ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Religion and Philosophy
 

Notices


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags alcoholics anonymous , alcoholism , treatment programs

Closed Thread
Old 18th June 2011, 04:11 PM   #3801
Hallo Alfie
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 10,703
Originally Posted by slingblade View Post
It doesn't matter if AA sanctions this kind of behavior or not; if the members are doing it, then it is part of AA; a rogue part that shouldn't be there.
It's a double edged sword though isn't it?
The only requirement for membership is a desire to stop drinking.

Who else would we kick out? Atheists and agnostics? The steps, history?

Originally Posted by slingblade View Post
Now, if the AA organization is working on it, great. More power to them. But if they're not practicing due diligence, they're being neglectful, and causing people to be hurt.
I agree, "Do what your doctor tells you" should be a saying too.

I guess the official stance that AA would take is that it is an outside issue, therefore AA has no opinion. See tradition 10

Ten—Alcoholics Anonymous has no opinion on outside issues; hence the A.A. name ought never be drawn into public controversy.

Originally Posted by slingblade View Post
That you and Tinyal are working to change such things is good. Keep up that good work.
Thanks.
Sometimes we can only do that one person, one meeting or one share at a time.

Originally Posted by hud View Post
As I mentioned above somewhere, this was done at the meetings around here. There was no directive from AA, so I guess it was more of a grass roots kind of thing.

At every meeting I was at where someone tried the anti-psychiatry or anti-meds thing, they were basically shouted down by multiple members. "AA does not play doctor" is what I learned, and of course just assumed it was like that everywhere. I didn't know there was a larger problem out there somewhere like you are describing. My sponsor approved of any and all treatments that might be effective.
Pretty much my experience here too. The "pills are for dills" lobby is very much in the minority.

Originally Posted by tsig View Post
So when some people in AA say not to take your pills that is not AA but when you tell him to take his pills that is AA.

Your argument is a No True Scotchman fallacy.
Actually what I really say is when it comes to medicine is "listen to your doctor".

Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
I see you're not interested in proving your claim and you're even insulting people who are on your side. I'll let you calm down on your own.
The ignore function is looking good. Some people are completey off tap at the moment; I think they should listen to their doctors and take their meds.

Last edited by Hallo Alfie; 18th June 2011 at 04:27 PM.
Hallo Alfie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 18th June 2011, 04:26 PM   #3802
slingblade
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 23,636
Originally Posted by A.A. Alfie View Post
It's a double edged sword though isn't it?
The only requirement for membership is a desire to stop drinking.

Who else would we kick out? Atheists and agnostics? The steps, history?
Whoa, slow down there, pardner! Who said anyone gets kicked out?

What do you do if a member brings a flask of booze to a meeting and puts it in his coffee? Do you kick him or her out?

Don't AA meetings have any rules of behavior? How do you enforce those, if there are any? Why can't you enforce this the same way?

PEOPLE DIE because of some members telling others they can't have their meds. Don't take this lightly, as it appears you're doing by making crap up wholesale about my position which I do think is called a strawman in some circles, eh?



Quote:
I agree, "Do what your doctor tells you" should be a saying too.
Me, too.



Quote:
Thanks.
Sometimes we can only do that one person, one meeting or one share at a time.
True, and I get that. One day at a time, one person at a time. K.I.S.S.

I'm saying the organization, from the top down, should be practicing due diligence, doing its best to make sure no one gets hurt by what they're told at a meeting. That's all.

Last edited by slingblade; 18th June 2011 at 04:29 PM.
slingblade is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 18th June 2011, 04:56 PM   #3803
Hallo Alfie
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 10,703
Originally Posted by slingblade View Post
Whoa, slow down there, pardner! Who said anyone gets kicked out?
My bad. I ran to the extreme end of the word sanction.

Originally Posted by slingblade View Post
What do you do if a member brings a flask of booze to a meeting and puts it in his coffee? Do you kick him or her out?
No. I have seen dozens of drunk people inside meetings, I have never seen anyone asked to leave. In fact, at one meeting we had three men in the back row opening their stubbies in the meeting; they brought their own.

Originally Posted by slingblade View Post
Don't AA meetings have any rules of behavior? How do you enforce those, if there are any? Why can't you enforce this the same way?
All are welcome, no-one is excluded.
I would be interested to hear how/if others have rules within their particular groups. If something was to be done I would imagine that it would only be if it was illegal (eg assault).

