Narcissists - AA's got some - and a lot of them become cult sponsors. How to deal with them!

And of course there's always the “walk away” option!

Cheers

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)

Questions and Answers on Sponsorship

Having given the AA preamble the 'once over' recently we thought we'd apply the same approach to the booklet “Questions and Answers on Sponsorship”. This piece of AA (conference approved) literature as you can see is available free online (as is most of our literature with the exception of various books (but see the “Big Book” (“Alcoholics Anonymous”) and the 12 Steps and 12 Traditions).

Sponsorship means many things to many people. Generally it has a benign impact but in the hands of the cult it has become a weapon of control, widely abused, and barely recognisable when compared with its exposition in AA literature (eg. “Alcoholics Anonymous” Chapter Seven - Working With Others, the above booklet etc). It's interesting to note that those groups (Roadies, Joys of Recovery, Back to Basics, Primary Purpose blah blah blah) who lay such stress (ad nauseam) on the benefits (even necessity) of sponsorship (or some kind of recovery 'expert') rarely if ever make reference to these texts (eg. Joe and Charlie in their so-called Big Book study virtually ignore the above chapter from the Big Book). The reasons why become clear when you contrast their approach with those recommended by AA generally. Fortunately anyone conversant with the relevant sections can easily avoid falling into the trap of being stuck with a cult control freak (and the nightmare that generally follows from such associations!), or, once “armed with the facts”, can extricate themselves without too much difficulty from the unwholesome clutches of these warped individuals. At this point we'd like to draw your attention to some important principles: Step Three; two of the three “pertinent ideas” b) and c) (BB, Chapter Five); Tradition 12 (as well as the section discussing Step Three in the Big Book):

Step 3: “Made a decision to turn our will and our lives over to the care of God as we understood Him.”

Note: This step does NOT say “Made a decision to turn our will and our lives over the care of our sponsor.”

Again in Chapter Five, How It Works (online edition, p. 60): 

“(b) That probably no human power could have relieved our alcoholism;

(c) That God could and would if He were sought.”

(our emphases)

ie. “no human power” (including a sponsor) is going to sort this problem out. On the contrary it will require the intervention of a Greater Power (howsoever this may be conceived) to produce the required results. 

Tradition 12: 

“Twelve—Anonymity is the spiritual foundation of all our Traditions, ever reminding us to place principles before personalities.” (short form) 

“12.—And finally, we of Alcoholics Anonymous believe that the principle of anonymity has an immense spiritual significance. It reminds us that we are to place principles before personalities; that we are actually to practice a genuine humility. This to the end that our great blessings may never spoil us; that we shall forever live in thankful contemplation of Him who presides over us all.” (long form)

(our emphases)

Again the principles of the fellowship and recovery programme are of far greater significance than any personal (and therefore necessarily partial) interpretation offered by the local 'guru', 'super sober', circuit speaker, Big Book 'expert' etc. Each member of AA is responsible for their OWN recovery and for no one else's. We repeat – no sponsor is going to fix you. Your recovery is dependent on you and your own conception of a Power greater than yourself.

Finally if you take a couple of minutes to read Step Three in the Big Book (Chapter Five, pp. 60-62) you will find a perfect description of a control freak in action

Since the booklet itself is some 32 pages long (and we're more than enthusiastic advocates of “Easy Does It” and “First Things First”!) we'll be dissecting it in easy stages over the next few weeks (commencing tomorrow).

Cheers

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)

A useful piece of literature

A member kindly sent in a scan of the following piece of Al-Anon literature (cheers!) (unfortunately this is not available as a free download from the Al-Anon site. Similarly to AA it would seem that they've failed to grasp the concept of being fully self-supporting ENTIRELY on the basis of VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTIONS .. and not via profits from literature sales – which do not constitute “voluntary contributions”

That aside it's a pity that AA guidance on sponsorship is not as explicit as that outlined here. You'll note how far Al-Anon philosophy on the subject diverges from that practised by the cult (who incidentally have also tried to infiltrate Al-Anon). According to Al-Anon sponsorship is “a confidential relationship”. However it is not uncommon for cult sponsors to pass on information communicated to them privately (eg. Step Four/Five) to their sponsors under the guise of obtaining 'guidance' - not much trust to be found here! And hardly a 'private relationship”. Further:

“Sponsorship Is: ….

...built on equality [again not part of the cult approach where the sponsee is regarded more like a piece of 'property' to be ordered about]....

A commitment to practice healthy communication – not based on intimidation or demands [again a process entirely at odds with the cult ethos if it can even be called that! Cult sponsorship is based purely on a set of demands – you MUST do this and you MUST do that with the implied, and frequently explicit threat that failure to comply will be met with the ultimate sanction …. YOU WILL DRINK AGAIN! Or the lesser, and in our view much to be desired sanction – YOU WILL BE FIRED!]........

