Purley (cult) meetings .. the medication issue …. again!

Here we go … again! Will they never learn?? 

 

We were recently contacted by a member from the Wimbledon area who told us that the Purley cult group is sending “out 'reps' to other meetings telling members that they are not sober if they take medication such as anti depressants.” Apparently the issue is going to be raised at the local intergroup (London South West .. so good luck with that!). 

 Our correspondent continues:

“There was a recent incident of one girl who was told to stop her anti depressant by one of these 'reps'. As a result of coming off her prescribed medication this girl tried to take her own life and is now recovering in hospital and does not want to go to AA. In fact her mother has contacted the General Service Office and seeking further advice. This just cannot be allowed to happen and is NOT AA.

The[re] is a leaflet on AA and medication which clearly states we do not give advice but there is a growing number of people who are doing just that and not adhering to the traditions and principles of AA. More worryingly they are blaming others who have expressed concerns and spreading malicious gossip. And as we know gossip is a killer. The yellow card is being broken time and many people are not feeling safe in these Wimbledon meetings.”

Does any of this sound familiar? .. 'Fraid so... The 'nutters' are still out there carrying the 'disease'. For their edification (if no one else's) here is the relevant (conference approved) leaflet: The A.A. Member—Medications and Other Drugs 

(You've got to wonder if any of these jokers can actually read! Maybe sign language?? Two fingered salute perhaps!)

Cheers

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)

PS Our correspondent wanted to remain anonymous not only for the usual reasons (ie. traditions)....but also concern about 'reprisals'. So not only 'nutters' but thugs as well... business as usual!

Clueless! London South West Intergroup...

And so the saga drags on and on and on and …...

Yet again the subject of the so-called “London Calling” International Convention (or is it Gathering?) has come up .. and yet again London South West fumbles the catch! This intergroup serves as a prime example of what happens where members are guided by personalities rather than principles, and where ignorance of the traditions (especially Tradition Four) is the norm. Led (if that's the right word) by a chairman whose knowledge of the traditions - and for that matter guidelines – is virtually zero (which almost unbelievably makes her slightly more enlightened than her predecessor) this intergroup continues to flounder around as they desperately try to avoid taking responsibility for their own actions. London Calling may have been the precipitating cause but this Intergroup has done nothing to mitigate the effect. However what did come out of their deliberations was further evidence that London Calling is no more than a front for a Christian fundamentalist movement populated by yet more completely unnecessary Big Book 'experts'. Apparently they're seeking (according to one member) to get “people into the UK to give a different experience of AA”... ie. missionaries. Moreover they advocate (contrary to both AA traditions and guidelines) an anti-medication stance. Membership of AA in the UK is currently static if not declining . The last thing we need is this kind of “different experience”.

If London South West intergroup had been guided by AA tradition in the first place they would have refused to endorse this dubious crew and would have largely avoided the mess they're in now. Instead they've elected yet again to invite this gang to attend the next IG meeting to explain themselves …. again! What's that well worn definition of insanity? Doing the same thing over and over ….. and expecting a different outcome! It's almost pitiable to witness them once more being led by the nose 'up the garden path'! But then if nothing changes nothing changes!

Cheers

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous.... and rather fond of the Traditions as well!)

“London Calling”: AA (?) convention (contd)

Further to our previous entries we quote from a copy of an email sent to us: 

“For attn: GSRs, Intergroup officers (and interested members)

  
Circulation list: GSO, Trustees of the General Service Board, London Region (north), London Region (south) and their constituent IGs 

To whom it may concern, 

I am contacting you in my capacity as GSR New Malden (Sunday)(London South West Intergroup LSWIG) group in accordance with our group conscience (and Tradition Four). 

Despite repeated representations on our part to LSWIG the Intergroup in our view has been negligent in its responsibilities (with only a few notable exceptions) having failed to properly observe both the Guidelines and Traditions. Therefore it falls to us to remedy these omissions and bring to your attention the following. 

Under Tradition Four (as you are probably aware) groups may exercise autonomy although this latitude is not without qualification ie. “except in matters affecting other groups or AA as a whole”. 

