Twelve Step Heretic - carried forward from a Help topic

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

I guess the resolution to the disagreement here might be that addicts who are at step one really are hopelessly addicted and completely powerless. I very much believe that. However, many steps later, that is not the case any more for a lot of them. That should be recognized. Maybe the counsellors should say, "You were once powerless over your addiction, but now you have a hold on it. It is your responsibility to maintain that hold, and not anybody else's responsibility." How does that sound?

I have seen pain killer addicts who have been sober for more than a year talk about how they have a disease and how relapse is something that often comes with the disease. I think that mentality is self-defeating and sets them up for failure. It provides too much of an excuse. What they should be thinking at that point is, "It's all up to me now."

---

I do agree with this to a point. It MAY be true or it may not. The problem is that the way to find out whether it is really true or not is to risk returning to the point you were at in your death spiral before.

In my case, I don't want to find out. I enjoyed it way too much.

It is indeed our individual responsibility to make that choice and maintain a lifestyle appropriate to our goals and desires. That's the definition of liberty for anybody, addict or not. For many addicts, a return to using the substance is a guarantee to a quick return to addiction. Ask anybody who has smoked cigarettes for any significant amount of time, quit for any number of years, then picked up a cigarette. Sure, there may be some who can do it. (I actually smoke an occasional cigar, but don't inhale. I would NEVER touch a cigarette again. It was just too damned much work giving that one up, and I don't want to do it again!)

Enough for now - I'm late for work. I don't have time to read back over this for consistency, so I'll revisit it in an hour or two once the morning rush is taken care of. If I've skirted questions or misunderstood anything, I'll address it then.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

Maybe the counsellors should say, "You were once powerless over your addiction, but now you have a hold on it. It is your responsibility to maintain that hold, and not anybody else's responsibility." How does that sound?

---

You don't understand the program either. If it's working for someone, why change would they change one day when you decide it's been "long enough" for them? What do they do differently when they "have a hold on it"? A.A. isn't based on counselors telling you what to do. Everyone here who is against it seems to be just because they don't like how "powerless" sounds or something.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

I have seen pain killer addicts who have been sober for more than a year talk about how they have a disease and how relapse is something that often comes with the disease. I think that mentality is self-defeating and sets them up for failure. It provides too much of an excuse. What they should be thinking at that point is, "It's all up to me now."

---

"You think" that mentality is self-defeating? You want to tell that to someone for whom the program is working? So they can change their thinking...to what? It doesn't make sense. "More than a year?" That's nothing; a year is a short time--these things stay with you forever. Once you are complacent is when you are in trouble. I struggle with things other than chemicals now (well maybe it's the chemicals in my own brain rather than exogenous) but believe me, it's when you think that you can control it is when you get into trouble. Remaining wary is the way to remaining abstinent. Knowing you are powerless is the key. You shouldn't try to take that away from someone just because you don't like the way it sounds, without truly having experienced how it really works.

"Can not or will not follow this simple program." You never know the difference between can not or will not. It doesn't work for everyone. It is a minority that remain abstinent; most people die of their diseases. However, nothing else works for everyone either.

I really do think if you argue against the program, you don't really understand it, because if you did, you would understand how it works. However, I also realize most people will never understand.

It's kind of strange for me to be talking about this, seeing how I never was a member of a twelve-step group. My Dad always said the first three steps were enough for some people; I forgot what they are past that. I never needed the fellowship of a group; my Dad's house and his friends were pretty much a twelve-step program when I was growing up (we joked about getting him serenity prayer wall-paper). Reading is enough for me now.

Or, you can try this: "SERENITY NOW!"

Ok, I'll shut up about it now. I just got annoyed at this hypothetical talk against something that people don't understand when I know it saves some peoples' lives.

After re-reading this thread, a big misconception becomes apparent.

AA is only an organization in the loosest sense of the word. We know better than to trust ourselves with anything that results in power over others. The extent of the organization is maintaining a listing of meeting times and locations, some limited publishing and other odds and ends, all strictly limited by the Twelve Traditions.

You become a "member" of AA by choice, and as such you maintain anonymity. There is no role of members. There are no dues or fees, though there is a free-will collection to cover the costs of location, coffee and whatnot.

This idea that there is some governing group exploiting the idea that "you can never leave" is utterly false. That attitude DOES exist in the meetings and is the point GH made that led to this thread. Some of us do leave... some of us have to. Others will spend the rest of their lives active in AA. To each his own.