Not a teacher-pupil relationship [see above – cult sponsorship is more like a master-slave relationship].......

An experience [not] based on … shame or judgement [again an approach running directly contrary to the cult approach which is all about “shame” and “judgement”].....

… no strings attached [again with the cult there are not so much strings attached but bloody great ropes with anchors]......”

And: 

“Sponsors – Members who are: 

….Respectful of the anonymity of others [see above] ….

Willing to freely give their time to the relationship [a bit difficult if you have more than two or three sponsees on the go .. and impossible with twenty or thirty sponsees … not unknown in cult circles]......

Continuing to work on their own recovery [again a bit difficult if you're busy running other peoples' lives]......

Comfortable to be with; encouraging, not pushy [the precise antithesis of any kind cult sponsor/sponsee relationship].....

Open minded listeners [ditto]......

Equal partners in recovery [see above]......

Able to listen without giving advice [forget it! Not going to happen with a cult sponsor. And REMEMBER - they don't give advice - they give DIRECTIONS!]

Maybe this book mark should be REQUIRED reading for all cult sponsors. They might get the idea …. eventually. But don't hold your breath!

Cheerio

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)

PS Also see our “Newcomers Pack”

Sponsorship …. enough to send shivers down your spine!

https://youtu.be/d9CipJ7CXOI 

Misery is optional they say! So too is sponsorship!!!

Cheers

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)

Co-dependency and the narcissist – the 'sponsee/sponsor' relationship

(For co-dependent read 'cult sponsee'. For narcissist read 'cult sponsor')

“Codependency is defined as a psychological condition or a relationship in which a person is controlled or manipulated by another who is affected with a pathological condition (typically narcissism or drug addiction); and in broader terms, it refers to the dependence on the needs of, or control of, another.[1] It also often involves placing a lower priority on one's own needs, while being excessively preoccupied with the needs of others.[2] Codependency can occur in any type of relationship, including family, work, friendship, and also romantic, peer or community relationships.[2] Codependency may also be characterized by denial, low self-esteem, excessive compliance, or control patterns.[2] Narcissists are considered to be natural magnets for the codependent.”

“Historically, the concept of codependence "comes directly out of Alcoholics Anonymous, part of a dawning realization that the problem was not solely the addict, but also the family and friends who constitute a network for the alcoholic."[3] It was subsequently broadened to cover the way "that the codependent person is fixated on another person for approval, sustenance, and so on."[3] As such, the concept overlaps with, but developed in the main independently from, the older psychoanalytic concept of the 'passive dependent personality' ... attaching himself to a stronger personality."[4]”

“Narcissists, with their ability to "get others to buy into their vision and help them make it a reality," are natural magnets for the "'co-dependent' ... [with] the tendency to put others' need before their own".[9] Sam Vaknin considered that codependents, as "the Watsons of this world, 'provide the narcissist with an obsequious, unthreatening audience ... the perfect backdrop.'"[10] Among the reciprocally locking interactions of the pair, are the way "the narcissist has an overpowering need to feel important and special, and the co-dependent has a strong need to help others feel that way. ... The narcissist overdoes self-caring and demands it from others, while the co-dependent underdoes or may even do almost no self-caring."[11]”

See also “Alcoholics Anonymous”, Ch 5, How It Works, pp. 60-62 (a near perfect description of your average cult sponsor):

“Being convinced, we were at Step Three, which is that we decided to turn our will and our life over to God as we understood Him. Just what do we mean by that, and just what do we do?

The first requirement is that we be convinced that any life run on self-will can hardly be a success. On that basis we are almost always in collision with something or somebody, even though our motives are good. Most people try to live by self-propulsion. Each person is like an actor who wants to run the whole show; is forever trying to arrange the lights, the ballet, the scenery and the rest of the players in his own way. If his arrangements would only stay put, if only people would do as he wished, the show would be great. Everybody, including himself, would be pleased. Life would be wonderful. In trying to make these arrangements our actor may sometimes be quite virtuous. He may be kind, considerate, patient, generous; even modest and self-sacrificing. On the other hand, he may be mean, egotistical, selfish and dishonest. But, as with most humans, he is more likely to have varied traits.

What usually happens? The show doesn’t come off very well. He begins to think life doesn’t treat him right. He decides to exert himself more. He becomes, on the next occasion, still more demanding or gracious, as the case may be. Still the play does not suit him. Admitting he may be somewhat at fault, he is sure that other people are more to blame. He becomes angry, indignant, self-pitying. What is his basic trouble? Is he not really a self-seeker even when trying to be kind? Is he not a victim of the delusion that he can wrest satisfaction and happiness out of this world if he only manages well? Is it not evident to all the rest of the players that these are the things he wants? And do not his actions make each of them wish to retaliate, snatching all they can get out of the show? Is he not, even in his best moments, a producer of confusion rather than harmony?

