Why do people insist AA is not religious?/Efficacy of AA & other treatment programs

[ponderingturtle]

I know someone reasonably high up in AA and he suggested their success rate is closer to 13% I would suggest no other programs are doing significantly better.

Of course no program does much worse, including people quiting on their own. So remember if the treatment is as effective as nothing is it really a treatment?

 

[ponderingturtle]

I've often had people tell me that they were "spiritual, but not religious" -- but beyond defining "spiritual" as "not religious", I've never gotten a coherent answer to the question, "what is spirituality?"

Being full of newage?

 

[zooterkin]

Being full of newage?

To rhyme with 'sewage'?

 

[Dancing David]

Youd be right. Its a religious group for the reasons you mentioned. How could it not be?

The body of AA is itself religious as Bill W. founded it, however many people who attend AA and other offshoots are not.

So many groups have different levels of religion, some are yuck (the lard's prayer, that would make me run), some are not religious at all.

Many groups tolerate members who do not chose god as their higher power but something like 'sobriety', in my experience groups vary a whole lot. And some are double thumpers where they tout the bible and the big book and others re not.

I myself really like Jack Trimpey's Rational Recovery^WP. because it really gets down to the core of quitting, the Big Choice to quit.

When I did 'counseling' I used a relapse prevention model but also had a strong 'reality therapy' bias.

Rational Recovery

ETA: Even in AA which has a tradition that hroups are unique to some extent has the DFD groups, where members shy away from the twelve steps and focus on DFD, which is Don’t *********** Drink

 

[Sledge]

I suspect a lot of the reason people insist AA isn't religious is so courts can continue to insist people attend it. Wouldn't it being religious interfere with the whole seperation of church and state thing in the US?

 

[EvilSmurf]

I'm also a little suprised at the outrage over the religious side of the program, it was started by a religious group back in the 30's. On Wiki they show you the original 12 steps and what they use today. Only two of the steps have any real religious relevence anymore.

I suspect a lot of the reason people insist AA isn't religious is so courts can continue to insist people attend it. Wouldn't it being religious interfere with the whole seperation of church and state thing in the US?

That answers your question MG. The reason I am outraged that AA is religious is that courts can order people do undertake it.

 

[ponderingturtle]

To rhyme with 'sewage'?

Of course

 

[MG1962]

That answers your question MG. The reason I am outraged that AA is religious is that courts can order people do undertake it.

However as others have pointed out in this thread, in some places it is the only game in town. It's free, organised so that you dont have to mis work (Assuming you have a job)

And do we have any evidence that if you are before the courts, and said your honour I believe the BB program run by XXX would be a greater benefit, the judge ignores this and says - "Off to AA you go"

 

[MG1962]

Of course no program does much worse, including people quiting on their own. So remember if the treatment is as effective as nothing is it really a treatment?

And what evidence is there that quitting on your own has the same success rate. Intuitively, no one would quit on their own, because they would stop before they reached this level of need in the first place

Humans are a social animal and we process much of our action through interaction with peers. Even organisations like weight watches realise this. The weekly, daily, whatever schedule meeting is as much a pep rally as part of the cure.

 

[Dymanic]

Being full of newage?

Well, that's about as coherent as anything I've heard so far, but I still feel... unenlightened. Though I've most often asked the question of those who were claiming to be "spiritual", I guess it could work the other way around as well: How do you know you're not "spiritual" if you can't articulate what that means?

 

[ponderingturtle]

And what evidence is there that quitting on your own has the same success rate. Intuitively, no one would quit on their own, because they would stop before they reached this level of need in the first place

So AA is full of people who are ordered there by the court, as no one would ever go there by themselves? They would have dealt with it before it got that bad?

 

[Dymanic]

That answers your question MG. The reason I am outraged that AA is religious is that courts can order people do undertake it.

Would it interest you to know that not all AA members or AA groups are entirely thrilled about the practice either? A popular cliche is that "AA is not for people that need it; it's for people that want it". So-called "court-carders" are usually at least tolerated, but not all meeting secretaries have an equal capacity for tolerance. I have attended meetings where the announcement was made at the outset: "If you're just here to get a court card signed, bring it on up and I'll sign it right now and then you can get the hell out". (Court-carders usually just sit quietly and scowl, but that secretary may have encountered one with enough resentment and suspicion to be disruptive). Some secretaries will simply state flatly: "I don't sign court cards" and leave it up to the individual to decide for themselves whether it's worth staying.

