A.A(Alcoholics Anonymous) meetings religious?

Verygames11

Hey all, I'm getting my life back on track and I'm trying to kick my alcohol addiction.
I was thinking of going to an alcoholics anonymous meeting but I'm a bit put off by "The Twelve Steps" that help people give it up e.g.

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

5. Admitted to God, to ourselves, and to another human being the exact nature of our wrongs.

6. Were entirely ready to have God remove all these defects of character.

7. Humbly asked Him to remove our shortcomings.

11. Sought through prayer and meditation to improve our conscious contact with God as we understood Him, praying only for knowledge of His will for us and the power to carry that out.

I don't believe in any God, celestial being or any religious nonsense.

Has anyone gone to such meetings in the past, if so what are they like, was it all based around religion?

sopretty

I have, but I have struggled massively with that element and have relapsed several times. In general in meetings they will very much talk about just taking a day at a time. In reality, the programme to recovery involves those steps. They do say that you can believe 'God' is the power of the group. I'm sort of where you are right now. I don't believe in anything in reality, though I would pray and hope lol. At the end of the day, it's very difficult to believe in 'God'. I have at times believed in 'God', less as being a man in the sky, but more like 'karma' or 'fate'. At the end of the day, my lack of trust in handing my life over to something or someone I don't really believe in, has been my downfall.

lazygal

Haven't needed to go myself but I know of at least one person who didn't use the service because of the religious elements. I think it's replacing one dependence, on alcohol, with another, on God. Not something that'd help me.

Cabaal

This is why in America people get upset (rightly so) when a judge orders somebody to attend AA, it's affectively pushing religion on them.

Not sure if judges do the same thing in ireland, do they?

I find the admitting that you are affectively useless as a human being a very worrying thing to do, people can be far stronger then they give themselves credit for when it comes to addictions,

sopretty

I don't think that's the case at all. When drinking, all alcoholics are completely powerless over their alcohol consumption, particularly in the later stages. AA is not religious. As in, it is affiliated to no religion. It is however spiritual. A belief in a higher power is sort of a prerequisite to recovery through AA. All that said, I am not in recovery. And I hate most local members of AA. Sick as bejaysus, despite being sober.

Verygames11

Thanks for the info.

lazygal

sopretty wrote: »

I don't think that's the case at all. When drinking, all alcoholics are completely powerless over their alcohol consumption, particularly in the later stages. AA is not religious. As in, it is affiliated to no religion. It is however spiritual. A belief in a higher power is sort of a prerequisite to recovery through AA. All that said, I am not in recovery. And I hate most local members of AA. Sick as bejaysus, despite being sober.

I don't believe in a higher power, nor do those I know who were put off by the specific reference to a deity to aid their recovery. I never needed the services of AA but if I do in the future (not that I think its likely) I would not avail of them because appealing to some sort of spiritual element wouldn't help me.

sopretty

lazygal wrote: »

I don't believe in a higher power, nor do those I know who were put off by the specific reference to a deity to aid their recovery. I never needed the services of AA but if I do in the future (not that I think its likely) I would not avail of them because appealing to some sort of spiritual element wouldn't help me.

Can I ask how you managed to get sober? What spurred you into it? How do you cope daily with emotions when sober?

lazygal

sopretty wrote: »

Can I ask how you managed to get sober? What spurred you into it? How do you cope daily with emotions when sober?

Sorry, I might have come across wrong. I never needed AA. But if I needed to get sober it wouldn't be helpful to me as someone who doesn't believe in a higher power or have a spiritual side.

sopretty

ah i see

seamus

Like many organisations with a religious slant, from what I gather the religious element of AA varies from meeting to meeting. Some meetings are run by a local priest and will include praying and strongly pushing the idea that you cannot free yourself of your demon without submitting to God.

Other meetings gloss over the whole spiritual part and give it little heed, instead focussing on actually doing something.

I would say on the whole though if you're irreligious, you will probably find it difficult in either case. If you don't feel like you fit in with the group dynamic or that you have to hide some aspect of your personality, then AA is not really going to work for you.

What's strange is that it's basically taboo to even question the existence of AA. A number of studies have been done, and none has ever demonstrated that AA is at all effective.
I recall an article from a couple of years ago where some study was claiming that AA was in fact less effective than going cold turkey on your own. People were almost foaming at the mouth that someone would dare question the worthiness of the AA.
I'll see if I can find any reference to that study.

perfectisthe

You have options other than AA Verygames11. There are other recovery groups that have no spiritual element. I found the ideas and philosophy of rational recovery very helpful when I kicked the booze.