Our actor is self-centred—ego-centric, as people like to call it nowadays. He is like the retired business man who lolls in the Florida sunshine in the winter complaining of the sad state of the nation; the minister who sighs over the sins of the twentieth century; politicians and reformers who are sure all would be Utopia if the rest of the world would only behave; the outlaw safe cracker who thinks society has wronged him; and the alcoholic who has lost all and is locked up. Whatever our protestations, are not most of us concerned with ourselves, our resentments, or our self-pity?

Selfishness—self-centredness! That, we think, is the root of our troubles. Driven by a hundred forms of fear, self-delusion, self-seeking, and self-pity, we step on the toes of our fellows and they retaliate. Sometimes they hurt us, seemingly without provocation, but we invariably find that at some time in the past we have made decisions based on self which later placed us in a position to be hurt.

So our troubles, we think, are basically of our own making. They arise out of ourselves, and the alcoholic is an extreme example of self-will run riot, though he usually doesn’t think so. Above everything, we alcoholics must be rid of this selfishness. We must, or it kills us! God makes that possible. And there often seems no way of entirely getting rid of self without His aid. Many of us had moral and philosophical convictions galore, but we could not live up to them even though we would have liked to. Neither could we reduce our self-centredness much by wishing or trying on our own power. We had to have God’s help.

This is the how and why of it. First of all, we had to quit playing God. It didn’t work. Next, we decided that hereafter in this drama of life, God was going to be our Director. He is the Principal; we are His agents. He is the Father, and we are His children. Most good ideas are simple, and this concept was the keystone of the new and triumphant arch through which we passed to freedom.“

See also Twelve Steps and Twelve Traditions esp:

Step Three:

“No adult man or woman, for example, should be in too much emotional dependence upon a parent. They should have been weaned long before, and if they have not been, they should wake up to the fact.” [p. 38]

“Our whole trouble had been the misuse of willpower. We had tried to bombard our problems with it instead of attempting to bring it into agreement with God’s intention for us.” [p. 49]

Step Four:

“Nor is the quest for security always expressed in terms of money. How frequently we see a frightened human being determined to depend completely upon a stronger person for guidance and protection. This weak one, failing to meet life’s responsibilities with his own resources, never grows up. Disillusionment and helplessness are his lot. In time all his protectors either flee or die, and he is once more left alone and afraid.

We have also seen men and women who go power-mad, who devote themselves to attempting to rule their fellows. These people often throw to the winds every chance for legitimate security and a happy family life. Whenever a human being becomes a battleground for the instincts, there can be no peace.

But that is not all of the danger. Every time a person imposes his instincts unreasonably upon others, unhappiness follows. If the pursuit of wealth tramples upon people who happen to be in the way, then anger, jealousy, and revenge are likely to be aroused.

…....

When an individual’s desire for prestige becomes uncontrollable, whether in the sewing circle or at the international conference table, other people suffer and often revolt.

…....

We had to see that every time we played the big shot, we turned people against us.

…....

Of course the depressive and the power-driver are personality extremes, types with which A.A. and the whole world abound.

…....

The primary fact that we fail to recognize is our total inability to form a true partnership with another human being. Our egomania digs two disastrous pitfalls. Either we insist upon dominating the people we know, or we depend upon them far too much. If we lean too heavily on people, they will sooner or later fail us, for they are human, too, and cannot possibly meet our incessant demands. In this way our insecurity grows and festers. When we habitually try to manipulate others to our own willful desires, they revolt, and resist us heavily. Then we develop hurt feelings, a sense of persecution, and a desire to retaliate. As we redouble our efforts at control, and continue to fail, our suffering becomes acute and constant. We have not once sought to be one in a family, to be a friend among friends, to be a worker among workers, to be a useful member of society. Always we tried to struggle to the top of the heap, or to hide underneath it. This self-centred behaviour blocked a partnership relation with any one of those about us. Of true brotherhood we had small comprehension.” [pp. 43-53]

Step Twelve:

“After we come into A.A., if we go on growing, our attitudes and actions toward security—emotional security and financial security—commence to change profoundly. Our demand for emotional security, for our own way, had constantly thrown us into unworkable relations with other people. Though we were sometimes quite unconscious of this, the result always had been the same. Either we had tried to play God and dominate those about us, or we had insisted on being overdependent upon them. Where people had temporarily let us run their lives as though they were still children, we had felt very happy and secure ourselves. But when they finally resisted or ran away, we were bitterly hurt and disappointed. We blamed them, being quite unable to see that our unreasonable demands had been the cause.

When we had taken the opposite tack and had insisted, like infants ourselves, that people protect and take care of us or that the world owed us a living, then the result had been equally unfortunate. This often caused the people we had loved most to push us aside or perhaps desert us entirely. Our disillusionment had been hard to bear. We couldn’t imagine people acting that way toward us. We had failed to see that though adult in years we were still behaving childishly, trying to turn everybody—friends, wives, husbands, even the world itself—into protective parents. We had refused to learn the very hard lesson that over-dependence upon people is unsuccessful because all people are fallible, and even the best of them will sometimes let us down, especially when our demands for attention become unreasonable.

