preachy propaganda a "study" that "investigated" something is really stretching the English language. A better understanding of AA spirituality will aid those rehabilitation programs currently, but ineffectively, employing the twelve steps (Booth, 1984a; Kohn, 1984). It might also encourage recovering alcoholics to better use the AA program and thereby reduce their risk of relapse.
We are going to understand "AA spirituality", are we?
It would help a lot if they would define their terms, and tell us what they
think spirituality actually is, but they don't. They just give us a lot of
vague handwaving and then hope that we will go along with it.
The authors complain that some Twelve-Step-based rehabilitation programs
are not pushing the spirituality enough? How can that be?
That sounds like an internal church problem to me.
The authors claim that if alcoholics "better use the AA program",
it will "reduce their risk of relapse."
Where is the evidence for that?
Every good test
of A.A. has shown the opposite to be true.
Even a Trustee of Alcoholics Anonymous World Services, Inc.,
Professor George Vaillant of Harvard University,
proved that A.A.
treatment was totally ineffective and utterly useless, when he did an
8-year-long test of A.A. treatment, trying vainly to prove
that A.A. does work. He found that A.A. had no better a recovery
rate than the usual rate of spontaneous remission in alcoholics — which means that
A.A. didn't make anybody quit drinking —
but A.A. had a much higher death rate.
A.A. had the highest death rate of any treatment
program that he examined.
Several studies reveal the success of AA in promoting recovery from alcoholism (Bradley, 1988; Cook, 1988; Emerick, 1987; Hoffmann, Harrison & Belille, 1983; McLatchie and Lomp, 1988; Shereen, 1988; Thurstin, Alfano & Nerviano, 1987). Gorski and Miller, among the foremost of relapse prevention specialists, asserted, "Alcoholics Anonymous is the single most effective treatment for alcoholism" (1986, p. 52).
That's quite a list of references.
Lots of people agreeing that A.A. is perfect.
It is a shame that all of those studies and reports fall into
one of these categories:
The truth is, Alcoholics Anonymous is not an effective treatment
for alcoholism.
A.A. does not have a success rate.
A.A. has a horrendous failure rate,
one that is between 95 and 100 percent, depending on how you
count and measure things. Remember that the usual rate of
spontaneous remission
("self-healing") in alcoholics is approximately 5% per year.
All of the apparent success stories of A.A. can be explained as mere
spontaneous remission — those people would have quit and recovered
anyway, without the cult religion.
Nevertheless, relapse (the unintended abuse of alcohol during recovery) even while involved with AA is a distressingly common phenomenon (Blum, 1991). Stories of relapse are often reported by alcoholics who claim to have been active in AA at the time of relapse. Upon questioning, it is usually found that they avoided step-work meetings and attended mostly large "fellowship" meetings at which they could risk less self-exposure. Even for those who claim to have had a "sponsor" to shepherd them through AA and its twelve steps, little effort was made in this vital area.
For once, some A.A. true believers admit that their organization has a horrible
relapse rate. Eventually, 99% or more of the people leave or relapse, but most
A.A. enthusiasts are in denial, and claim that there is no problem.
"It's just weak, sinful people who fail the program.
There is nothing wrong with the program. RARELY HAVE we seen a person fail
who has thoroughly followed our path..."
And note how the authors play "blame the victim."
A.A. members supposedly relapsed because they didn't do the Steps properly,
"little effort was made in this vital area".
Note that there is no supporting reference or footnote pointing
to any study that found that
the relapsers didn't do the Steps properly.
But Bill Wilson did not say that "risking self-exposure"
in the right kind of meetings was necessary for recovery from alcoholism.
And the authors' definition of relapse is funny, too:
Relapse is "the unintended abuse of alcohol
during recovery".
Relapse Risk Factors in Alcoholism People want to feel good. People have very long memories about what made them feel good in the past. People tend to forget the negative details, and just remember the pleasure, and they want to feel good again... Khantzian and Mack (1989) referred to alcoholism as "a complex disorder in which problems of self-governance malignantly interact with other vulnerabilities such as disabilities in regulating feelings (i.e., affects) and self-care to cause biologically susceptible individuals and others to become hopelessly dependent on alcohol" (pp. 79-80). This definition recognizes the importance of personality and behavioral characteristics that are subject to change (AA World Services, 1976; Whitfield, 1984c) as well as biological and genetic factors for which effective treatment has not yet been developed (Blum, 1991; May, 1988).
That is quite a complex definition of alcoholism. What's the matter with,
"Alcoholism is habitually drinking far too much alcohol"?
They are splitting the blame for alcoholism between psychological
and biological/genetic
factors. No "spiritual illnesses" yet...
But we are getting plenty of other A.A. tenets: Alcoholics suffer from what AA calls "character defects" (AA World Services, 1976, p. 59). These are feelings, beliefs, and behaviors that dispose them to seek a sense of well-being by abusing alcohol. Such "character defects" are frequently reflective of a pathological narcissism, in which those addicted to alcohol behave as though they were the center of their universe or their own God (Kurtz, 1979). Alcoholics also possess an underlying codependency involving an alienation from their true selves and an inability to establish functional relationships with significant others in their lives (Whitfield, 1989). The combination of these biological and character risk factors makes alcoholism difficult to treat and makes the recovering alcoholic vulnerable to relapse.
The authors' wording here is both confusing and deceptive:
Alcoholics have "character defects" that are
"feelings, beliefs, and behaviors that dispose them to seek a
sense of well-being by abusing alcohol."
Why not just speak plain old English and say that they feel bad, and
are trying to feel good?
Some of those alcoholics are desperate to feel good,
and they make the mistake of
thinking that more alcohol will make them feel better...
The authors are pulling
another bait-and-switch stunt
on us here.
They just said, in the preceding paragraph, that alcoholism was caused by a genetic
factor. Now they are trying to tell us that alcoholism
is caused by "character defects" — i.e., immorality.
The authors use the term "character defects"
here to mean something like "psychological factors"
or "mental factors."
Here, character defects are "feelings, beliefs, and behaviors".
But Bill Wilson used the term "character defects"
in the Big Book as a synonym
for "sin". Bill didn't want to publicly use the words
"sin" or "confession"
because that would have created conflicts with the Catholic Church, and
he would have lost all of the Catholic members.
(And it would have revealed just how intensely religious this
cult really is.)
So instead of "confessing our sins" while doing Steps
4 and 5, we make a
list of all of our "defects of character" and
"moral shortcomings",
and then we "admit ... the exact nature of our wrongs."
But note that when Bill Wilson wrote his next book,
Twelve Steps and Twelve Traditions,
published in 1952, 13 years after the Big Book, Bill
reverted to using the words
"sin" and "confession" throughout the book:
The authors' use of the term "character defects" here is just
getting us accustomed to the term, before they pull a
psychological-to-moral bait-and-switch redefinition stunt on us.
By the time this article ends, "character defects" will
be more moral than psychological.
Then the authors continue their hateful assault on the
stereotypical alcoholic:
"Such 'character defects' are frequently reflective of
a pathological narcissism, in which those addicted to alcohol behave as
though they were the center of their universe or their own God."
That was Bill Wilson's standard attack on alcoholics.
Bill Wilson practiced psychological projection a lot. He would
declare that all other alcoholics had the very character faults that he
himself exemplified, like
delusions of grandeur or a
narcissistic personality disorder,
and having an arrogant world-class inflated ego.
Note that, in just one sentence, the authors went from saying that
alcoholics feel bad, and want to feel good, to declaring that
alcoholics
have "a pathological narcissism" and "behave as
though they were the center of their universe or their own God."
There is actually no connection between those two things.
It really is possible to feel bad, and want to feel good, without
having delusions of grandeur and thinking that one is God.
As I said before,
Bill Wilson was the alcoholic who best exemplified the A.A.
stereotypical "A.A. alcoholic".
Bill Wilson had a vicious self-contempt, and lots of hatred
and loathing of his own faults and shortcomings,
and he projected all of those faults onto an imaginary standard alcoholic.
Bill routinely
taught contempt and hatred of that stereotypical alcoholic.
Then Bill declared that
"We are all like
that."
The authors, like so many other 12-Step-indoctrinated drug and alcohol
counselors, are just following Bill's teachings here.
That statement,
"Alcoholics behave as though they are the center of their universe or
their own God"
is very standard, often-repeated Wilsonism.
And Wilson's next line was usually,
"And that sick ego thinks it is too big and too good to need God."
Those statements
are also part of the A.A. rationale for why the newcomer alcoholics'
egos, self-respect, and self-confidence have to be attacked and
destroyed.
Which, in turn, is part of why Alcoholics Anonymous is a harmful cult that
inflicts psychological damage on its members.
In the quote above, the authors also stated,
"Alcoholics also possess an underlying codependency"...
That is just another A.A. superstition —
just another phony non-existent disease like
"dry drunk".
Neither the American Medical Association nor the American Psychiatric Association
recognize the existence of
any such disease or condition
as "codependency",
but A.A. does.
