Visits to this website have reached over 5,000!
Lots of people are, apparently, still being assigned attendance at AA meetings as part of "aftercare" by Amethyst Foundation, Inc. If this has happened to you, please note that:
Several Federal District Courts and State Courts, including the U.S. District Court for the District of New Hampshire, have ruled AA to be a "religious organization" for purposes of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. Coerced attendance at AA as part of your aftercare is illegal.
Amethyst Foundation, Inc., will often try to direct you to attend a "self-help" group as part of your aftercare, knowing full well that the only self-help groups available in the state of New Hampshire are AA. They will then respond to your complaints by stating that "you are not being required to attend AA and are free to attend any self-help group you can find."
Should this happen, immediately inform Amethyst Foundation, Inc., the Governor of New Hampshire, and the Director of the State of New Hampshire Dept of Health and Human Services in writing, by certified mail/return receipt requested. This should solve your problem.
In the unlikely event that this does not provide relief, file, pro se, for a preliminary injunction in the United States District Court for the District of New Hampshire.
There is no reason to attend AA or any type of self-group as part of your "aftercare." Yes, it was wrong to drive with a BAC over the legal limit. But that does not justify your being punished by the religious zealots of Amethyst Foundation, Inc., REAP, Serenity House, and others of the "recovery industry" with forced participation at cult-like, religious AA meetings.
Showing posts with label 12 Step. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 12 Step. Show all posts
Newt Gingrich, Big Book Thumper
In this Youtube video from a 2011 Republican Candidate Debate, Newt Gingrich states,
"there was a part of me that was truly 'hollow' ...and finally, a banker, who was a friend of mine from Georgia, gave me 'the two books that make up Alcoholics Anonymous'"
The two books Gingrich is referring to are "The Big Book," and "The Twelve Steps and Twelve Traditions."
Gingrich went on to say:
"Now...I wasn't drinking, but I had precisely the symptoms of someone who was collapsing under this weight" [referring to his hollow feelings].Reading the Big Book and trying to understand where I had failed and why I was empty and why I had to turn to God. I think if I had not had that experience, that intervention, that I would have collapsed totally. And that was really the beginning of turning my life around...I've been blessed."
I don't know what is more frightening: The idea of this idiot being President, or the thought of people being so ignorant as to actually vote for him.
More from Bill W., Cult Leader
It's simple: you either go to AA, conform complete to its covenant, or you die.
Update: AA removed these videos from YouTube. Even they are embarrassed by what their founder says.
Bill W. speaks of "The Only Way..."
Straight from the cult leader's mouth. Religion is everything to AA.
Again...I don't mind so much if people wish to do this foolishness on their own time. People are free to do or worship how they wish. Even more so in New Hampshire, the "live free or die" state.
However, it is wrong, legally and morally, for a State government to force non-willing participants to attend what is, in essence, an undeniably religious organization.
Oh...and don't tell me "AA has changed," because it hasn't. They still strictly adhere to the tenets of Bill W.'s "Big Book" which they regard as their bible.
Update: AA has removed these embarrassing and disturbing videos of their founder. I'll find them and repost them myself.
It revealing that AA has done this. They don't stand behind what their leader says and what is written in the "Big Book." They feel the need to hide it from viewers of Youtube. What hypocrites.
AA didn't work for Debra Oberlin....apparently
Former president of MADD arrested on DUI charge
Published: Thursday, February 24, 2011 at 11:58 a.m.
Last Modified: Thursday, February 24, 2011 at 11:58 a.m.
Last Modified: Thursday, February 24, 2011 at 11:58 a.m.
A former president of the defunct local chapter of Mothers Against Drunk Driving was arrested recently by the Gainesville Police Department on a DUI charge.
Debra Oberlin, 48, was arrested after she had difficulty on a field sobriety test. She registered a .234 and .239 on breath alcohol tests. Florida's legal limit for driving is .08.
Oberlin, a Realtor, had no comment when contacted Thursday by The Sun.
On Feb. 18 at 1:10 a.m., an officer spotted Oberlin driving erratically on Northwest 19th Street, swerving and crossing lanes, an arrest report states. Oberlin was pulled over in the 3600 block of Northwest 39th Avenue.
The officer wrote that Oberlin smelled of alcohol and had watery, bloodshot and dilated eyes. The report states that Oberlin told the officer she had four beers.
Gainesville's MADD chapter existed for several years in the 1990s before closing in 1996 because of lack of financial support. Oberlin was the chapter president for three years.
Disclose.tv - Former President Of MADD Arrested On DUI Charge Video
Blogger Jeremy Witteveen (Le Café Witteveen) posted a blog entry entitled "I love you, Debra Oberlin" and got this response:
"This hippocritical bitch should be public beat to death or better yet,turned over to any 100 of the thousands whose lives she helped ruin with her holier than thou bullshit,and let them deal with her.It would be too much to ask for that the system will subject her to the full extent of the law. They will probably coddel her because of the income flow she helped create."
Mothers Against Drunk Driving "was originally formed by Candice Lightner, who later left the organization. In 2002 she said that MADD 'has become far more neo-prohibitionist than I had ever wanted or envisioned ... I didn't start MADD to deal with alcohol. I started MADD to deal with the issue of drunk driving.'" MADD, like AA, the "recovery" system, and IDIP providers here in New Hampshire like Amethyst Foundation, Inc., Serenity House, Inc., REAP, Inc., don't want to eliminate drinking and driving--they want to eliminate drinking entirely in keeping with the religious/cult doctrines of AA (while making quite a nice, tax-free, profit doing so).
Good job, AA! You took an organization that once had merit (MADD) and ran it into the ground, trampling people's civil liberties, creating a legion of people that absolutely despise you.
The Heresy of the Twelve Steps
The fundamentalist, former drunks who run AA (and the entire "industry" including Amethyst Foundation, Inc.), if they had functioning intellects, would quickly realize that the Twelve Steps are heresy. But, either by choice, or by past alcohol use, or genetics, or a combination thereof, they don't. I'll spell it out for them:
"I am the LORD your God: you shall not have strange Gods before me." 1st Commandment
In the Alcoholics Anonymous program, you can use anything for your "God" or "Higher Power". A.A. has lots of stories of people using a bedpan, a teacup, a doorknob, a stone, a teddy bear, a mountain, a motorcycle, or "Good Orderly Direction" for their "Higher Power". You can pray to any Golden Calf, stone idol, or Higher-Powered item of Household Hardware that you like. One of the more ridiculous word redefinitions that A.A. offers us is, you can make the word "G.O.D." mean "Group Of Drunks". The LADC I was mandated to see told me, therefore, that my atheism was no excuse not to like A.A.
