AA Minority report 2012 (continued)(5)

“The assertive leadership in protection of “our common welfare” was well demonstrated by Bill W, the “trusted servants” involved with Chuck D. in 1958 and recently by those in the Toronto intergroup in Canada:

“Toronto’s A.A. Intergroup Bounces Atheists after Spirited Battle” by Dirk Hanson, The Fix, 06/06/11, issue 141:

http://www.thefix.com/content/does-aa-need-god

“Is There A Place For Atheists in Alcoholics Anonymous? – A long-simmering feud is spreading around the world, after one AA establishment voted to expel two atheist/agnostic groups in Canada” by Jesse Beach, The Fix 14/06/11: http://www.alternet.org/story/151294/is_there_a_place_for_atheists_in_alcoholics_anonymous?akid=7112.275856.JI6Ij2&rd=1&t=5

No doubt the courageous Toronto “trusted servants” have received plenty of “accusations…… gobs of rumour, gossip and general scuttle-butt” (Concept IX), perhaps attempts to twist warranty five “incitement to public controversy,” to try and throw them off beam. However, although it is unfortunate this matter has gone public, when compared to the incitement to public controversy caused by the behaviour in cult groups described in the Washington Post and The Independent, and the potential incitement to public controversy to be caused by A.A groups re-writing the A.A. program, each according to their dictator’s own sundry ideas, personal beliefs and prejudices, the article does show A.A. (In Canada at least) to have a legitimate organised structure with a duly elected responsibility and authority, rather than a headless anarchy.

“Salute to Canada – Our congratulations and thanks to Canada; no finer AA exists.” (Bill W. May 1951, Language of the Heart page 191)

For an A.A. group to re-write the Twelve Steps is to violate Tradition 4 (Long Form).

“For instance no group or intergroup could feel free to initiate, without consultation, any publicity that might affect AA as a whole. Nor could it assume to represent the whole of Alcoholics Anonymous by printing and distributing anything purporting to be AA standard literature” (Bill W. A.A. Grapevine March 1948,  Language of the Heart page 81).

“Our literature is a principle means by which A.A. recovery, unity, and service are facilitated” (Concept XI).

“And again, “Some [of the Washingtonian local groups] dipped into their treasuries to finance their own publications. There was no overall editorial policy……We are sure that if the original Washingtonians could return to this planet they would be glad to see us learning from their mistakes…… Had we lived in their day we might have made the same errors. Perhaps we are beginning to make some of them now.” (Bill W. AA Grapevine August 1945. Language of the Heart page 5) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washingtonian_movement

However, the principle applied to the atheist-agnostic groups in Toronto ought to be applied to any dual purpose group presenting itself as an “on your knees pray to God” Christian “early AA” - neo Oxford Group, or any other religion:

“Some years ago, numbers of AAs formed themselves into “retreat groups” having a religious purpose. At first they wanted to call themselves AA groups of various descriptions. But they soon realized this could not be done because their groups had a dual purpose: both AA and religion”. (Bill W. AA Grapevine February 1958; Language

of the Heart page 222).

“Speaking for Dr. Bob and myself I would like to say that there has never been the slightest intent, on his part or mine, of trying to found a new religious denomination. Dr. Bob held certain religious convictions, and so do I. This is, of course, the personal privilege of every A.A. member. Nothing however, could be so unfortunate for A.A.’s future as an attempt to incorporate any of our personal theological views into A.A. teaching, practice or tradition.” (Bill W. AA Comes of Age page 232)

“Beyond a Higher Power, as each of us may vision him, A.A. must never, as a society, enter the field of dogma or theology….. Lest we kill our usefulness by being bogged down in theological contention” (Bill W. Letter 1954, As Bill sees It page 116)

“This was the great contribution of our atheists and agnostics. They had widened our gateway so that all who suffer might pass through, regardless of their belief or lack of belief.” (Bill W. A.A. Comes of Age page 167)

“The atheist may stand up in an A.A. meeting denying God, yet reporting how he has been helped in other ways”….. we make no religious requirement of anyone…..In this atmosphere the orthodox, unorthodox, and the unbeliever mix happily and usefully together” (Bill W. “Pass it On page 172-173)

We wonder if the motivation behind the Toronto atheist group’s actions is out of a sense of insecurity arising from the influence of Traditions 4, 6 and 12 violations; the missionaries of the dishonest rendering of AA’s history by fundamentalist Christian authors emanating from the USA; Dick B. Joe McQ and Wally P.