SOME SPIRITUAL IMPLICATIONS OF ALCOHOLISM If alcoholism is to be effectively treated, the nature of well-being that is sought by the alcohol abuser, no less than by all human beings, must be understood. Well-being can be thought of as meeting one's basic needs. Some might say it means satisfying our wants. But, as many rich and "successful" people will agree, achieving our wants frequently results in a dissatisfying quest for more and more wants. If we were created for a positive purpose, and it makes little sense to think otherwise, satisfying our basic needs should produce a state of well-being.
That sure is a lot of fancy double-talk to avoid saying that people want to feel good,
and even need to feel good.
Note how the authors suggest that we should not get what we want, because we
will then only want more...
Funny how the authors slip a little religion in there, suggesting that "we
were created for a positive purpose",
and "it makes little sense to think otherwise."
Oh really?
So now these authors claim to know the Will and Purposes of Our Creator, God?
And it makes no sense to question their perceptions?
Isn't that just a little bit presumptuous?
What if God is an alien who
does not think in human terms at all?
Imagining that humans were created for a positive purpose is human logic, and might
not be God's way of thinking at all.
And, by the way, God definitely IS an
alien. He, She, or It is not native to the planet Earth, or even to the Milky Way Galaxy,
and probably not even to this Physical Universe... So it is very presumptuous and conceited to
imagine that God thinks like humans do.
It's the same old "God was created in Man's image" conceit.
If you want to just try to imagine how God
might think, try Kenneth Rexroth's line,
"Your words are inside out."
What, then, are our basic needs? Glasser (1984) seemed to be largely on target, with one exception, when he listed them as survival, belongingness, power, freedom, and fun (or more correctly, pleasure). The survival need, he said, is physical, but the concept could be broadened to include possession of the means to function effectively in the world. The other needs, he said, are psychological. In fact, with the exception of power, which seems culture-bound and compensatory, all the other needs seem to be spiritual in the broadest sense. It is highly likely that our Creator endowed us with these needs for our spiritual development. There they go again. More strange religious nonsense. Our "basic needs" are all "spiritual in the broadest sense"? The authors' idea of what the word "spiritual" means seems to change from one paragraph to the next. And this is some strange theology: our basic needs for belongingness, power, freedom, and pleasure help our spiritual development? How? Please define spiritual development. Most preachers say that the pursuit of pleasure hinders spiritual development. Therefore, no less than for the rest of us, the quest of the alcoholic is for spiritual well-being.
What incredible bull. The quest is for a pleasant buzz, to feel good.
The only people who are really on a quest for "spiritual
well-being" through chemicals are the users of LSD and other
psychedelics. Acid can sometimes, if you are lucky and prepared,
and in the right place at the right time, give you some very profound
spiritual experiences. Alcohol never does. In fact, it is only alcohol
withdrawal, not drinking, that comes even close. The hallucinations
of delirium tremens will get you a lot closer to a spiritual
state than alcohol ever will.
Of all the basic needs--survival, belongingness, freedom, and pleasure--the most spiritual is belongingness, which can be described as enjoyment of loving, accepting, and trusting relationships with one's self, other people, the world in all aspects of life experiences, life itself, and the God of one's understanding. These relationships seem to be the primary means of achieving well-being for alcoholics and for us all.
Oh? They never defined just what spirituality was, remember?
They hinted that we would better understand it, and then they didn't
define it. Now we are told that wanting to belong to a group and have
trusting relationships is
"spiritual". Not social or psychological?
This is ridiculous.
Of course it is social. And the drive to socialize is
one of the basic human instincts. We have few genuine instincts, but the urge to
socialize is one of them. We are intensely tribal animals. Solitary confinement is
torture for a human.
Fish swim in
schools, birds flock, horses herd, and so do cows, buffalo, antelope, gazelles, elephants,
and on and on. And monkeys and humans live together in tribes.
And a big part of our psychology
relates to our social relationships:
getting status in the tribe, competing with others of
our own sex for mates, cooperating with other tribe members
for our mutual survival,
trading favors... And our need to belong to the tribe is certainly intense.
Teenagers, in particular, really go bananas over social acceptance
and being one of the gang. To be rejected,
ostracized, and exiled from the tribe is often a fate worse than death.
To declare that our most "spiritual" basic need is
"belongingness"
is not just wrong, it is just plain stupid. The need for companionship is psychological,
and it's social,
but it isn't "spiritual". Again, the authors cannot seem to
figure out what the word "spirituality" really means.
Alcoholism is best understood and treated holistically (Wegscheider, 1981). It affects every aspect of the human condition. Abuse of alcohol damages a person physically, mentally, emotionally, socially, and spiritually.
Yes, that is the standard A.A. party line, "the patient
must be treated physically, mentally, and spiritually." And the best
"spiritual" treatment program always involves
sending the patient to
A.A. or N.A. meetings for the "spiritual benefits".
(I guess the second-best treatment
program would be some other cult religion, like The Church of Scientology,
which also claims that its courses and "auditing" of
members causes "spiritual" benefits.)
Note how the Steppers hijack the term "holistic healing"
and use it to mean,
"You also have to treat the 'spiritual' dimension of people by
sending them to A.A. meetings and making them do the Twelve Steps."
The central element in holistic healing is spirituality (Chandler, Holden, & Kolander, 1992; Witmer & Sweeney, 1992). Unfortunately for the alcoholic, it is the spiritual aspect of well-being that is usually overlooked or deemphasized in most treatment programs.
That is a very funny complaint to be making:
"the spiritual aspect of well-being
... is usually overlooked or deemphasized in most treatment programs."
Funny, considering that at least
90% of all of the treatment programs in the USA are based on the Twelve Steps.
(The National Treatment Center Study conducted by the University of Georgia
found that 93 percent of the more than 400 representative alcohol treatment
programs surveyed were based on the twelve steps of
AA.2)
So they should be very spiritual. What is the matter with all of the Alcoholics
Anonymous and Narcotics Anonymous members who run those treatment programs?
1996 Study:
2005 Study:
What are the authors really saying here? What are they campaigning for?
Do they want us to support a law that demands that all treatment programs
teach the Spirituality of the Twelve Steps? Are they really getting that
upset over the tiny percentage of treatment programs that are not based
on the Twelve Steps?
The reason appears to be both a lack of 'understanding of the role of spirituality in rehabilitation and a reluctance to become involved in what is presumed to be religion' (Booth, 1984a; Kohn, 1984). Excuse me, but we haven't even established that the A.A. and N.A. members who run the treatment programs are not shoving cult religion down the throats of the patients. They usually do that, you know. The Twelve-Step true believers work at counselling jobs in those treatment programs just so that they can convert patients into members of their Twelve-Step religion. So it is absurd to be looking for the cause of why the 12-Step counselors are not doing it. The result is an incomplete and relapse-prone recovery for the alcoholic.
That is some more standard A.A. cult dogma and fear mongering —
"phobia induction": Carl Jung observed of one of his patients, "his craving for alcohol was the equivalent, on a low level, of the spiritual thirst of our being for wholeness, expressed in medieval language: the union with God" (cited in Sikorsky, 1990, p. 14). Did he mean that spirituality is the same as what we today call religion? Probably not; for the more prominent thinkers of medieval times religion encompassed all aspects of life, both sacred and worldly (Moore, 1992). This broad view of spirituality is similar to that recognized by Booth (1984b) and Whitfield (1984a) as the essential but largely missing element in alcoholism treatment.
This is a bunch of ludicrous double-talk. The authors have no idea whether
Carl Jung was hair-splitting and
yammering the A.A. line,
"it's spiritual, not religious." They just wish he had.
And poor Carl was pretty addled in his old age: He praised the
spirituality of the Nazi movement, and allowed himself to be used
in radio programs that bragged about the spirituality of the Aryan
race and the racial purity programs, breeding tall, blond-haired,
blue-eyed Germans for Heinrich Himmler's SS... And Jung said that Jews and
women were inherently dishonest and spiritually inferior...
So it's hard to guess exactly what Carl Jung might have meant by
"spirituality."
Again, how can their much-vaunted "spirituality" be
"largely missing" from alcoholism treatment when A.A.
totally dominates and controls the alcoholism treatment field? How
can the authors possibly think they have something to complain about?
Spirituality is concerned with whomever or whatever is most important in a person's life (George, 1990).
They really do make some ridiculous statements, don't they?
Their description of "spirituality" is becoming less and less clear.
It seems to be everything to everybody:
Essentially, spirituality involves attitudes that are based on beliefs about our relationships with our self, with other human beings, with our world (including our physical and social environments), with life (as to its meaning and purpose), and ultimately, with God, a Higher Power, or "Universal Consciousness" (Whitfield, 1984a).
This description of "spirituality" is just a mixture of psychology
and religion. What is the difference between my "religious"
view and my "spiritual" view of my relationship with God?
The answer is: "There isn't any difference." There is no firewall
separating religion and spirituality. In A.A.,
it is all cult religion, period, in spite
of the constantly-repeated slogan about how
"It's spiritual, not
religious."
