Question
1:
“Would
the Fellowship share experience and make recommendations on how to
make AA more visible to the general public, particularly by
increasing awareness and understanding of how the AA programme
works?"
Extract:
“Interestingly
(and with reference to the comments above) it was only yesterday that
I was chatting with an intergroup chairman who indicated that they
have received complaints from a number of GPs in their area about the
conduct of one particular group who are engaged in what can only be
described as “promotional” activity on their own behalf (and with
no liaison whatsoever with the relevant intergroup officers or indeed
any other group – in breach of Tradition Four etc). Fortunately the
GPs in question are sufficiently familiar with AA to disregard the
overt “religiosity” of this group and when requesting contacts
for their referrals now explicitly specify that they DON'T want
members from this particular group to attend. However in this
instance we are relying rather on these doctors' good sense to
discriminate between AA and what have been referred to as “cult”
groups elsewhere in the forum, but with little or nothing being done
otherwise (or as far as I'm aware) on the part of the fellowship's
service structure to alert these and other outside agencies of the
dangers inherent in these rogue elements. In another intergroup area
treatment centres now distinguish between what they call the “two
AAs” and again it is simply due to the fact that the managers of
these facilities are sufficiently familiar with AA's ethos that they
refer their clients to “mainstream AA”. Moreover at least one
major London NHS Health Trust I know of has been alerted to some of
the “anti-prescribed medication” practices of some of these
“fundamentalist” groups. Indeed another 12 Step fellowship has
been set up quite recently in this country which explicitly refers on
its website to the harm suffered (including suicide) by some of its
members (all of whom are what is termed “dual diagnosis”) as a
result of being given misguided and downright dangerous advice on the
use of prescribed medication by members of these dogma-driven groups.
In yet another intergroup concerns have been expressed by health
service managers about the increasingly “religious” overtones
presented by some groups (and members). As a service that is
necessarily secular they are increasingly obliged to be much more
circumspect in their dealings with the fellowship. In the same
intergroup area I think it no coincidence that ALL the hospitals
there now no longer host AA meetings. The groups that were operating
in these facilities (and through no fault of their own) have been
given various “reasons” why they can no longer use the premises.
In yet another IG area “extremist” groups were targeting a chain
of treatment centres whilst offering to take their clients to a
particular group which is notorious for its anti-prescribed
medication/anti-counselling policies. It was only through the direct
intervention of an AA member (who had contacts on the board) that the
management were alerted to this fact and took the appropriate action.
This last instance highlights the extent to which outside agencies
still rely upon our reputation in deciding whether to allow AA (?)
members access to their patients. Our failure to keep them informed,
and warn them of the potential problems associated with these
“fundamentalist” groups, is an abdication of our responsibility
(under Concept XII). Moreover we have a “duty of care” with
respect to all those who come to us for assistance, and we are
currently letting them down quite appallingly. In my view it is no
longer sufficient for the AA conference simply to debate questions
and come up with guidelines (which are observed generally by AA
groups but ignored by those for whom they are most applicable). There
needs not only to be guidance but also clear and decisive leadership
at all levels of the service structure to ensure that this valuable
resource is not destroyed by those who would distort our message of
hope. Indeed there really is no point in discussing how we are going
to present our message to the wider public if we cannot even be clear
what that message is, or rather how we are going to ensure that it is
not to become so perverted as to be rendered virtually
unrecognisable! There are a number of practical measures which can be
employed to arrive at this end. I can think of some but I would be
interested to hear what other members have to say in this
connection.”
Join
the debate at: http://www.aa-conference.org.uk/conforum/index.php
Cheerio
The
Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)