Extracts from “By the Power Of God, A Guide to Early A.A. Groups & forming similar Groups Today” by Dick B:

“Of course the A.A. of yesteryear is truly gone forever. There is no Dr. Bob – physician, Bible student, ‘Prince of Twelve-Steppers,’ ambassador for Christ. There is no loving Anne Smith,- ‘Mother of A.A.’ ‘Founder’ nurse, evangelist, employment agent, and dispenser of ‘spiritual pablum’[sic] … …There is no quiet time…. where the Bible is studied,…prayer is made to God……. “(page xiii)

“There is a Good Big Book/Bible study group in California……There is also a ‘Safe to Talk about Jesus meeting’…….There is a Big Book/Bible study meeting in Florida. There are spiritual retreats for AAs and their families in at least seven locations in the United States and one in England.” (Page xiii)

“So also ‘Absolute purity.’…. And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out…. (Page 42)

And – ‘Absolute unselfishness’….So likewise who ever he be of you that forsaketh not all….” (Page 42)

“And ‘Absolute Love’ A new commandment that I give unto you that ye love one another …” (Page 42)

“Carrying the Message…As part of AAs Twelfe [sic] Step…And he[Jesus] said unto them….”(Page 189)

“Possible Approaches in Meetings 1. Listening to the readings of scripture. Perhaps segments of the Oxford Group book, How to read the Bible [Roger Hicks, How to read the Bible (London: Moral re- Armament, 1940)]” (Page 215)

“Alcoholism can be cured. Today’s people have just changed the language to satisfy the unbelievers” (page 233)

Dick B’s Alcoholics Anonymous History website: http://www.dickb.com/index.html

Extracts from “Back to Basics Alcoholics Anonymous Beginners meetings” by Wally P:

“In order for the process to work, newcomers need to be matched up with A.A. members who are willing to guide them through the four one hour sessions……..Newcomers do not attend beginners’ meetings alone, they are accompanied by their sponsors/sharing partners…..

For the Newcomer: 1.Your primary obligation is to attend all four sessions…. 2. We will read the appropriate parts of the ‘Big Book’ to you…. (Page 38)

“It is time to assign sponsors or sharing partners to those who need them. Will the newcomers please stand. These are the people who are about to take the Twelve Steps” (Page 39)

“Next the author instructs us to check what we have put on paper. Here the sponsor or sharing partner can be very helpful: Check…When in doubt and when it is important, what does another person who is working two way prayer think about this thought or action? .... Talk over together what you have written…Tell each other what guidance has come. This is the secret of unity….Then the author explains, to what many of us, is the most difficult part of all …Obey... Carry out the thoughts that have come. You will only be sure of guidance as you go through with it… [How to listen to God, p3]” (page 120)

“It is time to make a commitment to working with others…please stand. This is the Twelfe [sic] Step question ‘Will you carry the message to other alcoholics?’ please answer, one at a time, ‘yes’ or ‘no.’ After you have answered, please be seated. [Have each newcomer answer the question]” (page 146)

The following are some early A.A. definitions of God and prayer, by what some of today’s Back to Basics, “original A.A”., “On your knees” missionaries might call the “Original AA members” or “The first One Hundred”, “Big Book Authors,” “founders”:

“Most of us in Akron didn’t like all this praying…….We’d had enough of it in the Oxford Group. I still don’t like praying in A.A. I don’t like the Serenity Prayer. New York brought it in, and we resented it. We thought they were bringing back the Oxford Group” (1942, Oscar W. Early Akron A.A. group member) (Dr. Bob and the Good Old Timers, page 271)

1937: “And their concept of a Higher Power was different from that of the groupers, who were not prepared to accept light bulbs and Third Avenue buses as examples of “God as I understand Him .………… This, too, was an attitude that represented a fundamental difference between the A.A.s and the Oxford Groupers. A.A.s were more and more inclined to allow newer members to arrive at a concept of a Higher Power in their own time and manner.” (Pass It On, page 161)

“Try to find your own God – As you understand Him.” (Quote of Dr. Bob) ( Dr. Bob and the Good Old Timers, page 281)

1940: “ At his time – January – 1940 he wasn’t making you get out of bed to pray on your knees, to pray with you, I’m not sure that would have worked too well with me.” A recollection of Dr. Bob by John S. (Dr. Bob and the Good Old Timers, page 276)