At my home group a few years back we had an AA member dealing drugs (to non members) from time-to-time. I was the secretary of the group and discussed it with the other home group members. We had healthy arguments both for and against doing anything about this. In the end, I simply had a quiet word to him that "some people were aware" what was occuring and that I (as an individual) would like him to stop. He did so on that basis; no threats, no exclusions, no sanctions. He is still a member and (after a stint inprison - through nothing to do with AA) has stopped dealing.

Originally Posted by slingblade View Post
PEOPLE DIE because of some members telling others they can't have their meds. Don't take this lightly, as it appears you're doing by making crap up wholesale about my position which I do think is called a strawman in some circles, eh?
Huh? Now I could easily respond emotionally here . I most certainly do not take this lightly. I have not made crap up and I am not throwing straw. I think you are reading things here that are not there.

Originally Posted by slingblade View Post
I'm saying the organization, from the top down, should be practicing due diligence, doing its best to make sure no one gets hurt by what they're told at a meeting. That's all.
And I have said that our traditions cover that and we have a double edged sword.

Are you aware that people also die from not listening to their sponsor?

At the end of the day, the individual is responsible for their own actions. The opinions expressed are those of individuals and people are free to share their personal journey; how they got sober and what worked for them. Frankly I don't like anyone using the meetings to articulate their personal soapbox topics. These topics include:

- religion
- atheism
- God
- pills
- internal politics
Hallo Alfie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 18th June 2011, 05:28 PM   #3804
slingblade
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 23,636
Originally Posted by A.A. Alfie View Post

Are you aware that people also die from not listening to their sponsor?
Sure. But I wouldn't hold AA in any way responsible for that. That's on the alcoholic, not the program, isn't it?

You can't make alcoholics listen to their sponsors. You can't force alcoholics to work their program. But AA can be responsible about how its members present the program to other alcoholics. And it should.

It's either an "organization," with a charter, bylaws, mission statement, rules, guidelines, and accountability, or it's just a bunch of people doing whatever they want.
slingblade is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 18th June 2011, 06:04 PM   #3805
Hallo Alfie
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 10,703
Originally Posted by slingblade View Post
Sure. But I wouldn't hold AA in any way responsible for that. That's on the alcoholic, not the program, isn't it?
But that's my point too. That the anti-psych is not "the program" either. AA does not advocate this despite the hollow and fact free claims of others.

Originally Posted by slingblade View Post
You can't make alcoholics listen to their sponsors. You can't force alcoholics to work their program. But AA can be responsible about how its members present the program to other alcoholics. And it should.
Who should make these rules? Under what powers? While I may agree with this sentiment of yours, facilitating change will not occur without a complete dismantling of the organisation and this will not happen.

Originally Posted by slingblade View Post
It's either an "organization," with a charter, bylaws, mission statement, rules, guidelines, and accountability, or it's just a bunch of people doing whatever they want.
Tradition 9:
9. A.A., as such, ought never be organized; but we may create service boards
or committees directly responsible to those they serve.


I respectfully submit the "charter, bylaws, mission statements, rules" etc for your consideration, they are called the 12 traditions.

http://www.prismnet.com/aamen/trad.html

The reality is - despite Tinyal's earlier unsupported claims to the contrary - that unlike just about any other organisation, AA truly works from bottom up, not top down. His comments about the dizzying heights of power just meant he did had greater obligation to those he served, no-one served him. The more power he thought he had, the less he had in reality; this is why he gets so frustrated I think.

Last edited by Hallo Alfie; 18th June 2011 at 06:33 PM.
Hallo Alfie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 18th June 2011, 06:11 PM   #3806
slingblade
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 23,636
Hmmmmm.
slingblade is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 18th June 2011, 06:22 PM   #3807
Hallo Alfie
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 10,703
??
Hallo Alfie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 18th June 2011, 06:30 PM   #3808
Joey McGee
Transcendental Naturalist
 
Joey McGee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,612
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
I see you're not interested in proving your claim and you're even insulting people who are on your side. I'll let you calm down on your own.
Look, it's the fourth time I've asked for sometime to tell me what additional evidence there would be or you would need if my claim is true. If you're going to just let that slide, I win.

I don't "take sides'. I'm not nicer or meaner to people because they are on or off my side. I said this was "concern trollery" because you obviously have no legitimate grievance with me, you just didn't like how I told Alfie what he could do with his request for that evidence, when it's already proven beyond a shadow of a doubt. So attack my honor all you want.
__________________
A wise man speaks when there is nothing to be done. For action is the key to victory.