A.A. founder Bill Wilson ("Bill W.") wrote:
"I must quickly assure you that A.A.'s tread innumerable paths in their quest for faith. ... You can, if you wish, make A.A. itself your 'higher power.' Here's a very large group who have solved their alcohol problem. In this respect they are certainly a power greater than you, who have not even come close to a solution. Surely you can have faith in them. Even this minimum of faith will be enough."
--Twelve Steps and Twelve Traditions, William G. Wilson, page 27.
Given that most Christians believe in the holy trinity (The Father, The Son, and The Holy Ghost), I don't think many of them would think kindly to praying to a Group Of Drunks, or seeking and doing the will of a bunch of drunkards. Also, how would Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, or Jews feel about being told this?
But then, that's assuming that people that go to A.A. think. They don't.
In addition, the Twelve Steps talk about "God as we understood Him". Members are allegedly free to define God however they imagine or understand "Him" to be. Bill Wilson told A.A. recruiters to
Stress the spiritual feature freely. If the man be agnostic or atheist, make it emphatic that he does not have to agree with your conception of God. He can choose any conception he likes, provided it makes sense to him. The main thing is that he be willing to believe in a Power greater than himself and that he live by spiritual principles.
--The Big Book, William G. Wilson, Chapter 7, Working With Others, page 93.
Obviously, this makes A.A. incompatible with atheism. Atheism is the non-belief in a higher power. But A.A. members just see an atheist's nonbelief as another fault (like his alcoholism in denial) that needs to be cured. God will cure the poor sap's atheism--he just needs to be dragged in to A.A. meetings.
How about making my higher power Satan? Or Hitler? Or Wotan, Thor, Loki, etc...? Some of the people I've meet at A.A. meetings are absolutely insane. They have truly drunk the cool-aid and are full-blown cult followers. I'm sure some of the things they understand god to be would get them committed if anyone looked at A.A. with any degree of scrutiny. (A.A., for some reason, likely ignorance, gets largely a free pass by society, despite it being a religious cult which is completely ineffective at treating alcoholism.)
Bill Wilson emphatically repeated that doctrine in the Big Book:
Despite the living example of my friend [a sober Ebby Thacher] there remained in me the vestiges of my old prejudice. The word God still aroused a certain antipathy. When the thought was expressed that there might be a God personal to me this feeling was intensified. I didn't like the idea. ..
My friend suggested what then seemed a novel idea. He said,"Why don't you choose your own conception of God?"
That statement hit me hard. It melted the icy intellectual mountain in whose shadow I had lived and shivered many years. I stood in the sunlight at last.
It was only a matter of being willing to believe in a Power greater than myself. Nothing more was required of me to make my beginning. I saw that growth could start from that point. Upon a foundation of complete willingness I might build what I saw in my friend. Would I have it? Of course I would!
Thus was I convinced that God is concerned with us humans when we want Him enough. At long last I saw, I felt, I believed. Scales of pride and prejudice fell from my eyes. A new world came into view.
--Big Book, 3rd Edition, William G. Wilson, Chapter 1, "Bill's Story", Page 12.
We were now at Step Three. Many of us said to our Maker, as we understood Him: "God, I offer myself to Thee — to build with me and to do with me as Thou wilt. Relieve me of the bondage of self, that I may better do Thy will. Take away my difficulties, that victory over them may bear witness to those I would help of Thy Power, Thy Love, and Thy Way of life. May I do Thy will always!" We thought well before taking this step making sure we were ready; that we could at last abandon ourselves utterly to Him.
--A.A. Big Book, 3rd Edition, William G. Wilson, page 63.
Follow the dictates of a Higher Power and you will presently live in a new and wonderful world, no matter what your present circumstance.
--The Big Book, 3rd Edition, William G. Wilson, page 100.
You might be thinking that this is just "The Big Book" and A.A. doesn't really follow it strictly. You would be wrong in thinking so. You will very quickly learn that "The Big Book" is the absolute final authority and is never to be questioned! Bill W. is viewed as a near-God by these people. This, despite his well-documented abuse of his wife, infidelity, narcissism, and his utter failure at being sober (he cried out for whiskey on his deathbed).
The blind, cult-like obedience to the religion of A.A. extends beyond the meetings in church basements. In New Hampshire, the agencies entrusted with carrying out court-ordered Impaired Driver Intervention Programs (IDIPs), such as Amethyst Foundation, Inc., REAP, Inc., and Serenity House, Inc., are owned, operated, and staffed by A.A. members. Staff members spread the gospel of A.A. during IDIP classes, declare everyone an alcoholic (either admitted or in denial) and order mandatory A.A. attendance as part of the aftercare that virtually everyone is assigned. Also, as part of the "aftercare" is mandatory counseling sessions with Licensed Drug and Alcohol Counselors, who happen to espouse...yes, that's right, the tenets of A.A.
In essence, the state of New Hampshire let A.A. infiltrate a significant component of the government. (And I haven't even mentioned A.A.'s role in New Hampshire's prisons, parole hearings, professional disciplinary proceedings, and others yet...I will later.) The entire recovery industry is reaping in huge (tax free) revenue while indoctrinating new member into their A.A. cult. It's a great scam, and I'm sure the smart ones at the top are laughing their way to the bank. The stupid ones being exploited merely think they are saving souls.
Here's one final secret about A.A. members: they lie. They lie because they believe they are saving souls and that they know better than you. I've caught people at A.A. meetings (and at Amethyst Foundation, Inc.) red-handed in the act of lying, with well-documented evidence, and they still shamelessly maintain they are right.
If you are at the mercy of these people and need your license back, you need to understand the personalities you are dealing with. These are people who think they are fault-less and perfect because god has revealed to them the truth. They take pity on you. With the power they have been entrusted by the state they will bend you to their will. Play dumb. Reveal no will, backbone, or free-thought. Lie, as they will lie to you. Escape their clutches, get your license back and flip them the bird in your rear view mirror as you drive away.
If there were a god, and the Ten Commandments, these people would surely be going to hell.