….....

If we really depended upon God, we couldn’t very well play God to our fellows nor would we feel the urge wholly to rely on human protection and care.

…......

We were still trying to find emotional security by being dominating or dependent upon others. Even when our fortunes had not ebbed that much and we nevertheless found ourselves alone in the world, we still vainly tried to be secure by some unhealthy kind of domination or dependence.

….....

True leadership, we find, depends upon able example and not upon vain displays of power or glory” [pp. 115-124]

(our emphases in bold print)

Comment: No wonder this text (together with the AA pamphlet Questions and Answers on Sponsorship) is so unpopular in cult circles! Cuts too close to the bone we think!

Cheers

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)

Sponsorship? We think not

Extract from the aacultwatch forum (old)

“There is much more emphasis on sponsorship in AA today than used to be in the past. I can remember in my early days hardly ever hearing the word. It wasn’t until I heard David B. (founder of the cult movement within AA in the UK) do a chair on Step 4 around 1986 that I heard sponsorship being promoted so avidly. From then on sponsorship was promoted more and more. Incessant indeed. It has almost become a religion in its own right. The dangers of this are obvious. Unregulated, unmonitored, unaccountable individuals setting themselves up as gurus, teachers, lecturers and therapists. The damage has been done and is still being done. Vulnerable new members of the fellowship are pounced upon and subjected to bullying, psychological blackmail and other kinds of coercion and abuse, by certain well-known sponsors and self-appointed group "leaders". Websites, like David C Icon's effort, have been concocted which carry a message that is all about putting sponsorship on a level that was clearly never originally intended when the sponsorship idea was first introduced within the fellowship. We now have cults of sponsorship, sponsor-worship, sponsorship "lines", a riot of self-willed individuals who have invested themselves with infallibility and godlike powers over others.

What is to be done about this? In my opinion AA needs not only to take its own inventory regarding this dangerous out-of-control sponsor juggernaught, but we need to enlist the help of outsiders too. As our fellowship was founded with the help of outsiders in the medical and religious professions, we also need to enlist persons in the medical, legal, political, religious and media domains.  The scandals that have engulfed the Catholic church in recent years would not have come to light had the victims of clerical abuse relied solely on the mechanism of church hierarchy and procedure. Indeed the ecclesiastical hierarchy concerned tried their best to cover it up and sweep it under the carpet. No. It took a concerted media campaign and the help of medical, legal and other professionals to make change happen, and to stop the abuse.  And to develop and put in place procedures to prevent abuse happening again.

I remember a time many years ago in the fellowship when there was constant controversy about smoking in meetings. There would be hard effort to get a meeting to be non-smoking for those who suffered from serious lung problems (like me!), only to have Traditions quoted, and group consciences turn and overturn previous decisions. This controversy went on for years, and generated much heated debate, with little satisfactory outcome for those who felt excluded from many meetings because of choking cigarette smoke. The fellowship was largely incapable of solving this problem unaided. Then the law of the land intervened. All meetings are now non-smoking because it is now illegal to smoke in public buildings. People who want to smoke can still do so, outside.

Likewise I think it will require a change in the law to stop sponsor/cult abuse within AA. In my opinion the sort of sponsorship practiced by the likes of Wayne P, David C Icons, Happy Dennis et al, should be illegal. No unaccountable person should have that kind of power and control over a sick and vulnerable person. Sponsorship, if it is to exist at all, should be carefully monitored, possibly even licensed. An outside agency should be involved if possible. Clear boundaries should be set, and those breaking them prevented from sponsoring ever again at the very least.  Let them practice Step 12 in another and harmless way.

Prior to his death in 1997, the sponsorless David B did not have any AA service commitment for over 10 years. His excuse was that he was "ill". However he wasn’t so "ill" that he could not establish and command an empire of sponsees, and control meetings and group consciences through a "steering committee". The man was a fraud. It would have been better for him, and for AA as a whole,  had he washed up a few cups at the end of a meeting, rather than play at being God in other people's lives. So, as I said earlier, let these deluded and self-appointed avatars of "God's will", do some other less harmful and truly more humble service if they want to practice Step 12.

It is vitally important to expose the abusive behaviour of individuals such as those mentioned above, and others like them. We must have more stories of victims of sponsorship and cult abuse within AA. These must be sensitively publicized as much as possible, with of course, the approval of the victims.  We must enlist the help of as many allies and professionals as possible, and get them on our side.

10 years ago there was nothing about the abuse taking place daily within AA. Now there are websites, magazine articles, and forums. I feel optimistic that history is on our side and this problem will be eradicated one day. But, like the 12 step Program itself, we must keep working at it !”

