Basic HTML Version
On Stanton Peele’s article,
‘Mind the steps?’, DDN, April, page 8…
ALL RECOVERY GROUPS are about the people that attend them. I tried AA for a
couple of months as I didn’t know of anywhere else to go. The first thing that
shocked me were people at the group who had not touched alcohol for many
years (
eg
20), so they said. Why were they still attending AA? To keep them
sober, apparently. The fact is there is no discussion allowed, only listening to
someone else telling you the same old story about what they did when they
were drunk. You can’t challenge anything anyone says (no cross sharing). It is
all religious dogma founded in 1930s America. I have not had a drink for three
years, so I have got power over alcohol.
Many GPs for example don’t realise it’s a quasi-religious organisation.
‘Humbly asked God to remove my shortcomings’ – why did he give them to
me in the first place then? I told them I did not believe in the 12 steps so
was asked to leave – in fact AA state the only criteria for joining is a desire
to stop drinking. No, it’s a religion in my opinion and they try and convert
you. It’s all about God, although they deny that. Count how many times
alcohol is mentioned in the 12 steps then count how many times God is
mentioned. I formed my own SMART Recovery group. If AA works for some
people great, but treatment providers should be aware of other self-help
groups in their area and most aren’t.
Stephen Keane
ONE ONLY HAS TO READ STANTON’S BLOGS to understand why he is critical
of AA, and an interpretation of the 12 steps as has been made known to
him. The abuses that he has heard about in AA and has written of do occur
in AA meetings, and among AA patrons outside of the meetings. That these
abuses occur has been acknowledged in AA circles, down to and including
conference level, however, beyond acknowledgement little has been
achieved by way of effective action. The lack of action is possibly due, in
part, to members’ vulnerability (especially in early recovery) being taken
advantage of, and particularly in the UK, to confusing anonymity with
secrecy. There is also the wider societal and cultural reluctance (professional
and lay) to address, let alone deal effectively with, abuse.
12-step philosophy is open to interpretation, as is any philosophy (and I
use the word ‘philosophy’ as a coverall for all approaches to thought,
including theology). There are those that distort (intentionally or
thoughtlessly) a philosophy to rationalise their behaviour, hence some
religious adherents engage in various forms of abuse. AA and 12-step
philosophy is not immune to being abused, especially when proponents of
such interpret ‘powerless over addiction’ to mean ‘powerless, period’. I find
Stanton’s criticism of this interpretation of the 12-steps as reinforcing
victimhood valid. Personally, I admit I am powerless over addiction, mine and
others, however, I interpret that in an empowering way in that, I will do all
that I can to stay sober (and staying sober is more than just not drinking.)
My own journey with the 12 steps has been a solitary one. Having been
rendered a victim by a brutal religious regime in a life pre-addiction, my
personality is now such that I will not accept a code of conduct without
challenging it. I do not prescribe to the fundamentalist religious view of ‘my
way is the only way’, as quasi-religious types in AA do. As such, my challenges
offend those over-inflated egos attracted to AA, and their cliques.
I have spent over two sober decades poring over various approaches to
life and living. I cherry-pick, and accept responsibility for that which I have
chosen, and that which I have discarded. I may just take a Stanton cherry,
though it will be one that appeals to me now, at some tomorrow I may return
for more. Am I prepared to accept Stanton’s valid perception as the only way?
Of course not, ‘He’s not the Messiah, he’s just a(nother) naughty boy’.
Trevor H
WHAT YOU’RE SAYING
From the DDNwebsite, www.drinkanddrugsnews.com
Comment |
Obituary
12 |
drinkanddrugsnews
| July 2014
www.drinkanddrugsnews.com
It is with greatest sadness that we break the news of the
passing of Phil Fox, our founder and creative director. He
passed over on Monday night, 16 June.
Everyone will remember him as a truly inspirational person who
founded Outside Edge Theatre Company, as well as a friend and mentor to
so many. Being involved in theatre saved his life in 1999; through founding
Outside Edge, he was able to share that love of theatre and challenge and
engage us all to support his work so that he could help others through
their own recovery.
Our deepest sympathy and heartfelt consolations go to his family and
to everyone whose life he has touched. We are ourselves coming to terms
with this very sad and sudden loss. We will, as soon as we are able, share
further information about how we can remember and celebrate his life
and the gifts which he was able to share through his work. The company
will continue to operate as normally as possible which is what Phil would
have wanted.
Jim, John, Patricia, Shereen, Yvonne, Cathy, Siva and Annamaria, Outside
Edge Theatre
PHIL FOX
8 JUNE 1959 – 16 JUNE 2014
OBITUARY