1941:”Any concept of the Higher Power is acceptable. A sceptic or an agnostic may choose to think of his inner self, the miracle of growth, a tree, man’s wonderment at the physical universe, the structure of an atom, or mere mathematical infinity. Whatever form is visualized, the neophyte is taught that he must rely on it, in his own way, to pray to the power for strength.” (Jack Alexander article about AA , page 19)”

Comment: Toronto AA is an example of a pro-active service structure rather than a moribund one; this is what is meant by “leadership”. Here also is illustrated the necessity of a “canonical” literature within AA (ie. conference approved) which establishes the foundation both for our programme of recovery and the constitution of our society. Without these we are simply directionless and clueless – or as it might be put - just another bunch of drunks! Similarly the formation of “dual purpose” groups (of whatever denomination or type) by definition creates an “outside affiliation” and therefore (under Tradition 3) excludes these from further participation within the AA service structure (which will necessarily entail de-listing of the group and removal of its members (qua “group” membership) from service structure participation (and where necessary appropriate notification to outside agencies to that effect under Warranty Five, Concept 12) etc – but which does not affect in any way the right of each individual to be a member of AA as such ie. the only requirement for membership is a desire to stop drinking).

Finally – and very very briefly:

Dick B – a revisionist (and flawed) perspective of AA history with a Christian agenda.

Wally B – yet another version of doing the programme by “rote”. No thinking required here!

'Nuff said

Cheerio

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)

A Minority report (continued)

“SECTION 1

Analysis of past and current events, USA, Canada, UK

The following is an extract from A.A. Comes of Age. Bill W’s response to protect A.A.’s public relations by thwarting the plans of a potential figurehead with a “wonderful vision” and his “message”. Today one only has to replace the word “radio” with “website.” An example of TraditionTwo and Concept IX in action:

“An old story, revealing several aspects of A.A.’s public relations problem, comes to mind: One of our pioneer members conceived the idea of starting a group in his city by radio….. So our promoter friend constructed a series of ‘Twelve Lectures on Alcoholics Anonymous.’ These were a strange mixture of A.A. and his own religious ideas. He soon put them on air with all the vigour of a Chautauqua orator. Contrary to our expectations, he got a modest result. Inquiries came in and he started a group. Now flushed with success, he was smitten with a wonderful vision......... We advised him that the trustees felt his message inappropriate for national consumption. So he wrote a hot letter to this effect: ‘To hell with the trustees, the world is waiting for my message. I’ve got the right to free speech and I’m going on air whether you like it or not.’ This ultimatum was an alarming poser. It looked like promotion, professionalism, and anonymity-breaking all in one package…. every ad man and salesman in Alcoholics Anonymous would soon be selling A.A.’s wares, willy-nilly. We would loose control of our public relations.…………. We assured our well-meaning friend that we would certainly uphold his right to free speech. But we added that he ought to uphold ours, too. We assured him that if his ‘lectures’ went on air, we would advise every A.A. group of the circumstances and ask them to write strong letters to the sponsoring life assurance company, letters of a kind the sponsor might not like to receive. The broadcast never went on air.” (AA comes of Age pages 130-131)

The following is another example of Tradition Two and Concept IX in action; an A.A. committee taking an uncompromising stand against a power driving leader in 1958. This action split the A.A. group, thus protecting A.A. from wider disunity and subsequent bad press. True to Tradition Two, the prediction that the “arch deacon” would either accept the group conscience or wind up drunk came eventually, but only after 20 years. The subsequent history of Synanon shows that a cult run by an alcoholic can be very successful with long-term viability. The group’s leader Chuck D (who incidentally was to some years later appoint himself Pope, and his wife, High Priestess of the cult Church of Synanon), recalled his 1958 not so spiritual baptism with concept IX, wonderfully executed by A.A. trusted servants.

They intuitively knew how handle situations which seem to baffle us today.

“It happened right in the middle of an A.A. meeting. Our whole gang had taken over the Saturday night meeting of the Santa Monica A.A. group at Twenty Sixth and Broadway and built it up from its attendance of ten people to an attendance of about forty five or fifty. There was some objection on some issue by the members of the Board of Directors of the A.A. club. I recall the leader stopping the meeting. They didn’t like us. The alkies didn’t like the addicts, and they didn’t like me in particular…and they didn’t like my gang because they were mostly addicts. They made things difficult for us. I remember getting up in the meeting and saying, ‘All right, let’s go home-the hell with this.’ So the whole meeting got up, and we all got into our automobiles and came down to the club, and we never went back to A.A. again.” (From the Desk of Juan Lesende: How Drug Abuse Treatment Turns into Mistreatment By Juan E. Lesende - September 18th 2009)

http://www.treatmentsolutionsnetwork.com/blog/index.php/2009/09/18/from-the-desk-of-juan-lesende-how-drug-abuse-treatment-turns-into-mistreatment/