And check this out:

http://www.thefix.com/content/sponsorship-levels6010

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)

PS To use “comment” system simply click on the relevant tab below this article and sign in. All comments go through a moderation stage

PPS For new aacultwatch forum see here. Have your say!

Pyramid sponsorship

An extract from the aacultwatch forum (old)

“'Pyramid sponsorship' is simply a way of describing the way in which the cult groups operate their so-called “group consciences” or “steering committees”.  These groups are based on a hierarchy of sponsors with the local guru at the top, and then a descending “cascade” of his sponsees who in turn have their own sponsees and so on with  newcomers forming the base of the structure (by the way it is not unusual for a cult sponsor to have sponsees in double figures). Furthermore based on the central cult principle of “do exactly what your sponsor says” this means that when it comes to conscience meetings the group is run essentially by the guru (or perhaps a very small clique of sponsors) with any decisions made finally by them and then simply rubber-stamped by their “clones”. In this way the Joys of Recovery was effectively controlled by David B and his inner circle, the Road to Recovery in Plymouth by Wayne P and his little gang (that is before his fall from grace) and so on. Similarly the cult tactic of encouraging people to have two or more home groups means that this “pyramid” or “cascade” system can run across a number of groups e.g. some members of the Strood cult group (West Kent) also name the Tankerton group (cult – East Kent) as their home group.  By these means the cult have developed a network (and hierarchy) of groups not only in Kent and London but right across the country.  These groups also spread when dissent occurs within their ranks  (which happens quite frequently).  Control freaks can't really abide each others' company for too long and eventually there is a “break out” and the formation of “splinter groups” (these sometimes being more extreme than the original), and each with their own respective gurus.  This certainly happened with the Joys of Recovery (London), Eaton Square (London), Strood (West Kent) and so on.  (I even heard with the Tankerton cult group that a guy was refused sponsorship because he smoked (ie. ordinary cigarettes – not “wacky baccy”) and this rendered him “unsponsorable”).  After David B bit the dust David “The Icon” C (a sponsee) took over the helm and carried on with the system.  The whole thing is “rationalised” under the guise of “trusted leadership” which is supposed to ensure that the group is “guided” by its wiser, more experienced and “trusted” heads.  In fact there is little to be found here that falls under any of these categories and certainly even less that might be be trusted (witness again Wayne P in Plymouth, David B (Joys), David C (Joys), Mark M (Strood),  Tooting Dave (Tankerton), Blonde Dave (ex- of Kearsney – East Kent)  all of whom have been caught out lying to or misleading their groups, or whose private life is (how shall I put it?) is seriously at odds with their public “image”; their “walk” rarely if ever matches their “talk”.  A more alarming characteristic of this particular system is the practice of discussing a sponsee's Step Five within the hierarchy.  So for example it is by no means uncommon for someone's very private disclosures to be subsequently circulated within the “cascade” (again under the guise of seeking wiser counsel) and not necessarily with their full consent  (such sponsors as these hardly fall within the category of a “close-mouthed acquaintance” – as it's put in the Big Book).  A friend of mine (who used to be a cult member) even reported that his sponsor attempted to blackmail him by threatening to disclose some of the events he had revealed in his Step Five.  My friend was made of somewhat sturdier stuff perhaps than the average newcomer and told him to f*** off! Be warned!”

Cheers

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)

1944 AA Sponsorship Pamphlet (not conference approved)

Extracts:

“Each member of Alcoholics Anonymous is a potential sponsor of a new member and should clearly recognize the obligations and duties of such responsibility.”

“No member among us is wise enough to develop a sponsorship program that can be successfully applied in every case. In the following pages, however, we have outlined a suggested procedure, which supplemented by the member's own experience, has proven successful.”

“Sponsorship should never be undertaken to -

1. Increase the size of the group
2. For personal satisfaction and glory
3. Because the sponsor feels it his duty to re-make the world”
 
“Rushing such a man before he is ready might ruin his chances of ever becoming a successful A.A.. Do not ever deny future help by pushing too hard in the beginning.”

“While talking to the newcomer, take time to listen and study his reactions in order that you can present your information in a more effective manner. Let him talk too. Remember...Easy Does It.”

“To give the new member a broad and complete picture of A.A., the sponsor should take him to various meetings within convenient distance of his home. Attending several meetings gives a new man a chance to select a group in which he will be most happy and comfortable, and it is extremely important to let the prospect make his own decision as to which group he will join. Impress upon him that he is always welcome at any meeting and can change his home group if he so wishes.”

“These suggestions for sponsoring a new man in A.A. teachings are by no means complete. They are intended only for a framework and general guide. Each individual case is different and should be treated as such. Additional information for sponsoring a new man can be obtained from the experience of older men in the work. A co-sponsor, with an experienced and newer member working on a prospect, has proven very satisfactory. Before undertaking the responsibility of sponsoring, a member should make certain that he is able and prepared to give the time, effort, and thought such an obligation entails. It might be that he will want to select a co-sponsor to share the responsibility, or he might feel it necessary to ask another to assume the responsibility for the man he has located.”