Last edited by Joey McGee; 18th June 2011 at 06:34 PM.
Joey McGee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 18th June 2011, 06:36 PM   #3809
Hallo Alfie
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 10,703
Originally Posted by Joey McGee View Post
Look, it's the fourth time I've asked for sometime to tell me what additional evidence there would be or you would need if my claim is true. If you're going to just let that slide, I win.
Hallo Alfie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 18th June 2011, 06:39 PM   #3810
Joey McGee
Transcendental Naturalist
 
Joey McGee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,612
alfie whats actually funny is how you said my study had a small sample. You also refuse to answer that question, why? Because trying to answer it will result in me winning the debate.
__________________
A wise man speaks when there is nothing to be done. For action is the key to victory.
Joey McGee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 18th June 2011, 07:30 PM   #3811
Hallo Alfie
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 10,703
Originally Posted by Joey McGee View Post
alfie whats actually funny is how you said my study had a small sample. You also refuse to answer that question, why? Because trying to answer it will result in me winning the debate.


Hallo Alfie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 18th June 2011, 07:46 PM   #3812
Joey McGee
Transcendental Naturalist
 
Joey McGee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,612
What evidence do you need to prove that AA is anti-psychiatry?
__________________
A wise man speaks when there is nothing to be done. For action is the key to victory.
Joey McGee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 18th June 2011, 08:48 PM   #3813
Hallo Alfie
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 10,703
Originally Posted by Joey McGee View Post
What evidence do you need to prove that AA is anti-psychiatry?
Oh I don't know. Perhaps something that proves that AA (not some members) are anti-psychiatry.
Maybe:
- letters from central office.
- official correspondence.
- even big book references (in context) might even nudge it.
- grapevine articles might do it.
- website statements.
- offical policy documents - maybe you should ask Tinyal to get them from the secret archives (lol).
- surely it's in the suggested steps and traditions? What's that? It isn't!? Well I'll be ....!

As I say, anything that shows AA is not anti-psych.

You see, I can show anecdotally too that AA is pro-psych and pro-meds simply by usung the same level standards that you do. Anecdotes are evidence, but they are very very weak.

It's your claim mate, the onus of proof is on you.
Hallo Alfie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 18th June 2011, 10:30 PM   #3814
qayak
Penultimate Amazing
 
qayak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 10,490
Originally Posted by A.A. Alfie View Post
Oh I don't know. Perhaps something that proves that AA (not some members) are anti-psychiatry.
Maybe:
- letters from central office.
- official correspondence.
- even big book references (in context) might even nudge it.
- grapevine articles might do it.
- website statements.
- offical policy documents - maybe you should ask Tinyal to get them from the secret archives (lol).
- surely it's in the suggested steps and traditions?
I hate to suggest you are lying, again, but the facts speak for themselves. You didn't accept any of that evidence in the past so it is highly unlikely you will accept it now.

You're a regular little AA fanatic.
__________________
"The man who does not read good books has no advantage over the man who can't read them."

(Mark Twain)
qayak is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 18th June 2011, 10:51 PM   #3815
slingblade
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 23,636
Originally Posted by A.A. Alfie View Post
- letters from central office.
Impossible. AA isn't organized, so there is no central office.

slingblade is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 18th June 2011, 11:31 PM   #3816
Hallo Alfie
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 10,703
Originally Posted by slingblade View Post
Impossible. AA isn't organized, so there is no central office.

Actually there is a central service office. They distribute literature, organise delegate meetings etc etc; they service the membership.

Here's some onfo that might be useful.

http://www.aa.org.au/members/structure.php

Alcoholics Anonymous is not organized in the formal or political sense. There are no governing officers, no rules or regulations, no fees or dues. The need for certain services to alcoholics has, however, been apparent from the beginning of the Fellowship. Inquiries have to be answered. Literature has to be written, printed, and distributed. Requests for help are followed up. We need to cooperate with health workers. We need a central body to provide guidance on the AA Traditions.
Hallo Alfie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th June 2011, 05:11 AM   #3817
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details...
Posts: 38,440
Originally Posted by Joey McGee View Post
Look, it's the fourth time I've asked for sometime to tell me what additional evidence there would be or you would need if my claim is true.
I've already answered.