Where did it come from? Synanon Church and the medical basis for the $traights:

http://thestraights.com/theprogram/synanon-story2.htm

Wikipedia – Synanon: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synanon

Chuck Dederich Still Rules Synanon, but Now He Has 1,300 Subjects and a $22 Million Empire -- By Barbara Wilkins --PEOPLE magazine's archive: October 11, 1976, Vol. 6, No. 15:

http://www.people.com/people/archive/article/0,,20066985,00.html

Dederick Charles E: (The link may show “no text available”, if so click blue link “search for this page title”.

Search results may show “No page title matches”, If so click on the blue “Dederick Charles E link, about halfway down the page.): http://www.astro.com/astro-databank/Dederick%2C_Charles_E.

Finding Aid for the Mitchell-Synanon Litigation Papers, 1979-1989 University of Tennessee Special Collections Library, Knoxville, TN: http://www.lib.utk.edu/spcoll/manuscripts/1711.html

We wonder how A.A. would have responded, if Chuck had decided to operate his franchise as an autonomous group of A.A., for example “the Synanon group of A.A.” instead of going it alone. Or if the A.A. members had left the A.A. group all to Chuck by saying “Each group is autonomous!” “Live and let live!” “Vote with your feet!” instead of having the backbone to stand and defend A.A. Tradition. Would the intergroups and GSO of the 1960s have continued to register his groups and how much damage would the extraordinary abuses that were to occur in his cult have done to A.A.’s public relations, were his cult to have remained in A.A.?”

Comment: Again largely self-explanatory. The above indicates how effectively direct action by clear-thinking AA members (who moreover have some knowledge of our guiding principles) can nip a problem in the bud. You will note moreover that the action came from the AA groups and members, and not from other parts of the service structure. In addition to the above we would cite Tradition Three here:

3.—Our membership ought to include all who suffer from alcoholism. Hence we may refuse none who wish to recover. Nor ought A.A. membership ever depend upon money or conformity. Any two or three alcoholics gathered together for sobriety may call themselves an A.A. group, provided that, as a group, they have no other affiliation.

(our emphasis)

This clearly demonstrates that those groups that possess outside connections may NOT call themselves an AA group. Moreover the decision as to whether they are or are NOT so denominated is NOT solely theirs to make. We refer here to Tradition Four (the much misquoted Tradition Four!):

4.—With respect to its own affairs, each A.A. group should be responsible to no other authority than its own conscience. But when its plans concern the welfare of neighboring groups also, those groups ought to be consulted. And no group, regional committee, or individual should ever take any action that might greatly affect A.A. as a whole without conferring with the trustees of the General Service Board. On such issues our common welfare is paramount.

(our emphases)

If a group (or groups) acts in such a way (knowingly) and fails subsequently to mend its conduct it then becomes the responsibility (and indeed duty) of other groups to take the requisite action (which may include denying that group (or groups) the use of the AA name, this to ensure “our common welfare” remains “paramount”.

Moreover this principle extends not only to outside affiliations but even further. See Tradition Ten:

10.—No A.A. group or member should ever, in such a way as to implicate A.A., express any opinion on outside controversial issues—particularly those of politics, alcohol reform, or sectarian religion. The Alcoholics Anonymous groups oppose no one. Concerning such matters they can express no views whatever.

From this it can be seen that similarly those groups (and in this instance even an AA member) should abstain (but only insofar as they might be seen as implicating AA) from such conduct. Therefore those groups that espouse a particular religious or non-religious interpretation (atheistic, agnostic (see Toronto AA below), Christian, Buddhist, Moslem etc), or political orientation etc are in breach of this tradition. Note that the category of “controversial issues” relates to those “outside” the immediate purview of AA; this does not include the airing of controversial views WITHIN the Fellowship and ABOUT the Fellowship. The intention of this tradition is clearly not to stifle debate but rather to define its parameters within a given context. Those members who seek to “shut down” all debate on “controversy” grounds have missed the point! Additionally the word “particularly” is employed which suggests that the list is not exhaustive but intended to be exemplary and selective. Therefore other issues too may be considered as being included within this category.