AA's third tradition states: "we may refuse none who wish to recover". Strictly interpreted, that can be used (and, at "closed" meetings, IS used) to exclude those who have gotten "the nudge from the judge", as well as anyone who does not have "a desire to stop drinking".

The "preamble" recited at the beginning of every meeting states: "AA is not allied with any sect, denomination, politics, organization, or institution". (With respect to the OP, I would argue that the "sect, denomination" part was included specifically to address the question of AA being a "religion", but I guess the definition of that could be almost as subjective -- and, apparently, as difficult to articulate -- as is "spirituality").

"Alcoholics Anonymous is not part of the judicial system. We do not work with the courts or the police department. We do not ask the courts to send people to us. When people do show up with court papers, we are not responsible for making sure the people are sober."

"If a judge, court, school, or employer has sent you to AA meetings, it is because they believe there is evidence that you have a drinking problem. We had nothing to do with their decision -- in fact, AA has no opinion as to whether you have a drinking problem or not."

"While most groups will sign court papers, this is for each individual group to decide. Since AA is not allied with the court system, AA is not required to do the court's work."

"If a chairperson or other group member agrees to sign your papers, they will probably sign with their first name or initials. We are personally anonymous. We are not court employees."

http://www.aasrq.org/courtordered.htm

 

[Pup]

Well, that's about as coherent as anything I've heard so far, but I still feel... unenlightened. Though I've most often asked the question of those who were claiming to be "spiritual", I guess it could work the other way around as well: How do you know you're not "spiritual" if you can't articulate what that means?

As someone who's "not spiritual," I'd say it means believing that there are forces, entities, etc. which exist apart from our brains and which may have some effect on us but which can't be investigated or disproven by the scientific method.

I think that everyone has similar strong sensations--a sense of morality, meaning, connection, etc. It's just that spiritual people attribute it to something outside themselves and practical people like me realize it's part of the biological brain function we're given.

It really does fit with the "higher power" idea. Spiritual people believe there's a power outside of us that can control us and non-spiritual people don't except in the most mundane literal terms (a mob has higher power than an unarmed individual, and so forth).

 

[marplots]

As someone who's "not spiritual," I'd say it means believing that there are forces, entities, etc. which exist apart from our brains and which may have some effect on us but which can't be investigated or disproven by the scientific method. (snipped)...

It really does fit with the "higher power" idea. Spiritual people believe there's a power outside of us that can control us and non-spiritual people don't except in the most mundane literal terms (a mob has higher power than an unarmed individual, and so forth).

Well an example that I as a materialist can accept as a pseudo-higher power would be the psychological phenomenon of "social proof." It has been shown to influence the behavior of others, acting as a kind of outside entity. Certainly not a personal God or anything, but it is something AA groups can do.

You can think of it as entirely a context-based influence on behavior. Someone who attends meetings and focuses on sobriety may have a better change than someone who does not.

 

[Dymanic]

As someone who's "not spiritual," I'd say it means believing that there are forces, entities, etc. which exist apart from our brains and which may have some effect on us but which can't be investigated or disproven by the scientific method.

And what difference (if any) do you see between that and religious beliefs?

I think that everyone has similar strong sensations--a sense of morality, meaning, connection, etc. It's just that spiritual people attribute it to something outside themselves and practical people like me realize it's part of the biological brain function we're given.

I think I understand what you're saying, and don't really disagree with the essence of it, but I might quibble about it being strictly a matter of events taking place in the brain. For example, 'meaning' and 'connection' may arguably have as much to do with events in the endocrine system as anything (testosterone in particular seems almost to have a mind of its own at times, and usually doesn't give a damn what the brain has to say about its decisions). As for morality, there may be at least some room to consider the extent to which that is something that may exist independent of human thought -- even without invoking spirits.

It really does fit with the "higher power" idea. Spiritual people believe there's a power outside of us that can control us and non-spiritual people don't except in the most mundane literal terms (a mob has higher power than an unarmed individual, and so forth).

I believe that the laws of cause and effect exist outside of myself, and though I'm not certain how much power they have to control me, assuming that they have that power to a very considerable extent has generally worked better for me than has assuming that I can circumvent them. Is that mundane? Does that make me "spiritual"?

 

[EvilSmurf]

Would it interest you to know that not all AA members or AA groups are entirely thrilled about the practice either?

Not particularly surprising.

The "preamble" recited at the beginning of every meeting states: "AA is not allied with any sect, denomination, politics, organization, or institution".

Notice how it only says "Sect, Denomination" and not "Religion"...that to me says "We don't care if you're Catholic, Protestant, Methodist, Anglican, Jehova's Witness etc. as long as you're Christian".