Quote:
I said this was "concern trollery" because you obviously have no legitimate grievance with me, you just didn't like how I told Alfie what he could do with his request for that evidence, when it's already proven beyond a shadow of a doubt.
As I've already indicated, I don't give weight to anecdotal evidence from Alfie, and I won't from you, either. Either show that it's an official AA policy, or retract your statement.
__________________
"'Ought' statements are merely 'is' statements that beg the question." - PixyMisa

"When you vote, you are exercising political authority, you're using force. And force, my friends, is violence. The supreme authority from which all other authorities are derived." - Starship Troopers
Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th June 2011, 06:00 AM   #3818
Hallo Alfie
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 10,703
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
As I've already indicated, I don't give weight to anecdotal evidence from Alfie, and I won't from you, either. Either show that it's an official AA policy, or retract your statement.
For the record, I don't give my stories with a view to them being accepted as compelling evidence per se, I am usually just telling stories of my experiences.

Cheers.
Hallo Alfie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th June 2011, 06:44 AM   #3819
Joey McGee
Transcendental Naturalist
 
Joey McGee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,612
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
As I've already indicated, I don't give weight to anecdotal evidence from Alfie, and I won't from you, either. Either show that it's an official AA policy, or retract your statement.
Show me where I said it's official AA policy. I've said that the fact it's a faith healing cult leads to this belief, and that it's rampant because it gets spread memeticly through the sponsor system. This is a straw man against me. Ask any veteran of AA this has been a serious problem that no one has the power to prevent or fix, because of the sponsor system. Anyone who says that to a sponsee should not allowed to be a sponser. But who has the authority to do that in this bizarre cult?

Quote:
I recently talked with yet another ex-member old-timer, who has been in and out of A.A. for 30 years, who quit in anger, and hates A.A., because other old-timer sponsors kept telling mental cases to quit taking their medications, and then those sad cases committed suicide. His parting words to those A.A. members, after another funeral, were:
"Well, before you guys got ahold of him, at least he could say his own name.
But when you were done with him, he couldn't even do that." source
It's not my job to figure stuff out for people, that's impossible.
__________________
A wise man speaks when there is nothing to be done. For action is the key to victory.

Last edited by Joey McGee; 19th June 2011 at 06:46 AM.
Joey McGee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th June 2011, 06:50 AM   #3820
Joey McGee
Transcendental Naturalist
 
Joey McGee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,612
Originally Posted by A.A. Alfie View Post
Oh I don't know. Perhaps something that proves that AA (not some members) are anti-psychiatry.
Maybe:
- letters from central office.
- official correspondence.
- even big book references (in context) might even nudge it.
- grapevine articles might do it.
- website statements.
- offical policy documents - maybe you should ask Tinyal to get them from the secret archives (lol).
- surely it's in the suggested steps and traditions? What's that? It isn't!? Well I'll be ....!

As I say, anything that shows AA is not anti-psych.

You see, I can show anecdotally too that AA is pro-psych and pro-meds simply by usung the same level standards that you do. Anecdotes are evidence, but they are very very weak.

It's your claim mate, the onus of proof is on you.
No. This is your straw man against me, that it has to be official policy before it exists. I show it exists, that no one does anything about it, that it's allowed to happen in many places. It's a battle, sometimes the anti-psychiatry factions win and people quit, like that worthless anecdote I just shared.

People quit in anger and hate AA over this after 30 years of service, that it happens so badly a lot of deaths are blamed on it. I can pull up stories like that all day long. I know that AA probaly made official pro-psychiatry statements, but that doesn't change what actually happens in the program.

It's a faith healing religious cult, all of those have problems with anti-psychiatry, that's the problem. This is why people deserve a secular alternative. This problem is deathly serious, and still your best is "It's not on their website". No, everyone knows about it, you even deprogram people from that belief as part of your job, it happens because of AA, now what is there to honestly dispute about this...

You just don't want AA to look bad, while I want people to look at the facts of what happens in the rooms to people. Do you support making a rule that anyone with an anti-psychiatry belief should not be allowed to be a sponser?
__________________
A wise man speaks when there is nothing to be done. For action is the key to victory.

Last edited by Joey McGee; 19th June 2011 at 06:55 AM.
Joey McGee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th June 2011, 07:15 AM   #3821
Joey McGee
Transcendental Naturalist
 
Joey McGee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,612
Originally Posted by A.A. Alfie View Post
Actually there is a central service office. They distribute literature, organise delegate meetings etc etc; they service the membership.