You should check out the non drinkers forum here on boards. There are a lot of very helpful and supportive people there who have been through exactly what you're going through.

Peregrinus

AA isn't inherently religious, but it's underlying philosophy is, um, a pretty good fit with religion - or, at least, with the forms of religion that predominate in our society.

The basic idea with AA is that, in order to recover, you need to start by acknowledging your addiction, and your powerlessness in the face of it. You need to accept that, to beat your addiction, you will have to rely on some power outside yourself.

That "outside power", obviously, can very easily be understood as a loving interventionist god, and a lot of AA groups default to that kind of language and thinking. Obviously, that's no use to you in tackling your addiction.

But it doesn't have to be so. The outside power can be the support and solidarity of your group members, or it can be anything else - outside of yourself - in which you choose to place your hope and trust.

The trick is finding an AA group which thinks and talks in ways that you are comfortable with and that can help you, when so many don't. But AA group leaders should be familiar with this problem; you won't be the first to present themselves who can't accept the dominant discourse about this in a particular group, and they should be able to steer you in the direction of a group that can help you.

It's worth enquiring about, anyway.

GeorgiaC

I found a site ages ago with revised 12 steps for secular people. These were not for myself but a family friend. They may help you if you want to look at it a different way. Don't forget though the steps may be religious the people (as in attendees) will probably not be. Try calling ahead and see who hosts it, explain your circumstances and your feelings about religion. You may find being in a group with people who are experiencing the same thing could be of more benefit than the harm of religion. I looked at it, that if you are an atheist I doubt that the steps will somehow change you

Humanist Steps

Below is another version of secularized steps created by the renowned behavioral psychologist B. F. Skinner and first published in "The Humanist".
1. We accept the fact that all our efforts to stop drinking have failed.

2. We believe that we must turn elsewhere for help.

3. We turn to our fellow men and women, particularly those who have struggled with the same problem.

4. We have made a list of the situations in which we are most likely to drink.

5. We ask our friends to help us avoid those situations.

6. We are ready to accept the help they give us.

7. We honestly hope they will help.

8. We have made a list of the persons we have harmed and to whom we hope to make amends.

9. We shall do all we can to make amends, in any way that will not cause further harm.

10. We will continue to make such lists and revise them as needed.

11. We appreciate what our friends have done and are doing to help us.

12. We, in turn, are ready to help others who may come to us in the same way.

Humanist Steps

Below is another version of secularized steps created by the renowned behavioral psychologist B. F. Skinner and first published in "The Humanist".
1. We accept the fact that all our efforts to stop drinking have failed.

2. We believe that we must turn elsewhere for help.

3. We turn to our fellow men and women, particularly those who have struggled with the same problem.

4. We have made a list of the situations in which we are most likely to drink.

5. We ask our friends to help us avoid those situations.

6. We are ready to accept the help they give us.

7. We honestly hope they will help.

8. We have made a list of the persons we have harmed and to whom we hope to make amends.

9. We shall do all we can to make amends, in any way that will not cause further harm.

10. We will continue to make such lists and revise them as needed.

11. We appreciate what our friends have done and are doing to help us.

12. We, in turn, are ready to help others who may come to us in the same way.

nozzferrahhtoo

Verygames11 wrote: »

Has anyone gone to such meetings in the past, if so what are they like, was it all based around religion?

There are many similar meetings without the religious woo, nonsense and clear attempts to sell religion to the vulerable and needy.

Worse, there tend to be threads on fora like this one (and there has been at least two here before which I have posted on) where people try to play down the "god" aspect of the 12 steps. Hand waving nonsense tends to spew forth with all this "Oh it says "god" but it does not really mean "god" it means whatever you want it to mean really". Such faffers simply have to ignore the language used in the 12 steps which not only use the word "god" but very much use language that indicates we are talking about an entity with very specific attributes such as consciousness, the ability to listen to you, the ability to intervene, and even the male sex.

Even worse, because AA is such a known term, there are a lot of people who set up meetings, ignore most of the crap that comes with AA, but call the meetings "AA" anyway. So you could go to one "AA" meeting and find the host is an evangelical bible bashing look.... while you could go to another "AA" meeting and find that they have pretty much thrown the entire thing out with the bathwater and have simply put "AA" over the door to get bums on seats.