(our emphases)

Source: http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/AAHistoryLovers/message/192

Comment: Note the differences of approach from the 'assembly line', dogma driven offerings presented by the cult (and this pamphlet was produced by Clarence S!)

Cheerio

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)

The Role of AA Sponsors: A Pilot Study

“Aims: The aim of this study was to explore the roles of Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) sponsors and to describe the characteristics of a sample of sponsors.”

The Role of AA Sponsors: A Pilot Study (pdf)

Extracts:

“The roles of a sponsor, as delineated in this pamphlet [Questions and Answers on Sponsorship (Alcoholics Anonymous, 2005)]., are summarized below:

• A sponsor does everything possible, within the limits of personal experience and knowledge, to help the newcomer get sober and stay sober through the AA programme.
• They field any questions the new member may have about AA.
• Sponsorship gives the newcomer an understanding, sympathetic friend when one is needed most—it assures them that at least one person cares.”

Sponsoring roles:

 

Sponsorship styles:

“A number of sponsors were of the view that the message of AA should be delivered gently to sponsees. It seems that within the various subcultures that exist in AA, some members can be quite harsh with newcomers and some sponsors are perceived as ‘controlling’ by their sponsees. One member admitted to having been a controlling sponsor initially but now recognized that this was the wrong approach.

When I came in [to AA], I was very much a ‘step Nazi’. I told everyone exactly what to do and fired them [i.e. stopped sponsoring them] if they didn’t do what I said. (sponsor 14, male, 70 years old)”

“Sponsors who do not give advice directly use the mechanism of describing or sharing their personal experience of recovery as a way of guiding sponsees rather than telling them what to do. This approach is most in keeping with AA principles.

AA guidance may be applied in a straightforward fashion when it relates to sobriety. The message for sponsees is clear: do not drink, go to meetings and work the programme of AA. However, a number of sponsors recognized that their sponsees often needed help in areas of their lives other than in maintaining sobriety. In these circumstances, some sponsors were prepared to advise as long as the advice was either sought by their sponsee or it was given within the principles of AA. This seems to be a reasonable approach and not contradictory to AA guidance.”

“Controlling behaviour by sponsors

The matter of advice giving may relate to the extent to which some sponsors wish to impose their will on their sponsees. A number of sponsors referred to what could be loosely described as their controlling behaviour, often recognizing that it is unhelpful. Sponsor 14 even referred to himself as a ‘step Nazi’. The term ‘controlling behaviour’ is not well described in the psychiatric literature and is, perhaps, a lay term. However, AA literature refers to this type of behaviour as ‘self-will run riot’, which it believes to be at the core of ‘the disease’ of alcoholism.”

Comment: It's interesting to note that the term 'step Nazi' has now migrated into research literature. This will do wonders for AA's reputation!

Cheerio

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)

Be careful what you pray for!

See also Links and downloads 

PS For AA Minority Report 2013 click here

Sponsorship – the discussion continues.....

See AA History Lovers for more

Extracts:

“…....When I read all of ….. writings, they compel me to remember that I cannot be a good sponsor by attacking and shaming my sponsee. I cannot be a good sponsor by accusing and belittling my sponsee in ways that further overwhelm that poor person with an even greater sense of crippling guilt. Above all, if I start trying to "play God" with the person I am sponsoring, I will end up dooming my own soul.”

“So in the case of the question "what are AA sponsors supposed to do," what I have wanted to see for a long time, is a collection of case studies of how AA sponsors actually did their job at different points in AA history, including such cases as:

(1) What Ebby actually did with Bill W. at the beginning, giving the concrete details.

(2) What Father Ed Dowling actually did with Bill W. (using the book by Robert Fitzgerald S.J., The Soul of Sponsorship: The Friendship of Fr. Ed Dowling, S.J. and Bill Wilson in Letters, for the concrete details).

(3) Concrete, specific details from the book Dr. Bob and the Good Oldtimers, of how Dr. Bob (and Anne Smith) actually worked with specific newcomers.

(4) Does Mitchell K's book on Clarence Snyder have enough concrete information on how Clarence sponsored newcomers, to write anything useful on this particular topic?

(5) Father Ralph Pfau's autobiography, Prodigal Shepherd, has lots of concrete detail about the things which Doherty Sheerin in Indianapolis did in sponsoring him. A lot of knowledgeable people back at that time regarded Dohr [sic] as being up there with Dr. Bob in terms of knowing how to sponsor alcoholics effectively and teach them real spirituality. He taught them by his own personal example -- not by preaching or haranguing them, or accusing them of worshiping door knobs and other such belittling techniques, which past a certain point are only ways to try to beef up our own very weak egos). Very few AA people are going to be able to rise to Dohr's level, but we still need examples of extraordinary virtue to point us in the direction in which we need to make personal progress.”

