12 step programs - do they work?

Twelve years ago on my birthday, I quit a 6 year heroin habit. I did it cold turkey and from that day to this, I have not touched a grain of dope. Nor have I had any desire to.

Still, I’ve had proponents of 12 step programs tell me I’m not “really” an ex-addict – rather, I’m in denial and in danger of relapse because I didn’t go through the program. Stephen King wrote a column in Entertainment Weekly a couple of years ago that touched on that – he said that the only way a person could kick an alcohol or drug habit was by going through a 12 step program. Advice columnists regularly recommend 12 step programs for a broad range of addictions. I started to wonder how successful they really are.

So just for the hell of it, today I thought I’d do some research and just a preliminary (and completely unscientific) look at some of the information out there was enlightening to say the least. I just googled a bunch of terms – “AA recovery rates”, “12 step recovery rates”, “12 step relapse rates” etc.

I got a mix of information but the actual scientific studies that turned up suggested that the recovery rate for people who attend 12 step programs is roughly the same as that of people who simply decide to quit on their own (which seemed to apply to both drugs and alcohol). The relapse rate is quite high, also about the same as those who quit cold turkey.

Which brings up a couple of questions in my mind. First, isn’t it possible that those people who say that a 12 step program “saved” them might actually have saved themselves? In other words, perhaps their recovery is more because of them than because of the organization. There are numerous stories of people who quit several times, attended a program each time, relapsed and then finally quit for good. Was that because they were finally working the program “right” or because they’d finally decided to change their lives and meant it?

Secondly, why is it okay for judges to order people to attend AA meetings or other 12 step programs if they aren’t actually effective? This happens every day. Isn’t it dishonest to officially sanction a course of treatment that isn’t actually proven to be more effective than no treatment at all?

And perhaps most importantly, are we, by so universally supporting a course whose effectiveness is questionable failing to look for treatments that ARE effective?

Once again, I have to stress that the information I have is just from one afternoon’s casual googling. I have also never attended an AA meeting in my life so I have no personal experience with it. But it makes me wonder about a lot of stuff – there are people out there who are frightened and desperate and 12 step programs hold out the hope of a solution. If it isn’t really a solution, that’s pretty disillusioning.

Thoughts? Comments?

but I've never been addicted to anything illegal (we'll keep chocolate out of this discussion). I have several friends, however, who are members of NA (Narcotics Anonymous) and from what I've learned from them, the key to the group is THE GROUP. I am sure that there are some folks who, like you, can quit cold turkey and stay off of whatever they were addicted to. But others need a support group--just folks to be with, to hang around with, who won't judge and will help if there is a relapse. So many folks don't have someone around to be supportive and understanding.

And it is because of the group help that I think judges recommend AA--and also because it is a solid commitment--too easy for an addict to say they'll quit on their own and never do it.

However, there doesn't seem to be a lot of hard evidence showing that the group support is any more effective than anything else. Which makes me question whether it's right to order it in court.

Thanks for the reply. :hi:

if the only choices the judge has is that the person promises to kick the habit on his own or go to a program, I think the judge would have more faith in the program--not because it is more effective, but because he can find out if the person actually is trying to kick the habit because he has to attend meetings, etc.

quit drinking. I hated those meetings so bad that I decided I would do anything not to have to go back. Seriously though, they really did not work for me - I hated the meetings with a passion, and really stopped on my own. Every time we went to a meeting we were supposed to have the leader sign off on our little card so we could present it to the court. After 2 meetings a light bulb went off in my head - "anonymous". They signed the little card "Rick" or "Jim" so after that I started signing off on the cards whatever name came into my head. My very best friend at the time also was ordered to go to the meetings and she really got into them. She became a spokesperson for AA and conducted meetings, spoke at their conventions, apologized to everyone who she had ever done wrong to. Two years later she got herself a bottle, got drunk and blew her brains out. However, to this day when someone asks me how I quit drinking I always say "AA".

I know that I am an addict, because despite all the negative consequences that my addiction has brought me, I could still go back to it in a heart-beat.

When 12-steppers use the term "addict", they are not just referring to someone who is physically addicted to the substance or behavior, but rather it is meant to refer to some sort of trait within that person. For instance, I have known some very heavy drinkers who I would not refer to as addicts. I have known people who have used drugs (such as heroin) but were not addicts. That is not to denigrate their plight, but if you can make the decision to quit on your own - then you are not an addict.

Relapses are fairly common - in whatever program of recovery one is in. Some people can do it straight off, and bully for them. I, unfortunately, am not one of those people. For me, I can't do it on my own. I've tried, many many many times.

I am unfamiliar with the scientific literature on the efficacy of 12-step programs, but I can tell you that meeting with like-minded individuals who have similar desires can only help. You get a lot of support from complete strangers and, for me, it really has been a life-saver. As I said, I could not stop on my own. I needed help. Some people go into treatment programs, but I didn't have that kind of money - for me, it was the group.

Secondly, why is it okay for judges to order people to attend AA meetings or other 12 step programs if they aren’t actually effective? This happens every day. Isn’t it dishonest to officially sanction a course of treatment that isn’t actually proven to be more effective than no treatment at all?

If they aren't effective, then judges shouldn't order people to the groups. But I question the predicate.

And perhaps most importantly, are we, by so universally supporting a course whose effectiveness is questionable failing to look for treatments that ARE effective?

We're not. Scientists, psychologists, and psychiatrists are continually looking for courses of treatment that are more effective. AA has been around since the '30s, so it's not as though there's a great deal of research today being dumped into it to tinker with the principles of it.

Once again, I have to stress that the information I have is just from one afternoon’s casual googling. I have also never attended an AA meeting in my life so I have no personal experience with it. But it makes me wonder about a lot of stuff – there are people out there who are frightened and desperate and 12 step programs hold out the hope of a solution. If it isn’t really a solution, that’s pretty disillusioning.

My perspective is that, if one is frightened and alone, the group makes things much easier to deal with. You don't feel quite so alone in that you are surrounded by a group of people who struggle in the same ways that you do. I have seen people there with quite a lot of sobriety - my sponsor being one of them. At least, from my anecdotal experience, it does offer a solution to some.

on edit: Here's a page of research that I happened upon - you might be interested - http://www.hazelden.org/web/public/vcsum0research.page

"I have known people who have used drugs (such as heroin) but were not addicts. That is not to denigrate their plight, but if you can make the decision to quit on your own - then you are not an addict."

Bullshit.

Not an addict? Buddy, I spent every minute of every day for 6 years doing nothing but thinking about where the next fix was going to come from. I jonesed for those fixes, physically, mentally, totally. That shit owned me, body and soul. I neglected my life, my family, my kids all for that beautiful brown magical elixer. You tell me I wasn't an addict because I don't fit your 12 step definition of an addict? Excuse me, you have no idea of what kind of hell I lived with that shit. Or what kind of hell I went through when I kicked it, alone, at home, in my bed, wishing I could die right there.