Following on from the second section of the Tradition we draw your attention to the following event (of which you may or may not be aware):

 London Calling (see link: http://www.londoncallingaa.com) 

We have argued that since this “gathering” is clearly intended to be London-wide in scope under the above Tradition the organisers should have consulted with both relevant regions (London north and London south) together with their constituent intergroups (it might also be argued that since this is described as an “International” event the Trustees of the GSB should have been consulted under the same tradition). To the best of our knowledge they have not (with the exception of LSWIG within whose boundaries the event is to be located). 

We refer you here to the minutes of the two intergroup meetings where the issue was raised. See attachments “Minutes 27 March 2015 (1)” and “Minutes 29 May 2015” 

In our view the issue was not properly debated and the matter rushed through without proper deliberation with group officers (specifically the Chair) giving inaccurate advice on the aforementioned Tradition. It is clear from the minutes that the London Calling Committee only belatedly chose to consult LSWIG and then merely to have the event 'rubber-stamped'. LSWIG duly obliged. (Note: references are made in the minutes and also in the “ex-chair's report” (see attachment “Ex-chair's report 31.7.15”) to consultation with both GSO York and the London office. In both cases the matter was referred back to the IG advising them where the final responsibility remains). 

We raised our objections with LSWIG (sometimes referred to as SWLIG as an alternative acronym) drawing attention not only to London Calling's omissions but also to their own in deciding to endorse the event thereby lending the AA name (and logo) to the enterprise. These are summarised in the following attachments: “London Calling Supporting doc 31.7.15” and also the original agenda item submitted by the New Malden (Sunday) group. (“New Malden Agenda item”). 

The question was again discussed at the IG meeting held on the 31st July (see: “Agenda 31 July 2015”), which the New Malden group decided to boycott for procedural reasons. See “Boycott 26.7.15”). However we have been informed that the Intergroup voted to press ahead with the endorsement of the London Calling event notwithstanding our objections. 

I apologise for the length (and apparent complexity) of this correspondence but feel it is important your Intergroup/Region be placed in full possession of all the relevant facts (we also refer you here to the London Calling Chair's response to our agenda item: “Kamyar's [London Calling Chair] response 31.7.15”) should you wish to deliberate the matter further. We believe that LSWIG, even if only as a matter of courtesy, should have presented you with this information themselves. 

We should also add at this point that we have additional concerns about the London Calling event which were not directly raised with LSWIG viz. their advertising (and promotion) of named speakers which we believe is a fundamental breach of Tradition Twelve. 

We leave the matter in your hands. Should you wish further clarification please do not hesitate to contact me, 

Regards 

…....”

(GSR New Malden Sunday)

(edits to preserve anonymity)

Comment: It's interesting isn't it that this group is able to accomplish what both the so-called London Calling AA(?) Gathering and London South West Intergroup have so far failed to do ie. abide by Tradition Four - and consult with ALL interested parties (to be continued)

Cheers

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)

PS Thanks to our correspondent

See also:

Plymouth (cult) Intergroup corruption

For AA Minority Report 2013 click here

“London Calling”: AA (?) convention

We've received further correspondence on this so-called 'AA Gathering' specifically the arguments presented by the New Malden Sunday group in opposition to London South West Intergroup's rushed through, ill-conceived (and improper) endorsement of this event (in breach, by our reckoning, of not only Tradition Four but also Traditions Two, Seven, Ten, Eleven and Twelve – not bad! Half the set!)

We quote: 

“Group: New Malden (Sunday)

Our proposed item for the [Intergroup] agenda:

The group opposes SWLIG [or LSWIG] decision to support the London Calling 'Conference on the following grounds:

1) SWLIG exceeded its powers in endorsing a London-wide event (in breach of Tradition Four);

2) London Calling failed (and fail) to comply with AA Guidelines on conventions (notwithstanding subsequent modifications)(breach of Tradition Four);

3) London Calling organisers have thus demonstrated themselves to be either ineligible or incompetent to stage the event;

4) Their use of the AA logo is improper.

