Thread: Twelve Step Heretic - carried forward from a Help topic

First of all, I commend you on your success. 12-step programs can and do work, if you work the program.

Originally Posted by pj

It became my life for a time. Even my romantic interests were from this circle. After breaking off a second relationship, I realized that the whole lifestyle had become a replacement for the drugs and alcohol - which had served its purpose, indeed, but was no longer healthy or resulting in getting on with my life.

And that was my point with the post you quoted. There's a time when the recoveree must be able to step away from the program because it can only do so much. Beyond that point, goers are simply substituting one drug obsession with another.

So I quit AA. Twenty plus years later, I'm still clean and sober and happy, and life is better than I ever imagined it could be. I still choose not to drink or use mind altering substances, but I'm not afraid of alcohol. Over the years I've tasted wines, and I use alcohol copiously in my cooking. No cravings result from it. I could probably drink if I wanted to - but I like it way too much and would very likely return to my old destructive ways. Sober is better. That's my choice of lifestyle.

I always manage to find new levels of respect for you, pj. And attitudes like this are the very reason why.

It was time to move on.

People like you are why the programs work. They do their part and stick around for awhile to help others. Many members, however (as has been said) choose to never leave because they are fed the notion that without constant active participation in NOT using their vice they can never break free of said vice. To me, that's so backwards. The only way to break free is to reach a point where you simply break free and move on with your life.

Sobriety - true sobriety - is not replacing one unhealthy behavior with another. It is the complete reconstruction of a person's life, in humility and recognition of the incredible mess that was made of it the first go. The Twelve Steps are amazingly powerful tools in the path to achieving that goal, so long as they don't become the end in themselves.

Amen, brother

You know, when I went it wasn't because of an alcohol or drug problem. It was purely a legal problem. But, if I were to say that I got nothing out of going I'd be lying. I actually found some pretty deep spirituality in those meetings. There was a real bond going on there. Unfortunately, that's also what sucks some people in so deep, even long after they've supposedly moved on from their issues.

I say: Take and use the tools. Then apply them to the real world with real friends and healthy environments. Dwelling for years about how you're a hopeless addict isn't going to move you past that. Especially when you've been sober for years. If you don't do drugs then you're not an addict (any longer). And if you haven't done drugs for years then you're not "recovering", you are recovered.

"Recovering" implies ongoing dependence. "Recovered", yeah, that's empowering! That's victory. Don't let anyone take away your pride and sense of accomplishment.

I believe that the whole philosophy of the twelve step system is inherently flawed.

If you look at even the first step, you will see what I'm referring to - it essentially convinces the addictees that they are powerless over their own lives, and that only a 'greater power' can help them. To me, that is entirely wrong. The moment one 'admits' that they are powerless over their own decisions, it becomes true. This is the very reason people stay in AA groups for such periods of time - they've been brainwashed into thinking that they are incapable of staying sober on their own, and that they NEED some outside source of strength to overcome their addiction. AA becomes that source.

It seems to me that pj was able to leave because he didn't become completely convinced at step one. The system obviously helped him, but in the end he retained his control over his life, and that enabled him to carry on the sobriety on his own.

Despite clearly having positive effects on many addicts, twelve-step programs seem to weaken most of them, instead of making them emotionally strong enough to resist temptation. The people who stay in these groups long after their goal is attained are essentially broken. Their self-confidence, and their belief in their power over their lives, is systematically destroyed by the very first step.

I just think there has to be a more constructive method of action.

On another note, do they really send you to twelve-step programs for legal reasons? That seems a bit odd to me, considering that they are largely dependent on 'God'. I know they try to get out of this problem by saying 'God as we see him', but what happens if you're a militant atheist who sees no God at all?

[quote]If you look at even the first step, you will see what I'm referring to - it essentially convinces the addictees that they are powerless over their own lives, and that only a 'greater power' can help them. To me, that is entirely wrong. The moment one 'admits' that they are powerless over their own decisions, it becomes true. This is the very reason people stay in AA groups for such periods of time - they've been brainwashed into thinking that they are incapable of staying sober on their own, and that they NEED some outside source of strength to overcome their addiction. AA becomes that source.[quote]

Absolutely true. I agree. I think that AA doesn't want their members to leave because they don't believe in them, and that is just not right. How can you expect people to overcome their addictions, and how can they expect to if they have an organization that doesn't truly believe that they can eventually go off on their own?