I don't deny that many people have felt they were helped by a program. But I do wonder how much was the program itself and how much was them coming to the point where they actually could quit. But don't tell me I wasn't an addict just because I was able to quit on my own.

Bullshit.

I'm not the group kind of guy so that was out for me, I just went it alone and I'm around friends who still drink on a regular basis. it depends on what ones decides to do. I quite, they didn't, we're still friends and still enjoy each others company :shrug:

If you don't stop our way, you either didn't really stop (you're still a "dry drunk", or whatever) or you didn't have the problem to begin with.

That way the capital-T Truth that "there is only one way to quit, i.e. with the 12 steps and God's help" can withstand the challenge of clear evidence to the contrary.

That said, I know plenty of people who have been helped by 12 step programs, and plenty of people IN them who are not dogmatic or understand that one size does not fit all.

literature much IMO

the Big Book clearly states we make no claims of being the 'only way'

that is some shit the religiously inclined may claim, but that idea is repudiated clearly and in no uncertain terms in the literature.

:shrug:

Many acknowledge that there may be other ways to get there- and many treatment people take a pragmatic approach, like, "whatever works- good". I have no desire to bash on 12 steppers or the program. It has saved many lives, I know that.

That said- come on. Anyone who has spent any time in those rooms knows that there are lots, and lots, and lots of 12 step dogmas floating around out there, and "there is only one REAL way to do it- the 12 step way" is clearly one of them.

:rofl:

for 15 years! :patriot:

Varkam has a point. You might have had a physical addiction to heroin at the time but the fact that you could quit relatively easily and not go back probably indicates that you don't have an 'addictive' personality.

Where in my post did I say anything about it being easy? On the contrary, it was the hardest thing I ever did in my life and I'm bloody well proud of it.

Let me tell you what it's like to quit heroin "relatively easily."

I did my last hit of heroin on the morning of my birthday, one small line, snorted.

By early afternoon, my mid-back began to hurt.

By mid-afternoon, the muscles in my legs were cramping up. My stomach was upset. My head hurt. My ears rang.

By early evening, I was puking.

By about 9 that night, I was in bed. I did not leave it for a week, except to crawl (literally) to the bathroom to vomit - eventually to dry heave. I wasn't sleeping - I couldn't sleep. Instead, I lay there, aching, shaking, sweating, twitching, hallucinating and wishing I was dead.

A week.

When I got up, I was still sick and didn't start to feel even remotely normal for about 4 or 5 months. I was constipated for 6 months. I had difficulty eating anything more than a bland diet. I could smell heroin cooking frequently and I had dreams of doing it, so vivid that I'd wake up expecting to feel that release. The release that wasn't there.

Please refrain from diagnosis when you have absolutely no idea of what you're talking about.

You were calling 'Bullshit' on what looked like more a problem of semantics, or misunderstanding.

What's with all the anger?

and I accept the apology.

But I do get irritated when people make assumptions. That period of my life was very intense - I really felt that my only choices were to quit or to die. The fact that I'm still alive makes me feel like I did something incredible and I look at my life as a gift, one that I gave myself. To have that accomplishment somehow diminished by having it described as "relatively easy" got my hackles up.

I apoligise in turn if I overreacted. Please understand the reason.

Peace.

I've seen people really struggle with addiction in the sense of quitting and starting, quitting and starting. It's pretty remarkable that you were able to quit on your own and not go back. The words 'relatively easy' obviously weren't the right ones for what you did. Again, sorry.

:hug: Sorry if my back goes up a little too quick. :blush:

I was calling bullshit because I was being told that what I went through was not really addiction, which to me trivialized what I went through. You can call that semantics if you like and yes, it angered me.

but if you reread Varkam's 2nd paragraph the way s/he is using 'addict' vs. 'addiction' is pretty clear. In that sense you can feasibly have an addiction and not be an addict. Heroin IS physically addictive. The word 'addict' is being used two different ways, and I think causing confusion. I'm fairly certain it wasn't used to diminish your experience or difficulties. If a person uses an addictive substance like heroin enough times they'll become addicted - and you can fairly call them an addict. But I think Varkam was using the word in the other way - as a trait within a person, being inclined to addiction apart from any particular substance. Does that make sense?

Apart from your experience with heroin, do you consider yourself generally to be an addictive person? Some people are, some people aren't. A friend of mine who studies right/left brain hemisphere stuff says right brain, creative types tend to be more addictive - it seems to be connected in some way to brain hemisphere dominance.

I used heroin as an example because it's the most extreme thing I kicked but I also quit a ten year coke habit about 2 years before kicking the heroin, I've quit smoking cigarettes 3 times so far (hopefully this time for good) and I have to be very careful with alcohol. At one point, it was getting way out of control and I did stop drinking for several years. I do drink occasionally now but never more than 2 drinks in a day and almost never more than twice in a week. I'm VERY aware of it.

I do tend to do things to excess and it's taken me a lot of years to be aware enough of it to feel some control over it. So yeah, I think I am the type.

And while I did get what he/she was getting at, it just kind of rubs me the wrong way when people assume things on limited information. I was brief in the OP because I really didn't want to delve deeply into my experiences - the post was about 12 step programs, not me, and I simply used that example to set the stage, so to speak.

All I was intending to mean is that not everyone who abuses or is physical dependent on substances is an addict in the sense that the term is used in 12-step literature. In the medical sense, I have no doubts that you were an addict given your story. I'm not trying to offend you in any way whatsoever, and if I did I apologize. I just hit bottom a few months back, so I'm still trying to sort out everything I need to in recovery. I apologize again if I misunderstood your question or if I offended you.

When I posted this:


When 12-steppers use the term "addict", they are not just referring to someone who is physically addicted to the substance or behavior, but rather it is meant to refer to some sort of trait within that person. For instance, I have known some very heavy drinkers who I would not refer to as addicts. I have known people who have used drugs (such as heroin) but were not addicts. That is not to denigrate their plight, but if you can make the decision to quit on your own - then you are not an addict.


I should have perhaps worded it differently so as not to offend.

Many do better with a 12 step program, many don't. I think it is quite individualized. I see them as an adjunct to other forms of therapy. I have heard some people say they don't like 12 step programs as it seems to them to just be keeping people stuck and wallowing. I have heard some people say they would be dead if not for 12 step programs. For some the group is needed, for others not. As far as ordering 12 step programs, I can see having people experience them as they might help. I am not clear on how long they should be ordered, but having the experience can help.

I am glad for you that you are able to do what you did and continue on well.

Once an addict, you are always an addict. You can make the choice to use or not, but if you start again, it can more easily grab you again.

"Once an addict, you are always an addict. You can make the choice to use or not, but if you start again, it can more easily grab you again."