 

[Dancing David]

AA has some other issues for me, the biggest one is that many members foster and support a culture of 'AA only', people who would benefit from a variety of methods are encouraged to stick with AA, no matter what.

If you are three years sober then perhaps there are other ways to advance your life, without AA as the foucs.

I truly believe that 'Once and addict always an addict' but that can be just a warning to never use (there is that Big Choice again).

AA's is neutral on other methods, its members however can be a tad bit fanatical. They tell people who are depressed to avoid medication and that if they only focus on sobriety then their lives will be fine.

AA can also be a little snotty and clique-ish at times where longer term members will say really snotty and rude things about the stories of newer members , despite the no cross-talk rule. When someone goes on about their gratitude and how wonderful their life is and just how marvelous their life is now, and they don't talk about it except when other people share their suffering, it is really gross.

Then there are some groups that don't want new members because it would harsh their little social club. I personally really like the DFD or DFU groups, forget the steps, that is just something to keep you occupied. Stay sober, get better, get a life.

The last problem I have with AA is 'bottoming out' it is better to get sober before you bottom out and many people can learn to walk on the bottom.

 

[Pup]

And what difference (if any) do you see between that and religious beliefs?

None at all. I think those who claim to be spiritual but not religious reject the specific nature of most religions but they just substitute their own personal ideas or pick and choose from a variety of religions.

For example, 'meaning' and 'connection' may arguably have as much to do with events in the endocrine system as anything (testosterone in particular seems almost to have a mind of its own at times, and usually doesn't give a damn what the brain has to say about its decisions).

I agree.

As for morality, there may be at least some room to consider the extent to which that is something that may exist independent of human thought -- even without invoking spirits.

As a logical concept, sure, but then one can investigate it almost like mathematics, trying to see the greatest good, the rights of the individual, and so forth. As an intangible thing ("It feels right," "my conscience would bother me,"), we're back to nature and nurture. It may seem like a powerful force, and I'm all about integrity and honor and such myself, but sacrificing for the good of the hive probably seems like a powerful urge to a honeybee, too.

I believe that the laws of cause and effect exist outside of myself, and though I'm not certain how much power they have to control me, assuming that they have that power to a very considerable extent has generally worked better for me than has assuming that I can circumvent them. Is that mundane? Does that make me "spiritual"?

But the laws of cause and effect can be investigated with the scientific method. They're predictable: hit yourself with a hammer and it'll hurt every time. Take a 10% risk of something bad happening a hundred times and the bad thing will probably happen more than once.

Where being spiritual comes in would be if someone said, I can take a 10% risk a hundred times but because of intangible factor X (my guardian angel, my lucky charm, my in-tuneness with the universe, etc.), the bad thing won't happen to me, or if it does, it was meant to be...

 

[Hallo Alfie]

To the OP (et al).

I can only comment on AA meetings I have attended here and abroad and cannot therefor speak of the groups in (say) the US.
I have been clean and sober now for 10 years and work as a forensic counsellor in AOD as well as other areas.
AA forms the basis for the maintenance of my sobriey and I feel I can discuss this with some level of authority. So much for credentials.

As for the individual groups using (say) the lords prayer, doing 12 step work as some prerequisite etc etc. All that I can say is that this is a democratic decision taken by each individual group as to how they would like to run their group. There is no central office dictating how the groups should be run - it is their decision alone, voted on by the members of that group.

Someone else outlined that if one group doesn't suit you, try another, or another. There are plenty around and if one makes a small effort, they will find somewhere they are happy. If not, go back out and drink - the people in AA don't mind - that too is the choice of the individual just the same as their choice of/whether to have a higher power.


AA does not purport to be religious however to the uninitiated there would appear to be some religious connotations. There are many members who retain their agnosticism, atheism or whatever throughout their sobriety. There are many too whose 'spirituality' evolves over time. There is no "one God"; it is a God of ones own understanding in whatever form that might take.

Religion implies some sort of dogma/tenet or similar; a uniform approach to the religion. Spirituality refers to a 'purpose' or 'reason' an individual has: some might refer to this as ones psychosocial supports for example. Clearly this is not religion and is what is refered to as an individuals spirituality.

Cheers

 

[gabeygoat]

They've tried to make it more open, but insist that you have a "higher power"

as an atheist, it took me a long time to come with my "higher power"...nature.


that said, i still can't get anything out of AA, because A.) it really is mostly religious, and B.) every time i go, i just want to drink even more.