I watched my uncle go through AA. It was really bad for a really long time. He was always a wreck. Rushing off to AA meetings at night, but he never really believed he could do it. The 12 steps did get him through a lot of his problems, and he did end up sober, but only after he left was he truly sober.

On another note, do they really send you to twelve-step programs for legal reasons? That seems a bit odd to me, considering that they are largely dependent on 'God'. I know they try to get out of this problem by saying 'God as we see him', but what happens if you're a militant atheist who sees no God at all?

Then you're screwed I guess

Originally Posted by thegnome54

If you look at even the first step, you will see what I'm referring to - it essentially convinces the addictees that they are powerless over their own lives, and that only a 'greater power' can help them. To me, that is entirely wrong. The moment one 'admits' that they are powerless over their own decisions, it becomes true.

...and that they NEED some outside source of strength to overcome their addiction. AA becomes that source.

I completely agree.

It seems to me that pj was able to leave because he didn't become completely convinced at step one. The system obviously helped him, but in the end he retained his control over his life, and that enabled him to carry on the sobriety on his own.

That's right, the program should be a source for coping skills, not a permanent crutch.

On another note, do they really send you to twelve-step programs for legal reasons?

Yes, but it was an option. Either jump through their hoops, go and get my paper signed or have a record for being arrested for having a tiny bit of pot in my house. My roommate had gotten a friendly visit from the police one day and they smelled his pot that he was smoking in the living room. Next thing I know there was f*cking cops in our home and one is at my bedroom door asking if they can search. It was all downhill from there.

Long story short, an accident on some one else's part landed me in jail for some hours. The resolution was either standard probation or this new program that only first-time misdemeanor offenders could take advantage of. It involved monthly consultations with a case worker, 8 meetings a month (NA/AA), filling out paperwork for each meeting, paying money each month, taking piss tests twice a week, and other hoops through which to jump. The advantage is that it was shorter than standard probation and it keep the offense from being logged on my record.

Proudly, I can say that I was a poster child for the program. I mean, I had every 'i' dotted and every 't' crossed. I impressed my case worker so much and got along with her so well that she ended up letting me out of the program early. They all loved me and, honestly, I didn't hate having to do it. Well, at first I did but, the way every one related to me was rather surreal. I sometimes have that effect on people. In real life, people love me for some reason. Honesty and sincerity go a long way in life. Plus, I was able to maintain an amazingly positive attitude about the whole situation, which eased the road immensely.

My case worker actually cried when I gave her a "goodbye" card on the last day I saw her. On my way out of the courtroom, she ran up to me and gave me a huge bear hug with tears in her eyes

I know they try to get out of this problem by saying 'God as we see him', but what happens if you're a militant atheist who sees no God at all?

And by referring to "a Higher Power".

Originally Posted by thegnome54

If you look at even the first step, you will see what I'm referring to - it essentially convinces the addictees that they are powerless over their own lives, and that only a 'greater power' can help them. To me, that is entirely wrong. The moment one 'admits' that they are powerless over their own decisions, it becomes true.

I'm afraid I must disagree with you all.

Believing we have control over the situation is insanity. If we had control, we wouldn't have become addicted. By the time we get to the point of being willing to try a 12 step program, you can bet EVERY other option has failed, and that we have left behind a trail of disaster, damage and profound hurt.

No - we are there because we COULDN'T fix it ourselves. Admitting we have failed, that we are powerless, is the absolutely essential first step in starting to tear down the lifestyle that got us where we were so that we can start building again.

The only way to accept powerlessness and failure without falling into complete hopeless despair is to recognize that there is something beyond us capable of restoring us to sanity. If not, then admitting defeat is tantamount to suicide. Sadly, for most addicts and alcoholics, NOT admitting defeat is equally suicidal.

Nope... admitting powerlessness is essential. There's a reason it is the first step.