In this connection we cite Tradition Three again (and as an example of a breach of Tradition Four):

3.—Our membership ought to include all who suffer from alcoholism. Hence we may refuse none who wish to recover. Nor ought A.A. membership ever depend upon money or conformity. Any two or three alcoholics gathered together for sobriety may call themselves an A.A. group, provided that, as a group, they have no other affiliation.

From this it can be seen that as stated in the short form of this tradition:

Three—The only requirement for A.A. membership is a desire to stop drinking

It follows from this therefore that ANY AA member may attend ANY AA meeting in the world without ANY further qualification. Those groups which seek to impose further qualifications on admission are in clear breach of this tradition (amongst others). This would include the so-called “non-restrictive” meetings (generally women's only), the ethnically specific meetings, gay/lesbian meetings, young people's meetings etc. All of these run contrary not only to this tradition but also Tradition One:

1.—Each member of Alcoholics Anonymous is but a small part of a great whole. A.A. must continue to live or most of us will surely die. Hence our common welfare comes first. But individual welfare follows close afterward.

Note the word “whole”.

Finally as an update to the above theme we refer you to a selection of links covering the Toronto Atheists ban:

Does religion belong at AA? Fight over 'God' splits Toronto AA groups

Toronto's AA Intergroup Bounces Atheists After Spirited Battle

Toronto Ban on AA Atheists Sparks Global Flap

Needless to say (in our view) Toronto AA got it right!

Cheers

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)

PS Some of the links in the original report are not functioning. We have renewed them here but members are advised otherwise to use the link details in a search engine to discover the new location

A Minority report to conference 2012 (a serialisation)

(The entire report is available here. Note: Downloads may take a few seconds to complete).

“To Alcoholics Anonymous from Alcoholics Anonymous - A call for moral inventory and leadership in A.A.

This document comprises an analytical and critical survey of the Fellowship in 2011, discussing the complex dynamics surrounding current events occurring in the USA, UK and Canada and relating these to past events and to AA Traditions and Concepts.

The discussion begins with two examples of active leadership, one by Bill W. in the 1940s, the other by a committee in Santa Monica California USA, in 1958; it then moves on to include current events. The outcome exposes a hazardous departure from Tradition, serious and growing internal divisions and public concerns. It also exposes a widespread and hazardous misconception in the application of A.A. Traditions. And a situation where neither A.A. Tradition, nor General Warranties of Conference are withstanding in today’s fellowship. This causes us to feel duty bound to place this as a minority report before the UK General Service Conference 2012.”

Comment: Largely self-explanatory. However (and briefly) the central thesis of the report is that the service structure of AA (and the Fellowship at large) have failed repeatedly to actively uphold the guiding principles of the Fellowship, this inactivity resulting from a consistent misinterpretation of these same precepts. In our view (and as a direct consequence) there is developing within our midst a movement that is wholly antagonistic to both the letter and spirit of these principles but which represents itself as being a legitimate exponent of the AA programme of recovery. Their directive, manipulative, dogmatic and indeed punitive methods have resulted only in an increasingly fragmented Fellowship and inflicted moreover completely unnecessary suffering on those who are most vulnerable, and who have come to us for help: the newcomer. Their 'philosophy' of recovery runs directly counter to that of AA's, their methods founded on a “revisionist” history of the Fellowship coupled with a gross misrepresentation of the recovery programme. Moreover, and in order to sustain their agenda, they rely upon unsubstantiated claims concerning AA recovery rates to lend both support to their oppressive methods and credence to their arguments. These groups and their members seek to 'institutionalise' their abusive methods within AA, their main instrument being the transformed role of the sponsor. This role (in their hands) has effectively supplanted the central concepts of “God” or “Higher Power” employed within the Fellowship, the sponsor now taking the pre-eminent position. This approach is enshrined in their statement: “Do exactly what your sponsor tells you to do”. The dangers of this approach should be all-to-evident to anyone sufficiently acquainted with the basic text. (Note especially: Chapter Five: the “three pertinent ideas”; the section on Step Three; and finally Chapter Seven – here you will see a direct antithesis to the dogmatic methods espoused by the above). As a direct result of these distortions newcomers have been directed (or had pressure put upon them) to: discontinue prescribed medication regimes (amongst other therapeutic interventions. This had led in some instances to them taking their own lives); adopt particular religious beliefs; sever links with family and friends (entirely inappropriately); undergo financial and sexual exploitation and so on. As a result of these kinds of exploitative conduct we have labelled this movement a “cult” since they exhibit all the defining characteristics of such; the term we think is entirely apposite.