One of the things I did when I quit was to sever ties with the friends who were still using. Because I know how tempting it can be when something is right there. At the time, it kind of hurt. Later, I realized that most of them weren't really friends anyway - more like people who hung out and got high together. There wasn't really anything else we had in common.

many years. Twelve-step programs offer good information and ways to help yourself stop doing what you want to stop doing (sponsors)... I listened, had a good sponsor, and picked up after two years or so. I didn't go to AA on my own, I was nagged into it. Finally, one day I felt lousy, looked like hell and was neglecting important stuff. That was it, I had had enough I finally stopped when I felt like stopping, and like you, did't give it a second thought. I think your findings are accurate and reliable. It's like going on a diet; you have the diet, the pre-planned meals set out for you, but if you want that vanilla-fudge ice cream badly enough you're going to cheat on the diet. It's a personal decision as to how much YOU want it. I heard a lot of "war stories" in AA, mostly enjoyed the "discussion groups". If you haven't affiliated yourself with a twelve-step program, that surely does NOT mean you're not "sober." You haven't picked up,? You're sober my friend, and my hearty congratulations to you.

And I really don't mean to put down AA or 12 step programs - I know that plenty of people feel they helped them a lot and that's cool. But I was surprised to see what I did in regards to recovery rates and wondered what other people thought about that.

Congratulations on 7 years. :thumbsup:

but that's a topic for another whole thread I suppose.

As for your question on 12 step programs, all I can share is my own experience. AA worked for me.

I don't know that I couldn't have done it on my own, but I never did succeed when I tried it. I could stay 'dry' for a few miserable days but then the awful chatter in my head would send me back to the bottle.

What I found in AA was a way to quiet that inner dialog, a way to cope with life problems without having to drink.

I, too, was a heroin addict for several years and did quit cold turkey one day and never looked back, but alcohol helped with the withdrawals from smack and I soon found I couldn't *not* drink.

While it's true the recovery rates are comparable to no program at all, what I have seen and heard around the rooms of AA was that being 'dry' did not give one the coping skills for a happy life. The 12 steps have helped many people learn those skills, with or without an addiction driving them.

You will probably get some great responses if you pose this question again in the Addiction/Recovery forum. Here's the link:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topics&forum=336

I'm not really an astronomer - just a lover of the night sky. :)

What you say about coping skills makes a lot of sense to me and it's something I hadn't thought about and isn't touched on in any of the studies I read. I do know that groups are often helpful for people - it's always nice to know you're not alone and that there are other people who understand.

I'm glad you found the help you needed. :hug:

as the literature says, "It's a design for living that really works!"

and FYI, 15 years clean and sober here, as of last Tuesday :bounce:

I was one of the unusual ones that didn't relapse (so far) :hi:

aa, na, and ca separate things some what -- they acknowledge that some people can party their asses off with drugs and alcohol -- but never reach that hopeless stage.

which is -- poetic -- for some deep addictive behavior and chemical behaviors in the body.

22 years - that's very cool. :thumbsup:

The 12 step program works for some and is useless to others, just like weightwatchers works for my aunt and didn't do a damn thing for me.

I went to a meeting once some years ago ( cocain)and got cured that very night ! I decided that, if this is what I'd have to do the rest of my life , I'd rather give up the dope....and I did.

My BIL, went from being hooked on booze to being hooked on meetings ( at least 2 a day ) for the past 30 years. I can't stand to be around his ass but I like him better now than I did when he was a drunk. I see him and his "buddies" as life time losers that really just need friends and people they can feel superior to.

As with any other mind altering or destructive behavior, one needs to find the root cause of their problem and try to deal with it. Sounds like you did. Now quit looking for reasons to undermind yourself.

on edit
After reading my comments about BIL and his buddies being " losers " I think I should apologize in advance to people who find success w/ the program and are not like those I mentioned. Actually, I know several people who've been in recovery for years and are good and decent folks that don't judge others...like I did.

Nor am I looking for reasons to undermine myself. I'm pretty comfortable with who I am and how I got there. Nah, it's just intellectual curiosity which drives a lot of what I do and what I get passionate about and the intro was just that - an intro. :)

Congrats on your kicking the coke habit and thanks for your reply. :hi:

they did help my lil bro. :)

:)

I would think the program has to be accepted in your heart for it to work, in which case such a program could be condensed into one or two steps.

...inherantly weak and the support of the group is a lifeline for them to cling to. Some people are helped by the spiritual aspect of the program, and others continue to go to meetings to give back to others the help that themselves received from the group.
When you are hooked you will try anything to save your life. Worked for me so God bless them.

taking a friend through the program. They are too into "God" or higher being. To me that is just an excuse to use or not use. It should come from within ones self. I also noticed they had no problem hooking their clients on other addictions like smoking and sugar, so much sugar.

Beating it on your own will probably go farther in the long run. You don't need anyone to babysit you, you don't have to worry about a higher being and you aren't on other fixes.

I was told by a former substance abuse counselor that the model doesn't work equally for men vs. women, nor for people with different backgrounds (economic, racial/ethnic, religious.) From my anecdotal perspective I know a lot of people who cleaned up/became sober via 12 step programs with or without in-patient care, a few who stopped on their own after deciding that the 12 step approach wasn't working, more than a few who cleaned up in jail or prison (the poor man's drug rehab center) and many others who never found a way to get clean.

I've never looked at the scientific data but have been curious about it because of the different outcomes that I have seen. Even among successful 12 steppers I've seen a broad range, from people who seem pretty solid in their sobriety to people who seem always one step away from taking up alcohol or drugs again even when they've been clean and sober for years.

I think as another poster wrote, judges would rather get people to try AA than send them off on their own without a net. If judges could send people to an in-patient program they probably would. People who have money sometimes plea bargain by agreeing to go into a treatment program.

I'm not trying to be combative but I've heard this said, too - that those who don't find success with the program are somehow "not doing it right." In the case of the many people who attend a program, relapse, attend the program again, relapse, and on and on until they finally succeed - is it that they finally "did the program" correctly or that they simply decided that now was the time? Or a combination?

Or conversely, those who try the program and don't succeed, are they somehow not doing something right? Looking at it like that, it seems that the program gets a lot of undeserved credit - I mean, no matter what, if a person succeeds or not, the program is not seen at fault - the person is. Yet the statistics don't really seem to bear that out.

i was able to quit a coke habit years ago on my own after some serious rhinoplasty anat but20 years later it took a 12 step program to get me off meth and alcohol. i applaud you, as not many folks are able to quit heroin CT. good on ya. as for rates of success and relapse, i think all of those numbers need to be taken w/ a large graain of salt. since many folks are sent to AA&NA w/ a nudge from the judge and really don't wanna be there it's not a big surprise that when their committment is fulfilled they are back on a barstool or looking for a bag. i know i wasn't ready until it was waaay past time when i shoulda quit. let's face it - most drunks and dope fiends are slow learners when it comes to that particular subject. that and we're up to our necks in that egyptian river -denial.
as for the solution being disillusioning, i only know that i have today and i'm not gonna drink or use. when i wake up tomorrow i'll burp and scratch and look at my 3-legged dog and the chances are real good i'll make the same decision then too. i certainly plan to. but i'm not gonna worry about it.i'm closing in on making that decision, one day at a time, for 9 years now and it does get easier.

and if the path ever gets a little shaky for ya it's never toolate to pop your head into a NA meeting and get booster shot ya know?

good luck to ya!