This is a very interesting and important thread. I have had my own problems with drugs over the years. I will give my background on it before I talk about AA and such. (If you want to skip to that, go to the second paragraph.) I have a problem with binge drinking, but I don't have a problem of wanting to drink every day. I don't drink that often. It's just that once in a while I have a strong urge to do it, and it's when I do it that there is often a problem. Once I start drinking, I sometimes just keep going and going until I black out and have to learn the next morning what I did, and what I did is often pretty insane. That problem really started slowing down for me when I woke up in the emergency room three years ago after getting sent there by some cops who found me somewhere about to fall over dead. Sadly, it took a few more blackouts for me to really get a better handle on the situation. I still drink sometimes, but it has been a while since I really went overboard. I probably need to quit completely. Also, I have a pot addiction. But that is a psychological one like gambling, and I sometimes go weeks and even months without pot when I really try. Pot very noticably fogs up my head, makes me much lazier, and makes me feel significantly sickly when I get on a tear with it. I feel all of those effects even weeks after the phase ends. I have come close to overdosing on cocaine and meth a few times each, but I know I will never use meth again and that if I were to ever do cocaine again, I would keep a major limit on how much I did. I have a much stronger grip on meth than cocaine for some reason. But hopefully I will never do cocaine again either. I went through a shoot up pain killers phase. It lasted four months. I ended up quitting on my own, without going to any meetings. That is very unusual, but it might not have been so easy if I had continued the habit much longer. Psychedelic drugs like salvia divinorum and LSD are non-addictive and non-lethal, so I am not totally sure how they work into things. Sometimes it seems that leaving their door open leaves the door open to all drugs. Maybe so. I still have not completely shut the door on them, but I'm thinking I might have to.

So that is my background with drugs. I still do them sometimes, but I have gotten much better. I am leaning toward cutting them out completely, and sometimes I go weeks and months without doing any at all, with 100% belief that I have quit for life. So I have a drug problem, but not one that I think would be helped by AA. I went to an AA meeting one time, and it was not for me at all. I was in a room full of people who love to get blitzed out of their minds and who talked for an hour straight about how they love to get blitzed out of their minds. Some of them cried while they did it, and that was very depressing for me. They kept talking about getting messed up. That situation of being in a room full of drug lovers talking about drugs and how they love to do them made me want to get blasted out of my mind. But we all just walked out and didn't get messed up. But I wanted to get lit way more when I walked out of there than I did when I walked in. So I think those meetings are apparently good for people who are hoplessly obsessed with getting messed up all day every day, but sometimes not for people who still have some room to quit on their own.

A high percentage of my best friends from my college years and the years following college are either dead or hopelessly hooked on stuff that has them where they are just the walking dead. Their lives are essentially over, unless something very drastic happens. I am talking about people who have to wake up and do their drugs and then maintain their effects all day, even if that means robbing their parents' houses, which is something they would have never dreamed of doing 15 years ago. Many of them have been to rehab so many times that they no longer think it's worth attending. They have zero control over their problems, and I know that facing that is a necessar first step. Those people have faced it and need to continue down the right road. I think they definitely need to get into a program and stay in it for life. And I have seen where those programs help keep people sober. Copac is one of the best rehabs in the U.S., and it's in Jackson, where I live. A lot of celebrities come here to attend it. I used to live around a bunch of Copac people, and I know that it saved their lives and has kept them sober for years and years. All of them were all day every day users of very hard and addictive drugs, and Copac helped them save themselves. Now they are still part of Copac's program and also attend AA meetings every single day. It is like a religion to them, it has them in a state that would qualify as "brainwashed", and in regular conversations they will recite Copac and AA teachings in the same manner extremely religious Christians recite Bible verses. But I think that's a great thing. Because drugs were such an obsession for them, that obsession needed to be replaced with another one. It was their only hope. You can't go from being an all day ever day heroin or meth addict to being somebody completely without an obsession in a short time. I very much believe that something like Copac or AA is necessary.

With that said, I have thought for a long time that maybe after a long, long time, some major addicts could get the benefits they need form the program and then leave the program when the time comes so they can stop wrapping their lives up in drug issues. When you talk and think about not doing drugs all day every day, the drugs are still with you, but you are defending yourself against them. It seems like maybe some people need to reach a point where the drugs have nothing to do with their lives. That might not be the case for everybody, but I think it is for some people. I now know that PJ is an example of one of them. For me personally, AA and such would have me craving drugs every day. They probably produce cravings for everybody, but for some people that craving level is a reduction, while for some people it is an increase. I do my best when drugs have nothing to do with my life, so maybe that should be the long term goal for many people.