16 Red Flag Hearings: 14 Affirmed, 0 Reversed, 2 Remanded
Looking for Justice by holding a Red-Flag Hearing? Don't Count On It
The Department of Safety, Bureau of Hearings, has posted a Compendium of Superior Court Cases. Under "I. Substance Abuse Completion Requirements" there are listed sixteen red-flag hearings, or appeals of decisions made by Amethyst Foundation, REAP, or other administrators of IDIP programs. Of those sixteen hearings, none were reversed.
"90 meetings in 90 days"
Keskula v. Beecher, 04-E-142, (Merrimack, Lewis, 07/19/04) AFFIRMED
Referred to further counseling by LADAC; Petitioned for, and after a hearing, Hearings Examiner entered as his disposition the indefinite suspension of Petitioner's driving privileges and further directed that he attend 90 self-held group meetings in 90 days, and securing a low-risk alcohol evaluation from a LADAC …; Petitioner disagreed; appeal filed; HELD: "The Hearings Examiner acted within his discretion in making the rulings and determinations … There is ample support for the conclusion that the required aftercare was warranted in this case."
Charming. Ninety meetings in ninety days is an old AA slogan. It is how new people ("pigeons" in AA slang) are recruited. Like other cults, AA tries to insulate new member from the outside world during the period of indoctrination. There's no evidence that this helps in maintaining sobriety at all.
Issues of effectiveness aside, ordering AA attendance, which this clearly is doing, is unconstitutional.
All of these courts have ruled that Alcoholics Anonymous is a religion or engages in religious activities:
- the Federal 7th Circuit Court in Wisconsin, 1984.
- the Federal District Court for Southern New York, 1994.
- the New York Court of Appeals, 1996.
- the New York State Supreme Court, 1996.
- the U.S. Supreme Court, 1997.
- the Tennessee State Supreme Court.
- the Federal 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals in New York, 1996.
- the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit.
- the U.S. Court of Appeals, Seventh District, 1996.
- the Federal Appeals Court in Chicago, 1996.
- the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, September 7, 2007.
- the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, 2006.
- the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, 2005.
- the U.S. District Court for the District of New Hampshire, 2006.
The United States Supreme Court has refused to hear challenges to those rulings, or to change or over-turn those lower court decisions. By letting them stand, the Supreme Court has made them the law of the land.
In the case of Grandberg v. Ashland County, a 1984 Federal 7th Circuit Court ruling concerning judicially-mandated A.A. attendance, the court said:
Alcoholics Anonymous materials and the testimony of the witness established beyond a doubt that religious activities, as defined in constitutional law, were a part of the treatment program. The distinction between religion and spirituality is meaningless, and serves merely to confuse the issue.
— Wisconsin's District Judge John Shabaz
"Conflicting LADACs"
Reyno v. Beecher, 05-E-603,(Merrimack, Fitzgerald, 01/18/06) AFFIRMED
Referred to further counseling by LADAC; suspension sustained after hearing with conflicting testimony from more than one LADAC. Program disagreed with LADAC. Hearings Examiner held that Petitioner must follow program's recommendation. Court affirmed in a short one-line opinion.
Bastille v. Beecher, 05-E-055,(Rockingham, McHugh, 04/27/05) AFFIRMED
Referred to further counseling, suspension was sustained after hearing with conflicting LDACs. Director ordered counseling. Court ordered Petitioner to submit to a new LDAC evaluation. Evidence was sufficient to sustain order, but time was up and court ordered restoration after it reviewed additional submissions by petitioner about two weeks later.
The bottom line appears to be: In a contest of opinion between an Amethyst Foundation/REAP/Serenity House LADC vs. your outside expert, you lose.
"The Court may not 'Second Guess' the Examiner's reliance on the Reports, as to what weight and credibility to assign them."
Gregoire v. Beecher, 04-E-0063, (Strafford, Smukler, 07/07/04) AFFIRMED
Referred to further counseling; did not comply and at a hearing, the Hearings Examiner ordered Petitioner to show compliance; Petitioner argues that although the examiner was correct in reaching the foregoing conclusions based on the evidence before him, the evidence upon which he relied was inaccurate. HELD: Petitioner has not met his burden of demonstrating that the examiner's decision was unreasonable or unlawful. "The Court … may not second-guess the examiner's reliance on the reports or his determination, as to what weight and credibility to assign them."
Oeser v. Beecher, 02-E-50, (Cheshire, Groff, 8/19/02) AFFIRMED
After a hearing ordering aftercare, Petitioner appealed raising "the following five issues on appeal: (1) …sentence has been served and her license must be restored; (2) … was not granted a hearing; (3) … license must be reinstated after 1-year; (4) hearing violated … right to due process and the DOS regulations; (5) … counselor is unqualified and the tests used … to determine her risk of re-offending were unreliable." Court held: "clearly the statute provides for continued revocation of the license of a person convicted of a DWI offense beyond the 1-yr period, if the person fails to meet the further counseling requirements. The Court finds that there is no evidence the hearings officer failed to follow the departmental regulations in the conduct of the hearing, or failed to give … a full and fair hearing in complete accord with all constitutional requirements of due process. Finally, the Court finds that … has failed to establish as a matter of law that the counselor was unqualified or that the tests were unreliable. The Court finds that the hearings officer's acceptance of the counselor's opinions and recommendations for treatment were reasonable."
Ferris v. Beecher, 01-E-42, (Strafford, Mohl, 4/6/01) AFFIRMED
Referred to further counseling by CADAC; after hearing the Hearings Examiner agreed with the CADAC and concluded that petitioner's alcohol abuse problem was not under control and that he was at risk to be a repeat DWI offender; appeal filed; petitioner considers himself only a "problem drinker" and argues that his test scores were inaccurate because he answered the questions based on his life style habits in 1998 as opposed to the present, as directed to do by the CADAC. The Court held: once petitioner demonstrates compliance with the program and is not at risk to recidivate, he can then petition to be decertified as an Habitual Offender.
So not only will your expert witness be wrong, the court will too, and it must defer to the wisdom of the Amethyst Foundation/REAP/Serenity House LADC! Nevermind that to be a LADC requires only a rudimentary training, and not even a high school diploma, which is driven by christian fundamentalist ideology that is unconcerned with issues such as fairness. Retribution, punishment, and "saving you" for your own good is all that they are concerned with.
I Don't Care If People Don't Like Me
Senator Franken got it almost right with his character, Stuart Smalley. But Stuart is kind and assumes the best in people (just not himself). The twelve-steppers of AA, founded on Christian born again fundamentalism, aren't They are full of fear, intolerance, and hate. The audience of SNL wasn't (and probably still isn't) ready for this type of honest depiction, however. It's still taboo to criticize religion. Hopefully people will start to see these psychotics for the irrational, dangerous, lunatics they are.