To each his own. That's where all of this started. It is sad that people like me can be considered heretic because of our choices, but it isn't even remotely reasonable to take this human failure and use it to condemn a program that has saved untold millions of lives.

*points to the pretty fireworks* "Pretty!"

Alright, I for one am not against the 12-step programs at all. I know they have and continue to help many, many people. I do feel that the wording and spirit of the meetings may sometimes give the impression that "without us you are hopeless". That's what I'm not a fan of. There's no argument that the programs are of great value to a huge number of people.

As pj said, there are no ties beyond what the "member" himself forms with the program. [edit]There is, however, an underlying cult mentality that goes along with the program. That's not necessarily a bad thing as long as it's kept in check.[/edit] My position is that many people simply substitute obsessive drug use with obsessive drug non-use. The two unhealthy aspects that are supposed to be wiped out are being perpetrated in cases such as I'm referring to: obsession and drugs. All the while, they never end up getting drug abuse out of their life because it still occupies and dictates their every move.

When you haven't done drugs or gotten drunk in YEARS, yet ALL of your ties, friends, your social club, your evenings, etc... are spent in the company of drug abusers/drunks... How is that healthy? How is an obsession with hanging around "bad people" getting drugs out of your life?

Now, I could see the desire to attend a meeting a month or so, listen to testimonies and such to keep the notion that drugs were a thorn in your side. But, it's those who continue to attend meetings nearly every day in perpetuity that I'm at odds with because they aren't ever going to break the vice if they actively engage in it every day. That's the point of this thread.

My point is that - once the program does its magic and gives you the tools and support you seek - you need to be able to move on and return to living a normal life. That's what recovery is all about: getting the bad out of your life then moving on with a normal life.

And I just can't accept calling a "bad habit" a "disease". "Bad habit" is changeable and breakable. Bad habits are a choice issue. I'm not claiming it to be an easy choice but, it is a choice. "Disease" is something that you are subject to. Disease happen to the one inflicted, implying captive submission. It's like the difference between dreaming and lucid dreaming. Dreaming (disease) "happens" to the dreamer (dreamer is pulled along for the ride, having no say-so). Lucid dreaming (habit) is something the dreamer does (the dreamer has empowerment). Overcoming addiction is about empowerment, not weakness. Weakness is why they need that empowerment, not the other way around.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

I guess the resolution to the disagreement here might be that addicts who are at step one really are hopelessly addicted and completely powerless. I very much believe that. However, many steps later, that is not the case any more for a lot of them. That should be recognized. Maybe the counsellors should say, "You were once powerless over your addiction, but now you have a hold on it. It is your responsibility to maintain that hold, and not anybody else's responsibility." How does that sound?

I have seen pain killer addicts who have been sober for more than a year talk about how they have a disease and how relapse is something that often comes with the disease. I think that mentality is self-defeating and sets them up for failure. It provides too much of an excuse. What they should be thinking at that point is, "It's all up to me now."

---

I like that assessment. It's always best to put power in the hands where it's needed. There's nothing wrong with surrendering to a "Higher Power" but, the one who surrenders must be willing to stand up and take charge.

Your God can give you the tools and opportunities but it is you who must be ready to step up and do the work. Letting go and saying "God, take the wheel" will only get you run into a wall. Steering that wheel yourself in the direction you've been shown is the only way to avoid that brick wall.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moonbeam

"You think" that mentality is self-defeating? You want to tell that to someone for whom the program is working? So they can change their thinking...to what? It doesn't make sense.

I just got annoyed at this hypothetical talk against something that people don't understand when I know it saves some peoples' lives.

---

I understand that this program works, and I'm by no means saying that it should stop or change its ways. All I'm saying is that just because we have found a way to help some addicts does NOT mean that we should give up and not look any farther. This 'hypothetical' talk could very well result in another program which saves even more addicts in a more efficient manner. You won't get anywhere if you refuse to try to improve existing systems because they work fairly well.

It works for people who want it to work. Any doubt in the 12 steps causes failure to rehabilitate. That is why AA is so fanatical about the 12 steps.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Half/Dreaming

It works for people who want it to work. Any doubt in the 12 steps causes failure to rehabilitate. That is why AA is so fanatical about the 12 steps.

---

That's why they stress that you have to "work the steps". It's an active process; you get out of it what you put in to it. But, done right, you can end up getting much more out of it.