Something that makes me mad about AA/NA is how the members are treated as victims. I don't understand the logic behind alcoholism being teated as a "disease". However, it is good for the mental health of addicts to feel like it's not their fault. But, the mentality that "its not my fault" just seems to create relapses.

Originally Posted by pj

Believing we have control over the situation is insanity. If we had control, we wouldn't have become addicted.

But if you don't have control, how can you realize you have a problem and choose to go to AA meetings, devoting several hours a day to trying to fix the problem? That is a form of control. I never said that it's easy to just *stop* drinking - there are complex physiological causes for addiction, and just wanting to stop is often not enough to go through with it. However, to assert that you have NO control over your own actions is bound to make you mentally weak - make you give up on yourself, believing that there's nothing you can do anyways.

Originally Posted by Half/Dreaming

Something that makes me mad about AA/NA is how the members are treated as victims. I don't understand the logic behind alcoholism being teated as a "disease". However, it is good for the mental health of addicts to feel like it's not their fault. But, the mentality that "its not my fault" just seems to create relapses.

I think that's probably true. The old friends of mine who keep relapsing and really screwing things up for themselves and people who care about them do have the mentality that they are victims and that they are somehow special because they have a disease most people don't have.

I see drug addiction as a disease, but it is a self-induced one and one that the person who has it is responsible for dealing with. I see it as a disease because I think it's a mental illness. Another old friend once told me that he came really close to robbing a liquor store to have the money he needed to get some crack. He said he knew he would go to prison for it, but he wanted crack so bad he was willing to deal with the consequences. Major addicts often do things to get their drugs even though they know damn well they will go to jail for it. Some heroin addicts collapse so many veins that they start cutting their muscles open with knives to get the stuff into their blood. If they don't have their own needles, they will share needles with people they know are HIV and Hepatitis C positive just to get a quick fix. Many of them will steal from family members to get drug money, knowing damn well that they will be putting major dents in family relationships. I believe that anybody who is willing to do that type of stuff for a high is mentally ill. So I think it is a mental disease. But I still say that they brought the disease on themselves and are responsible for doing what they have to do to handle the mental problem they created. I don't think they have a valid excuse for doing what they do. Their mentality that they do keeps them from trying as hard as they should. The best thing you can do for a drug addict is hold him/her responsible and shun the person for doing evil things.

Thats exactly what I mean, especially the "self induced" part. The word "disease" just doesn't describe a self induced mental disorder to me. Even worse, a large number of alcoholics claim that is really isn't their fault, but their genes MADE them drink themselves into addiction. I can see how alcoholic parents can rub off on the children, but saying that it is imbeded in DNA is evasive.

I guess what I am trying to say is that the term "disease" usually refers to sicknesses that are out of our control.

Originally Posted by thegnome54

But if you don't have control, how can you realize you have a problem and choose to go to AA meetings, devoting several hours a day to trying to fix the problem? That is a form of control.

The step is "We admitted we were powerless over (fill in the blank), and that our lives had become unmanageable."

That "fill in the blank" bit is what you are missing. We do not convince ourselves we are in some nebulous state of infantile helplessness - but we recognize that we have lost control over alcohol or drugs or whatever else it may be that we have become addicted to, and that we are unable to fix it ourselves.

I really dislike the "disease" thing as well. It is bullshit, as far as I'm concerned - especially when that "disease" can get you into a class of people receiving special treatment for a "disability." My family's life has been deeply impacted by an alcoholic who has embraced this notion, and by other family members who refuse to hold her responsible for her actions as a result.

Genetic propensity or not, we make the choices - right up to the point where we lose control. We choose ourselves to that point. We choose to stick that needle in our arm or take those pills or snort or smoke or drink or whatever. There are consequences to choices... and one of the consequences to certain choices happens to be addiction. It doesn't just fall out of the sky and hit you.

Originally Posted by Half/Dreaming

Something that makes me mad about AA/NA is how the members are treated as victims. I don't understand the logic behind alcoholism being teated as a "disease". However, it is good for the mental health of addicts to feel like it's not their fault. But, the mentality that "its not my fault" just seems to create relapses.

Originally Posted by pj

I really dislike the "disease" thing as well. It is bullshit, as far as I'm concerned - especially when that "disease" can get you into a class of people receiving special treatment for a "disability."