I think this is probably true for *some* people but not everyone. Nor perhaps not as many people as AA type organizations promote. Mind you my opinion comes from rather narrow experience. I have at least one friend who most definitely has a physical addiction and AA definitely saved his life. It's almost certain that if he ever did drugs or drank again it would be free-fall to a very unhappy place. But I've also seen people who were so convinced that a social drink would ruin them forever that it seemed to set them up for failure from the start. Personally, I just shudder whenever I see one of those glittery 'Powerless' bumper stickers on someone's car. That just CAN'T be a psychologically or spiritually healthy way to think about oneself.

I was in a therapy group back in the 80's that got government funding - making the counseling affordable. Because of the funding, there were a number of people with drug and alcohol problems sent to this group. This organization's approach was to address the psychological issues behind the addiction. They purportedly had a *much* higher success rate than AA for treating drug and alcohol problems. While there are some people who do have a physical problem, a lot of people drink or do drugs to cover up and not deal with deep emotional pain - or even because of a spiritual crisis (we had just as many 'recovering catholics' as alcoholics). Part of the process they used was to require *everyone* coming into the group to not drink or do drugs for one month (whether there for an addiction problem or any other reason). If a person lapsed, they had to start back at 'day one'. For some people this was a long process - much, much more than a month. We would also GO OUT TO A BAR after group sessions to socialize over a drink - including the folks on their month long 'fast'. It was beneficial for people to learn that they could be around alcohol and socialize without drinking and also learn to drink socially.

I have found that saying these things often upsets people into AA a lot. I'm half expecting to raise some hackles with my post. The whole program seems to hinge on the 'all or nothing' idea. The suggestion that it might be otherwise seems to be a threat. I can see the reasons though - as thinking otherwise might be too much of a temptation to relapse.

Frankly, if you were able to quit heroin and not go back to it for as long as you have, then I don't think it's fair for anyone to make claims that you are 'still an addict'. Congratulations on your recovery.

Some people pick up quite a few bad habits in their using years, beyond the drug. Some started using so young they never even learned how to ask someone on a date. Others picked fights so they could blame someone else for their use. Others had never even been on a job interview or finished high school. Stunted emotional and mental growth can seriously dampen someone's attempt at sobriety. The program provides a path to uncover the rocks in the road, the group provides solutions.

Doesn't mean people can't find other ways to deal with personal issues they might have. For a free program that is global and open to all cultures and religions, I think 12 step programs have done an amazing job. Don't know why anybody wants to bash them. If you don't like them, as the saying goes, they'll refund your misery.

I realize a lot of people feel they've been helped by them and that's fine. But I was surprised to find the data I did regarding recovery rates - I expected to find a significant success rate and was surprised when I didn't.

That is all.

I've been clean and sober for years. Anyone who says that there is NO WAY to do it other than 12 step programs, well, they're just plain wrong.

Maybe there's no way for THEM to do it other than the 12 steps- but in my experience, one size does not necessarily fit all. That's not to denigrate 12 steppers or 12 step programs- they do work for lots of people. AA saved my dad's life (at least long enough for the smokes to kill him) But you know what? Some diet plans work for some folks, other ones work for others. You wouldn't argue that if you lost weight some way other than weight watchers, you were never "really fat" to begin with, or that you were still lugging around pounds of invisible fat that you just never dealt with in the proper way...

In my battles in my youth, primarily with alcohol, I certainly spent plenty of time in AA meetings, and also plenty of time investigating the alternatives- because for me, as someone who does not believe in the Western concept of "God", no amount of semantic gymnastics was going to put me in a place where I felt comfortable saying the Lord's Prayer all the time and "turning my life over to the care of 'God'" even as I understood him.

The fact that AA and other 12 step programs are undeniably religious (or at least "spiritual") is also the reason why I think that if courts are going to mandate them, they NEED to make secular alternatives available.

Now- from my point of view, there are sensible reasons why AA as a model works- meetings with people who have been there, people who are really the only other ones who can understand what addicts go through- and I think the powerless and turning over to a higher power works for many people because it gets the problem out of their own heads; and their own heads is where the problem is. It's sort of like, you couldn't fix a broken arm with that same broken arm.. addiction is in the head, IMHO, so it's a tough trick to think your way out of the problem. Of course, I had more than my share of people in AA tell me that my problem was "really" that I didn't believe in "God", and the core reason that I had trouble with booze was my atheism. I call bullshit; my family tree is littered with people who had issues processing alcohol; I think the issue is in the genes, brain chemistry, and liver enzymes, not in a lack of church attendance.

That's not to say the people who argue a Higher Power is keeping them sober are "wrong"; where I think the whole thing goes wrong is when the argument is made that that's the only way ANYONE can ever stay sober.

But, again- there are TONS of people in AA who have a more open mind about things, and who accept that one size does not fit all. That's the bottom line, for me- AA works for some folks; but people- particularly people who aren't looking to "see the light" around God or a Higher Power- should know that there ARE alternatives that work for many, many folks as well.

Here's a couple links:

http://unhooked.com

http://rational.org

Yeah, the whole god aspect does turn me off though like you, I don't consider myself anti-12 step. I was just surprised at the recovery rate - or lack of same.

Hard to get too into that without stepping (excuse the pun) on some folks' toes, and I'm not terribly interested in doing that these days.

except the 12 steps from my desk to the bathroom. Any "program" may or may not work for you or any other individual. It all depends on whether you really want to change your life. If you feel you need to change things in your life and can't do it without help, give it a shot. I don't think solutions to problems can be defined so easily. The problems and solutions are almost infinite.

The fact that you walked away from your drug of choice for six years tells me it was not an addiction, it was a release from some emotional or psychological problem you were dealing with. Without any further details, that is only an assumption based on personal experience. I don't see any reason for needing a "program" beyond not having a reason and the personal resolve to make it so.

For myself, I'm obsessive/compulsive and too emotionally involved with everything I do. I drink because it helps numb me from the rage that I would endure from seeing what goes on in the world today. Through my life, I've found many ways to adjust my interaction with the world, but today it's hard not to be disillusioned.