When you strip off the excess verbosity, the authors are saying,
"spirituality involves attitudes".
What is so spiritual about having an attitude?
If those beliefs were formed in circumstances of unconditional love, acceptance, and trust, we probably exhibit attitudes of unconditional love, acceptance, and trust in all of our relationships. Prezioso called this positive spirituality, which, he said, reflects, "a sense of gratitude and acceptance, a sense of connectedness with others and with a benevolent power greater than self. .. anchored in the belief that life has meaning and purpose and that, although imperfect, each of us is acceptable, lovable, and worthwhile" (1987, p. 239).
Meaning: if you weren't an abused child, you will have a better, more positive
attitude towards life in general. That is hardly a great discovery...
Prezioso may have called this "positive spirituality" but that doesn't make it so.
It isn't spirituality at all, it's just good psychology, and the proper,
loving way to raise children, giving them good attitudes about themselves, life,
and everything.
Note that the authors never used the word "childhood". They just
said,
"If those beliefs were formed in circumstances of unconditional
love..."
Well, early childhood is when all of our attitudes about life, the Universe, and
everything are formed. A child has formed his or her basic core personality by the
age of four. If you treat them good during those years, then they get a positive attitude
towards life and their relationships with other people, and they feel good about themselves
too. But if you abuse them and mistreat them during those years, then they come out
of those first four years bitter and angry, resentful and hateful, and have very negative
attitudes towards themselves and other people.
They become callous and
unfeeling, and cannot be compassionate or considerate of other people's feelings.
It is very difficult for them to even feel good.
And it is extremely difficult to change those feelings later.
It's just like baby birds imprinting the image of "mother".
The baby birds just think that the first big moving thing they see
after they hatch out is their mother, and they memorize the picture of it.
Once the baby birds imprint, it's impossible to change their minds. Some
researchers did a goofy experiment once: They fooled baby birds into thinking that
ping-pong balls were their mothers, because ping-pong balls were the first big moving
thing that the birds saw after they hatched out. And those poor birds spent the rest
of their lives pushing around ping-pong balls... Let us hope that we are not just as
blind about some of our imprinting.
When we experience positive spirituality, we tend to view ourselves as lovable, capable, and deserving. We allow others to enter and enrich our lives without feeling a need to manipulate, use, or abuse them. We find our world (job, school, community) to be a largely safe place wherein we are able to develop toward our full potential. Life has positive meaning and purpose, and many of us find a loving God who guides our lives, shares our joys, and sustains us when we are in pain or in need. When positive spirituality dominates our lives, we have no need to alter our moods with addictive substances or behaviors.
Again, meaning: if you weren't an abused child, you will have a better, more positive
attitude towards life in general.
The authors claim that many of us will find a loving God because we weren't
abused children? I suppose there is some truth to that. Those children are less
likely to believe that a hateful, malicious God runs the Universe. But that
isn't "spirituality", that's just somebody's opinion...
And it is true that when you feel good, you have less need to make yourself
feel good by using drugs or alcohol, but that isn't spirituality either.
That's just very simple logic, a truism. If you already feel good, then you
don't need to make yourself feel good.
The opposite is true for active alcoholics and sober but nonrecovering alcoholics referred to in AA as "dry drunks." Their lives are dominated by a negative spirituality (Prezioso, 1987). They are insecure, defensive, and lacking in self-esteem. They try to fill their unmet relationship needs by using and abusing others whom they fear and distrust. They see the world as unsafe and use that as justification for conning and manipulating their way through it. Life for them is not only devoid of positive purpose; to quote an often-heard comment, "Life sucks, and then you die." And the god, if any, of their understanding is either harsh and unforgiving or has no relevance to them.
Meaning: if you were an abused child, you will have a bad, negative
attitude towards life in general. That is hardly a great discovery...
And, like before, Prezioso calls this "negative spirituality",
but it still isn't "spirituality." It's just simple, every-day psychology.
According to the authors' logic, positive or negative "spirituality"
is basically the kind of mind-set or attitude towards life that
comes from being loved or abused as a child...
So what is the difference between the authors'
ideas of "spirituality" and a psychologist's concepts of "outlook on life"
or "attitude towards life"?
Apparently none.
It would appear that this idea of
"spirituality" is quite unnecessary, and can be replaced
with simple non-supernatural psychological terms.
But the term "a positive approach to life" doesn't
sound nearly as grandiose
and ego-pleasing as "positive spirituality", does it?
Apparently, the authors and also
a lot of A.A. members like to think that God really cares
whether they are in a good
mood or not... And they like to imagine that they are getting
closer to God by being
cheerful. — Now actually, there might be something to that.
I won't challenge that
attitude, because it has a ring of truth to it. You are
certainly distancing yourself
from God by being hateful. But isn't all of this yammering
about "spirituality"
just a big self-congratulatory ego trip? Isn't it just the
kind of egotism that Bill Wilson
and A.A. hate, or claim to hate, and insist must be destroyed?
And note how the authors slipped
the standard A.A. negative stereotype of
The Alcoholic into that paragraph:
"They see the world as unsafe and use that as justification for
conning and manipulating their way through it. Life for them is ...
devoid of positive purpose"...
How can you possibly be "sober but nonrecovering"
when alcohol was the thing that was killing you, and you aren't drinking it any more?
Also note how the authors managed to slip in that imaginary A.A.
bogeyman, the
"dry drunk" —
"sober but nonrecovering alcoholics
referred to in AA as 'dry drunks.'"
So the authors say:
"sober but nonrecovering
alcoholics, referred to in AA as 'dry drunks,' [have] lives ... dominated by
a negative spirituality..."
And some people still claim that Alcoholics Anonymous is
not an irrational cult religion...
Nevertheless, they seem to be constantly striving to realize the joys of positive spirituality, albeit through a substitute relationship with alcohol. They are trying to get a buzz on and feel good, you idiot. Unfortunately, their strivings are doomed to failure because the relationship with alcohol is unnatural and the problems alcohol abuse creates causes them increasing unhappiness.
Excuse me? This just gets better and better. The last time I heard that
"unnatural relationship" rap was in a denunciation of homosexuality by a rabid
right-wing hatemonger fundamentalist Christian minister... You know, one of those
TV evangelists...
So now alcoholics have "unnatural relationships" with their bottles?
So what position constitutes a "natural relationship" with a bottle?
And of course alcohol has bad side effects, and if you drink too much it
makes you feel sick. We figured that out for ourselves...
A NEW LOOK AT AA'S SPIRITUAL REHABILITATION MODEL (Excuse me, but what was the "old look"?) As the human personality develops from a preoccupation with the survival, passion, and power needs of its "lower self," toward the understanding, compassion, and unity strivings of its higher self (Whitfield, 1984a, 1984b), it also grows spiritually. This is really beautiful flowery talk. Please prove it. And please define "spiritual growth." To Bill Wilson, it meant brainwashing yourself into being a good A.A. cult member. What's your definition? As the lower self is transcended, life's relationships become more fulfilling. Without that transcendence, life's relationships are predominately troublesome.
More Bull. And it is all a big gnostic heresy: The belief that
survival, life, sex, and the
need for control over one's own life is all evil. Everything down here
on Earth is dirty and evil, and the domain of Satan, and the only goodness to be
found is in Heaven. — That's a gnostic heresy.
The authors treat the idea of "the lower self" the same way.
They claim that
"the human personality develops from a preoccupation with the
survival, passion, and power needs of its 'lower self'..."
The authors claim:
"As the lower self is transcended, life's relationships
become more fulfilling.
Without that transcendence, life's relationships are predominately
troublesome."
The authors leave us no elbow room in their absolute attitudes here. It seems that
all alcoholics are automatically evil and "preoccupied" with the bad, lower self.
It doesn't seem to matter how much or how little attention they pay to sex or survival...
They are preoccupied with the "survival, passion, and power needs"
of their "lower self" because the authors say they are, and only joining
the authors' religion and experiencing "spiritual growth" in
the Twelve-Step program will save them from sex and survival.
Maslow (1954) held that psychological illnesses occur when the attainment of the higher nature of the individual becomes blocked. For alcoholics, mainly because of attitudes of negative spirituality, relationships with self, others, the world, life, and God are unsatisfactory. Indeed, they are primary sources of stress, which initiate and prolong alcohol abuse.
Meaning, abused children are messed up in the head. We already knew that, and it doesn't take any vague superstitious concepts of "negative spirituality" to explain the phenomenon. Most alcoholics began drinking abusively in their teens.
Even the Big Book says:
Likewise, Bill Wilson didn't start drinking until he was in
his twenties, a young lieutenant in the Army on the eve of World
War One.1
And the Big Book also says:
And:
So much for the stereotyping statement that most alcoholics start drinking
abusively in their teen years.
From that point, alcohol became their method for coping with stress, and they apparently failed to develop much beyond the adolescent personality stage. The twelve step rehabilitation program of AA helps to complete that personality development process.