I couldn't agree more. It irks me that society has labeled bad behaviour "disease". Every damn thing that goes wrong is a disease. That's the mentality of the victim. You'll never recover if you accept that you have no control over what your future holds.

I'm sorry, drug abusers and alcoholics are not victims: they are willing participants. Sure, they may have reached the point of "no return", so to speak, where they've lost control. But they themselves brought themselves to that point.

To call it a disease is only a cop-out to say that "I have no control" and "This happened TO me". No, it didn't happen TO you - it's something YOU DID.

Like so many things in today's society, we try to pass blame onto things beyond our control. That way we don't have to answer for our actions. That's bullshit, plain and simple. Your kid won't sit his ass still and pay attention in class? Well, damn, he needs medication. After all, he has a "condition". Dammit, his "condition" is being a kid.

The damn drug companies (and Liberalism) have the world so engulfed in finger pointing, passing the buck and subscribing to their BS mentality that every thing is a medical condition. Well, I'm here to say that it's not. Personal responsibility is where it's at.

We all choose our path in life: Choose wisely.

Well said Onieronaught. Liberalism is evasive and ultimately dangerous. It makes every social issue twice as complicated, because "who should we blame?" is more important than the solution. And liberalism will always gain power as long as there are people who are too lazy or incapable of solving their own problems.

Ha! I have to disagree with you guys again.

"Liberalism" has historically been about open-mindedness and liberty - keeping government out of people's lives and business, allowing the maximum freedom for human beings to progress through innovation and creativity nurtured in a non-repressive environment.

I'll grant you that at this point in history that is no longer so, but most people who call themselves "liberal" don't seem to understand that. What they seem to fear (and rightly so, based on track record) in modern "conservatism" is exactly the same thing that is being dished up by "liberals". This is simply because collectivists have co-opted the "liberal" label.

Never forget that Thomas Jefferson was a liberal.

I would take that "liberal" tag out of both of your arguments and replace it with "Cultural Marxism", which accurately reflects the notion of forced sharing of responsibility. Do a search on the term and enjoy some fascinating reading.

Let's not allow this thread to collapse into an argument about this particular point though, even though I do feel it is important. Start another thread on it if you wish.

PJ, the only thing liberalism is doing today is complicating everything. It allows blame to be placed anywhere you want it. Liberalism is a philosophy of whining and finger pointing.

Liberalism brough "Political Correctness" on us. PC is an absolute joke. Everybody is "so offended" these days, and even our sports teams are being attacked for their names.

Liberalism asserts that the right not to be offended is more important than free speech and freedom of religion. It has done some good, but it values and harbors victimization. It is a hippie joke that flew out of control in the hands of smug individuals.

You have given liberalism to the enemy.

I suggest you rethink that strategy.

Liberalism has been stolen by the enemy, not given by me. They took a good idea, and used it to fill peoples heads with self righteousness and victimization. Liberals play on people's emotions and misfortunes to gain power. It pathetic and twisted.

Again, I would love to engage in an in depth exploration of that subject, but not in this thread. If you want to start a new thread, do so and point to it from here.

Do yourself a favor and learn what Cultural Marxism is, where it came from, and how it has (and is being) implemented. You will begin to understand where I am coming from.

A.A. saved and continues to save my father's life, so for those of you who don't agree with it based on something about the wording of the philosophy you that don't happen to like, without any first-hand experience, you are pretty much saying the people whose lives it has saved would be better off dead. The twelve-step philosophy has been a part of my life indirectly for so long (due to hearing about it incessantly for like the last 25 or 30 years), I apply it all the time without even thinking about it. It helps in many situatitions, with many sorts of problems, that's why there is A.A., N.A., O.A., for sex addicts, and gambling addicts, etc. etc.

It doesn't matter if you are an atheist (which I am and my father used to be when he first started going); you just have to realize that there is something in the universe which is greater than yourself. That's not hard for anyone to imagine, especially an addict.

Mental disorders, of which addiction is one, are real diseases. It doesn't matter if they are self-induced or exacerbated by an individual's behavior; this is true of many (most?) physical diseases as well. Blaming addicts for their condition is the same as blaming a person for depression, or obesity, or diabetes, or arthritis, etc. etc.--a lot of the diseases people suffer from are there own "fault", but luckily they can be treated by behavioral changes, if a person is willing, and just as a diabetic needs to learn how to eat differently, an addict can learn changes in thinking patterns which can alleviate their disease. That is how twelve-step programs help.