I did the whole psych routine a few years ago and their first suggestion was pharma products. At the time, the primary discusion was about depression. Fine, no problem, I'm depressed! How about this for a thought, mabey I have a reason (some physical reality to deal with) that is the cause. The respone was trying to push some prescription drug to adjust my "brain chemisrty". My "brain chemistry" can't affect physical reaity, only my perception of it!

Final comment: There is no simple solution to any problem because no problem is as simple as it seems.

someone who has issues or problems with a substance and is still actively using that substance isn't in a position to offer a whole lot of cogent advice on this matter-

at least, not much advice beyond "do it up".

I'm getting really sick of people telling me that I didn't really have an addiction because I was able to "walk away from it."

First of all, I didn't walk. I crawled, kicked and screamed. It was fucking work and I'm sick of people trivializing it by telling me, who experienced it, that it was somehow not an addiction. Jesus Christ on a fucking pogo stick! :banghead:

I hear heroin withdrawal can be pure hell.

I am an AA er myself.One of the things the AA text says is that addiction has two components.A physical craving combined with a mental obsession.
The only way to treat the physical craving is withdrawal followed by total abstinence.

The mental obsession is what the 12 steps are designed to deal with.They help us deal with the issues that lead us to pick up in the first place.I'm sure you know what that first hit leads to.

It sounds to me that while you had a serious physical addiction you did not have the psychological obsession to deal with.That seems like a good thing to me.Some people never get over the obsession and end up relapsing again and again.Some people are like you.Once they get over the physical addiction they have no problem staying away.

While AA or NA may not seem like something you need,always remember that if you start feeling the call for a fix AA or NA can give you a support network to help hold you over.You don't have to go hog wild into the program,just use it as a temporary crutch if needed.


Edited to add:By the way,I am a stone cold atheist.One does not have to beleive in any gods or deities for the steps to work.People who insist that you must beleive in their god are confusing their religous dogma with the AA program.They are two seperate idealogies.One is concerned with the afterlife while the other is for the here and now.

same definition of addiction, I think this is terribly wrong, but there you are. If you were a heroin addict, you had an actual addiction, a physical dependency on a substance to maintain homeostasis, OTOH, people incorrectly claim to be addicted to everything from chocolate to TV shows all the time and we accept this claim as a validation for their habits and lack of will.

The traditional 12 step program has, at its root, a commitment to a belief in the individual's inability to deal with their own problems and a dependence on "a higher power" to overcome that addiction. Most programs claim that faith is not required for the program to work, yet all of the literature is chock-full of references to a god and having to turn yourself over to some "other" for salvation. I've also seen dozens of people replace their addiction to alcohol with a dependence on programs, probably a less harmful dependence but still a dependence.

The people that are telling you that you're "in denial and in danger of relapse because I didn't go through the program" fall into this category. All addicts are in danger of relapse, program or no program, because they're addicts, duh. An alcoholic cannot drink because they are addicted to alcohol, their brains process and react differently to alcohol than non-alcoholics do. A non-alcoholic can drink every day of their lives and will never be an alcoholic, although they will likely need a new liver after a few decades, while an alcoholic can stay dry for 50 years, have one drink and end up on a 3 week bender. It is the nature of addiction.

Personally I think it is mostly a load of crap, but OTOH I've never been addicted to anything although I do have several bad habits, and have known several people that are certain they never could have overcome their own addictions without the program, so there you are. As you've found, when looked at objectively they are no more or less effective than anything else, including the individual just making up her/his mind to stop using.

In short, whatever works for you, works. As for judges ordering people into these programs, I'm sure it's wrong, but not as wrong as throwing people onto the hell that is our prison system, so I guess it's OK with me.:shrug:

Gave me a rueful chuckle which I needed. Thanks. :hi:

That's not to say that they're not the right solutions for other people, but I found them repugnant.

I had a problem with alcohol (20-30 beers a day), and a friend talked me into going to AA. I felt worse after the meetings than I did before, which caused me to drink more.

After seeing a counselor who looked at things from a secular and common-sense direction, I stopped drinking. I still occasionally drink, and over-imbibe on New Year's Eve, but the problem with me wasn't alcohol, but something else entirely.

Still to this day I see people from that AA group that are convinced that I did something wrong by seeking out something else. They consider me an addict - and I'm not. I see it as a form of brainwashing, and if it helps some folks, more power to 'em.

BTW - kudos on kicking the heroin habit CT. I can't imagine the pain and anguish that you must have gone through. :hi:

Best birthday present I ever got and I celebrate my birthday with that in mind every year. :hi:

there is too much "God" in the 12 step program.

I had a drinking problem and I am agnostic. After attending two AA meetings, I wanted to drink more!

AA is not for everyone.

Like you, I quit on my own. Being so sick of the hangovers, I told myself to stop for awhile. But if I wanted a drink, I could have one.

That was six years ago and I have had no desire to drink since. The thought or the smell of alcohol makes me nauseous.

I applaud all people that were able to quit through AA and I applaud all people that quit on their own.

I agree that if people find success, that's the most important thing. I was simply surprised that the recovery rates didn't reflect an improvement over no treatment, given the high profile of 12 step programs.

However, as another poster pointed out, there are so many variables to take into account including the fact that many people are required by the court to attend AA so there's a lot that can skew the results.

Google it, do the research. AA or 12-step programs are no more effective than cold-turkey, SOS, eating Necco wafers -- nothing. The point is to quit, not HOW you quit. The big difference is that AA gets its support from the government via draconian "rehab" programs. That is the ONLY difference. Some people need "group hugs." Some don't. The government has signed on to the "group hug/God is a doorknob" approach.

And don't you fucking dare question them. It only proves you're in denial and you have a serious problem.

.

Some folks go to rehab and quit without aa.I've even seen rationalrecovery meetings held in centers.Some aa folks visit rehabs to tell their stories and see if people sobering up are interested,but that's about as far as it goes.

Aa is self supporting through it's own contributions and neither endorses or opposes any causes,including various other methods of staying sober.The government has no say in aa,nor are there any "aa rehabs".On the contrary,rehabs often are open to participation from aa members,much the same way they offer different therapies,psychiatry,etc. in an effort to help the person stop and resume a peaceful life.

Court mandated referrals. Try finding a judge who issues any other punishment than AA. The courts think AA is the one and the only method, and therefore AA gets all the "business" and all the dollars dropped in the hat.

Believe me...I've done my research. Courts don't even like people to mention Rational Recovery or S.O.S....if you do, you're "in denial." The fact is, ANY method of quitting works, because you can only quit when you want to and are ready to. Therefore, you could read Alice In Wonderland as your "method" if you are really ready to quit, and you'll quit. It has less to do with the method than it does with the motivation of the individual. The statistics back me up on this one.

.