More total bull. People who began drinking heavily much later in life
do not need to relive their teenage years. And they are not stuck at
"the adolescent personality stage."
This is still just more of the same old stupid A.A. stereotype of
The Alcoholic.
The Twelve-Step "rehabilitation program" of AA helps to
make people into cult members, period. The Twelve Steps help to
destroy people's personalities.
The bible of Alcoholics Anonymous, the Big Book, even says
that explicitly:
The twelve step "rehabilitation program" of AA does not
help to complete any personality development process other than
brainwashing and cult conversion. The "new, free self"
that will be built is actually a slave, someone who is
"totally dependent"
on A.A. and its "Will of God." The authors will clearly
say that a little later. Bill Wilson repeatedly bragged that
his program
made people dependent upon Alcoholics Anonymous, that Alcoholics
Anonymous was just a substitute addiction.
Read on for the gory details.
It also instills attitudes of positive spirituality, which will allow recovering alcoholics to deal effectively with the stresses of life and bring about a fulfilling and even joyful recovery. The twelve step "rehabilitation" program of AA unfortunately helps to instill a nasty tendency to become neurotic, to engage in uncontrolled binge drinking, and sometimes even to commit suicide. It does so by promoting the growth of a healthy ego in a nurturing environment.
The Twelve Steps destroy egos, they don't nurture them.
The authors have written, even in this very article, that the purpose
of the Twelve Steps is to "deflate" the egos of new A.A.
recruits.
And if by a
"nurturing environment", they mean A.A. meetings,
they've got to be joking.
According to Khantzian and Mack, "The spiritual dimension of AA helps to move a person from a less mature, childish self-centeredness toward a more mature form of object love" (1989, p. 79). Essentially, the founders of AA understood that the transcendence of ego stimulates in the alcoholic a corresponding growth of positive spirituality.
The authors just really lay it on, don't they?
The process duplicates, in part, the early childhood and subsequent relationship influences intended to promote positive spiritual development in us all but which often fall short of the mark. This is insane. Note that none of this happy hype about what great things the Twelve Steps will do for you is even supported by a reference or a footnote. It's all just grandiose hand-waving and wild generalizations, unsupported by any facts. The authors are just repeating the grandiose, bombastic, delusional sermons of William G. Wilson. If the Twelve Steps really duplicate early childhood, then the unfortunate members whose early childhoods are being duplicated really were abused children, weren't they? Abused children with crazy fundamentalist cult religion preachers for parents... AA also serves as a kind of surrogate family to provide alcoholics with consistent unconditional love, trust, and acceptance, coupled with reality-testing and a respectful amount of direction and guidance.
Hint: They are a bunch of alcoholics with messed-up personalities,
remember?
They are incapable of unconditionally loving anyone.
The authors just told us that.
According to the authors, they are all full of "negative
spirituality."
Putting two dozen of them together in a room doesn't just
suddenly magically fix them,
so they will still be shoving all of their various "character
defects" and other negative mind games on each other.
There are far too many horror stories of
sexual predators and crazy
control freaks in those rooms.
Don't expect any "unconditional love, trust, and
acceptance" from them.
Again, read Rebecca Fransway's book, AA Horror Stories. Although AA exerts no pressure on alcoholics to change, it provides every encouragement and assistance necessary for them to do so if they are willing, open-minded, and capable of being honest with themselves and others.
Baloney. Of course there is pressure to change, lots of pressure.
Immense pressure. That's how the game works.
It is the authors of this propaganda who are not "capable
of being honest with themselves and others."
The Twelve Steps
Now the authors list the Twelve Steps. The true believers just love to reprint the Twelve Steps at every possible opportunity. One of the hallmarks of this A.A.-booster school of literature is that they find some excuse to reprint the Twelve Steps in their article. Sometimes, they even include The Twelve Traditions and the Serenity Prayer, too, just to make sure that we get The Message. (Step Twelve specifically commands members to "carry the message" to others, so that's what the authors are doing to us.) A listing of the twelve steps of Alcoholics Anonymous and their implications for ego-transcendence and positive spiritual development is found in the publication Twelve Steps and Twelve Traditions (AA World Services, 1952).
Yes, these authors are really hard-core true believers,
quoting "12x12". The book
Twelve Steps and Twelve Traditions is some
very dark hateful
sermons that Bill Wilson wrote 13 years after
he wrote the opening chapters of the Big Book. By then, Bill's
madness was complete, and he just raved hateful insane negative stuff
about alcoholics and human nature for
192 pages, while going through a bout of deep, crippling,
clinical depression that lasted for eleven years.
Most professional psychologists or drug and alcohol rehabilitation
counselors avoid quoting 12x12 in public, because it is
practically impossible to then declare that A.A. isn't a religion.
Words like "God, Higher Power, sin, guilt, blame, faults,
defects, pride, greed, lust, sex, anger, gluttony, envy, sloth,
moral shortcomings, defects of character, or confession" appear
on almost every page.
The steps are introduced as follows, accompanied by interpretations provided by the authors of this study.
Step 1. We admitted we were powerless over alcohol--that our lives had
become unmanageable.
Excuse me, but it doesn't say that at all. Step One said that we were powerless over alcohol,
and that our lives had become unmanageable.
It said nothing about us being self-centered.
Those lines that follow Step One are ostensibly quotes from
Twelve Steps and Twelve Traditions, but the line:
("Our sponsors" declared that,
but "our sponsors" were dead wrong.)
Those statements are
very revealing, because they show how Wilson and his followers will
twist things around, and
make the words mean whatever
they want them to mean.
Step One said nothing, absolutely nothing about
"a willful and
irresponsible ego is recognized as the root cause of the destructive use
of alcohol."
And Step One said nothing, absolutely nothing about
"dependence on self-confidence or willpower in its
treatment is seen as a 'total liability'."
Both of those statements are completely false.
The statement that dependence on self-confidence or willpower
is seen as a "total liability" is just laying the
groundwork for demanding that
you surrender your mind and your will to the cult and let someone
else order you around and do your thinking for you.
Likewise, "acceptance of being powerless" prepares
the ground for the eventual surrender to the cult, not for the
transcendance of ego, like the authors claim. Prof. Margaret Thaler Singer
listed
"Create a sense of powerlessness, covert fear, guilt,
and dependency"
as one of the
five essential conditions for successful brainwashing, and the constantly-parroted
statements that you are powerless over alcohol accomplish the 'powerlessness' part of
it. (And steps four through ten accomplish the guilt part — constantly listing
and confessing all of your sins.
And the 'covert fear' part is accomplished through
Phobia Induction
— constantly telling people that
they will relapse and die a horrible death if they don't "work the Steps", and
conform to the A.A. program, and do everything their sponsor says.
Likewise, new members are made dependent on A.A.
for everything from their self-respect to their self-confidence.)
According to the A.A. cult dogma, you can not, you absolutely
must not, depend on yourself and just quit drinking.
If you do, then you won't need them. Plus, you will set an
example they don't want the
beginners to see: sane, sober, cult-free, guilt-free, self-reliance.
Happy recovery without any cult religion, which is supposed to be impossible.
Wilson also wrote, on that page in "12x12",
That is a lie — a complete, total, deliberate, bare-faced lie — a lie intended to fool
people into thinking that they cannot live without the A.A. cult.
Most people who recover from alcoholism
do it alone, without any treatment program or support group or any
other cult religion "help".
The NIAAA's 2001-2002 National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related
Conditions interviewed over 43,000 people. Using the criteria for alcohol
dependence found in the DSM-IV, they found:
And the Harvard Medical School reported that
80% of all alcoholics who
successfully quit drinking for a year or more did it alone,
without any "treatment".
Doing it alone is the proven,
successful, way of quitting. It was Bill's "spiritual
treatment program"
that almost never succeeded
in curing alcoholics.
Half of the original Big Book authors relapsed and returned to drinking.
A.A. had, and still has, less than a one percent long-term success rate (above
normal spontaneous remission).
And Bill knew that when he wrote those words, because he had 16 years
of experience in failing to cure alcoholics by the
time that he wrote his second book, Twelve Steps and Twelve
Traditions, in 1951 to 1952. What Bill Wilson should have written is:
This step is bad, really bad. It teaches people that they cannot
take care of themselves, and just quit drinking. They are told
that it isn't their fault, that it's a disease, and that
they can't control it
(so don't even bother trying). It's a setup for failure,
and a setup for dependency on the cult. It is intellectual
suicide disguised as admission of having a drinking problem.
One of the A.A. slogans is:
"I pray to God every day that I never get the
idea that I can run my own life."
The truth is, self-confidence and will power are good things,
necessary strengths, and vital
tools in the battle to recover. You won't be able to resist
temptation without will power. Self-confidence helps to keep
you stable, and keep you from despairing, or getting depressed,
or freaking out. Those 12-Steppers have it all backwards.
No wonder they have nearly a 100% failure rate.