See also the following links for background to the above:

Primary Purpose/Back to Basics

AA recovery rates

Gresham's Law – a critique

Cult Awareness

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)

AA Service News – Winter – No. 149 – gets it wrong!

The following extract from the above (under Report by the Alternate Chair of Conference 2012)

“The Committee also received a very long Minority Report for consideration for presentation to Conference. The Committee accepted the Report and thanked the member who submitted it. After reviewing it at the September Conference Steering Committee meeting, the Committee asked for a revision of the Report, which was received and subsequently reviewed at the October meeting. Ultimately, the Committee felt that it could not be presented to Conference in its present form, largely owing to its length (over sixty pages with over one hundred pages of accompanying background material) and because the Report referenced and linked to a large number of sources (websites, etc) that are outside of Alcoholics Anonymous. The Committee however did feel that many of the concerns and issues raised in the Report were reflected in some of the questions that were selected for the Conference agenda. Furthermore, the Committee’s response suggests that the member may wish to re-submit the Report in revised and condensed form for consideration for Conference 2013”

(For a full copy of the report download here)

Comment: A full copy of this excellently researched and thoroughly evidence-based study was sent to us (as a matter of courtesy since our website is included in the lengthy list of reference material). Unlike the aforementioned committee we had no problem whatsoever in reading the article in its entirety and moreover were most impressed to observe the use of proper citation and reference methods which provided all the necessary background information throughout. We were also informed that the report had a number of authors (all of whom are AA members and had submitted their details to GSO York in confirmation of this). The reference therefore to a single member presenting the research is wholly inaccurate and misleading and should be corrected as soon as possible. Moreover the stance of the committee in rejecting evidential sources on the grounds that this requires reference to “outside” sources indicates again the misapplication of the relevant tradition. At some point the Conference (and indeed the Fellowship) will have to face up to the fact that AA does not operate in some kind of “bubble” but within the context of a wider society, and one in which we will have to demonstrate not only our relevance as an inclusive treatment method for alcoholism but also our ability to act in a principled, responsible and accountable manner. Our forerunners lay solid foundations on which to proceed, but unfortunately we have failed (and are failing) to build upon this. It would not be an exaggeration to say that time is fast running out for AA not only in the UK but also in the US to take action. The alternative we leave to your powers of inference.

In light of the above we will be producing a serialised version of the report over the next few weeks (together with some modest commentary on our part). We trust this will prove of assistance to those who find it relatively indigestible in its present form, and moreover provide some additional clarification (and expansion) of some of its central points. Finally we urge all AA members to consider the arguments presented by its AUTHORS …...and then take ACTION.

Cheers

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)

The Minority report ends up in Australia!

“Hi there,

After writing the below I notice Wayne B gets a mention in your "A Minority report to conference 2012."

I went to his workshop last year, more than a few were on the verge of relapse after it. This group has become increasingly noticeable in Perth, Australia. Headed by Wayne Butler from the USA, his company through which this runs is The Last Mile Foundation …... Locally they brand themselves as having "Emotional Sobriety."

They breach lots of the traditions, and they have grow through local members not knowing or turning a blind eye to it.

They have their own "big book" and "12 step guide", known as the Step n' Ahead Workbook. They have a pyramid type sponsorship structure. All follow the same directions, HP is my sponsor and you're either willing or not. Never question your sponsor, no medication, no other therapists. They are told they have to have 5 sponsee's and actively recruit and target newcomers. Its very much an ego, personality type group that sees itself as the true AA. Most original members are those who were in AA, didn't work the program were about to leave/drink, then found this extreme version.

I personally have no issue if a member wants to go the extreme route, but it is the targeting of the newcomer that is the concern. The slanting and twisting of the big book, and the controlling cult like behaviour that goes on outside the rooms. ….......

many thanks”

An AA convention? We think not!