Except the money part.People don't have to contribute to the hat.Also,to the best of my knowledge,anyone ,including the cashier at the 7-11,can sign court cards,as well.

that led up to self medicating and addiction. The person wanting to quit and change can with support. But the way that person is wired due to childhood or adult experiences is left intact if counseling isn't recieved. Alcholics have what they call stinking thinking. They can become a dry drunk if they quit without ever addressing underlying psych issues they had before and developed due to the chemical alterations of their brain. I speak from experience with one who quit, but didn't 12 step for a few years, high bottom and his thinking was adversley affected, therefore relating to others never improved. Once he 12 stepped, issues could be delt with and his life improved dramatically. Counseling with quitting is imperative.

I'll cut and paste from my reply to someone else below -

I also question the idea that so many people have put forth in this thread that one cannot "truly" quit without some kind of counseling or help to deal with the reasons one is using.

I'm not against counseling and have gotten a lot out of it at various times (I've also had counselors who weren't worth a flying fuck, like the last one who told me I needed to put my faith in jesus :eyes: ) I also know that a lot of people need someone objective to point things out to them or help them reach conclusions about their behavior.

But I also know damn well that a rational, thinking, introspective person can come to a lot of very deep and true realizations on their own and go a long way toward dealing with those issues. I recognized why I was using while I was still using. I recognized my destructive behaviors while I was living them. And I realized how I needed to change before I did change. Then I quit, modified my behavior and changed my life. Radically.

I don't think there are hard and fast rules to anything - some people can quit successfully without counseling - others cannot. Some people are capable of self-analysis - some are not. Just because I quit without doesn't mean I was somehow not addicted. I don't direct the next remark to you personally but to be told time and again that I wasn't "really" addicted is insulting and belittles both my pain and my accomplishment.

You say you speak from the experience of one person who quit without a program with no success but then quit successfully when they joined one. Hardly a scientific study there.

and pain, yet you diss omeone else's personal experience after you asked for others thoghts on this. I never offered this as anything else. I nevcer once said a person can't really quit if they don't get counseling as well. But I saw what went on and simply tried to write about a prersonal and painful experience. If you didn't want the input you needn't have posted the question. I never siaid you didn't really quit. In fact I never referred to your experience at all.

i gave more personally painful info than I should have just trying to give one persons inputin what I thought was a real discussion, not a personal attack on you or me.. Nothing more.

I'll be happy to ignore all future posts of yours.

I apologise if I offended you - I never said you said I didn't really quit; in fact, I expressly stated that the remark about belittling was NOT directed at you personally.

I was simply responding to your comment and I quote - "Counseling with quitting is imperative."

That is all. And I certainly didn't mean to come off as if I were dissing your personal experience - I'm sorry if it sounded that way and re-reading my own post, it rather did. So I do apologise, I thank you for your post and I did not mean to hurt you. It IS a painful subject and I appreciate your input on it.

Study after study shows that, whatever the "brand" of therapy, about 1/3 get better, about 1/3 stay the same, and about 1/3 get worse.

So, how can judges mandate "therapy"?

Makes ya wonder, eh?????

Good topic! :toast: oooopss.... :hi:

IMHO, 12 step programs DO work for many people, and they don't work for others. Some people don't like them because of the emphasis on God and a Higher Power. There are alternative groups out there, however, for people who would like the support of a group, but without the God aspect.

I worked in substance abuse treatment centers for a number of years, and I came to the conclusion that if standing on your head in a corner, whistling "Dixie" gets and keeps you clean and sober (not just "dry"), then do it. I have known people who have quit various substances cold turkey, and they have good lives. Then there are people like Bush, who really is a dry drunk, because I don't think he's ever truly accepted the fact that he had a problem. That is a crucial step, I believe, in recovery, regardless of the method one uses (12 step program, inpatient treatment, cold turkey, etc.).

From your post, it sounds like you DID accept that you had a problem, and you took responsibility for your actions, and took responsibility for getting and staying clean.

As to the issue of judges ordering people to attend 12-step programs, I am of two minds on that. On one hand, given that the people who attend them aren't any more successful than people who don't (based on your research), your point is well taken about it being dishonest to order people to attend. On the other hand, though, of those who are ordered to go, some of them obviously do quit, and go on to a good recovery by attending them.

Perhaps a good alternative would be to first order them to get an assessment, and then tell them they need to go to AA, NA, or another group for X number of weeks or months, then go back before the judge. Or something like that.

Notwithstanding the pretzel incident and his various "brush cutting accidents", I've seen video of him on the stump in the past few years looking REALLY fucked up. He's on something, I'll betcha.

I absolutely agree. I think he's tipping the bottle again and probably snorting again too. It's bad enough that he is without a soul, but trying to substitute the soul with substances just ain't gonna fly.

12 steps work for some people and not for others. I like to think of the substance abuse treatment field as a buffet of choices that provide options for each type of person. I'd LIKE to think this because sadly it's not the case. But there is, more than ever, an influx of different treatment and recovery models, including the 12 steps, motivational interviewing, cognitive-behavioral interventions, the strengths perspective, and harm reduction, to name but a few. If you attempt to search out effectiveness literature on most interventions, you'll find a paucity of data. Researchers in the treatment field have been slow to adopt rigorous evidence-based practices, and evidence-based research is only now starting to slowly trickle into the social service disciplines.

Judges order people to attend AA and NA because they are creatures of habit and because the programs are cheap and quick to join. People are familiar with them. Plus, there are no wait lists. Makes a compelling case in the absence of drug courts with linkages to existing treatment programs.

Personally, I dislike the 12 step model of addictions that states "once an addict always an addict." I think it sets a negative tone in part by removing both hope and the internal locus of control from the individual. Some AA/CA/NA groups also actively frown upon the use of psychotropic medications, which can be an important part of a person's mental health treatment. But that's my perspective. Some people really flourish under this model, and I would support their individual use of it.

Incidentally, I work with individuals that inject heroin. And one of my closest pals has been heroin-free for about 11 years now.

:hi:

I'm an ex-veteran of 12 step programs and think they are probably very helpful to the small percentage of people for whom they are suitable. For me it was disastrous. I bought into it for quite a while because I was very young and impressionable when I joined. They drilled all the chants and mantras into me and convinced me that if I ever "went out" I would lose all control and drink myself to death. Looking back, I can see what a self-fulfilling prophesy that can become. As a result, I was terrified of not complying with the often arbitrary and confusing commands of my sponsor and various interpretations of the Steps. Basically, you have a bunch of unqualified and uncredentialed "sponsors" acting as powerful advisors to vulnerable "pigeons". Sure, some of them are reasonable and well-meaning but others are whack job control-freaks.

I saw a mentally man guy go off his prescribed meds at the suggestion of his sponsor, who believed that by taking them he revoked his sobriety date. A girl whose father had sexually abused her was told to "make amends" to him. Those are just a few examples of the kind of dangerously irresponsible guidance that went on. And the incidence of sexual harassment and exploitation was unbelievable. Some of the worst offenders were respected old timers, preying on newcomers.