Step 2. Came to believe that a Power greater than ourselves could restore
us to sanity.
I'm not insane, so I don't need an invisible Higher Power or spirit or God to
restore me to sanity. I really would be insane if I came to
believe that I was insane and needed some ghost or spirit to
fix my brain. (Such a bizarre delusion is characteristic of schizophrenia.)
And I will eventually become pretty neurotic if I
come to believe that I can't trust my own thinking, because
I'm insane. That routine is illogical and self-contradictory:
If I'm really that insane, then how can I possibly be
so clear and correct in diagnosing my insanity?
This is religion, not a quit-drinking program. And it's crazy
religion at that. It is also a lot of unproven and disproven
dogma, like:
Again, it is NOT a matter of believing in a God; it's a matter of
believing in the deluded ravings of
a lunatic
— specifically, Bill Wilson.
And it's a matter of surrendering to a cult religion.
Step 3. Made a decision to turn our will and our lives over to
the care of God as we understood Him.
More grandiose bull. Very very few people get to transcend
the ego,
and it is usually the culmination of many years of study and practice.
Sometimes, an entire lifetime of study and practice.
Declaring that you will quit drinking and transcend the ego
instead is just as
stupid as declaring that you are going to quit drinking and
become a world-class
concert violinist instead. Oh, and you are going to do it in
just one year, too,
even though you have never played a note before in your whole life.
Actually, here is where you are supposed to surrender to the cult.
You turn your will and your life over to the control of your
sponsor and other old-timers in the group while pretending
that you are surrendering to God.
Step 4. Made a searching and fearless moral inventory of
ourselves.
No, personal assets, strengths, and positive qualities are
never counted.
Only bad things, like "character defects",
"moral shortcomings" and "resentments" are counted.
The goal is to make you feel guilty, inadequate, inferior,
powerless, hopeless, and depressed, so that you can be more
easily controlled by others.
Besides, alcoholics have a "disease", don't they?
They should be getting a searching and fearless
medical examination, not a moral inventory.
Step 5. Admitted to God, to ourselves, and to another human
being the exact nature of our wrongs.
See, you confess "the exact nature of your wrongs" here,
not your assets and good qualities. The goal is to induce guilt and self-doubt.
They say that
"The ego shrinks as its defenses are overcome: honesty
increases self-esteem."
No, actually, self-respect and self-esteem shrink as you
wallow in guilt, self-rating, and self-condemnation.
The authors shove some strange logic on us. The discussion above
talked at length — albeit indirectly — about how child abuse and
bad childhoods cause "negative spirituality" and
"character defects", and now we are being told that our
character defects are all our own fault, so we will "accept
and acknowledge the responsibility."
How is it our own fault if we were abused children?
Now there is nothing wrong with doing an honest self-assessment and
figuring out who you really are, and maybe whom you would like to
become.
I recommend it, in fact. But A.A. twists this
all around, and won't let you talk about your good qualities.
It is really just a very ordinary cult guilt-induction
process, disguised as honesty and self-improvement.
This is actually a bait-and-switch stunt. In the beginning, they
tell newcomers that they have a disease, a very dangerous,
progressive, usually-fatal disease that is something like an allergy to alcohol,
and that they are powerless over it, and that it isn't their
fault. So they don't need to feel guilty about being alcoholics.
But then they pull a medical-to-moral morph, and demand that the newcomers
list all of their sins, everything they ever did wrong in their
entire lives,
all of their defects of character and moral shortcomings,
and wallow in guilt and confess it all, confessing
the exact nature of their wrongs,
sometimes on their knees
in front of their sponsors.
A.A. won't use the "disease" word again until they are trying
to hoodwink another newcomer into joining. From here on out, you are guilty of
everything.
Steps 6 and 7. Were entirely ready to have God remove all those defects of
character, and humbly asked Him to remove our shortcomings.
I am not just ready, I am downright eager for God to take away all of my defects and shortcomings.
I want to look like Robert Redford, sing like Neil Diamond, and play the guitar
like Jerry Garcia and Eric Clapton. So get busy, God.
You've really got Your work cut out for You this time...
Excuse me again, but increased
"Willingness to depend on God" does not mean
"the lessening influence of ego."
Your ego is your concept of who and what you are.
Your ego doesn't stop you from believing in God.
Perhaps A.A. and the authors are trying to push a different
concept here, one of egotism, one of an inflated,
strutting-peacock egotism:
Plenty of religions will tell you that
"Willingness to Depend on God"
is not spiritual growth,
it is superstitious nonsense
and infantile narcissism.
God is not Santa Claus, and God is not a Genie who grants three wishes
if you rub His lamp.
You should learn to depend on yourself, and not expect
God to be constantly pulling puppet strings and doing favors for you
and answering your prayers.
Very few religions believe in a God Who micro-manages the world
and grants everybody's wishes.
It is bad manners and bad theology to
demand miracles of
God —
"The Lord helps those who help themselves."
But if you learn to depend on yourself, you won't need
Alcoholics Anonymous. You won't be addicted to A.A., and A.A. says that's
really bad.
"Willingness to depend on God"
really means
willingness to depend on the Alcoholics Anonymous cult,
and willingness to surrender
one's independence to the cult. That's the A.A. idea of holiness.
Also note the progressive change in terminology that Wilson pulled in steps 4 through
7. In step 4, we were theoretically supposed to do an honest inventory, listing both good and
bad things about ourselves.
But in step 5, we "admitted our wrongs", only. Then, in step 6,
those wrongs were renamed to "defects of character", and in step 7 they were
called our moral "shortcomings". Labeling parts of ourselves as defective — so
defective that only God can remove the defects — is good for
instilling feelings of self-doubt and guilt, but that is not good for recovery.
Steps 8 and 9. Made a list of all persons we had harmed and became willing
to make amends to them all, and made direct amends to such people wherever
possible, except when to do so would injure them or others.
More baloney:
"Positive spiritual growth is tested..."
Nobody has even established that the Twelve Steps have a
positive influence on people's
minds or spirituality, and yet the authors foist
"positive spiritual growth"
on us as a given.
(That's the propaganda stunt called
petitio
principii —
"assume facts not in evidence".)
If anything is really being tested here,
it is the degree of successful
cult indoctrination and conversion to cultish behavior.
There is nothing wrong with making amends, where it can be done.
And making amends reduces guilt and paranoia, and may increase
self-respect.
But to claim that it
"erodes egocentricity and constructs
positive spiritual connections with others"
is pretty far-fetched.
It is just more of the A.A. religious hype, and voodoo medicine.
What's the difference between a
"positive spiritual connection"
and a
"positive social connection"?
It looks like the authors
are making Bill
Wilson's standard mistake: confusing "spiritual" things
with "psychological" or "emotional" things.
The authors are also making the mistake of using Mr. Wilson's bombastic,
grandiose descriptions of everything.
Rather than accurately saying that we are merely "building
positive social relationships", the authors
like to brag that we are
"constructing positive spiritual connections".
Step 10. Continued to take personal inventory and when we were wrong
promptly admitted it.
This is "Repeat Steps 4 through 9, in an infinite loop." You must continue to criticize yourself and denigrate yourself, forever. Note that it doesn't say anything about when you are right. You dwell on when you are wrong. And they call that neurotic behavior self-improvement. No wonder members relapse.
Step 11. Sought through prayer and meditation to improve our
conscious contact with God as we understood Him, praying only for
the knowledge of
His will for us and the power to carry that out.
Who says that God has a will for us? Maybe God just wants us
to be free, and go play outside in the sunshine, like all of the other wildlife.
How much did Jesus say that the lilies of the field toil?
Step Eleven is where we get into the
Buchmanite occult practice of
"Receiving Guidance".
We hold a séance, and, essentially,
"channel" God.
We just sit quietly, and listen, and wait for God to deliver messages to us,
our "Guidance",
our orders for the day from the big Dictator in the sky.
Then we go do whatever the voices in our head tell us to do.
No joke. Really.
We are supposed to spend the rest of our lives "Seeking and Doing
the Will of God", as the practice was taught to Bill Wilson by
the Hitler-praising
fascist minister Dr. Frank Buchman and his disciples.
That's why Alcoholics Anonymous is a cult religion, not a quit-drinking program.
Watch out.
They really do mean what they are saying here.
They are like vampires and were-wolves —
those lunatics really do intend to
B.I.T.E. you and make you one of them.
They really do mean "total dependence".
They really do believe that
they hear the Voice
of God in their heads,
and that God is telling them what to do, all day, every day.
I'm not exaggerating. This really is a crazy cult.
Step 12. Having had a spiritual awakening as the result of these
steps, we tried to carry this message to alcoholics, and to practice
these principles in all our affairs.
Having driven ourselves totally insane and having become
completely delusional, irrational, and superstitious, we now
promise to suck others into our cult and make them
just as crazy as we are.
We promise to be powerless, guilt-ridden, irrational and
superstitious in all of our affairs.
They claim that
"Ego-transcendent spirituality is practiced in
all relationships."
