One issue that bears watching will be the changing nature of NA, CA,
AA
support groups as a result of more mandatory meeting participation.
Will a
larger population of paroled felons attending meetings under court
order
change the nature of many such meetings? One would imagine so. Of course,
such groups are not amenable to very much research, by their very nature.
However, in the absense of a large variety of alternative community
relapse
prevention mechanisms, AA type groups may be contorted in ways that
lead to
either more abusive situations or less effective operation. The
other
positive possibility, of course, may be the growth and proliferation
of
different types of support mechanisms. With 500,000 people
returning to
communities each year from jail or prison (and 50 to 80% of them
with drug
histories, depending upon whose research you believe), we can
only hope
that ingenious people will design more community alternatives that
meet
people at differing places in their own recovery or re-entry.
As my former
statistics teacher once said, "If the only tool you have is a hammer,
you
tend to treat everything like a nail."
Gregory Dixon
The issue with 12-step programs and the courts goes
beyond the issue of how to help people into
recovery to the issue of constitutional right to freedom of religion.
In fact, in several jurisdictions, including
New York, it has been declared unconstitutional
to mandate that an offender attend 12-step programs
because AA/NA/CA have a clear, upfront religious orientation ("God",
"Higher Power" "God as we know him", etc.). The SMART Recovery website
actually maintains a section on the various such court decisions around
the
country. So, to my mind, the issue is not mandating people to attend particular
AA meetings, but mandating people to attend AA at all. And, if you are
a true AA, that should be disturbing to you, as well. Throughout the BB
Bill speaks of the "self-chosen" nature of true success in AA--how one
diagnoses
oneself, how AA is "one approach that worked for us" but not the end
of the story by any means, how one should not pressure someone into going
to or affiliating with AA. I can cite chapter and verse on this, if you
like.
Finally, research is clear that coercing people
into any particular approach, however that happens, is likely to breed
failure. Research is also clear that social support for sobriety, such
as provided by AA, is associated with longer maintenance of abstinence.
It is also clear, however, that many people achieve and maintain abstinence
and sobriety without attending 12-step meetings
at all. I believe our task as professionals is to help people find
the path that works best *for them*. We can suggest good places to look
for that path, but we shouldn't be telling people that one path is the
only way. Many courts (and counselors) see it as their duty to do exactly
this. I think they have misunderstood the whole process!
Fred
Frederick Rotgers, Psy.D., Assistant Chief Psychologist Smithers Addiction
Treatment and Training Center
Phone: 212-523-6874 Fax: 810-958-7649
-----Original Message-----
From: Faith & Fred Hochrein [mailto:faith@lni.net]
Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 1999 11:27 PM
To: subabuse@jointogether.org
Subject: RE: Fwd: Deprogramming from Alcoholics
Anonymous
Hello all and a happy and safe holiday season!
I am a bit baffled by the tone of some of this
discussion. Not only do I
work in the field of substance abuse...keeping
in mind the idea is
growth and recovery...but I have had the pleasure
of attending several
AA, NA, and CA meetings over the last 10 years.
In Lenawee Co., MI
it is a common practice for the court system
and local substance
abuse treatment facilities to refer clients
to meeting in conjunction with
their formal or primary treatment. Keeping
this in mind, meeting lists
are regularly distributed to clients so that
they may choose which
meetings best fit their needs. Yet,
I typically refer clients to meeting
where I know there is long-term sobriety
present and steer them away
from the typical "court ordered hang-outs."
I have never questioned
the ethics involved in which meetings I might
or might not refer a client
to attend. Do some courts mandate particular
meetings? I could see
how this might be problematic...but the bottom
line is that AA type
programs DO work. I believe 12 step
meetings continue to be the
backbone of a strong program of recovery.
Just my 2 cents.....
Faith Bashore-Hochrein
Intake Coordinator, Sage Center
Do you have absolute proof that people cannot
recover from an addiction? I
haven't seen it.
And in fact I have seen more proof that they can. The vast majority
of
people leave AA after six months, and over fifty percent of these stay
sober in their own way, including being recovered, or become social
drinkers.
Anyway, another myth of our industry is that one must always be in
recovery. Thank Wakanda that
Wakanda opened my eyes to this fact over sixteen years ago.
To the counselors that promote the recovery only model, think of how
may
folks have turned away from you because of that and how many relapses
this
falsehood may have caused.
Now if someone comes up to you and says they are recovered, shake their
hand and say "I am glad you have found your path of life."
If someone comes up to you and says they are in recovery, shake their
hand
and say "I am glad you have found your path of life."
If someone comes up to you and says I became a social drinker, shake
their
hand and say "I am glad you have found your path of life."
If someone comes up to you and says Jesus visited them last night and
they
are sober forever, shake their hand and say "I am glad you have found
your
path of life."
If you cannot do this, then get out of the addiction business for you
are
doing far more harm than good and such closed mindedness only interferes
with other peoples' recovery.