Judges mandate 12 step attendance, often under the threat of jail, which is a Constitutional violation in my opinion. It's a religious program that requires you to profess a belief in a deity. They'll let an atheist or agnostic slide for awhile but you'll be pressured to make the expected conversion and shunned if you don't. That was one of my main problems with them - I just couldn't bring myself to believe and got tired of pretending so I'd still be welcome at the meetings and coffee after wards.

P.S...I was also warned about getting too interested in politics because it would distract me from my "program" and wreak havoc on my serenity. That right there should tell you everything you need to know about them!

have been used as a template for many "addiction" services programs around the globe.

Many of the twelve step programs behave in ways contraindicated by real counseling and therapy and some have a cult like status with their members.

Now each community of twelve steppers are different and back, when I was in the addictions field, I would encourage them to find a meeting that met their needs. The tone and make up of twelve step meetings are very very diverse depending on where you go.

The problem was that they dominated the thinking of the "addictions" field and any thought, treatment or alternative outside of the 12 steps was often belittled, minimized or outright criticized. The 12 step community, in some ways, became as fundamentalist as the religious whack jobs out there.

Does it work? Hell yes, for millions upon millions of people, but I can also say it alienated and turned off millions and millions of people out there.

And some people such as yourself can quit without them. Good for you. You should be extremely proud of that accomplishment. Heroin is a very hard drug to quit on your own.

It's largely an issue of need. Some people feel the need to be around those who are struggling, others prefer to go it alone.

Either way, whatever works to get an addict's monkey off their back is wonderful.

I put many, many teenagers into rehab, and I had many, many patients who faced with the certainty of going to rehab quit on their own.

It's not a matter of willpower, either. An addict is physically and psychologically addicted to their drug of choice.

It if were a matter of willpower, I don't think anyone would be an addict, just a casual user.

But, that's JMHO.

Excellent point and I agree.

I've been told several times on this thread that I "wasn't really" an addict because I was able to quit on my own, or because I must not have had a psychological dependency if I was able to quit and not relapse.

I find that rather odd thinking personally and it's something that's made me uncomfortable with 12 step programs over the years because there seems to often be a feeling of "if you don't do it our way, you haven't really done it."

Mainly I didn't really want to dwell too deeply on exactly what my situation was because the post wasn't about me - it was about 12 step programs.

Thanks for your post. :hi:

you jumped over my house, would you do it? I'm sure you couldn't.

Would you DESIRE to do it? I'm sure you would.

Would willpower allow you to do it?

Of course not. The desire to quit using and the ability to quit using are often polar opposites.

And, I don't discount brain chemistry either. There is a lot going on in the addict's mind that is unknown and people shouldn't be so quick to judge the labels by which we label ourselves.

And, again, congratulations. When I left CT and put a hold on my practice, I had a 25 year old patient who had been a methadone addict as a way to get him off heroin for 8 years.

He didn't have the desire to quit. I wonder if he is still even alive.

I could go get some of the studies that are floating around in the back of my mind - specifically the way the brain works after trauma, both with children and PTSD. I suspect that happens with some addicts as well, the idea that they can't survive without the drug becomes hardwired over time. Consequently it takes efforts above and beyond dealing with a few days of physical withdrawal to stay off the drug. Maybe it has to do with combinations of mental illnesses, OCD and clinical depression and abuse related dependencies, along with the physical addiction. So maybe this 'true' addict needs more than someone physically addicted without any real mental or emotional alterations.

OTOH, a friend of ours was a hard core drunk most of his life, by his telling of it. He quit drinking by himself about 15 years ago, after a heart attack. He still doesn't drink. He is addicted to pain medication however. He's at the doctor once a week for pain somewhere in his body. Nobody recognizes it because he's old and lots of old people have aches and pains, but he always comes out with pain medication and spends half of his time looped. That's the other side of what can happen with untreated addiction.

many people do find that the support and understanding of those who also have been there is an important part of the process; yet have trouble with 12 step programs because requiring a relationship with 'god as we understand him' to stay sober is tantamount to asking for a religious conversion.

For those folks, secular alternatives to AA, like LSR, are an excellent choice:

http://unhooked.com

Unfortunately, last time I checked, much of the rehab in this country was still wedded solely to the 12 step model, adding an extra hurdle for atheists who seek treatment. That said, many of those people function pretty well in 12 step meetings for a period of time before venturing on to other support options. I just think it's important for people to be made aware of the alternatives from the get-go.

Now I don't know what to do

I've done some research and a lot of thinking on the subject and arrived at that conclusion. Their constant chant 'you can't do it on your own' is meant to disempower...make you feel like you can't do anything for yourself. this is NOT the way to conquer an addiction.

I apologize for the snarkiness. Yes I know it works for many people. I have a personal bias against them. But as you have discovered it is no more effective than an individual quitting on their own. In fact I've seen data that says it is less effective.

I'm surprised that you didn't mention the whole religious aspect of it and how that interferes with the separation of church and state when it is legally required of a person to go as part of a sentence.

Congrats on your very real sobriety. For anyone, by any means, to quit heroin it is truly an accomplishment. I quit the very addictive substance of nicotine 10 years ago after a 6 year habit. Oddly enough I did it without a group and I can say unequivocally that I will never be a smoker again despite that.

I am glad when anyone finds something that works for them of course but for some people they are stronger on their own than in a group. Some people are not joiners. Some people will never ever believe in a higher power despite the euphemisms, all of the literature defines "God as we understood Him". Pretty lonely and hopeless if you never feel that way. If you're told that you'll never be sober or happy unless you swallow it all, I can understand how you'd keep using because you are a lost cause.

There are other options, even for help for those who don't want groups but want some guidance.

Rational Recovery is where it all is. They will understand your point of view and make sure that you don't doubt yourself and ability to stay clean despite your independence of these groups.

Check it out:
http://www.rational.org/

"Congrats on your very real sobriety."

Thanks for that, too. I don't care what anyone says - I know damn well that I was horribly addicted, both psychologically and physically and I know damn well that I quit and have stayed quit and am not "in denial" or something.

I also question the idea that so many people have put forth in this thread that one cannot "truly" quit without some kind of counseling or help to deal with the reasons one is using.

I'm not against counseling and have gotten a lot out of it at various times (I've also had counselors who weren't worth a flying fuck, like the last one who told me I needed to put my faith in jesus :eyes: ) I also know that a lot of people need someone objective to point things out to them or help them reach conclusions about their behavior.

But I also know damn well that a rational, thinking, introspective person can come to a lot of very deep and true realizations on their own and go a long way toward dealing with those issues. I recognized why I was using while I was still using. I recognized my destructive behaviors while I was living them. And I realized how I needed to change before I did change. Then I quit, modified my behavior and changed my life. Radically.

the other end.