Never mind that there is, for all practical purposes, no such thing.
Oh, I do believe that a few rare saints do end up in a state something
like that, but they don't get there by drinking too much alcohol,
or by doing Bill Wilson's Twelve Steps.
Again, someone is foisting a load of bull on us, and calling it
"Spirituality."
Then they go on to say that the A.A. member cannot ever leave the
cult, and must continue his self-destructive Twelve-Step behavior
forever.
He must maintain a life-long addiction to Alcoholics Anonymous.
They say,
"spiritually negative patterns remain that can still
act as relapse triggers."
That is exactly like Scientology, which says that you have
"engrams", which are memories of past injuries, and those
engrams make you insane.
You must buy lots and lots of "auditing", to "process
your engrams", to clear them out of your head, so you can regain
your sanity.
But you never seem to be able to clear all of those engrams
out of there, so you can't ever leave Scientology, or quit paying them
money...
Actually, the
"You Can't
Ever Leave" rule is totally typical of cults.
It is one of the
most important defining characteristics of a cult.
Finally, note what was not said in the Twelve Steps:
Why don't the 12 steps describe
the process of quitting drinking for us, rather than the process of
confessing our sins? Why aren't the Twelve Steps a formula for
quitting drinking and staying quit?
Because that isn't
what A.A. is really all about:
But the only way that they want to "serve" other people
is to convert them to the A.A. religion. A.A. intends to perform no other
services for people, because:
So don't do anything to help alcoholics, other than try to convert
them to the Twelve-Step Religion, and call that "helping others
selflessly."
Now the authors just rehash the baloney that they shoved on us earlier, telling us the same falsehoods all over again: As recovering alcoholics "work the steps" of the AA program, guided by their sponsors in the supportive family environment, they begin to develop positive spirituality. This is reflected in blossoming attitudes of unconditional love, acceptance, and trust in relationships with themselves, others, the world, life, and the God of their understanding. They come to believe that they are fundamentally okay even if their behaviors sometimes are not. They begin to love, accept, and trust themselves.
This is just impossibly Pollyanna-ish.
Everything is just so wonderful.
Doesn't it just make you feel
incredibly lucky to be
an alcoholic? Why, without the A.A. program, we could never have
achieved so much Heaven on Earth.
That is, of course, completely untrue.
People go crazy as they "work the steps"; they don't enjoy
"blossoming attitudes of
unconditional love,
acceptance, and trust".
I'm not going to continue to repeat myself, like the authors here will continue to do.
Suffice it to say that we've been over all of this before.
Feeling more secure in themselves, they find the confidence to risk reaching out to others. They find that many other AA members are worthy of their trust and friendship and need not be manipulated to provide them with satisfying personal relationships. They come to believe that other human beings are fundamentally okay even if their behaviors sometimes are not. They begin to experience loving, accepting, and trusting relationships with others.
Pollyanna strikes again. As they see others in AA succeeding in the world in ways that are satisfying to them, even if not necessarily valued by society at large, and as they find that they too are beginning to fulfill their potential for personal development, they come to believe that the world (nature, community, work, school) is generally a safe place for them to enjoy life and become all that they are capable of becoming or wish to become. Accordingly, they come to love, accept, and trust the world.
What does this fancy double-talk mean? "A.A.
members succeed in the world, in ways that are satisfying to them,
but in ways not valued by society at large"? Oops!
Just what "not valued" ways is A.A. pushing?
Being an unsold artist, or being a low-paid janitor for the rest of
your life,
or wasting your entire life going to A.A. meetings?
Or is it some really dark and evil stuff? As they begin to live life through satisfying relationships with themselves, with others, and with the world, they come to believe that life is okay. They no longer see it as a purely biological happenstance or some kind of cruel joke, but rather as a condition that has profound meaning and purpose for them. They come to love, accept, and trust life. For most members of AA, it is inconceivable that such life is not ordered and supported by a loving God. Accordingly, they come to love, accept, and trust God.
So they experience religious conversion, and embrace A.A. theology.
Those who achieve this level of spiritual development show the greatest happiness in recovery and seem to have the greatest sobriety. They seem to have a special presence about them, a kind of light in their eyes that draws newly recovering alcoholics to them like a magnet. They are the role models for all who are serious about their recovery. The most effective sponsors come from their ranks. They inspire all who are resolutely working the steps as well as those who have newly entered AA and have not yet committed themselves to its program.
This is really delusions of grandeur. They all become like unto
reincarnations of Jesus Christ. They are all living saints, because
they have experienced religious conversion through Bill Wilson's
Twelve Steps.
Too bad this stuff doesn't really work. It would be wonderful if it
did. We could force everybody through the program, and force everybody
to become a saint. But, alas, most of the old Twelve-Steppers just
finally flip out and relapse and die drunk. Twelve-Steppers are like
time bombs, most of them will go off eventually. Really old old-timers
are as rare as hen's teeth. Not one person in a thousand makes it
in Alcoholics Anonymous for twenty years.
My doctor recently told me that late-stage alcoholism has the same
fatality rate as cancer: fifty percent. Consider that Alcoholics
Anonymous is THE leading alcoholism "treatment" program
in the country, dominating 85% to 93% of all of the treatment facilities in the USA.
So A.A.-member counselors and
therapists give them "12-Step treatment",
and then they die. That's the sad reality.
Unfortunately, many of the latter will find AA's spiritual focus a threat to the sick ego that is ruling their lives and will stop going to the meetings. Or maybe they will come to their senses and decide that cult religion is not really their cup of tea. They may continue to destroy themselves through alcohol abuse, or they may find other solutions that are less ego threatening but probably also less spiritually satisfying.
Yes, they may continue to destroy themselves through alcohol abuse,
or they may quit drinking.
They might quit alone, as a successful do-it-yourself
project, or they may go to some secular group, like SMART, WFS,
MFS, or SOS.
Admittedly, those secular meetings
won't give you the same smug, sanctimonious, conceited feelings, or tell
you that you are one of
the chosen children of God,
busy seeking and
doing the will of God.
You won't get any of those extreme ego trips out of the secular groups.
In comparison to A.A., secular meetings may seem downright boring, and definitely
not so "spiritually satisfying" to a grandiose ego.
A secure and joyful recovery will likely elude them until they reach out in desperation and surrender their will to the spiritual renewal inherent in the program of Alcoholics Anonymous. Once they do, they will no longer need mood-altering chemicals to feel good about their lives.
Yes, usually, people won't surrender to a mind-controlling cult until they
hit bottom and
are desperately trying to save their own lives. Then they behave like
drowning men grabbing at any straw, seeking something to hold onto.
They will do anything to save their lives,
even surrender their minds and their wills to a crazy cult religion.
And the claim that "they will
no longer need mood-altering chemicals to feel good" is also false.
A.A. members relapse all of the time.
The authors of this very article began by saying that, loud and clear.
And then the authors simply refused to admit that 85% to 93% of all
treatment programs in the USA are based on the Twelve Steps,
so
it is the allegedly "spiritual" Twelve-Step programs
that are failing constantly.
So, apparently, the A.A. members DO need
mood-altering chemicals to feel good.
RECOMMENDATIONS Alcoholism is a psychological illness (American Psychiatric Association, 1987). Observation of alcoholics and the process of alcoholism suggests that this illness is essentially cognitive (what AA members call "stinking thinking"), behavioral (habitual and dysfunctional actions), and spiritual (relationship-centered) in nature.
Now the authors carefully tap-dance around the A.A. "spiritual illness" definition
of alcoholism.
They deliberately misquote The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders,
Third Edition Revised, 1987 (DSM-III-R),
which called Alcohol Dependency and
Alcohol Abuse mental disorders.
The American Psychiatric Association did not use
the word "alcoholism",
or recognize it as a disease, anywhere in that book.
And the A.P.A. did not even hint that alcoholism might be a
"spiritual disease."
One of the two authors of this so-called "study" is
the chairman of the Department of Psychology at Central Connecticut
State University, so he should know how to read and correctly quote
the bible of the American Psychiatric Association. So why doesn't he?
Then the authors give us another totally unsubstantiated report, claiming that
"Observation of alcoholics ... suggests that this illness is
essentially cognitive, behavioral, and spiritual."
Who observed what? When? What facts suggested anything?
It certainly wasn't the American Psychiatric Association that
"observed" or "suggested" something, like that
deceptive misquote tries to fool us into believing.
No real studies or scientific observations have suggested that the
"disease" of "alcoholism" is spiritual in nature,
or that there even is a "disease" called alcoholism,
or that there is such a thing as a "spiritual disease".
That is all simply part of A.A.'s religious dogma, a superstitious belief that
Bill Wilson wrote in the Big Book (page 64), and which is
accepted as unquestionable fact by all of the true believers of the Alcoholics
Anonymous cult.
