home : overview : the steps : treatment : confession session : links : contact : letters : random : my aa writing : research
The first part of my response to Agent Green:
(His words are in plain text and mine are in bold.)
His site is available here.
Alcoholism
Alcoholism is a contentious topic. Some people swear that it's a disease and that one drink could eventually kill an alcoholic; others vow that all problem drinkers need is a little determination to control their drinking. The fact is, both these views are true depending on severity.
If this is the case why is AA so reluctant to remind people of this fact in its literature? Instead AA coaxes anyone that attends its meetings into believing that AA has the only answer – failure to adhere to this solution is ‘punishable’ by either insanity or death. I agree with some of what you say above, but for the purposes of this, let us focus on the fact that AA has become the norm for treatment. The result of this is that many problem drinkers get coerced into surrendering themselves to the program, and in turn they are lead to believe they are ‘worse’ than they really are.
Some problem drinkers just need their mothers or a couple of hangovers to persuade them to cut back. Others can use willpower and support from friends to kick the habit, or at least limit their intake. Some ruin their families, their jobs, their finances, and their lives, and end up drinking themselves to death. Why won't they stop? Is it pure stubbornness and moral weakness, or are they in the grip of some strange disease or disorder?
Assuming that everything above is correct for a moment, my first question to you would be as follows - What tests, or process of discovery is employed, before any AA member or group tells a person they are an alcoholic? As we all know the answer is none – it is assumed that anyone in an AA meeting is an alcoholic with an illness. Further to that anyone attempting to offer any reason why they might not fit AA’s stereotype is told they are in denial. The next question would be, who makes this diagnoses? And finally, having made this diagnosis, on what authority do they do so? After all the treatment that follows presupposes the person is insane, hence Step 2 (We came to believe that a power greater than ourselves could restore us to sanity). Conversely a court has rigorous tests in place before it can label someone insane.
Research has shown that there is no sharp distinction between alcoholics and non-alcoholics. Instead, alcoholism can be rated from zero to extremely severe according to the number of symptoms. People are spread out all along the scale, just like with blood pressure or IQ. We're in the 21st century, but the sad fact is, there is no medical cure for severe alcoholism. All medicine can do is provide detox services and crisis management and help people to heal themselves.
If this is the case then why does AA suggest the same remedy to EVERYONE entering their rooms, complete with an identical prognosis? AA is unable to deal with exceptions, and thus reduces all problem drinkers to mere clones. The price for some is a total loss of individuality and a sacrifice worse than the consequences of even their drinking.
I do not want to destroy AA, but I do want people to be aware that there are alternatives to AA, and most of all I want AA to admit this in its literature. If its primary purpose is truly to help the alcoholic that still suffers, then it should have no problem admitting these truths. I do not like AA, but I would dislike it a lot less if it removed those barriers to exit that are keeping many people in a perpetual cycle of failure, shame and guilt. Some argue that people being sent to AA is not AA’s fault, however AA could put a stop to it by simply making a few things clear. This point also highlights another one of AA’s dangers; its inability to take responsibility for anything hiding behind the Traditions.
I will conclude this later…
James G