Atheists Aren't The Ones Who Are Arrogant
During my IDIP courses at Amethyst Foundation, Inc., the LADC who was "teaching" told me repeatedly that my "arrogant atheism" prevented me from ever being able to deal with my "drinking problem."
I encountered this same insanity during the AA meetings I was forced to attend (especially when I refused to hold hands in a circle and pray with those losers).
You know what's arrogant? Thinking that the supreme being is interested in your sorry ass or your whining about your "drinking problem." That's the height of arrogance.
It's also the height of stupidity. But if you've been through this, you already know how stupid these people are. Willful ignorance is a prerequisite to being a LADC, and it's why they drank to deal with their problems before being certified to push their nonthinking ideology on others. I'd rather they had stayed the pathetic drunks they were.
Amethyst Foundation LADC Orders Six More Months of Aftercare For Consuming One Drink, And Despite An Independent LADC's "Low Risk" Assessment
One Drink During Six Months of Assigned Aftercare Results in Six MORE Months of After-Aftercare
Here's a story from a recent victim of Amethyst Foundation, Inc.
As a form of self therapy to help me deal with their idiocy, I've written an imaginary letter to the Amethyst LADC in question. Any rational person will see the problems with what this LADC did, and may not get much from reading it, but my rant will help vent some anger and frustration. And, who knows, maybe the LADC will read it and have a "moment of clarity," to borrow a phrase from AA.
An Open Letter to the LADC at Amethyst Foundation, Inc., Who Did This:
What did assigning another six months of aftercare for having one drink accomplish? Really, what good could result from this? (--and your identity was provided to me by your victim, so I know who you are.) Does this make you feel good about yourself? As a licensed counselor bound by an ethical code to help your clients? As a person?
Your job is as an agent of the state of New Hampshire to competently implement DWI programs. As an agent of the state, you work for the taxpayers of New Hampshire (even though your paycheck says "Amethyst Foundation, Inc."). Your job is to protect the public from DWI offenders repeating their offense, by educating them about the dangers of drinking and driving. To repeat, your job is to educate and intervene, period. Even had this person gotten behind the wheel, his/her abilities to drive would not have been impaired.
Your job is NOT to punish. That is the job of the courts, not you.
Your job is NOT to diagnose people as alcoholics. Your job is to stop people from driving while under the influence of alcohol. People are free to drink as much as they want, as long as they don't drive, or behave in public in a disorderly fashion. It is not against the law to get drunk.
Furthermore, you are NOT QUALIFIED to diagnose people as alcoholics. Under He-A 705.02, Minimum Qualifications for Certification;
Your job is NOT to stop people from drinking altogether. Your job is to stop people from drinking to impairment and driving. Having one drink in a six month period will not result in a DWI. How much a person has to drink is none of your business as long as they do not get behind the wheel.
Your job is NOT to cast moral judgment on others. Lose the scorn and judgment. It has no role in the realm of counseling or education. Drinking, by itself, is not inherently bad. People have done it since the beginning of civilization, when they learned about the fermenting process. They will continue it do so likely indefinitely. And society does no have a problem with it--only you do.
I know you are a former drunk who has been indoctrinated into the cult-like organization, AA. AA has told you that you have a disease and that you can never have even a single drink again. "One drink, one drunk" is one of your mottos. I know that AA has taught you that thinking is bad and the God is good. I also know that the 12th step commands you to convert others to the AA ideology.
I know that you are limited in your intellect, ability to think critically, and ability to think in shades of gray (everything is black and white to you). You are also in deep denial (yet, ironically accuse all who disagree with you to be so). I've written this message to you in simple language and, I hope, with convincing reasoning. I have also written it in the best interest of all. I do not hate you personally. I hate what you are doing to people. Though I do not believe in "karma" per se, I do believe that when you treat enough people badly, some of them will "bite back." This is human nature.
Well, being a professional LADC serving the needs of the citizens of New Hampshire means putting your ideology aside and doing your job.
Your job is to prevent people from driving while impaired. It is not to stop people from drinking. We tried prohibition, and it was a monumental failure (Google it). Your job is not to punish people. You may be a former drunk, caught up in your own fantasy world in which you refuse to critically reason, but don't turn everyone else into one. Most of the people arrested for DWI are not alcoholics. They do not need to attend AA and conned into praying to God and believing that only "he" can cure them of their lifelong disease. It's not a disease. And even if it were, it's not your concern if they don't drive. For the purposes of your employer (us) they just have to stop driving while impaired.
I really don't expect any LADCs to understand this. You are uneducated, anti-intellectual, and have cast away all belief in rationality for faith. You simply "believe" that you are right, and that others are wrong. You do not "believe" scientific or medical data, despite how much of it they are shown. Furthermore, why are you so angry and so set on exerting your authority on others through petty acts like those above? I suspect the anger comes from the same self-hatred that caused you to become an alcoholic and then a LADC. This is payback for you against a world that has "mistreated you."
So keep your ideology to yourself, get off your power trip, and start acting like a professional by doing your job by helping people, not punishing them. No wonder people hate and disrespect you so much.
You might start by thinking about why, as a counselor who has been trained to "help" people, you are so universally hated. And, no, it's not because we're all in denial. Most of us have nothing to be in "denial" about because we're not alcoholics. It's you who are in denial about what it is you are supposed to be doing.
Here's a story from a recent victim of Amethyst Foundation, Inc.
"I did amethyst's after care. some counseling and some AA, but one evening I had dinner with my father (who I rarely see). I had one drink. literally, one drink. I admitted it to my counselor and Amethyst ended up hearing about it in her report. My counselor still said that I was a low risk--didn't even make me complete all the counseling. But Amethyst says they want to hold my license for six more months because of that one drink. And even worse, I would have to report to myself about abstinence. HELLO!! You meatballs! I could just lie to you, so what's the point? Sounds more like a punishment. They want to get an alcoholic (which I'm not) off the roads, but instead they are going to put a crazed man going postal pretty soon."This is very much like my experience with the spiteful idiots that run Amethyst Foundation, Inc.
As a form of self therapy to help me deal with their idiocy, I've written an imaginary letter to the Amethyst LADC in question. Any rational person will see the problems with what this LADC did, and may not get much from reading it, but my rant will help vent some anger and frustration. And, who knows, maybe the LADC will read it and have a "moment of clarity," to borrow a phrase from AA.