Here's some onfo that might be useful.

http://www.aa.org.au/members/structure.php

Alcoholics Anonymous is not organized in the formal or political sense. There are no governing officers, no rules or regulations, no fees or dues. The need for certain services to alcoholics has, however, been apparent from the beginning of the Fellowship. Inquiries have to be answered. Literature has to be written, printed, and distributed. Requests for help are followed up. We need to cooperate with health workers. We need a central body to provide guidance on the AA Traditions.
Oh really.

As Gary Persip points out in Recovery From Addiction Without God?:

Quote:
The very A.A. Traditions that curtail members from presenting information or sharing with one another from a "professional" standpoint during meetings effectively act to keep A.A. groups ignorant of current findings in addiction studies; they are assumed to have no place in the program of recovery. This cry of "professionalism" was originally designed to ensure the equality of all participants in the program of recovery, A.A. traditionally being based upon one drunk sharing his or her experience, strength, and hope with another. The current fellowship of A.A., however, has diverged in so many regards from the original program that any information that sounds as if it were based upon professional opinion comes to be regarded as suspect and is, therefore, discouraged. Anything above the level of a drunkalog is met with a stern admonition to "keep it simple." Neither is any current information on addiction research presented in the Grapevine, the official publication of the organization. Dissident cries from members, when permitted to be published, are mild and fully supportive of maintaining the traditional focus.
Like I said, the cult is protecting it's own blueprint before rationally trying to help people.
__________________
A wise man speaks when there is nothing to be done. For action is the key to victory.
Joey McGee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th June 2011, 07:22 AM   #3822
slingblade
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 23,636
I'd judge this thread to be over, really.

We've shown enough evidence, only partially anecdotal, that AA is a group with clear, undeniable aspects of religiosity.

The topic has long since derailed into topics of harm and efficacy, and should be split.
slingblade is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th June 2011, 07:39 AM   #3823
ArchieGoodwin
Muse
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 554
Originally Posted by slingblade View Post
I'd judge this thread to be over, really.

We've shown enough evidence, only partially anecdotal, that AA is a group with clear, undeniable aspects of religiosity.

The topic has long since derailed into topics of harm and efficacy, and should be split.
Shoot, that's not even the original point of the thread, if you look at the title. The original question was,

Quote:
Why (given that it is religious) do people insist AA is not religious?
Of course the part in parentheses is my addition but it was implied in the question.

That the thread drifted away from its origins is not unusual. Just my opinion, but I'm not sure the JREF really needs multiple AA threads. This has kind of served as a catch-all thread for everything AA related, in a good way I think.
ArchieGoodwin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th June 2011, 07:48 AM   #3824
slingblade
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 23,636
Originally Posted by hud View Post
Shoot, that's not even the original point of the thread, if you look at the title.
Sorry, Hud, if I didn't phrase it in the best way, but I think my point stands. No offense intended.


Quote:
That the thread drifted away from its origins is not unusual. Just my opinion, but I'm not sure the JREF really needs multiple AA threads. This has kind of served as a catch-all thread for everything AA related, in a good way I think.
I don't think the drift was a bad thing, per se, but when thread drift becomes this obvious, it's often split off into a thread of its own. Several threads, addressing the various topics, might be better. Just IMO.
slingblade is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th June 2011, 07:57 AM   #3825
ArchieGoodwin
Muse
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 554
Originally Posted by slingblade View Post
Sorry, Hud, if I didn't phrase it in the best way, but I think my point stands. No offense intended.




I don't think the drift was a bad thing, per se, but when thread drift becomes this obvious, it's often split off into a thread of its own. Several threads, addressing the various topics, might be better. Just IMO.
No offense taken, hope I didn't sound like I was offended.

To your point, a few pages back I mentioned that a separate thread should be started dealing with only the question of "does it work." I'd like to see links to all relevant studies collected in one thread, instead of what is going on in this thread where posters keep saying something like "but I already proved that X pages ago."