It could be argued that a resolution of the spiritual problem would ultimately resolve the other two. But any attempt to achieve or influence wellness in the short run must involve all three components. Most treatment programs focus heavily on cognitive and behavioral change and pay little more than lip service to the spiritual component. Recovery is thus jeopardized. The rehabilitation program of Alcoholics Anonymous incorporates all three components, assuring recovery if its "simple" (not necessarily easy) program is thoroughly followed (AA World Services, 1976).
Now the authors are really feeding us the religion and voodoo medicine.
We must, through non-logical, irrational, magical practices —
specifically Bill Wilson's Twelve Steps — fix the
"spiritual" component of our "illness"
if we really wish to recover. The authors claim that
"Most treatment programs focus heavily on cognitive and
behavioral change and pay little more than lip service to the spiritual
component."
That is really a strange accusation, considering that
93% of all of the alcoholism
treatment programs in the USA are based on the Twelve Steps,
and are run by Twelve-Step true believers.
From which planet do the authors get the idea that
"Most treatment programs focus heavily on cognitive and
behavioral change and pay little more than lip service to the
spiritual component"?
Then the authors claim that A.A.
'assures recovery if its "simple" (not necessarily easy)
program is thoroughly followed',
and they have the gall to cite the Alcoholics Anonymous Big Book — "AA
World Services, 1976" — as "proof" that
the Steps work.
That's a tautology. They cite the cult's own book as
"proof" that the organization is good.
They say that the 12-Step program works great because the founder
William Wilson wrote some grandiose lies in the Big Book where he
bragged that the 12-Step routine worked great
(which it didn't).
And, one more time, they plant that little hint of
"blame
the victim for the failures": they say that the program is
"simple, but not necessarily easy to thoroughly follow."
Alcoholics Anonymous provides alcoholics with both a fellowship and a program of rehabilitation. The fellowship supports the program by creating a safe and supportive environment that allows for building the trust necessary to work the program and overcome negative spirituality. We have gone over all of this before. The 12-Step program is cult religion, not rehabilitation. A room that is frequented by sexual predators, neurotic power-trippers, child pornographers, and crazy cult true-believers is not "safe." There is no such thing as this imaginary hocus-pocus "negative spirituality" disorder. Contrary to the belief of many, it is not a program of conversion to religion, although a religious conversion is probably unavoidable as one becomes positively spiritual.
Don't you just love the double-talk? They claim that conversion to
their religion is not the goal. It will just accidentally
"probably unavoidably" happen if you
"work the Twelve Steps" properly.
Religious conversion is of course the goal of the A.A. program, and Bill
Wilson said so repeatedly:
So, the real goal, and the real effect, of the Twelve-Step program is to get everyone to
"love God and call Him by name."
And still, the authors of this article actually have the gall to lie to us
and say that religious conversion is not the goal of the Alcoholics Anonymous program
"...although a religious conversion is probably unavoidable..."
It is, rather, a sophisticated process of rehabilitative personality development. The twelve steps are designed to confront a diseased ego and promote its transcendence through creation and maintenance of positive spirituality, shown by loving, accepting, and trusting relationships with the self, others, the world, life, and ultimately, with God, as one understands God.
It is a sophisticated process of CULT
personality development, one that resembles
the Red Chinese brainwashing
used during the Korean War. The goal is to destroy your old ego, and give
you a new cult-member personality, and turn you into a true-believer
cult member:
They want to create more members who feel completely justified in
practicing
deceptive
recruiting, and who feel comfortable with lying to other people
whenever they think it will further their cultish goals, just like
the authors of this article have repeatedly done to us
(in
the DSM-III-R quote above, and in the
"no religious conversion" statement, just for starters).
They want to create more cult members who think that
addiction to cult religion
is "freedom".
By the way, there is no such thing as a "diseased ego".
The authors wrote: The alcoholic personality is grounded in a destructive negative spirituality.
Yeh, he drinks with Darth Vader, in a bar called The Dark Side.
And I'll bet he has cooties, too.
Actually, they are again trying to foist that stereotype of The
Alcoholic on us.
The truth is, some people who drink too much have very negative
outlooks on life, very negative personalities. And some don't. Some
are actually very cheerful and happy when drunk.
Some are mentally ill,
like Bill Wilson was,
and some aren't. Some have other problems,
serious medical or psychiatric problems, things that they have been
trying to fix by self-medicating with drugs or alcohol.
And some people don't have those problems.
Some alcoholics are criminals,
like Bill Wilson was,
and some aren't.
Some alcoholics are full of bitterness, anger, resentment, and hatred,
like Bill Wilson was, and some are not.
Some alcoholics are in pain, and are just trying to kill their pain.
And some aren't.
Simplistic stereotypes just do not work. People are all different,
and a one-size-fits-all treatment program is very bad medicine.
And the phrase "destructive negative spirituality" is just
some more undefined psycho-babble.
The AA program reverses that negative spirituality and provides the conditions necessary for a higher level of personality development to help recovering alcoholics satisfy their basic needs without alcohol and achieve a sense of well-being in their lives. If that development ultimately includes a joyful dependence on God, it seems far preferable to a destructive dependence on alcohol.
More cult propaganda:
"The AA program reverses that negative spirituality..."
That sounds like some really neat technology. Is it patented? It
sounds a lot like the innermost secrets of The Church of Scientology,
"LRH tech"...
Or Star Trek:
And once again, the authors rationalize the resulting religious
conversion that this "spiritual, not religious" program
isn't supposed to cause.
"If that development ultimately includes a joyful dependence
on God, it seems far preferable to a destructive dependence on
alcohol."
They claim that addiction to cult religion is superior to addiction
to drinking. That is really debateable, actually.
Addiction to alcohol is really bad, horrible, a genuine nightmare,
but cult religions are an evil cancer too.
And what about the suicides that A.A. and the Twelve Steps have caused?
Those people are not better off.
What about the people who died because their sponsors ordered them to
quit taking their medications?
The spiritual component essential to rehabilitation continues to be misunderstood and misapplied.
No surprise there, considering that they still haven't even defined spirituality.
The authors do not seem to understand spirituality themselves.
They just implied that negative emotions are negative spirituality,
and that belief in a Higher Power and having a positive slant on life
is positive spirituality.
They stated that
"Spirituality is concerned with whomever or whatever is most important in a
person's life."
And then they said that
"Essentially, spirituality involves attitudes
that are based on beliefs about our relationships with our self, with
other human beings, with our world (including our physical and social
environments), with life (as to its meaning and purpose), and ultimately,
with God, a Higher Power, or 'Universal Consciousness'."
— All of which gives us a vague feeling about what they think spirituality is, but they
were never any more specific than that. Their incomplete definition really just tells us
that their idea of spirituality is
"attitudes based on beliefs about relationships",
and
"concerns about what is important to us."
That is just simple psychology. That isn't really spirituality.
In fact, in the final analysis, that "spirituality" is
just people's opinions of things.
And you know the old saying about opinions:
"Opinions are like ass-holes — everybody's got one."
Those opinions, attitudes, beliefs, and concerns actually have
little or nothing to do with God or any
friendly supernatural Higher Power, or experiencing
higher planes of existence, or developing your mental powers,
or purifying your heart and your mind,
or filling your heart with love,
or any of the other things that knowledgeable priests, ministers,
and other spiritual teachers are talking about when they talk about
"spirituality."
Opinions are just opinions.
Bill Wilson would not have known spirituality if it had walked up
to him and bitten him.
And his followers don't seem to know anything more about it
than he did, either.
They just love to yammer "spirituality" because it
really sounds Holy and religious,
and it inflates their egos and makes them feel good.
They have a lot of fun
playing
spiritual make-believe. (Which is typical of cults.)
Something that religious fanatics don't seem to be able to
understand is
the fact that making people into religious converts does not
make those people any more holy.
Getting people to parrot all of the teachings and beliefs of
a religion just makes them into jabbering parrots.
The true believers in the religion may get a lot of satisfaction
out of being
surrounded by parrots who say what the true believers want to hear,
but that doesn't help the converts any.
Real virtue, real holiness, and real religion are something else.
Ask yourself,
This article will have served its purpose if it stimulates further inquiry into the nature and impact of spirituality in recovery from alcoholism, and perhaps other addictions as well. Gee, and I thought their purpose was to push A.A. and the Twelve Steps on us. Undoubtedly, they will be delighted with my further inquiry here... Nevertheless, there exists a need for measures that will demonstrate the therapeutic effectiveness of positive spirituality in the twelve step rehabilitation program of Alcoholics Anonymous. Such measures should include a questionnaire to determine the effectiveness of positive spiritual attitudes in achieving a sense of wellness that precludes the use of mood altering chemicals and other instruments designed to assess the development and rehabilitative effectiveness of positive spirituality in the twelve step program.
"There exists a need for measures that
will demonstrate the therapeutic effectiveness..." of A.A.?
There is a need for some
more real clinical tests and medical studies of the effectiveness of A.A.-based therapy,
but it is highly unlikely that such tests will show good results
for 12-Step treatment. None of the previous ones did.
The few proper scientific studies of Alcoholics Anonymous
that have been done so far show that
A.A.
is no better than no treatment at all for treating alcoholism.