Cheers

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)

(Our thanks to our reporter in Perth)

South East Region (GB) Annual General Meeting – update

 

Well the meeting came and went and the usual efforts were made to avoid the most burning issue facing AA today – the cult within our midst! The event itself got off to an uninspiring start with attendees devoting an entirely disproportionate amount of time to discussing procedural matters whilst studiously ignoring the blazing inferno going on around them (Pass us the fiddle Nero. We can feel a good tune coming on!). Eventually the matter got raised and was promptly jumped on by one of the conference delegates who seemed to have a marked aversion to the “C” word. The matter disappeared only (and rather strangely) to be resurrected by that same conference delegate a little while later. Matters deteriorated even further when the anonymity of the minority report's author (supposed) was broken in a rather feeble (and subsequently failed) attempt to “personalise” the issue. This is a standard cult tactic whereby attention to the substance of an argument is deflected by directing it rather to the proponent's alleged suspect motives and/or questionable character – something along the lines of: “they've got a resentment”, “they're a dry drunk”, “they're a case of untreated alcoholism”, “they haven't got a SPONSOR”, “they're OFF the programme” etc – fill in the blanks! It never seems to occur to these critics that the authorS (yes – authorS – plural!) might have been galvanised into action rather by their revulsion for the cult's activities both here in Great Britain and elsewhere than by any trivial and indeed ego-driven ambitions (hence the anonymity). Still the cat has now been well and truly dragged screeching and wailing out of the bag and we doubt very much that it will be returned to those confines for a very, very long time to come. The minority report is here to stay (we can guarantee this) (for copy click here). The report itself will be distributed to all the region delegates and is currently being circulated throughout both Great Britain and North America. We've got a sneaking suspicion (don't ask us how!) that it will make its way eventually to every corner of AA. Additionally our readers might like to consider this selection of Grapevine articles on the subject. (Click here to download pdf)

Happy reading 

Cheers 

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)

South East Region (GB) Annual General Meeting & Conscience

Well we should all be thinking (with gratitude) of those fine boys and girls who have already trudged the Road of Happy Destiny to Burgess Hill on this damp and foggy November morn to attend the South East Region Annual General Meeting and Conscience. Generally speaking such events pass by almost unnoticed by the fellowship at large but today we think the occasion is worthy of some modest comment. Indeed (or so we are told) there are a couple of items on the agenda which should be of interest to all AA members who are concerned about the current state of the fellowship in Great Britain, and have an interest, moreover, in where we might be heading in the distant and then not so distant future.

Firstly there is to be some discussion on the subject of what are referred to as “alternative groups” operating within AA in the South East region (and elsewhere). Now we know that some AA members have a tendency to come over all coy at the merest suggestion of any “controversy” within the fellowship (and would rather bury their heads in the sand and suffocate than face what is placed directly before them!) but we'll go for the “call a spade a spade” option and refer to them as “cult groups”. There! That wasn't so painful was it? It would seem this debate has been prompted by representatives of at least three intergroups that have been experiencing “problems” with CULT groups in their respective areas. South East Region itself is currently made up of 10 intergroups (as follows):

Brighton Area

East Kent
East Sussex
Mid Surrey
North East Surrey
Northdown
Solent
Southdown
West Kent
West Sussex

Of these we have received reports of cult activity (and groups) in at least six. We're pretty sure that if we looked really closely we'd find cult activity in every single IG. Perhaps during the course of the meeting some more of these will come out of the closet!

Secondly (or firstly – we don't have the AGM agenda to hand), and of greater interest perhaps (but directly related to the aforementioned), there will be some discussion of the minority report which has been submitted to the 2012 AA Conference (GB). This is entitled: "To Alcoholics Anonymous from Alcoholics Anonymous - A call for moral inventory and leadership in A.A.".

In summary this comprises the following:

“This document comprises an analytical and critical survey of the Fellowship in 2011, discussing the complex dynamics surrounding current events occurring in the USA, UK and Canada and relating these to past events and to AA Traditions and Concepts.

The discussion begins with two examples of active leadership, one by Bill W. in the 1940s, the other by a committee in Santa Monica California USA, in 1958; it then moves on to include current events. The outcome exposes a hazardous departure from Tradition, serious and growing internal divisions and public concerns. It also exposes a widespread and hazardous misconception in the application of A.A. Traditions. And a situation where neither A.A. Tradition, nor General Warranties of Conference are withstanding in today’s fellowship. This causes us to feel duty bound to place this as a minority report before the UK General Service Conference 2012.

Background

The grounds for submission of a minority report;

The principle of anonymity upheld.

1) The conference procedures are given in the AA Service Handbook for Great Britain section 10-3, 10-4. This can be accessed online at the UK GSO website:

http://www.alcoholics-anonymous.org.uk/members/index.cfm?PageID=98&DocumentTypeID=21

Concept V explains the criteria and reasons for sending a minority report.

A minority report can be sent by any AA members, at any level in the service structure from A.A. group to Conference.