An Open Letter to the LADC at Amethyst Foundation, Inc., Who Did This:
What did assigning another six months of aftercare for having one drink accomplish? Really, what good could result from this? (--and your identity was provided to me by your victim, so I know who you are.) Does this make you feel good about yourself? As a licensed counselor bound by an ethical code to help your clients? As a person?
Your job is as an agent of the state of New Hampshire to competently implement DWI programs. As an agent of the state, you work for the taxpayers of New Hampshire (even though your paycheck says "Amethyst Foundation, Inc."). Your job is to protect the public from DWI offenders repeating their offense, by educating them about the dangers of drinking and driving. To repeat, your job is to educate and intervene, period. Even had this person gotten behind the wheel, his/her abilities to drive would not have been impaired.
Your job is NOT to punish. That is the job of the courts, not you.
Your job is NOT to diagnose people as alcoholics. Your job is to stop people from driving while under the influence of alcohol. People are free to drink as much as they want, as long as they don't drive, or behave in public in a disorderly fashion. It is not against the law to get drunk.
Furthermore, you are NOT QUALIFIED to diagnose people as alcoholics. Under He-A 705.02, Minimum Qualifications for Certification;
To qualify as an IDIP or WIDIP instructor, the applicant shall either:
(a) Meet the following requirements:
(1) Possess a valid New Hampshire LADC license; and (2) Document 6 months experience in substance abuse and group counseling or otherwise formal group facilitation; OR
(b) Meet the following alternative requirements:Under He-A 705.02(a)(1)-(2), you do not even need a high school diploma or a GED (LADC licensure in New Hampshire does not require this). Even if you meet the "higher" standard of He-A 705.02(b)(1)-(3) and hold a high school diploma or a GED, you do not possess an adequate education in science or medicine to be diagnosing people.
(1) Document a minimum of one year's experience in the field of education, social sciences training, or substance abuse and group counseling or otherwise formal group activities facilitation;
(2) Demonstrate knowledge of the impaired driver intervention program and curricula and of other programs in New Hampshire that provide intervention and educational programming in the field of alcohol or drug abuse for a comparable clientele, or of equivalent DWI intervention programs in other states; and
(3) Hold at least a high school diploma or GED.
Your job is NOT to stop people from drinking altogether. Your job is to stop people from drinking to impairment and driving. Having one drink in a six month period will not result in a DWI. How much a person has to drink is none of your business as long as they do not get behind the wheel.
Your job is NOT to cast moral judgment on others. Lose the scorn and judgment. It has no role in the realm of counseling or education. Drinking, by itself, is not inherently bad. People have done it since the beginning of civilization, when they learned about the fermenting process. They will continue it do so likely indefinitely. And society does no have a problem with it--only you do.
I know you are a former drunk who has been indoctrinated into the cult-like organization, AA. AA has told you that you have a disease and that you can never have even a single drink again. "One drink, one drunk" is one of your mottos. I know that AA has taught you that thinking is bad and the God is good. I also know that the 12th step commands you to convert others to the AA ideology.
I know that you are limited in your intellect, ability to think critically, and ability to think in shades of gray (everything is black and white to you). You are also in deep denial (yet, ironically accuse all who disagree with you to be so). I've written this message to you in simple language and, I hope, with convincing reasoning. I have also written it in the best interest of all. I do not hate you personally. I hate what you are doing to people. Though I do not believe in "karma" per se, I do believe that when you treat enough people badly, some of them will "bite back." This is human nature.
Well, being a professional LADC serving the needs of the citizens of New Hampshire means putting your ideology aside and doing your job.
Your job is to prevent people from driving while impaired. It is not to stop people from drinking. We tried prohibition, and it was a monumental failure (Google it). Your job is not to punish people. You may be a former drunk, caught up in your own fantasy world in which you refuse to critically reason, but don't turn everyone else into one. Most of the people arrested for DWI are not alcoholics. They do not need to attend AA and conned into praying to God and believing that only "he" can cure them of their lifelong disease. It's not a disease. And even if it were, it's not your concern if they don't drive. For the purposes of your employer (us) they just have to stop driving while impaired.
I really don't expect any LADCs to understand this. You are uneducated, anti-intellectual, and have cast away all belief in rationality for faith. You simply "believe" that you are right, and that others are wrong. You do not "believe" scientific or medical data, despite how much of it they are shown. Furthermore, why are you so angry and so set on exerting your authority on others through petty acts like those above? I suspect the anger comes from the same self-hatred that caused you to become an alcoholic and then a LADC. This is payback for you against a world that has "mistreated you."
So keep your ideology to yourself, get off your power trip, and start acting like a professional by doing your job by helping people, not punishing them. No wonder people hate and disrespect you so much.
You might start by thinking about why, as a counselor who has been trained to "help" people, you are so universally hated. And, no, it's not because we're all in denial. Most of us have nothing to be in "denial" about because we're not alcoholics. It's you who are in denial about what it is you are supposed to be doing.
Interesting Feedback On My Posts From Reddit Readers
Interesting Feedback
Over on Reddit, I've gotten some interesting opinions I thought I'd post. AA cult members are very hostile to criticism of their fragile belief system. Belief trumps reasoning for them. They are extremely anti-intellectual. I call them members of the "Anti-Enlightenment" movement. I expected a lot worse feedback then I received. Some of it was very interesting.
On the post I did called "AA: What The Science Says," I presented the major scientific studies on recovery programs. The studies compared the efficacy of no treatment, AA, Rational Emotive Behavioral Therapy (REBT, or "SMART Recovery") or just conventional "talk" therapy (insight therapy). Reddit readers made the following comments. I was shocked by the faulty reasoning and logic in them.
They're only as effective as the person who is utilizing them.
Meaning: If the person really wants to quit, they're good resources. The only problem is the PERSON doesn't usually want to quit or isn't strong enough to stick to the programs.
Too much emphasis is placed on the programs.
I suspect this person is a present or former AA'er. This is the typical "blame the victim" reasoning. If AA doesn't work, it's because the person didn't want to quit badly enough, or isn't "strong enough" to stick with the program. At the meetings I'm forced to attend, each one is opened with everyone chanting:
RARELY HAVE we seen a person fail who has thoroughly followed our path. Those who do not recover are people who cannot or will not completely give themselves to this simple program, usually men and women who are constitutionally incapable of being honest with themselves. There are such unfortunates. They are not at fault; they seem to have been born that way. They are naturally incapable of grasping and developing a manner of living which demands rigorous honesty.