Background:

SWLIG acted beyond its own remit in endorsing this event. London Calling is described as an “International AA Gathering” and is clearly intended to be London-wide (if not national) in scope. SWLIG comprises only one intergroup out of the two London regions. In effect the intergroup itself is in breach of Tradition Four for failing to consult at least the other constituent intergroups.

The organisers of the 'Conference' (or convention) have not complied with the AA guidelines on conventions No. 15 (p..57) (2011) (notwithstanding their assurances on speakers' expenses and the appointment of London Region South Treasurer to their committee). Such an endorsement 'after the fact' in our view establishes a dangerous precedent

We regard the organisers' explanation that they were unaware of conference guidelines as either implausible or indicative of a level of competence which should render them ineligible to run such an event. Moreover not only did they disregard the guidelines but also Tradition Four.

From the above their use of the AA logo (on their website and fliers) is improper (see Copyright/Logo in Guidelines (p. 3)

Our proposals:

that SWLIG reverses its decision and withdraws both its endorsement and the participation of the London Region South treasurer on their committee;

that London Calling be formally notified of this decision;

that London Calling be instructed to desist from its improper use of the AA logo on its website, fliers and any other advertising literature;

that any fliers which have been distributed via the groups be destroyed accordingly, and their further distribution denied;

that SWLIG (because of its prior endorsement, and in order to avoid any confusion) issues a notice to be communicated to all members that it no longer endorses London Calling as an AA convention;

that a formal apology is offered to other intergroups in the two London Regions for our failure to properly consult with them under Tradition Four;

that in future (to avoid any potential controversy) where a decision is to be taken which may contravene guidelines, traditions etc the matter is referred back to AA's highest authority ie. the conscience of the groups (in accordance with the inverted triangle hierarchy)”

Comment: In brief - we concur. Moreover, to the best of our knowledge, the remaining 16 intergroups and two regions that make up London AA still haven't been consulted! But more on this later …....

Cheers

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)

PS Thanks to our correspondent

See also:

Plymouth (cult) Intergroup corruption

For AA Minority Report 2013 click here

London Euston: Gratitude in Action Big Book Study (contd)

See below

The ignorance (or duplicity perhaps?) displayed by the organisers of this “International AA(?) Gathering” might be excused on the grounds that they constitute yet another gang of clueless Big Book 'chancers'. But London South West Intergroup surely cannot raise the same defence. Yet if you read the minutes of the intergroup discussion on this issue (which we have) you will find a lot of questions raised but very few answers forthcoming. Indeed it is quite worrying to observe the general lack of awareness of AA Traditions (not to mention guidelines) throughout, Traditions which this intergroup is supposed to uphold. It should be said at this juncture that it is not uncommon for GSR attendance at London South West IG meetings to be as low as 25 per cent. Therefore the latter can hardly be considered a representative body by any standard you might wish to apply. Perhaps we can take some consolation in this fact whilst clinging to the hope that the remainder of the groups are not so blighted as this particular part of the service structure. As far as we can discern only one group (New Malden Sunday) seemed to inject any clarity into the discussion arguing (quite correctly in our view) that both the organisers and the Intergroup itself were in clear breach of Tradition Four ie. both had failed to properly consult with all interested parties viz. the two London regions and their constituent intergroups. Proper discussion was further hampered by the actions of both the outgoing Chairman and her current replacement. The former's grasp of the Traditions (specifically Tradition Four) can best be described as not even rudimentary. Clearly she believed that the statement “each group is autonomous” adequately summed up the substance and intent of this particular guideline. It does not (we invite you to read the Tradition for yourself, and ponder all of its implications) Moreover her main function in the debate seemed to be to act as both 'apologist' and 'cheerleader' for the “International AA(?) Gathering” position whilst 'ramming' through the proposal at the greatest possible speed, and in the process obstructing even minimal reasoning. Her departure from Intergroup might be considered as something of a blessing until you consider the actions of her successor, and her own blatant disregard of AA guidelines....

(to be contd)

Cheers

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)

PS Thanks to our various correspondents

See also:

Plymouth (cult) Intergroup corruption

For AA Minority Report 2013 click here