Personal taste, to be sure. I don't think every approach is for everyone. Meetings do help some people, and there are secular meetings that don't have any dogma beyond "don't drink (or use), no matter what". For many people in early sobriety, having a phone number of someone they can call if it gets hairy can really help a lot. I think for some people with problems around alcohol, in particular, the social aspect can be important for many because many heavy drinkers tend to do ALL their socialization around booze- then they get sober and find themselves really lonely.

And in my experience, there's some overlap between all the approaches. I've come across Secular Sobriety and AA people who know about AVRT and incorporate it, too.

First, please forgive the long and rambling nature of my response. I did not sleep all night.

I hate to criticize anything that works for someone but I am highly critical of AA and their ilk. What Stephen King said is one of the reasons. How dare they say that. AA brags about their success rate without ever bringing up their 70% relapse rate. They are overly into god, though many have progressed past that, to some degree. They condemn any other method and they often criticize psychiatric drugs. They are simple-minded in their denial of other mental illnesses and they don't get that many alcoholics are schizophrenic or bipolar and are using alcohol to self-medicate. They say idiot things like "stinkin' thinking" meaning you should not over analyze stuff. I don't like any group that tells you not to think. They make you start over if you fall which only leads to binges. I went to an AA meeting once and they were discussing a woman who had been sober for 35 years and fell off the wagon. After she went back on the wagon she had to say she had only been sober for one day or one week or whatever, rather than she had been sober for 35 years and fallen once.

I am an alcoholic. I have been sober for 15 years and I use Rational Recovery when I need to talk to someone. So don't listen to Stephen King or anyone else. I will say this. Your problem is heroin not alcohol and NA tends to be much cooler, less rigid...(they know I smoke pot and that my own shrink told me too but they don't criticize me for it. At AA my sobriety wouldn't even count because I smoke pot. Unless you are at an AA in California where they call it marijuana maintenance...<g>) My own shrink tells me to smoke pot because I have such problems with all the drugs for bipolar disorder. They make me so nauseous I can be driving down the street and I throw up on myself. Pot helps tremendously with that. So when I can't find a Rational Recovery meeting open and I am in need of a meeting I will go to an NA meeting where all are welcome and they aren't as rigid.

A wonderful woman, one of my counselors when I went through a treatment program about 25 years ago said this, about AA and I know it's classist so don't yell at me. She knew it too but didn't know how else to express this. I am also not putting down bowlers. I like to bowl. This is just to make a point. She said her college textbook said AA works best for people who are lower working class and belong to a bowling league...that kind of mentality. Not overly educated, etc. I know that's a crappy and classist way to express that but this is an important issue. ...and it's true. The people I know for whom AA has worked the best, tend to be not overly educated and not overly questioning, etc. Neither she nor I mean that example in a mean way and I wouldn't say those kinds of generalizations if this wasn't such an important issue. I just don't know how else to express that.

All that said, there are exceptions. AA and NA and all their groups tend to be fairly autonomous within certain constraints. There is one all women's AA meeting in Austin, where I live, on Saturday mornings, that is wonderful. ...but they don't follow most of AA's official crap...the Blue Book crap. So ask around. Go to a couple of meetings at different places and talk to the people.

Also, anytime anyone, including the very cool Stephen King, tells you that what you are doing WILL NOT WORK AND DOESN'T COUNT...run, run like the wind because they are more into an agenda than they are into helping.

Also, AA and NA now have official on-line meetings for people who cannot make it to a meeting.

I wish you luck and if you ever need to email me personally, do so. I am not saying all about AA is EVIL but they do need to update some. Congratulations on your 12 years. It does count. A lot. Just keep in mind, you are in control and can leave anytime you want. Some people I know who go to AA just use the ..."take what you need and leave the rest"... It works for them. It doesn't for me because I get mad at the god stuff and the turning over your will stuff, another big issue of mine about AA. I don't turn my will over to anyone and that is actually one of the steps..."turn your will over to God..." Blech. I had to fight most of my life for my rights to say what I think and question what I doubt. I am not turning my will over to anyone.
Lee

http://nhsblogdoc.blogspot.com/

<snip>

When I saw him, he had not had a drink for nearly thirty six hours.

“I’ve wasted thirteen years” he said. “One pint of beer, and it’s all gone. I have to start again.”

He is going to an AA meeting tonight and will get a lot of support. I think he will be all right. I think it was an isolated lapse. He did the same thing thirteen years ago after five years of abstinence.

AA is brilliant. It provides far more support than the NHS. But there is one problem with the AA psychology. Members believe that “one drink” means you are finished and so, often, it becomes a self-fulfilling prophesy. And AA measures time from “the last drink” which makes Eric feel that the thirteen years was wasted. It was not. I spend some time trying to persuade him that in fact he had gone eighteen years with only two lapses, and that if he could do that again, things could be worse. But that is not the psychology.

I don't think it's helpful to burden people with that kind of negative thinking. And some of the studies I read indicated that people who use 12 step programs tend to indulge in binges more than those who do not - precisely because of that logic. They feel they've failed so why not fail big?

For every rationalization you can come up with, there's another addict using the exact opposite to give him/her self permission to drink. The thing is, if an addict 'gets it', then they aren't going to 'fail big' or any of the rest of it. It's nonsense that a person going back to a meeting after 13 years clean would be told that it was all wasted. There's a lot of people talking out of their ass for a variety of personal reasons, from professional jealousy that a drunk can accomplish what a psychiatrist cannot, to denial of ones own powerlessness, to just plain rebelliousness. One doesn't have to go to AA to get or stay clean. But one does, absolutely, have to understand that addiction is bigger than the individual and that this IS a case where abstinence is the only answer.

You should be very proud of yourself!

I don't buy into the idea that a 12-step program is the only way to go. Actually, I should back up and first say that I've never had to kick an addiction stronger than caffeine, but I've had both friends and family who have and some used AA and some didn't. Out of those, the 12-step'ers are the more successful ones, but I don't think that's a good sample to draw conclusions from. I think the program that will work depends upon the person. Obviously you've found a way on your own - 6 years is a huge success and many in AA and in other programs will unfortunately never reach that goal. If one has the strength to go it alone, and you obviously do, I almost feel the determination is stronger because you have made the decision on your own to change, separate from anyone else telling you what to do or imposing rules on you. But ultimately it has to be the right "fit" for that person and only they can tell what that is.

As for judges ordering people to go to AA - I thought they just ordered some sort of rehab, not specifically AA? Or, perhaps they order AA specifically when they know the person doesn't have the means to undergo an expensive rehab program?

And as for the programs not holding much hope, it's better than nothing and no one program stands out as more successful than another. Perhaps with more advances in medicine to treat the physical causes of addiction, recovery rates will rise, but for now they are low in all programs unfortunately.