The Big Book, William G. Wilson, Chapter 5, How It Works, page 58.
See the reasoning? If AA doesn't work, it's YOUR FAULT! You are constitutionally incapable of being honest with yourself. You are one of the unfortunates. You are naturally incapable of even comprehending what self-honesty is. How incredibly condescending.
It shouldn't be "your fault" if a supposed "effective" treatment doesn't work. This is comparable as having a doctor give you a sugar pill, having it not work, and then telling you that it's because you are a worthless lowlife.
A "Ms. Kim" from the "court system" (read--drug rehab industry, probably a LADC) wrote:
Of all of the people I have worked with in the court system, the majority of people who were sober after having drug and alchol/drug problems said it was because of AA/NA. A few quit cold turkey but that was very few.
To which I replied:
With the New Hampshire court system, EVERYONE is assigned to AA. There is no alternative alcohol/drug program.
It may be that the people you have worked with used AA because that's all that was available or that secular alternatives were just not as readily available. Also, AA'ers proselytize just like any other fundamentalist group.
The science shows that AA is ineffective, or at least no more effective than spontaneous remission without treatment. Reliable scientific data trumps opinion, rumor, or anecdotal evidence, always. Not, "I heard" or "all the people I've worked with" or "around here" etc...
"Ms. Kim" replied:
People in the area were sentenced to rehab, treatment plans, AA, and a few other things through the drug court. I have yet to meet anyone who went to a treatment or rehab program and "got cured" (I'm sure there are some, I just haven't met them). Of the people I worked with AA is what people said worked. There is no hard data on the one cure all for alcoholism. If there was, everyone would be using only that one cure that worked. Now it is a hit and miss proposition and what works for one person may not work for another.
Ms. Kim completely misses my distinction between anecdotal, personal or hearsay evidence with real scientific evidence--large sample size, randomly assigned to different treatment groups, double-blind, etc...Then she states "there is no hard data." Evidently she didn't read my post, because there is hard data and it is not a "hit or miss" proposition.
I replied:
Yes...there is hard data on recovery programs. A simple search of the literature would have shown you this. But I guess it's easier just to say "There's no hard data on the one cure for all alcoholism," isn't it?
See, particularly, the meta-analyses below:
Ditman, K.S., Crawford, G.C., Forgy, E.W., Moskowitz, H., & MacAndrew, C. (1967). A controlled experiment on the use of court probation for drunk arrests. American Journal of Psychiatry, 124(2), 64-67.
Brandsma, J.M., Maultsby, M.C., & Welsh, R.J. (1980). Outpatient treatment of alcoholism: A review and comparative study. Baltimore: University Park Press.
Alcoholics Anonymous. (n.d., presumably 1990). Comments on AA.s triennial surveys. New York: Alcoholics Anonymous World Services.
I can tell you work in the court system and not the scientific system.
Let's hope Ms. Kim is not involved in choosing mandated self-help programs for DUI offenders. Or maybe she is, here in New Hampshire.
"Cananboy" wrote:
Statistically speaking, they are not very effective. However, I've been to several AA meetings (open) as an observer and there are many individuals that it is helpful for. There is nothing wrong with taking a placebo if it works. So many people get caught up in the science and numbers, that they forget the actual meaning of it. There are few places where people can go and find a supportive group of friends and strangers. More power to them.
I mostly agree with Cananboy, and I appreciated his honesty. Yes, there is something wrong with taking a placebo. If you have an illness (drug abuse/dependence), you should not be given a placebo (AA) when there is an effective drug available (SMART Recovery, or even doing it yourself). It's against the law for physician to do this.
Additionally, AA is not "optional" for me. I've been ordered to go. I'm an atheist. AA is a religious organization. Being forced to attend what are essentially religious services has been found by six federal circuit courts to be illegal. In the case of Grandberg v. Ashland County, a 1984 Federal 7th Circuit Court ruling concerning judicially-mandated A.A. attendance, the court said:
Alcholics Anonymous materials and the testimony of the witness established beyond a doubt that religious activities, as defined in constitutional law, were a part of the treatment program. The distinction between religion and spirituality is meaningless, and serves merely to confuse the issue.
--Wisconsin's District Judge John Shabaz
If people want to voluntarily go to a religious service (where the Lord's Prayer is said while holding hands in a circle), they are welcome to. They should know however, that in the largest and most rigorous scientific study to date, AA-treated subjects were over four times more likely to binge drink compared with the control group, and nine times more likely than the lay-REBT group. (Brandsma, J.M., et al., (1980). Outpatient treatment of alcoholism: A review and comparative study. Baltimore: University Park Press.)
This is called "Informed Consent." No one gives a damn about my consent, though, because New Hampshire mandated my AA attendance. Silly me.
On my post entitled, "AA: Of Course It's A Cult," I got a lot of responses from Reddit readers.
"bwthwy" posted:
I was involved in AA for around a year, and this was ultimately the reason I left. I was originally attracted to the program because I wanted to cut down on my drinking, and AA is one of the few drinking/drug programs that had meetings where I was. Coming in, I was pretty adamant with them about the past troubles I'd had with religion, but the party line is that your higher power can be anything, "even a doorknob," that keeps you from drinking.
After a few months, I noticed that, in reality, almost everyone had the same Christian higher power, but I decided to stick with it because another party line is, "many who leave the rooms die drunk within a year." One of the later steps is prayer. When I asked my sponsor about this, he insisted that I take the steps one at a time and that I act first, believe later.
I eventually read online about other secularists who had left the program and turned out fine. Many people like myself had grown tired of the slogans and dishonesty. I left a week before I would've picked up my one year chip and I've never looked back.
It's been six months, and things have turned out really well. I've had a few beers since then, but I do not drink like I used to. At some point, I think I just decided to grow up and take responsibility for my actions. As a result, I'm a lot more satisfied than I was either before or during AA.
"Canadian anarchist" wrote:AA lures you in by telling you that it's not a religious organization, but, in reality, it is.
AA actually has quite a abysmal success rate at 5% of "graduates" staying sober 1 year after the program. Meaning that 95% of people are still alcoholics. The failings of AA are directly attributed to its religious basis. By taking the blame and responsibility off yourself and placing it in God's care, you absolve yourself of all independent will to change. If you fail, it's God's fault; if you succeed, it's God's blessing. The best drug abuse treatment is when the individual accepts responsibility for their actions and their future, that way lasting progress is possible.It was so refreshing to hear someone who knew the actual science behind AA. More evidence that the US schools are failing to produce science-literate graduates capable of critical thinking (this poster was Canadian).