I didn't think anyone else liked the idea. There are too many folks on both sides of this who like the argument and the personalities, and are enjoying themselves I think.
ArchieGoodwin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th June 2011, 08:02 AM   #3826
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details...
Posts: 38,440
Originally Posted by Joey McGee View Post
Show me where I said it's official AA policy.
Well, then. I believed you at first, provisionally, while I was awaiting _some_ sort of evidence. I'll retract that belief, now.
__________________
"'Ought' statements are merely 'is' statements that beg the question." - PixyMisa

"When you vote, you are exercising political authority, you're using force. And force, my friends, is violence. The supreme authority from which all other authorities are derived." - Starship Troopers
Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th June 2011, 08:13 AM   #3827
Joey McGee
Transcendental Naturalist
 
Joey McGee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,612
Originally Posted by A.A. Alfie View Post
Pretty much my experience here too. The "pills are for dills" lobby is very much in the minority.
So what? How long have you been in AA? What do you suggest to completely eradicate this phenomenon?

Quote:
The ignore function is looking good. Some people are completey off tap at the moment; I think they should listen to their doctors and take their meds.
Disgusting insult. Ignore me like you ignored the Cochrane review, it's not nice to AA either.

Originally Posted by A.A. Alfie View Post
Are you aware that people also die from not listening to their sponsor?
Evidence of this? I'm aware that sponsers hold an unhealthy power over their sponsees (What? You joined a coed soccer team? ) because of the threat of this. Very disgusting. People die from not following proper medical advice, which sponsers are not qualified to give.

Originally Posted by A.A. Alfie View Post
But that's my point too. That the anti-psych is not "the program" either. AA does not advocate this despite the hollow and fact free claims of others.
Straw man, I never said AA advocated for this, I said it's a common problem that no one has the ability to solve, and it happens because of it's faith healing belief structure. It thrives there. I know the 30 yr old timer that quit because of the meds fights, that story I just told, it's worthless. There are more for you all to find in google, but they are worthless.

It's denialism. Nothing but straw mans against me this entire time.
__________________
A wise man speaks when there is nothing to be done. For action is the key to victory.
Joey McGee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th June 2011, 08:14 AM   #3828
Joey McGee
Transcendental Naturalist
 
Joey McGee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,612
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
Well, then. I believed you at first, provisionally, while I was awaiting _some_ sort of evidence. I'll retract that belief, now.
So you misunderstood my argument, of course I didn't give evidence for your straw man...
__________________
A wise man speaks when there is nothing to be done. For action is the key to victory.
Joey McGee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th June 2011, 08:20 AM   #3829
qayak
Penultimate Amazing
 
qayak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 10,490
Originally Posted by a.a. Alfie View Post
for the record, i don't give my stories with a view to them being accepted as compelling evidence per se, i am usually just telling stories of my experiences preaching.

Cheers.
ftfy.
__________________
"The man who does not read good books has no advantage over the man who can't read them."

(Mark Twain)
qayak is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th June 2011, 09:03 AM   #3830
slingblade
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 23,636
Originally Posted by hud View Post
No offense taken, hope I didn't sound like I was offended.
No, no! Not at all. You've just been taking some undeserved flak, and I didn't want to appear as if i were somehow piling on.

Quote:
To your point, a few pages back I mentioned that a separate thread should be started dealing with only the question of "does it work." I'd like to see links to all relevant studies collected in one thread, instead of what is going on in this thread where posters keep saying something like "but I already proved that X pages ago."

I didn't think anyone else liked the idea. There are too many folks on both sides of this who like the argument and the personalities, and are enjoying themselves I think.
I not only liked it, I agree with it and think it's overdue.
slingblade is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th June 2011, 09:37 AM   #3831
The Norseman
Meandering fecklessly
 
The Norseman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 5,050
Originally Posted by A.A. Alfie View Post
Actually there is a central service office. They distribute literature, organise delegate meetings etc etc; they service the membership.

So when was the huge membership meeting that withdrew official support from the AA World Organization for those two secular AA groups in Canada? I don't remember hearing about it. Did you vote? I'm presuming you would have voted to keep those groups as officially recognized groups, right? I mean, maybe I'm misunderstanding what a bottom-up organization means.



Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
Well, then. I believed you at first, provisionally, while I was awaiting _some_ sort of evidence. I'll retract that belief, now.

You know what? What if it was written down in the Big Book that AA is officially anti-psychiatric? What would it matter because all the AA-apologists would point to a few sentences and/or words sprinkled here and there which says something slightly contradictory and call it good.

