Quote
Barbara,
I here you! No, your not crazy! There are in my opinion elements in you criticisms of AA that ARE TRUE!
Quote
retracted
Quote
From my reading of this thread (I am only halfway through) it seems that the complaints arising from AA come from participants before, during and after participation in the group.
That, to me, is what distinguishes AA from being destructively cult-like.
I can only speak for myself. I did not say a word until I left and got away and did a lot of thinking. I would never have complained before or during my time there. I saw what happened to those who complained. I remember asking innocent questions and being told to "work my program". I learned to shut up quick.Quote
upsidedownnewspaper
Controversial groups like Scientology and Landmark produce complaints only once a member is [b:2c57f82ed2]outside of the influence [/b:2c57f82ed2]of the group.
From my reading of this thread (I am only halfway through) it seems that the complaints arising from AA come from participants [b:2c57f82ed2]before, during and after participation in the group[/b:2c57f82ed2].
That, to me, is what distinguishes AA from being [b:2c57f82ed2]destructively [/b:2c57f82ed2]cult-like.
Quote
barabara
colter:Quote
upsidedown:Quote
From my reading of this thread (I am only halfway through) it seems that the complaints arising from AA come from participants before, during and after participation in the group.
That, to me, is what distinguishes AA from being destructively cult-like.
[b:cde7c7f9ec]So are you saying that if you complain about abuse and mental anguish while it is happening, it isn't destructive? Or are you saying that it hasn't occurred?[/b:cde7c7f9ec]
Actually, though, you do have a point.
You might even be right, to some degree.
Those who complain haven't bought in to the "group think".
Those who [b:cde7c7f9ec]have[/b:cde7c7f9ec] bought into the "group think" react as vehemently to criticism of it as in any recognized cult.
As in scientology, landmark, and the Hari Krishnas, those who do not conform to the accepted mind set are reviled, ostracized, and "corrected".
You will get the same response from your AA group as you would get from "colter" here. This was my experience.
Criticism and questioning is only "tolerated" only because there is no one to "kick you out" of the group if you do so.
And, there is no accountability in an AA group.
[b:cde7c7f9ec]Who can you complain to if you feel you are being harmed?[/b:cde7c7f9ec]
Who will stop it if someone harms you?
More than likely, (as we have stated ad nauseam),, you will be told "yes, it happened, but what was your part in it?", and "work a fourth step on it"; [b:cde7c7f9ec]you will have to take the blame.[/b:cde7c7f9ec]
You can stay as long as you can take the heat.
[b:cde7c7f9ec]Chances are, however, you will be pushed out by the constant disapproval of the "believers".[/b:cde7c7f9ec]
[b:cde7c7f9ec]AA is unlike scientology in that the indoctrination techniques are not as rigorous, and more people slip through the cracks.
[/b:cde7c7f9ec]Also, if you are forced to give up your money to be indoctrinated, you will experience greater cognitive dissonance, and will be more likely to decide the "group think" is good. (Read up on cognitive dissonance if you don't know what I'm talking about.)
No, AA is not "as bad" as scientology, probably, certainly can't compare to to "the family", or the "people's temple".
[b:cde7c7f9ec]Pneumonia isn't as bad as lung cancer, either, but both can kill you.[/b:cde7c7f9ec]
And yet I still feel there is a distinction. I agree I haven't pinpointed it yet. I'll continue reading the thread with interest.
Quote
dwestI can only speak for myself. I did not say a word until I left and got away and did a lot of thinking. I would never have complained before or during my time there. I saw what happened to those who complained. I remember asking innocent questions and being told to "work my program". I learned to shut up quick.Quote
upsidedownnewspaper
Controversial groups like Scientology and Landmark produce complaints only once a member is [b:85e2755207]outside of the influence [/b:85e2755207]of the group.
From my reading of this thread (I am only halfway through) it seems that the complaints arising from AA come from participants [b:85e2755207]before, during and after participation in the group[/b:85e2755207].
That, to me, is what distinguishes AA from being [b:85e2755207]destructively [/b:85e2755207]cult-like.
However, some members of Jonestown complained while in Guyana. Does that make them any less of a cult?
http://mentalhelp.net/poc/view_doc.php?type=doc&id=9878Quote
A Better Meeting
Mark Dombeck, Ph.D.
Updated: Jul 1st 2006
It seems to me that helping the group to self-police is important and imperative if that group is going to be maximally supportive for its members.
I have run psychotherapy groups in my work as a psychologist, and I have run an online community as well. There are always members who try to dominate groups, and there must always be an 'immune system' for any group that exists to minimize abuses. In a psychotherapy situation, that immune system is called the therapist. In an online group, it is called the moderator. In an anonymous group with no real leader, the group itself has to have a way to keep itself in check.
The question of coercion needs to be addressed. I'm thinking that this is not something that really is within AA's control (whether or not people are mandated to join them). This is a legal issue, instead. Personally, I'd like to see a whole lot more public money be put into professional treatment programs based on sound scientifically based principles, and for courts to mandate people into such programs. This isn't entirely practical, however. This money is just never made available at the level where enormous numbers of people can be helped on a daily drop-in basis, and hence AA is pushed because it is ubiquitous.
Anyway, those are my thoughts for what they are worth. I'll put the questions to you again, because I am interested in your answers to them more than my own: [b:7fb3be2a61]What would a useful alternative to AA look like? What parts of AA are useful and should be incorporated into this new alternative, and what parts need to be left behind? What reforms and innovations should be added so that the resulting program is more useful to its members?[/b:7fb3be2a61]
http://mentalhelp.net/poc/view_doc.php?type=doc&id=9527Quote
Its no secret that AA's focus on submission to a higher power has broad potential for abuse. [b:7fb3be2a61]That focus on submission and making ammends is there for a very important reason[/b:7fb3be2a61] - it encourages the growth of empathy and social solidarity in participant addicts; qualities which help them resist the lure of their drugs.[b:7fb3be2a61] And yet, that very submission also comes with a terrible vulnerability.[/b:7fb3be2a61] it is important that anyone teaching submission as a way of life also be a kind and loving person, because otherwise, that submission becomes the basis for cult-like cohesion, as the commenter points out.[b:7fb3be2a61] Sociopathic types who also tend to be addicts are very likely to get themselves into AA and then use it for their selfish purposes.[/b:7fb3be2a61] At any given moment within AA, there are going to be people who are honestly struggling with remaining sober and people who are using and not admitting it, or not taking the steps necessary to end it; people who understand hurt and who want to help others stop hurting and people who are all too willing to use other people for selfish purposes.