There have been many studies trying to show the efficacy of AA and they are generally NOT good. Some figures for their beneficial results have been akin to simple inaction. Not good at all.

Those studies that HAVE shown good results are even worse. They tend to be commissioned in the AA community itself and show MASSIVE methodological flaws. One study for example ONLY studied members who had been members for an extended period of time. They ignored drop outs and recent members for example. If you only study people who have committed long term then you are likely to only get very good results.

So between studies that show bad results, and studies that engage in such massaging of the figures in order to manufacture good results, it over all does not look good for "AA" _in general_.

The best argument people can muster in defense of AA it seems is to bleat repeatedly that "Oh it has helped SOME people hasn't it? There is SOME testimony out there of people who were saved by it!". That is truly a useless argument though because ANY approach, no matter how ridiculous, is going to get SOME positive testimony. If I got 1000 alcoholics in a room tomorrow and told them all that the next time they feel the urge they should stare for 5 minutes at a green dot on an orange piece of paper.... all the while humming the Hokey Pokey.... while standing on one leg....... there is going to be "SOME" people from that 1000 who come back claiming they are no longer alcoholics and my "cure" was what did it for them.

All that said however the best I can recommend you do is simply attend a variety of meetings. AA and not AA. In various locations at various times. There will be one there for you somewhere. And I wish you all the best in your journey.

AA is, at the end of the day when you strip away the crass and blatant attempt to push religion on the vulnerable and needy, simply a social support group to assist with addiction. And social support groups are a GOOD thing for someone in your position. I can not recommend them enough. The task ahead of you is simply to find the right group for you. Do not go to one just because it is called AA, but do not avoid them for that reason either. Try them all until you find one that clicks for you.

Do not buy 100% into this nonsense mentality that they sell that you are "powerless" and your solution comes from outside either. Sure outside things... friends, family, support groups, a "sponsor" and so forth are all helpful and great things. But you are not a powerless automaton either, at the sole mercy of everything external. You have a will, you have a mind, you have a choice, you are not powerless at all. The power lies inside YOU. You just need HELP with it, and that help is external.

Cabaal

Penn & Teller's take on the AA and 12 Steps

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yUG9dr6SZSY

Verygames11

Cabaal wrote: »

Penn & Teller's take on the AA and 12 Steps

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yUG9dr6SZSY

Thanks for the info and help all.

I had a chat with CADS(Community Alcohol & Drug Service) today and I'm going to see them next week. It's run by the HSE as well.

After watching the Penn & Teller's video I'm definitely not going to try AA

Sorry if this went off topic.

lazygal

Best of luck op.

gaynorvader

Verygames11 wrote: »

Thanks for the info and help all.

I had a chat with CADS(Community Alcohol & Drug Service) today and I'm going to see them next week. It's run by the HSE as well.

After watching the Penn & Teller's video I'm definitely not going to try AA

Sorry if this went off topic.

For what it's worth, my Dad got off the drink without the AA and he said what he found most helpful was the support of his family and friends. He was disheartened at first because some of his friends abandoned him, but he realised that they were only really drinking buddies and in all probability alcoholics themselves. Seeing him going through the recovery shone a light on their own problems and people don't like that.

Best of luck to you in giving it up.

nozzferrahhtoo

gaynorvader wrote: »

For what it's worth, my Dad got off the drink without the AA and he said what he found most helpful was the support of his family and friends.

"True that" as they say.

One of the reasons dodgy diet plans or dodgy vitamin supplements get away with all they do is that at their core they all contain some wisdom. Self proclaimed dietry experts will espouse a ton of nonsense but at the core of it they recommend things like drinking lots of water and avoiding processed foods.

So people end up testifying to the efficacy of such nonsense because it is the core wisdom that is having the beneficial effects, not the nonsense that was built up around that core.

The same is true of AA. As you say above one of... if not THE.... most important aspect of giving up an addiction is the helpful support from a circle of people.

At it's very core AA simply is a social support group. So like charlatan dodgy diet plans.... it is going to work for some people some of the time for this reason because of this reason alone. Alas people will ascribe the credit for that to the nonsense that is built up around that core truth. The 12 steps, the spiritual assistance from "god" and what not.