Bill W. had a personal revelation; many others of the original founding group had revelations. Alcoholics Anonymous was founded based on a the highly religious Oxford Group. AA's fundamental premise is that alcoholism is a spiritual problem which requires a spiritual solution. Time and again, his story and story upon story upon story illustrates that they "tried everything else" and it failed. The only solution is to accept God and turn your life and will over to Him. The advice given in the literature and by sponsors and others in the group is to STOP THINKING and do what you're told.

What's the advice given to newcomers? "Get a sponsor." "Read the Big Book (often followed by someone handing out a free copy)." "Go do 30 in 30 (thirty meetings within thirty days)." Heck, I knew lots of zealots who would do 60 in 60 or 90 in 90 even. "Keep comin' back -- it works!" "Work the steps."

There are webpages devoted to these sayings and quips, which I've even quoted from in posting in this thread months ago.

Anyway, I personally wouldn't go so far to say that AA is anti-psychiatry, but I certainly think that since AA views alcoholism as a spiritual problem which requires a spiritual solution, then the actual science on addiction isn't really their focus. And this is borne out by -- at minimum -- the fact that no changes have been made incorporating any new advances and discoveries in addictions treatment.
__________________
"It started badly, it tailed off a little in the middle and the less said about the end the better, but apart from that, it was excellent."
- Blackadder

Last edited by The Norseman; 19th June 2011 at 09:40 AM.
The Norseman is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th June 2011, 10:02 AM   #3832
Joey McGee
Transcendental Naturalist
 
Joey McGee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,612
Whether or not AA is "officially" anti-psychiatry, whether the literature supports it (it supports faith healing which in turn is why this belief thrives there) has absolutely nothing to do with my claims. It happens there, a lot, and nothing is done. It's a side effect of being a faith-healing cult, all I need to do is show how often it happens. Some meetings are different, that doesn't change the fact that they are only different now after many years of battles!

Quote:
I recently talked with yet another ex-member old-timer, who has been in and out of A.A. for 30 years, who quit in anger, and hates A.A., because other old-timer sponsors kept telling mental cases to quit taking their medications, and then those sad cases committed suicide. His parting words to those A.A. members, after another funeral, were:
"Well, before you guys got ahold of him, at least he could say his own name.
But when you were done with him, he couldn't even do that." source
But this is just an anecdotal report. How many similar stories do you need me to post in this thread before you admit there is a problem in AA that could be solved by axing it and making it a professionally run organization with accountability and responsibility mechanisms? It's just such an easy thing to see. I'm baffled by all of these red herrings being tossed my way.

Like I said, this battle really peaked about a decade ago and has been getting better. From 1998...

Quote:
Thus Spicer was a progressive, putting Hazelden at odds with more conservative, fundamentalist, 12-Step facilities like the Betty Ford clinic. And it put Spicer at odds with some of his own staff — half a dozen counselors quit in protest when Spicer approved of the anti-depressants. For them, allowing both coffee and anti-depressants seems to have been just too much of a departure from a purely spiritual treatment program.
Good riddance!

The fact that some meetings and groups have changed isn't impressive. It only happened naturally, how could it happen any other way? There's no directive from AA that says "sponsers who give medical advice are not allowed to be sponsers" which would be the first rule I would make in such an organization. It's not being dealt with proactively, it's still happening, but it's tolerated the same way other religious are. Unbelievable.
__________________
A wise man speaks when there is nothing to be done. For action is the key to victory.

Last edited by Joey McGee; 19th June 2011 at 10:08 AM.
Joey McGee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th June 2011, 11:16 AM   #3833
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details...
Posts: 38,440
Originally Posted by The Norseman View Post
What if it was written down in the Big Book that AA is officially anti-psychiatric?
That would be the most convincing piece of evidence I can imagine to prove Joey's claim.

Quote:
What would it matter because all the AA-apologists would point to a few sentences and/or words sprinkled here and there which says something slightly contradictory and call it good.
I don't care about AA apologists. I asked Joey the question, not Alfie.
__________________
"'Ought' statements are merely 'is' statements that beg the question." - PixyMisa

"When you vote, you are exercising political authority, you're using force. And force, my friends, is violence. The supreme authority from which all other authorities are derived." - Starship Troopers
Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th June 2011, 12:11 PM   #3834
slingblade
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 23,636
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
That would be the most convincing piece of evidence I can imagine to prove Joey's claim.
Belz, does it make some kind of significant difference to the people involved if it isn't "official policy," but it's still happening?
slingblade is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th June 2011, 12:14 PM   #3835
Joey McGee
Transcendental Naturalist
 
Joey McGee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,612
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
That would be the most convincing piece of evidence I can imagine to prove Joey's claim.
That's unnecessary to prove my claim. The big book is faith healing, the program is a faith healing cult. To some people it's not those things, but it is to others. And I can show how the faith healing is connected to the preponderance of old timers quitting in anger over anti-psychiatry.

