Question
2:
“Would
the Fellowship ask itself the question: “Are there too many
meetings and not enough groups?”
Background
Pamphlet
‘The AA Group’
The
Home Group: Heartbeat of AA
Consider
the contribution to the carrying of the message, financial and
practical implications when deliberating each question.”
Extracts
“I
think the revival of the “Little Rock Plan” does have something
to do with AA’s lack of growth and problems concerning unity, since
it inverts the principles of AA Traditions. I wonder if Conference
delegates, the General Service Boards of AA World Services, AA
Grapevine Inc., the General Service Board in Great Britain, and those
serving at regional, intergroup and group levels have not erred too
much on the side of being led by the group conscience over the last
30 years or so, instead of leading the group conscience on AA
Traditions via concept IX on certain issues.
At
Conference 2000, the question was asked: How well is the transfer of
delegated authority understood at group, intergroup and regional
level within our structure? Is the trusted servant provision fully
understood? Make recommendations.
Answer:
The transfer of delegated authority is, in general, poorly understood
at all levels. In addition the trusted servant provision is not fully
understood. (Committee 5 Question 3)
This
poor understanding of the transfer of delegated authority doesn’t
appear to have changed in the last twelve years and it has laid the
fellowship wide open to exploitation by outside enterprises.
In
the 1970s, Little Rock, Arkansas, produced another alcoholic with a
plan which has striking similarities to the 1947 version in its
coercive sponsorship and study. The 1947 plan was met with an outcry
at the time including H.E.T.’s exclamation: “Good grief and
little fishes! What have they got out there in Little Rock, Ark.--a
concentration camp?”(AA Grapevine November 1947). It is therefore not surprising that the
modern revival of the Little Rock plan has brought with it similar
comparisons to a concentration camp with AA members referring to
others as “Step Nazis” in Great Britain. It appears the term
“Nazis” has also been coined in the USA:
"A
lot of AAs are very rigid," according to one of my university
professors. "Some turn into AA Nazis," she says. "There's
no room for people who need to work a different kind of program."
This woman is experienced and skilled with reaching troubled
adolescents.” (Let the Dogs Bark, What do you say to AAs critics?
AA Grapevine October 2004)
With
the outside publication of a sponsorship guide to promote this Little
Rock alcoholic’s plan for the fellowship and his treatment centres
using this plan to sponsor newcomers into the fellowship, I’m sure
few would disagree that this outside interference in our affairs has
had a major influence on the fellowship. On a website which is
providing help and support for people leaving AA the following post
was made: (Names have been shortened to initial, to hopefully comply
with this forum moderation. Although this could be construed
technically as an opinion on an outside issue, I would disagree for
the following reason: It represents an opinion on an outside
interference in the affairs of AA which has already drawn AA into
public controversy and therefore it is not an outside issue, but one
which the fellowship as a whole needs to address without delay
according to warranty five.)
"I
have my doubts that “the F[ellas] [ie. aacultwatch]…” will be
taken seriously, but I congratulate them on trying! We have a lot of
J[oe] and C[harlie] worship in my area, we have a couple of treatment
centers that use their “R[ecovery] D[ynamics]” program. It is
very strange to hear some young guy from a hard upbringing, no more
than 25 years old, spouting 1930′s sentax like a programmed
machine, except with the fire of an evangelical preacher. That’s
what R[ecovery] D[ynamics] will give you though. That and the people
in the treatment centers being forced to endure painful dental
surgeries and other medical procedures with no pain medication
allowed afterward. Brain washing and torture.The best slogan spouting
examples of the most recent graduates of these RD treatment centers
are kept on as “assistant staff”. In other words, they get to
make the newer clients obsessively analyze the alcoholic motives of
their recurring belly-button lint and the center pays them next to
nothing for their trouble since they are eternally grateful for the
love of the center." (Border Collie Mix, 28th October 2011, on a
website helping people leave AA)
I
wonder if the inclusion of the Little Rock Plan in “Home Group:
Heartbeat of AA” even the concept of the “Home Group” itself,
has been led not by AA Traditions, but by the influential promotion
of this alcoholic’s plan for the fellowship.
In
2010 another outside organization published a 12 step guide for use
within AA [The Last Mile Foundation]. The organization specifically targets AA
members, the vulnerable who may need medication, with “emotional
sobriety”, as quoted on its website:
“We
want and we encourage AA members to refer alcoholics to us who fit
our demographic, especially those who are talking about going on
medication or into a treatment program or talk therapy; most
importantly, before they do so.”
From
reading the guide, website and promotional workshop flier picked up
at a local AA meeting in my area, I would call it ego feeding
emotionalism, preying on the vulnerable, dangerous both to vulnerable
individuals and to AA as a whole. But I wonder if this outside
interference into our affairs is also leading the board of AA
Grapevine Inc. to new publications such as “Emotional Sobriety 1”
and “Emotional Sobriety II”?
Yet
another sponsorship guide is being advertised as soon to be
published, by another outside organization which has already
published doctrinal AA meeting guides.
The
comparison between Dr. Bob’s AA Grapevine editorial “On Cultivating Tolerance” (AA Grapevine July 1944) and the
university professor’s comments in “Let the Dogs Bark, What do
you say to AAs critics?” (AA Grapevine October 2004) shows how far
some AA groups have moved away from the original flexible and all
inclusive principles of A.A. to a rigid and exclusive dogma.
Dr.
Bob’s all inclusive flexible approach to the programme with his analogy of the wheel with radiating spokes, each spoke allowing
the individual AA newcomer almost unlimited ways in which to approach
and interpret the programme; irrespective of religious belief,
cultural or social backgrounds; inclusive to all those who need to
work a different kind of program. Whereas the comment of the
university professor in 2004 shows some AA groups are now rigid and
exclusive: "A lot of AAs are very rigid," according to one
of my university professors. "Some turn into AA Nazis," she
says. "There's no room for people who need to work a different
kind of program." (Let the Dogs Bark, What do you say to AAs
critics? AA Grapevine October 2004).”
Cheerio
The
Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)