Concept V states that all minorities should be encouraged to file minority reports whenever they feel that a majority is in considerable error. That they should charge themselves with the actual duty to file a minority report if they consider the issue to be such a grave one that it could affect A.A. as a whole. The main function of a minority report is to protect against the making of a grave error and to restrain those in authority from unjust uses of their power. The well heard minority is therefore our chief protection against an uninformed, misinformed, hasty or angry majority.

The Conference steering committee will decide whether to put the contents of the report and any questions arising from it to conference for discussion.

2) “Anonymity is the spiritual foundation of all our traditions, ever reminding us to place principles before personalities.” (Tradition 12)

It is AA Tradition that the names of those who make submissions of topics /questions to conference are kept confidential. The same principle of anonymity applies to minority reports. It also applies to officially published AA pamphlets and books, the authors are not accredited except for a few titles by Bill W. The names of authors of the report are not accredited since this, according to AA Tradition is irrelevant, the subject matter of the report is what is important. It was co-authored by a number of AA members residing in the UK.

In fellowship”

[Apparently the above has now been circulated to every region in Great Britain shortly to be followed no doubt by distribution to their respective intergroups. Indeed some intergroups are proposing to further disseminate the report to all of their constituent groups so important do they regard its implications for the future of the fellowship in this country (and elsewhere). A number of particularly enthusiastic supporters have even mailed copies to every area in the US and Canada (incidentally under the Traditions this is not only entirely appropriate but even required given the nature and scope of the problem under discussion)].

Finally, of course, a copy can be downloaded here

We trust that you will make the effort to read it – and then take action!

Cheerio

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)

"To Alcoholics Anonymous from Alcoholics Anonymous - A call for moral inventory and leadership in A.A."

Quote from an email currently in circulation (together with pdf attachment - see below for download link):

"To whom it may concern,

Attached is a copy of a minority report submitted for consideration by AA Conference (GB 2012).

Summary:

To Alcoholics Anonymous from Alcoholics Anonymous - A call for moral inventory and leadership in A.A.

This document comprises an analytical and critical survey of the Fellowship in 2011, discussing the complex dynamics surrounding current events occurring in the USA, UK and Canada and relating these to past events and to AA Traditions and Concepts.

The discussion begins with two examples of active leadership, one by Bill W. in the 1940s, the other by a committee in Santa Monica California USA, in 1958; it then moves on to include current events. The outcome exposes a hazardous departure from Tradition, serious and growing internal divisions and public concerns. It also exposes a widespread and hazardous misconception in the application of A.A. Traditions. And a situation where neither A.A. Tradition, nor General Warranties of Conference are withstanding in today’s fellowship. This causes us to feel duty bound to place this as a minority report before the UK General Service Conference 2012.

Background

The grounds for submission of a minority report;
The principle of anonymity upheld.

1) The conference procedures are given in the AA Service Handbook for Great Britain section 10-3, 10-4. This can be accessed online at the UK GSO website:

http://www.alcoholics-anonymous.org.uk/members/index.cfm?PageID=98&DocumentTypeID=21

Concept V explains the criteria and reasons for sending a minority report.

A minority report can be sent by any AA members, at any level in the service structure from A.A. group to Conference.

Concept V states that all minorities should be encouraged to file minority reports whenever they feel that a majority is in considerable error. That they should charge themselves with the actual duty to file a minority report if they consider the issue to be such a grave one that it could affect A.A. as a whole. The main function of a minority report is to protect against the making of a grave error and to restrain those in authority from unjust uses of their power. The well heard minority is therefore our chief protection against an uninformed, misinformed, hasty or angry majority.

The Conference steering committee will decide whether to put the contents of the report and any questions arising from it to conference for discussion.

2) “Anonymity is the spiritual foundation of all our traditions, ever reminding us to place principles before personalities.” (Tradition 12)

It is AA Tradition that the names of those who make submissions of topics /questions to conference are kept confidential. The same principle of anonymity applies to minority reports. It also applies to officially published AA pamphlets and books, the authors are not accredited except for a few titles by Bill W. The names of authors of the report are not accredited since this, according to AA Tradition is irrelevant, the subject matter of the report is what is important. It was co-authored by a number of AA members residing in the UK.

In fellowship

......"

Comment: A useful analysis of the challenge presented by cult groups within the Fellowship both in Great Britain and North America

Enjoy the read!

Cheers

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)

(our usual thanks to our reporters)