“..... But paradoxically, a sponsor can only become a "God-bearer" and become "transparent to God" by speaking with ruthless honesty about all his or her own shortcomings and failings, and the difficulties he or she meets in actually living the principles of the program. The minute sponsors start going on an ego trip and start trying to "play God" in too much of a presumptuously self-important kind of way, they cease to have any major value as spokesmen for God.”

(our emphases)

Cheerio

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)

Sponsorship – the debate continues …..

A correspondent recently drew our attention to a debate currently being conducted on this subject - rather unusually - on the AA History Lovers group site (under the heading Each AA member MUST have a sponsor)

Some extracts to whet the appetite:

“Can someone tell me when AA adopted the doctrine that an alcoholic in AA cannot function without a sponsor? Perhaps I wasn't paying attention, but I don't recall hearing this in the 70s.”

“In northern Indiana, by the latter 1970's it had become clear that getting a sponsor was one of the seven most important things to impress on newcomers, if you wanted to increase the percentage of these new people who got sober and stayed sober.” …...

“Chapter Seven in the Big Book tells us how to carry the message to newcomers. And I understand that an alcoholic couldn't get into the alky ward in Akron without an AA sponsor."

“My question deals with modern sponsorship in the USA, in that we in effect turn our wills and our lives over to the sponsor rather than to the God of our understanding. At a conference a few years ago a speaker from the East Coast, who said he'd been sober for twenty-seven years, proudly announced that he never makes a decision without calling his sponsor, who lives on the West Coast.

The consensus today seems to be that every alcoholic coming through the doors of AA is either too unintelligent or too brain damaged to understand the Big Book and needs a sponsor to explain every word, and then too guide him/her through his/her everyday life. It has even been stated locally any number of times that anyone who tries to take the steps without a sponsor's guidance isn't working the AA program.

I'm trying to find out when this became AA doctrine.”

“......struck a chord when he commented on the frequent sentiments shared on the personal importance many AA members place on their relationship with his/her sponsor and how that has apparently changed since AA began. Some go so far as to generalize for all members in their sharing. and give an impression that sponsorship is mandatory.

I relied heavily on the AA message when I started my journey. It is still only a suggestion that members work with a sponsor. My own experience is that it was a good suggestion! My sponsor helped me understand AA and helped me to learn to live the AA program of recovery.

However, I remember reading the AA pamphlet on Sponsorship. It laid out pretty clearly what was expected of the relationship that I was entering with my sponsor. It did not emphasize any form of outrageous dependency that some individuals seem to place on their relationship with their sponsor. The AA literature even allows for multiple sponsors but cautions about it. But it is a personal choice like anything in AA. The literature states that it is still a suggestion and not a necessity!

The best proof of the fallacy that every member MUST have a sponsor is the membership experience itself. The 2011 Membership Survey reveals that 81% of the membership has a sponsor. That's far from 'everyone'. However, that by itself doesn't suggest that almost 20% of the membership got sober without a sponsor.

Many members lose their sponsor after years and just do not seek another one.

Little is said in AA about the evolution away from dependence on a sponsor for those who enjoy it while early in sobriety but no longer feel the same need later on.

Individual sharing may often misunderstand or mischaracterize what is truly AA versus what is simply their own individual experience or view. I also hear sharing that sounds more codependent with a sponsor or vice versa, sponsors who sound like control freaks. But that's another story! When in doubt go to the literature which reflects the larger conscience of Alcoholics Anonymous.”

.. and so on and so forth.....

For authoritative guidance one needs (No! You don't NEED to ask your sponsor .. nor is it suggested!) look no further than Questions and Answers on Sponsorship (AA Conference Approved literature)

There! That wasn't too painful was it!

Cheerio

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)

PS Thanks to our correspondent for the info

The Primary Purpose Big Book Study Cult … or As Joe Sees It! (contd)

Previous entry

Extract from our forum: http://forums.delphiforums.com/aacultwatch under thread: “TLM in Alanon UK?”

“......... The following extracts from Joe McQ’s “Carry This Message – A Guide to Big Book Sponsorship” disturb me because A.A. sponsors do not have a right to pressure, teach, coerce or discipline newcomers. We are all equals in A.A. A newcomer to A.A. has an equal status to his/her sponsor. A.A. sponsors simply share their experience strength and hope with newcomers on a basis of mutual need. Whether or not a newcomer decides to take the steps and when, where, how, and with whom, is entirely up to them to decide for themselves and it is not for anyone else to decide for them. The A.A. program is based purely on attraction. I think the influence of Joe’s McQ’s sponsorship guide has a lot to do with newcomers leaving A.A. and it has a lot to do with the associated bad press which accuses A.A. of cult-like behaviour. I find the following extracts from Joe McQ’s book disturbing because they give any power driven narcissist a green light to go and find someone to bully and control. They are the exact opposite values to the equality given to every A.A. member that is expressed in A.A. literature concerning sponsorship.