Brian Shanahan

Verygames11 wrote: »

Has anyone gone to such meetings in the past, if so what are they like, was it all based around religion?

Given what little they actually give out we have to assume that the AA failure rate is about 95%, so even if you have no problem with their massive (if not quite directed) religiosity, I'd suggest you look to other options.

Unfortunately, not having any problems re alcaholism I cannot give you advice on where to go.

roosh

the meetings are as religious as the members. some meetings people bang on about "god", other meetings they don't bang on about "god" as much. NA is a younger crowd, and they aren't as "catholic" as AA.

It's not actually religious at all - as said, it's as religious as the members.

Your higher power could be evolution, if you so wished. It is a "god"/"higher pwer" of your own understanding - I repeat OF YOUR OWN UNDERSTANDING.

AA, apparently enjoys the same success rate as other rehabilitation programmes, no better, no worse - from what I've read. There are some very practical things in the steps, that should prob be part of every program. Making amends has a powerful effect - you don't need AA for it, but it's part of the steps.

Meditation, for me, is the most effective one of the steps - "buddhist" meditation, or just MBSR, or whatever label you want to put on it. The practice itself is transformative.


If you don't like the term "god", then find a meeting where there aren't so many bible bashers - they are there ( I would recommend NA [younger demographic and it's also for people who have had issues with alcohol - personally, don't like the terms "alcoholic" or "addict"])


Alternatively, find a treatment program that you are comfortable with. Whatever program you choose, I couldn't recommend meditation strongly enough, get some counselling also - bcos drinking is just a symptom of the underlying problem. I don't think it's a question of either AA or something else - even though many AAers will swear by AA. Talking to other people with similiar issues is very helpful, talking to a counsellor is also very helpful - bcos there's just some things you can't tell a group of people.



Whatever else you do, I would strongly recommend meditation - simply the practice of observing your own mind.

nozzferrahhtoo

roosh wrote: »

Your higher power could be evolution, if you so wished. It is a "god"/"higher pwer" of your own understanding - I repeat OF YOUR OWN UNDERSTANDING.

Yet the 12 steps themselves impart an understanding to you. Not one of your own devising. They refer not just to "god" but directly to attributes and capabilities of this god.

It sounds good on paper to say that it is all down to your own opinion and understanding but how true is this in reality, across the board?

It is a lot like the Burka argument to me. The pro argument there says that women in certain communities are free to wear it or not as they choose. That sounds great on paper. But in reality a woman in a society where all the other women are wearing it... where to not wear it would cause her to stand out and even be ostracised or suspected..... does she REALLY have a choice anywhere BUT on paper?

Similarly if you go to a religiously dominated meetup of this type are you REALLY free to espouse your own understanding of this "higher power" or are you going to keep wearing your mental burka and just go about what the others are doing?

And that's just "normal" healthy people. Here we are talking about people who have issues, addictions, will power problems, vulnerability and more. Are they going to be strong enough to break the mold?

So this peer pressure.... coupled with the actual text of the 12 steps..... leaves me unable to buy into the "Of your own understanding mantra". No matter how many times you might repeat it, or type it in all caps.

roosh wrote: »

AA, apparently enjoys the same success rate as other rehabilitation programmes, no better, no worse - from what I've read.

It would be interesting to know what you read then because AAs own figures.... such as they release and people can actually get to read..... suggest their success rate is in the order of 5% which is coincidentally around the same success rate as if you had done nothing at all.

roosh wrote: »

There are some very practical things in the steps

Of course there is. There is also some very practical things in even the most nonsense of new age dietry routines such as the cayenne pepper diet. That is the insidious nature of fraudsters and charlatans. They do not just espouse or sell 100% nonsense. No, they wrap their own brand of nonsense around a small core of genuinely useful and practical things.

What people do then notice a benefit ascribe that benefit to whatever program.... be it AA or cayenne pepper or vitamin pills.... it was they signed up for when in fact the program itself had nothing to do with it.... just the core useful parts that exist in ALL such programs.