"RyanPsych" posted:
"spacepirate01"I've previously worked in an alcohol/drug rehabilition program- and yeah, AA is totally a religious program. In fact, several of the 12 steps require religiosity, including finding a "higher power" who is the only one that can solve their alcohol problems.
The fact that the majority of them take place in churches doesn't help the situation.
Ohhhhhhhhhhhh, I thought by AA you meant "American Atheists". Whew. Yeah "Alcoholics Anonymous" is definitely overly religious."TerXIII" said
I brought this up a few months ago. I was overwhelmingly shut down by the community, and downvoted into oblivion for stating my opinions of AA's perversion of scientific data, their low success rate, their semantic coercion, and the overall assumption that I was put into the program for a reason.
I refused treatment, and did my six sessions. I left the program of my own accord, despite their warnings that my problem would "consume you without our help.", and I have had maybe a handful of drinks in the last year. I have simply had no interest in drinking, but not because of the program, because I decided that I don't like being around alcoholics any more.
"CompactusDiskus" posted:I don't know what's with AA people, but they seriously chew your ass for bad-mouthing the program.
AA is hugely problematic. To call it a cult is a little far fetched though, as it doesn't necessarily meet a lot of the standard cult criteria.
And finally, I got this lively exchange:It is, however, based on completely unscientific foundations, discourages rigorous analysis of its practices, and reveres its founding "holy book" as doctrine that must be followed in order to succeed in overcoming addiction.
AA Refers To Atheists And Agnostics As "Those People"
Out of boredom during my last compelled AA meeting I picked up the most recent issue of my area's AA newsletter, "Pipeline." The New Hampshire Area Assembly of Alcoholics Anonymous, Inc., is Area 43.
In the June 2011 issue of Pipeline there was coverage of the 61st General Service Conference. The GSO, remember is AA. It's true (corporate name) is the General Service Board of Alcoholics Anonymous, Inc., a tax exempt IRS 501(c)(3) "non profit" organization that makes more than $10 million annually. The GSO, in turn, is made up of the two corporations, AA World Services, Inc., and The AA Grapevine, Inc.
So, every year the GSO has a conference. The attendees in question are 93 delegates from AA areas in the U.S. and Canada, trustees, AA World Service and Grapevine Directors, and staff from the GSO and Grapevine. This year, at the 61st General Service Conference, according the the June 2011 issue of the Grapevine newsletter, they spoke about:
- "Adding the AA preamble to the Big Book."
- "Unbelievable action that may just turn things around for the Grapevine" whatever that means.
- Unauthorized sale of AA literature. "This is all about to stop!" it said breathlessly.
- A "proposed new pamphlet on Spirituality which includes stories from Atheists and Agnostics."
Of course, as an atheist being forced by the state of New Hampshire, I raised an eyebrow upon seeing the section on the proposed pamphlet. The author of the Pipeline article writes that, "[t]he piece reminds us that AA is not exclusive; we welcome all to AA that have a desire to stop drinking, regardless of their view of or belief in "God.""
The author continues;
It was heavily debated and my interest was deeply personal. One side of the argument was that AA is a program based on spirituality and that you cannot be an Atheist or Agnostic and succeed in the program. The opposing side's position was that many come into AA with no "God" (like me), while others have their own concept of a power greater than themselves and have successfully stayed sober.
The debate raged for two hours. At that point, a Delegate referred to Atheists and Agnostics as "those people." That's when I knew where I stood. When I came into AA, I was one of "those people." I told my sponsor I did not believe in God, and he said to me, "Be glad he does not feel the same way about you!" As I worked through the steps, I believed in a power greater than myself--but not "God" in the traditional sense. I found my higher power in my AA group and in the goodness of other people. I have since found a God that is beyond my dreams, and those that know me hear me talk of his grace with great frequency--I ask for help every day.
After I left the microphone, another person shared that he, too, was one of "those people." A gay man, he came to AA a drunk and an Agnostic, yet he found his version of god in AA.
Finally, the last person shared that she was a fallen woman who was welcomed into AA. She found her sobriety, her soul, and her God--but if she had not been so unconditionally loved in AA regardless of her beliefs, she felt she never would have made it.
The vote to approve the new pamphlet passed with substantial unanimity. At that moment, I felt God in the room and knew that AA would last for my grandchildren and yours.
Let me leave you with Dr. Bob's essay, "On Cultivating Tolerance," and I hope to see you all at the post conference June 18th to hear your thoughts.
Yours in Service, Rich P. Delegate 60/43, New Hampshire
What absolute bullshit. Let's take a moment to read between the lines and see what's really being said.
Yes...We welcome Atheists and Agnostics, but they have to find God to become cured.
Yes...We welcome Atheists and Agnostics, but they have to find God to become cured.
AA repeatedly tells this blatant lie: "AA is not exclusive; we welcome all to AA that have a desire to stop drinking, regardless of their view of or belief in "God."" Chapter 4, "We Agnostics" in the Big Book is always used to support this lie. This chapter says nothing about how agnostics and atheists are welcome to AA, or that they can succeed using the techniques of AA. This chapter clearly explains how all of the former agnostics and atheists in A.A. got converted into true believers in Bill Wilson's religion, and how all of the new skeptics must also be converted. In fact, the whole chapter is devoted to just one subject: how everyone must "abandon Reason and human intelligence" and come to believe Bill Wilson's religious beliefs.
Here the Big Book states that belief in a higher power is necessary for recovery. Atheism and Agnosticism, by definition, are both lacking in the belief of a higher power:
Bill W. himself was emphatically and repeatedly clear that the Higher Power was God:
Here the Big Book states that belief in a higher power is necessary for recovery. Atheism and Agnosticism, by definition, are both lacking in the belief of a higher power:
We needed to ask ourselves but one short question. "Do I now believe, or am I even willing to believe, that there is a Power greater than myself?" As soon as a man can say that he does believe, or is willing to believe, we emphatically assure him that he is on his way."Oh, but you can have your 'higher power' be anything you want!" AA members often lie. The author of the Grapevine article writes: "I found my higher power in my AA group and in the goodness of other people." What does this even mean?? One AA member told me that his higher power was a doorknob.
The Big Book, 3rd & 4th Editions, William G. Wilson, Page 47.