And, sponsers are allowed to continue to influence vulnerable victims of mental illness and addiction with their ill-gotten authority without any accountability or responsibility. This is just a bloody outrage.

Quote:
Alas, some of the old-timer faithful in his twelve-step recovery group, including his sponsor, are telling him to stop taking the pills that the doctor gives him, and just trust the Twelve Steps to heal him. That borders on criminal irresponsibility.

It is also practicing medicine without a license, because they are countermanding the orders of a real doctor.

It is also practicing medicine without any training — those fools have never gone to medical school. Attending A.A. meetings for a few years does not make someone a competent doctor or psychiatrist.

Fortunately, my friend is following his doctor's orders. (Although he worries me — those nuts are getting to him — he is saying things like, "Still, I wonder if I can make it without medications..." He never did before. He freaked out and relapsed every time.) source
This goes on every single day all over the world, it should be illegal.
__________________
A wise man speaks when there is nothing to be done. For action is the key to victory.

Last edited by Joey McGee; 19th June 2011 at 12:32 PM.
Joey McGee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th June 2011, 12:54 PM   #3836
slingblade
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 23,636
http://www.aa.org/pdf/products/p-11_...ersMedDrug.pdf

No comment. Read and assess for oneself.
slingblade is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th June 2011, 01:01 PM   #3837
ArchieGoodwin
Muse
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 554
Originally Posted by slingblade View Post
http://www.aa.org/pdf/products/p-11_...ersMedDrug.pdf

No comment. Read and assess for oneself.
The first 6 pages - I stopped before it got to the member "stories" - seems like what I remember. Doesn't seem too controversial to me.

The "No AA Member Plays Doctor" part definitely rings true. On the other hand, I was never given a copy of this, either. As I said before I didn't know there was anything written on the subject.
ArchieGoodwin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th June 2011, 01:05 PM   #3838
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details...
Posts: 38,440
Originally Posted by slingblade View Post
Belz, does it make some kind of significant difference to the people involved if it isn't "official policy," but it's still happening?
Of course not, but that's not the issue here.

If the question "is AA a religious organisation" does not depend on individual anecdotes, then why would the question "is AA anti-psychiatry" be ?
__________________
"'Ought' statements are merely 'is' statements that beg the question." - PixyMisa

"When you vote, you are exercising political authority, you're using force. And force, my friends, is violence. The supreme authority from which all other authorities are derived." - Starship Troopers
Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th June 2011, 01:21 PM   #3839
Joey McGee
Transcendental Naturalist
 
Joey McGee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,612
Originally Posted by slingblade View Post
.
Quote:
2. Remember that the best safeguard against drug-related relapse is an active participation in the AA program of recovery.
Poor advice! Citation? They don't offer one for some reason.

I have never denied and have even suggested that AA has made pro-psychiatry statements in the past. This pamphlet is from 1984 and all of the examples I have given are from the last decade or so. Whatever this pamphlet was supposed to achieve, it failed.

People have a right to go to a recovery group without being pressured to go off their meds. If AA was worth it's salt it would put a permanent end to this by disciplining anyone who gives this advice and an accountable reporting system. This would be easy, but it would go against the cult blueprint, so it still hasn't happened, and the abuse continues, and will continue, until someone takes responsibility for what goes on in the group.
__________________
A wise man speaks when there is nothing to be done. For action is the key to victory.

Last edited by Joey McGee; 19th June 2011 at 01:22 PM.
Joey McGee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th June 2011, 02:13 PM   #3840
slingblade
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 23,636
Originally Posted by hud View Post
The first 6 pages - I stopped before it got to the member "stories" - seems like what I remember. Doesn't seem too controversial to me.

The "No AA Member Plays Doctor" part definitely rings true. On the other hand, I was never given a copy of this, either. As I said before I didn't know there was anything written on the subject.
I respectfully suggest you didn't read far enough. The stories provide evidence that some members do indeed wrongly suggest that members not take medications.
slingblade is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Closed Thread

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Religion and Philosophy

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:30 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.