My father continues to go to A.A. because he says that his recovery depends on helping other people. And just like a diabetic, an addict is never "recovered", because the symptoms of their chronic disease will come back if they don't continue to practice what they have learned. To each their own, if it is working.

I say this knowing that some former abusers, such as pj and myself, can change their ways, in his case after giving up going to meetings, in my case never even starting (but like I said I got a lot of it second-hand). I don't know what that part means, but it doesn't mean that A.A. doesn't serve its purpose for some people. If it's not your thing, don't go, but you shouldn't criticize it, because it has saved a lot of people.

Originally Posted by Moonbeam

If it's not your thing, don't go, but you shouldn't criticize it, because it has saved a lot of people.

I'm not debating that, I just think that if a method was created involving complete personal acceptance of control over the issue, even more people could be completely saved, just as you and pj have been.

Addiction is a very difficult thing to overcome, but no matter how powerful the urge is, it is always possible for an addict to say no. I'm not saying it's easy, by any means, but if you were to lock an addict in a room with no drugs, they would be 'cured' after a long enough period. There are no other diseases like this, which is why many hesitate to consider it a disease - it's more of a state of mind which needs to be broken out of. It's entirely possible for some individuals to break free from such a state through sheer will, and I know some people who have done so. I think that if we try to reinforce the idea of addiction as a state of mind instead of an affliction that the addict has 'no power' over, we may save many more people from despair and relapse.

There may be different roads to the same place, but most addicted people fail no matter which way they go. That is the nature of the disease, and is why you should not criticize something that works for some people--it's more help than some theoretical wonderful program that doesn't exist except as your idea of what would be ideal, because you don't like how the first step sounds. Unless you've developed this method and tested it and it has a higher success rate than programs that are currently operating and actually helping people, you are knocking the one thing that may save an individual addict.

I'm not saying I'm so great or anything, because I don't know my diagnosis exactly, just that I used to use way too many drugs, and now I don't. I think it is much harder for most people than it is for me. And probably because I've had so much twelve-step shoved down my throat for years, but I'm better off for it.

How do you know it is always possible for an addict to say no? Your experience as a former heroin addict? Your success in quitting smoking? You can't cure an addict by "locking them in a room" for a long time, and "sheer will" does not work forever--will power always eventually fails. It takes something else, a spiritual change, as pj said, and that is what twelve-step programs teach. You do not understand, and because you don't understand, you shouldn't knock it. No offense, but it's obvious that you just don't get it. That's OK, most people don't and never will, but for those that do, it is a life-saver.

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."

Originally Posted by thegnome54

It's entirely possible for some individuals to break free from such a state through sheer will, and I know some people who have done so.

A state of mind gets an addict there, but once there it becomes a terrible trap. The trap never happens for some people, while for others it gets you unbelievably quickly. There is a genetic predisposition in some people. I happen to come from a long line of alcoholics on my mother's side. My children know they have alcoholics from both sides, and are going to have to weigh that very carefully when the time comes for them to decide whether they wish to drink.

We have a saying in AA about willpower: the next time you have diarrhea, try willing yourself to stop.

My point in starting this has gotten lost. It was simply that AA itself can become an addiction. Given the choice between being addicted to AA or being addicted to any substance, the choice seems perfectly clear. I would much rather see a person immersed in the AA lifestyle and alive than any of the alternatives - alternatives which include the likelihood of death and insanity.

I mentioned that my life has been tremendously impacted by alcoholics who have ended up going in these other directions. There are some here who know the story of my wife's mother, whose alcoholism ended in her tragic, senseless death that ended up turning our lives inside-out for months. Another close family member, while now possibly sober after repeated rehab stays and a 40 year cycle of addiction and relapse, seems to have gone the insanity route - a situation involving two young children who will continue to bear the weight of their mother's irresponsibility for the rest of their lives.

This shit isn't theoretical. It's real, and it kills. I can just as emphatically state that AA works. In the face of the alternatives, that's a pretty staggering promise to be able to make.

PJ, I am curious to know whether you agree with what I have said. It's pretty much summed up in my last post.