Bill W. himself was emphatically and repeatedly clear that the Higher Power was God:
We found that as soon as we were able to lay aside prejudice and express even a willingness to believe in a Power greater than ourselves, we commenced to get results, even though it was impossible for any of us to fully define or comprehend that Power, which is God.
The Big Book, 3rd & 4th Editions, William G. Wilson, Page 46.
At the moment we are trying to put our lives in order. But this is not an end in itself. Our real purpose is to fit ourselves to be of maximum service to God and the people about us.And what does a religiously converted AA member do next? Like any good cult member, they go out and lure others using the "higher power" lie, ultimately converting them to religion.
The Big Book, 3rd & 4th Editions, William G. Wilson, Chapter 6, Into Action, page 77.
From great numbers of such experiences, we could predict that the doubter who still claimed that he hadn't got the "spiritual angle," and who still considered his well-loved A.A. group the higher power, would presently love God and call Him by name.
Twelve Steps and Twelve Traditions, William G. Wilson, pages 108-109.
It apparently worked on the dupe who wrote this Grapevine article since he writes, "I have since found a God that is beyond my dreams, and those that know me hear me talk of his grace with great frequency--I ask for help everyday."
Courts don't buy this lie, either. In the case of Grandberg v. Ashland County, a 1984 Federal 7th Circuit Court ruling concerning judicially-mandated A.A. attendance, the court said:
Alcholics Anonymous materials and the testimony of the witness established beyond a doubt that religious activities, as defined in constitutional law, were a part of the treatment program. The distinction between religion and spirituality is meaningless, and serves merely to confuse the issue.
--Wisconsin's District Judge John Shabaz
So, the next time you hear some AA member say "We welcome everyone, even agnostics and atheists!" or "It's not religious, it's spiritual," you'll recognize them for the nonthinking cult members that they are.
It's always funny to me that AA members' first reaction to people who disagree with them is that they are "in denial." When I hear this, it's hard not to start laughing.
Oh, and if you fail to find God, and thereby fail to cure yourself of alcoholism, IT'S YOUR FAULT!
RARELY HAVE we seen a person fail who has thoroughly followed our path. Those who do not recover are people who cannot or will not completely give themselves to this simple program, usually men and women who are constitutionally incapable of being honest with themselves. There are such unfortunates. They are not at fault; they seem to have been born that way. They are naturally incapable of grasping and developing a manner of living which demands rigorous honesty.
The Big Book, William G. Wilson, Chapter 5, How It Works, page 58.
It's your fault because you are constitutionally incapable of being honest with yourself, you unfortunate! The real truth is that AA doesn't work. By the way, this passage is chanted to start every AA meeting.
Why, some of my best friends are gay Agnostic alcoholics!
After the
After I left the microphone, another person shared that he, too, was one of "those people." A gay man, he came to AA a drunk and an Agnostic, yet he found his version of god in AA.
This reminds me of the hypocritical racist who says, "why, some of my best friends are black." But if you think about it, it's even worse. The author is really saying that AA is SO welcoming, why look at the immoral filth we open our arms wide for! Not only is he an Agnostic, but he's GAY!!! Look at us, everyone, we admit GAY PEOPLE!
Yes, the only thing worse than a nonbeliever, is a gay nonbeliever.
If you know anything about the founding of AA, this will not come as a surprise. Frank Buchman and his Moral Re-armament group (the founders of AA) were rabid homophobes and gay bashers. Here's a 1954 Moral Re-armament guide on how to spot gays:
Why, even women are welcome!
AA even welcomes women, imagine that. Here's what AA thinks of women.
Here is what AA tells a wife to do with regard to her abusive alcoholic husband;
Yes, the only thing worse than a nonbeliever, is a gay nonbeliever.
If you know anything about the founding of AA, this will not come as a surprise. Frank Buchman and his Moral Re-armament group (the founders of AA) were rabid homophobes and gay bashers. Here's a 1954 Moral Re-armament guide on how to spot gays:
The son of one of Frank Buchman's early disciplines has said that it was an open secret that Buchman was gay himself. Gosh, doesn't this sound familar? (Larry Craig, Ted Haggart, Mark Foley, Bob Allen, Glen Murphy, Jr.)There are many who wear suede shoes who are not homosexual, but in Europe and America the majority of homosexuals do. They favor green as a color in clothes and decorations. Men are given to an excessive display and use of the handkerchief. They tend to let the hair grow long, use scent and are frequently affected in speech, mincing in gait and feminine in mannerisms. They are often very gifted in the arts. They tend to exhibitionism. They can be cruel and vindictive, for sadism usually has a homosexual root. They are often given to moods.
...There is an unnecessary touching of hands, arms and shoulders. In the homosexual the elbow grip is a well-known sign.
Remaking Men, Paul Campbell, M.D. and Peter Howard, 1954, pages 60-62.
Why, even women are welcome!
AA even welcomes women, imagine that. Here's what AA thinks of women.
In Chapter 8 "To Wives" in the Big Book of Alcoholics Anonymous, a woman is instructed how she should react to news her alcoholic husband is cheating:
Sometimes there were other women. How heart breaking was this discovery; how cruel to be told they understood our men as we did not (Big Book, 2001).In other words, how can you blame the husband? He was just seeking out someone who could understand him.
Here is what AA tells a wife to do with regard to her abusive alcoholic husband;
Don't condemn your alcoholic husband no matter what he says or does. He is just another very sick, unreasonable person. Treat him, when you can, as though he had pneumonia. When he angers you, remember that he is very ill (Big Book, 2001).
The book goes on to tell women exactly how to handle their alcoholic husband;
Your husband has begun to abuse alcohol. The first principle of success is that you should never be angry. Even though your husband becomes unbearable, and you have to leave him temporarily, you should, if you can, go without rancor. Patience and good temper are vitally necessary.
The next rule is that you should never tell him what to do about his drinking. If he gets the idea that you are a nag or a killjoy, your chance of accomplishing anything useful will be zero. He will use that as an excuse to drink some more. He will tell you he is misunderstood. This may lead to lonely evenings for you. He may seek someone to console him - not always another man (Big Book, 2001).
A woman should never get mad if her drunk husband drinks his paycheck or sleeps with other women. And, when the situation becomes intolerable, you should leave without making any waves. Why is this? To not disturb your husband or his drinking!
If this was not enough, the book tells a woman that she should not tell the husband what to do about his drinking, because it might backfire and cause him to have an affair
.
.
Read the June 2011 Issue of AA's The Pipeline
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)