At the very very core of it, AA is just a social mutual support group. And social mutual support groups are a GOOD thing. It is the woo, damaging claims and agendas and other nonsense built up AROUND that useful core that makes the package being sold.... and the package that people object to.

roosh wrote: »

If you don't like the term "god", then find a meeting where there aren't so many bible bashers

Indeed. Since there is no real regulatory body around AA, people are free to set up any kind of meeting they want.... keeping or ditching as much of the tenets and claims of AA as they want..... and still stick "AA" on the door. But is it still AA then? Putting "AA" on the door does not make it "AA". So if people are setting up meetings that are "AA" in name only then why even use the name? I guess because it is a marketing success and a household name, so use of "AA" automatically sells your group rather than you having to establish your own group in the awareness of your target market yourself.

But it worries me that people can set up any kind of meeting they want without any kind of regulatory body. Imagine oncologists did this for example, simply setting up any practice and keeping or ditching whatever "best practice" guidelines they subjectively please themselves with.

At the end of the day we are treating a condition here and those purporting to treat it should at least be answerable to some iterativly improved best practice guidelines and regulatory body. Otherwise even those with the best intentions in the world, who set up such groups, could end up doing more harm than good.

roosh wrote: »

Alternatively, find a treatment program that you are comfortable with.

I agree. And what should make people comfortable is a group with a program that is clear and regulated. That publishes not only their success figures but how they were compiles. Can show that such figures and studies are fed back into the system to improve it by iterations. And that adherence to this established "best practice" is assured and regulated.

THAT would make me comfortable if I were seeking such a group. Alas I am personally unaware of what groups, if any, in Ireland adhere to such standards. Someone else more in the know than me will have to enlighten us on this one I am afraid.

roosh wrote: »

I couldn't recommend meditation strongly enough, get some counselling also

I agree. One of our users around here gives free guided meditation sessions to groups to students of one of the Irish colleges. He talks often however of how his group evolved from just students to people suffering from addiction, anger issues and more. In fact he purports to have an ordained priest and a trainee priest among his regulars. He says, anecdotally at least, that meditation has clearly helped his addiction members. I laud him for his generosity of spirit and his personal time to give so freely to such people for no reason at all.

On the subject of counselling. There has been studies showing that self help meetup groups of this sort work best when done in CONJUCTION with professional counselling. If however you go back to the original AA documents related to AA, guess what? Yes, you guessed it. They recommend strongly that AA be used EXCLUSIVELY and professional counselling be avoided.

One of the many examples of how AA not only fails to help people, but actively and positively espouses notions that HARMS those people by cajoling or admonishing them into avoiding things that actually will help them.

roosh wrote: »

drinking is just a symptom of the underlying problem.

Often it is yes. But not exclusively. So by wary of painting too wide a brush stroke. Sometimes Addiction IS the problem. Sometimes as you say Addiction is only the symptom of a problem. The trick, on a case by case basis, is to figure out which it is.

Geomy

I have heard of a few AA groups referred by religious members as the Godless groups.
So they give it a wide berth, but most of these Godless members sre around 10 to 30 year's without a drink. ..

Horses for course's :-)

sopretty

I feel the need to post my opinion, as I feel that AA can potentially save some lives.

First of all I need to preface my post by two statements:

A) I have struggled massively with the God/Higher Power concept.
I dislike a large proportion of my AA cohorts or 'fellows'.

That said, I think it is worth looking at what led the two founders of AA to come up with the 'God' concept.

The three pertinent ideas were:
A - that we were alcoholic and could not manage our own lives
B - that probably no human power could have relieved our alcoholism
C - that 'God' could and would if he were SOUGHT (note for a start, that this one doesn't stipulate that 'God' must be 'believed in!')

Anyway, what led them to devise the programme of AA i.e. the 12 steps (which AA in some areas is failing to pass on adequately), was the very simple fact that despite ENDLESS efforts on the part of the predecessors to AA, they simply COULD NOT STAY SOBER. The Big Book goes into this at length. I would read the prefaces to the current edition and the first few chapters.
Most (if not all?) of the first 40 (or 100?) to RECOVER were pretty high achievers. You're talking former wallstreet brokers, surgeons, lawyers etc.
They had EVERYTHING TO LIVE FOR, every medical facility open to them, every motivation to stop, every ounce of will-power they possessed, every need and reason to stop and stay stopped, everything that money could buy.
But nothing could blooming keep them stopped for any significant period of time (i.e. No human power could have relieved them of their alcoholism)!!
This was when Bill came to the conclusion that nothing short of 'divine intervention' (inverted commas here, as not 100% sure of what words he uses), was going to save his life. And then he had his 'spiritual experience'.