Other studies have shown that A.A. is actually far worse than no treatment.
In Dr. Jeffrey Brandsma's 5-year-long test, the people who
received A.A. training did
five times as much
binge drinking after they were taught that they
were "powerless over alcohol" in A.A. Step One.
And the A.A. group did nine times as much binge drinking as another group
of alcoholics who got Rational Behavior Therapy (something very similar to
SMART).
And again, Professor George Vaillant, Trustee of Alcoholics Anonymous World Services, Inc.,
got no such good
results from his 8-year-long test of A.A.-based treatment of alcoholics.
He found that the biggest effect of A.A.-based treatment was that it raised the
death rate of the patients.
And I *really* want to see that questionnaire which is supposed to
"determine the effectiveness of positive spiritual attitudes..."
Just how shall we measure
How do we measure the "effectiveness" of those things? Effect on what?
That will be a very interesting study.
But it really would be interesting to see a good, large, long,
controlled study of the "increased spirituality" that is
supposedly caused by practicing the Twelve Steps. And let's also measure
the success rate in actually quitting drinking and staying quit while we are at it.
(Remember that quitting drinking is what Alcoholics Anonymous was supposed to be about.
But the authors here are now telling us that A.A.
is about "the therapeutic effectiveness of positive spirituality".)
While we are doing that big clinical study, I'd like to see these things
measured or counted, too:
All of those things should be measured or counted often, at the same
time, over a period of many years, like 10 or 20 years, to see how
those things really correlate with the practice of
the Twelve Steps and A.A.'s "positive spirituality".
And those patients who stop going to A.A. should still be included in
the study, to track what happens with the A.A. drop-outs.
And all such studies or experiments must have control groups, of course. The hope of the authors is that more reliable scientific proofs will be accumulated to buttress the voluminous anecdotal and heuristic evidence already documenting the central role of spirituality in treating alcoholism.
More reliable? There haven't been any yet,
so we don't just need
"more reliable" scientific proofs, or more "reliable"
scientific proofs, either. As the authors admit in that sentence,
all that exists is rumor, anecdotal stories, and cult belief in the program.
But I'm all for us conducting a bunch of valid medical studies, to show everyone
what the real truth is. Just make sure that they are real studies,
honest and fair studies, not some faked, fudged studies like Project MATCH... Perhaps then, the concept of spiritual awakening promised by Alcoholics Anonymous and other similar twelve step programs will be better understood, accepted, and effectively applied by addiction sufferers as well as those who would aid in their recovery. And then again, maybe people will start to believe that the Moon really is made of blue cheese.
REFERENCES AA World Services, Inc. (1952). Twelve steps and twelve traditions. New York: Author. AA World Services, Inc. (1976). Alcoholics Anonymous: The story of how many thousands of men and women have recovered from alcoholism (3rd ed.). New York: Author. American Psychiatric Association (1987). Diagnostic and statistic manual of mental disorders (3rd ed. rev.). Washington, DC: Author. Blum, K., in collaboration with Payne, J. E. (1991). Alcohol and the addictive brain: New hope for alcoholics from biogenic research. New York: Free Press. Booth, L. (1984a). The gauntlet of spirituality. Alcoholism Treatment Quarterly, 1(1), 139-141. Booth, L. (1984b). Aspects of spirituality in San Pedro Peninsula Hospital. Alcoholism Treatment Quarterly, 1(2), 121-123. Bradley, A. M. (1988). Keep coming back: The case for a valuation of Alcoholics Anonymous. Alcohol Health & Research World, 12, 192-199. Chandler, C. K., Holden, J. M., & Kolander, C. A. (1992). Counseling for spiritual wellness: Theory and practice. Journal of Counseling & Development, 71, 168-175. Cook, C. C. H. (1988). The Minnesota model in the management of drug and alcohol dependency: Miracle, method or myth? Part II. Evidence and conclusions. British Journal of Addiction, 83, 735-748. Emerick, C. D. (1987). Alcoholics Anonymous: Affiliation process and effectiveness as treatment. In M. Galanter (Ed.), Recent developments in alcoholism (Vol. 7, pp. 37-53). New York: Plenum. George, R. L. (1990). Counseling the chemically dependent. Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Gorski, T. T., & Miller, M. (1986). Staying sober: A guide for relapse prevention. Independence, MO: Herald House/Independence. Glasser, W. (1984). Control theory: A new explanation of how we control our lives. New York: Harper & Row. Hoffmann, N. G., Harrison, P. A., & Belille, C. A. (1983). Alcoholics Anonymous after treatment: Attendance and abstinence. International Journal of the Addictions, 18, 311-318. Khantzian, E. J., & Mack, J. E. (1989). Alcoholics Anonymous and contemporary psychodynamic theory. In M. Galanter (Ed.), Recent developments in alcoholism (Vol. 7, pp. 67-89). New York: Plenum. Kohn, G. F. (1984). Toward a model for spirituality and alcoholism. Journal of Religion and Health, 23, 250-259. Kurtz, E. (1979). Not-God: A history of Alcoholics Anonymous. Center City, Minnesota: Hazelden. Maslow, A. H. (1954). Motivation and personality. New York: Harper. May, G. G. (1988), Addiction and grace. San Francisco: Harper & Row. McLatchie, B. H., & Lomp, K. G. E. (1988). Alcoholics Anonymous affiliation and treatment outcome among a clinical sample of problem drinkers. American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse, 14, 309-324. Moore, T. (1992). Care of the soul: A guide for cultivating depth and sacredness in everyday life. New York: HarperCollins. Prezioso, F. A. (1987). Spirituality in the recovery process. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 4, 233-238. Shereen, M. (1988). The relationship between relapse and involvement in Alcoholics Anonymous. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 49, 104-106. Sikorsky, I. I., Jr. (1990). AA' s godparents: Three early influences on Alcoholics Anonymous and its foundation, Carl Jung, Emmett Fox, Jack Alexander. Minneapolis, MN: CompCare. Thurstin, A. H., Alfano, A. M., & Nerviano, V. J. (1987). The efficacy of AA attendance for aftercare of inpatient alcoholics: Some follow-up data. The International Journal of the Addictions, 22, 1083-1090. Wegscheider, S. (1981). Another chance: Hope & health for the alcoholic family. Palo Alto, CA: Science and Behavior. Whitfield, C. L. (1984a). Stress management and spirituality during recovery: A transpersonal approach. Part 1: Becoming. Alcoholism Treatment Quarterly, 1(1), 43-54. Whitfield, C. L. (1984b). Stress management and spirituality during recovery: A transpersonal approach. Part II: Being. Alcoholism Treatment Quarterly, 1(2), 1-50. Whitfield, C. L. (1984c). Stress management and spirituality during recovery: A transpersonal approach. Part III: Transforming. Alcoholism Treatment Quarterly, 1(4), 1-54. Whitfield, C. L. (1989). Co-dependence: Our most common addiction--Some physical, mental, emotional, and spiritual perspectives. In B. Carruth & W. Mendenhall (Eds.), Co-dependency: Issues in treatment and recovery. New York: Haworth. Witmer, J. M., & Sweeney, T. J. (1992). A holistic model for wellness and prevention over the life span. Journal of Counseling & Development, 71, 140--148.
By ROBERT D. WARFIELD and MARC B. GOLDSTEIN Robert D. Warfield is director of Addiction Services Programs at Stanley J. Radgowski Correctional Institution in Montville, Connecticut. Marc B. Goldstein is chairman of the Department of Psychology at Central Connecticut State University. Correspondence regarding this article should be addressed to Marc B. Goldstein, Department of Psychology, Central Connecticut State University, 1615 Stanley Street, New Britain, CT 06050.
— End of article —
The copyright of the magazine Counseling & Values is the
property of American Counseling Association.
Material used here is excerpted under the Fair Use clause of the Copyright Act.
Footnotes:1): Bill Wilson's first intoxication, when he was a young Army lieutenant in his early twenties, is described on pages 106 to 108 of the book Bill W., by Robert Thomsen.
2):
Alcohol Treatment: When Faith-based Options Aren't Enough,
By: Fletcher, Anne M., Humanist, 00187399, November-December 2001, Vol. 61, Issue 6.
UPDATE: 2012.08.28: For many years now, I have been quoting the National Treatment Center in Atlanta, Georgia, which found in 1996 that 93% of the treatment centers in the country used the 12-Step model. Well, it turns out that they did another study in 2005, and found that only 75% of the treatment centers are now using the 12-Step model. That is a big drop.
Bibliography:
DSM-IV == Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental
Disorders, Fourth Edition.
Alcoholics Anonymous World Services, Inc. (AAWS), New York, 1957, 1986. Harper, New York, 1957. ISBN: 0-91-685602-X LC: HV5278 .A78A4 Dewey: 178.1 A1c This is Bill's history of Alcoholics Anonymous. It suspiciously differs from known history here and there.
Last updated 10 March 2014. |