"The steps work if you work the steps."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moonbeam

You don't understand the program either. If it's working for someone, why change would they change one day when you decide it's been "long enough" for them? What do they do differently when they "have a hold on it"? A.A. isn't based on counselors telling you what to do. Everyone here who is against it seems to be just because they don't like how "powerless" sounds or something.

"You think" that mentality is self-defeating? You want to tell that to someone for whom the program is working? So they can change their thinking...to what? It doesn't make sense. "More than a year?" That's nothing; a year is a short time--these things stay with you forever. Once you are complacent is when you are in trouble. I struggle with things other than chemicals now (well maybe it's the chemicals in my own brain rather than exogenous) but believe me, it's when you think that you can control it is when you get into trouble. Remaining wary is the way to remaining abstinent. Knowing you are powerless is the key. You shouldn't try to take that away from someone just because you don't like the way it sounds, without truly having experienced how it really works.

"Can not or will not follow this simple program." You never know the difference between can not or will not. It doesn't work for everyone. It is a minority that remain abstinent; most people die of their diseases. However, nothing else works for everyone either.

I really do think if you argue against the program, you don't really understand it, because if you did, you would understand how it works. However, I also realize most people will never understand.

It's kind of strange for me to be talking about this, seeing how I never was a member of a twelve-step group. My Dad always said the first three steps were enough for some people; I forgot what they are past that. I never needed the fellowship of a group; my Dad's house and his friends were pretty much a twelve-step program when I was growing up (we joked about getting him serenity prayer wall-paper). Reading is enough for me now.

Or, you can try this: "SERENITY NOW!"

Ok, I'll shut up about it now. I just got annoyed at this hypothetical talk against something that people don't understand when I know it saves some peoples' lives.

---

I think you misread what I wrote. Did you read my posts at all other than skimming them for things to bitch about? I said that some people need to leave the powerlessness idea behind while others need to always hold onto it. Everybody needs to admit powerlessness in the beginning. The need to accept complete responsibility applies to some people, and the time it becomes necessary varies from person to person. PJ is one of the people who is better off leaving the program behind and not immersing himself in drug issues. I know people personally who would relapse if they got back into a 12 step program at this point. I also know people who need to be slapped in the face and have somebody yell, "Stop blaming it everything but yourself!" Different things work for different people.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Oneironaught

I like that assessment. It's always best to put power in the hands where it's needed. There's nothing wrong with surrendering to a "Higher Power" but, the one who surrenders must be willing to stand up and take charge.

Your God can give you the tools and opportunities but it is you who must be ready to step up and do the work. Letting go and saying "God, take the wheel" will only get you run into a wall. Steering that wheel yourself in the direction you've been shown is the only way to avoid that brick wall.

---

Thanks. That is exactly what I am saying, aside from the God ideas. But I can understand the "higher power" necessity. Some could call it nature or whatever. But I think we agree on the necessity of personal responsibility and the role it has to play.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

Thanks. That is exactly what I am saying, aside from the God ideas. But I can understand the "higher power" necessity. Some could call it nature or whatever.

---

I only mentioned "your God" because it springs off of the "Higher Power" concept encouraged by the standard 12-step program. In my opinion, that higher power may be anything from a Biblical God to your own subconscious and will power. That's why they use the generic "Higher Power": because it can be tailored to the individual participant. That is a good thing, no doubt.

Quote:

---

But I think we agree on the necessity of personal responsibility and the role it has to play.

---

But yeah, you and I definitely see eye-to-eye on this.

I understand that what I put forth on the issue can be construed as cold or insensitive. But, in reality, I believe this attitude - that of personal responsibility - is the ultimate solution to a personal problem of just about any capacity or magnitude. Because - whether a given recoveree admits it or not - if success is achieved by some one it's that person who did the work and who had the success.

Now, there's no shame in having to lean on support for awhile. Nothing at all. But think about it on those terms and you'll see that to being able to say "I quit", "I broke free from drugs" and "I" was able to beat alcoholism" is where it's really at. That's moving on - that's recovery. The real power in saying "I did it" is that the power stays with you. That is real power.

Moral:

To have to continue believing that you couldn't do it but, that others had to do it for you, says something deep inside. What that says is that I'm weak and don't have the confidence to go out on my own and face the world. That, my friends, is what's counter-productive about not eventually breaking free from the 12-step program: you end up denying your own success; it's self defeating.

Remember, when the chips are down and you have no one to lean on you are the rock that must stand strong. Eternal dependence won't help you there. That's all on you and you and you... and me.