Extracts from “Carry This Message – A Guide to Big Book Sponsorship” by Joe McQ published 1990, August House Inc:

“There wasn’t as much pressure- there wasn’t such a desperate need – to coerce him or her into thoroughly working the steps.” (page 3)

“Without the ‘coercion’ of being sold on these ideas, we have the phenomenon of people doing strange things like taking one step a year…” (page 4)

“As sponsors we know, there are certain things we require of a sponsoree [sic] … … … he has to carry out his assignments and do the things you ask him to do” (page 25).

“… … we are working with an undisciplined person. Assignments should be given, and the sponsor should make it clear to the person that assignments have to be done by a specific time…..there are certain things we require of a sponsoree… … He has to carry out his assignments and do the things you ask him to do … … Dr. Bob said ‘Get down on your knees.’ And they took step 3… … But an alcoholic can do just about anything you make her do. If you insist that she do certain things, she’ll get them done. She has to go from the undisciplined to the disciplined… … At our treatment centre, Serenity Park, we require all the clients get a sponsor within the third week… The sponsor teaches discipline… … everything is working on this undisciplined person… …. An undisciplined person may fight discipline, but it has to be enforced to help the person….” (pages, 26, 27)

"You can’t just say to the sponsoree ‘go start on your inventory’ because it might take him a month, maybe two. Create a schedule by saying something like, ‘We are going to work on resentments for two days’ then do the other inventories similarly, with a schedule for each one which doesn’t allow the sponsoree to skimp, but moves him or her along at a good pace….”(Step Four assignment).

"You need to move your sponsoree along pretty fast…. but you need to keep the sponsoree busy and keep her moving… you should just move him right on through them bam, bam, bam, bam. Keep the momentum…..” (page 65)

“Remember that all the people in our fellowship groups are not really alcoholics… … … They aren’t really alcoholics – because an alcoholic can’t do that. They don’t usually stay; they just come in an out of our fellowship. But they don’t have a message to share…..” (page 65)

Contrary to Joe McQ’s sponsorship, there are absolutely no requirements to AA membership other than a desire to stop drinking. No AA sponsor has the authority to say to a newcomer that he/she ‘has’ to do anything. There is no requirement for a newcomer to take the steps in any conventional sense or to have a sponsor, as Bill W. is quoted below: “All people having an alcohol problem who wish to get rid of it and make a happy adjustment to their lives, become A.A. members by simply associating with us. Nothing but sincerity is asked of anyone.”

“For example, The Twelve Steps of our AA program are not crammed down anybody’s throat. They are not sustained by any human authority.” (Bill W. Extract, “Rules’ Dangerous but Unity vital” The Language of the Heart p 8. AA Grapevine September 1945)

“One of the great insights Dr. Bob and I shared was that all true communication must be founded on mutual need. Never could we talk down to anyone, certainly not another alcoholic. We saw that each sponsor would have to admit his own needs, as clearly as those of his prospect. Here was the foundation of A.A.’s Twelfth Step to recovery, the Step in which we carry the message.” (Bill W. 1953, extract, ‘The Language of the Heart’; The Language of the Heart p 247)

“I was no longer a teacher or a preacher.” Bill W. (Bill W. extract, A Fragment of History: Origin Of The Twelve Steps, AA Grapevine July 1953, The Language of the Heart p 199)

“You see, our talk was a completely mutual thing “I had quit preaching, I knew I needed this alcoholic as much as he needed me.” (Bill W. Alcoholics Anonymous Come of Age p 70)

“History has shown that whatever their several merits, neither preaching nor moralizing has ever made much impression on alcoholics as a whole.” (Bill W. Extract’ On the Alcoholism Front’ AA Grapevine March 1958, The Language of the Heart p186)

“4. It was discovered that all forms of coercion, both direct and indirect, had to be dropped. We found that ‘checking’ in the hands of amateurs too often resulted in criticism, and that resulted in resentment, which is probably the most serious problem the average alcoholic is troubled with….

6 ….. We can never say to anyone (or insinuate) that he must agree to our formula or be excommunicated. The atheist may stand up in an A.A. meeting denying God, yet reporting how he has been helped in other ways….

7. In order to carry the principle of inclusiveness and tolerance still further, we make no religious requirement of anyone. All people having an alcohol problem who wish to get rid of it and make a happy adjustment to their lives, become A.A. members by simply associating with us. Nothing but sincerity is asked of anyone. In this atmosphere the orthodox, unorthodox, and the unbeliever mix happily and usefully together.” (Bill W. Extracts, letter 1940, Pass it On p 171-173)

Questions and Answers on AA Sponsorship”

(our edits)

Cheerio

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)