If anyone reading is questioning the 'religious' (which it's not), but 'spiritual' aspect of AA, I would suggest speaking about it at meetings, reading the prefaces and first few chapters and also reading the Appendix on 'Spiritual Experience' (can't remember whether it's Appendix I or II.

The big book is freely accessible FOR FREE online. Just google AA Big Book Online and you'll get it there.

I admit that the toughest part of AA for me is the belief in a Higher Power or power which is not human ('no human power.......'). That said, when I have moments of handing my life over to another power, the peace and relief and load off my shoulders that I get is tremendous.

Best of luck to all reading.

Chazz Michael Michaels

Not sure if this has been mentioned, but there an alcoholic recovery group that is secular

www.dublinlifering.com/

Benny_Cake

If you live in a part of the country where they operate, you could try LifeRing which is definitely non-religious. I've no experience in this area so I can't vouch for them either way but perhaps it might be an alternative to AA for some.

AA works for some, it doesn't work for others. It's not the only option and it's unlikely to work simply by itself although I'd imagine a support group could be a useful tool among many in the recovery process. I hope things work out for you OP.

Edit: Chazz Michael Michaels got in just ahead of me.

Geomy

sopretty wrote: »

I feel the need to post my opinion, as I feel that AA can potentially save some lives.

First of all I need to preface my post by two statements:

A) I have struggled massively with the God/Higher Power concept.
I dislike a large proportion of my AA cohorts or 'fellows'.

That said, I think it is worth looking at what led the two founders of AA to come up with the 'God' concept.

The three pertinent ideas were:
A - that we were alcoholic and could not manage our own lives
B - that probably no human power could have relieved our alcoholism
C - that 'God' could and would if he were SOUGHT (note for a start, that this one doesn't stipulate that 'God' must be 'believed in!')

Anyway, what led them to devise the programme of AA i.e. the 12 steps (which AA in some areas is failing to pass on adequately), was the very simple fact that despite ENDLESS efforts on the part of the predecessors to AA, they simply COULD NOT STAY SOBER. The Big Book goes into this at length. I would read the prefaces to the current edition and the first few chapters.
Most (if not all?) of the first 40 (or 100?) to RECOVER were pretty high achievers. You're talking former wallstreet brokers, surgeons, lawyers etc.
They had EVERYTHING TO LIVE FOR, every medical facility open to them, every motivation to stop, every ounce of will-power they possessed, every need and reason to stop and stay stopped, everything that money could buy.
But nothing could blooming keep them stopped for any significant period of time (i.e. No human power could have relieved them of their alcoholism)!!
This was when Bill came to the conclusion that nothing short of 'divine intervention' (inverted commas here, as not 100% sure of what words he uses), was going to save his life. And then he had his 'spiritual experience'.

If anyone reading is questioning the 'religious' (which it's not), but 'spiritual' aspect of AA, I would suggest speaking about it at meetings, reading the prefaces and first few chapters and also reading the Appendix on 'Spiritual Experience' (can't remember whether it's Appendix I or II.

The big book is freely accessible FOR FREE online. Just google AA Big Book Online and you'll get it there.

I admit that the toughest part of AA for me is the belief in a Higher Power or power which is not human ('no human power.......'). That said, when I have moments of handing my life over to another power, the peace and relief and load off my shoulders that I get is tremendous.

Best of luck to all reading.

Well I think what they mean by "no human power can relieve our alcoholism" is that your friends, family and carer's cannot relieve your alcoholism. ...
It's an inside job.

Only an addict or alcoholic can empathise with people who find those 12 steps are working.

The 12 step approach can really fck up some people's heads,other people adapt to it easy enough.

It's a simple programme for complicated people ;-)

mathepac

Geomy wrote: »

... It's a simple programme for complicated people ;-)

It's a simple programme for people who need it, and despite the critics who have never attended a meeting or suffered substance dependency, compulsive gambling, etc it continues to help people straighten out their lives.

To give the lie once and for all about the religiosity of any 12-step programme, download and read the AA, NA, AlAnon, etc literature which is available free to all who are open-minded enough to want to know about the programme(s). If you want more information at first-hand, feel free to attend a local meeting, look up the on-line schedules or phone the central contact numbers in you local phone book.

Talk to people after the meetings and get their views on the programme. You'll get a wide variety of informed opinion because contrary to the nonsense being posted here (again) they are not (all) religious automata. Why?

When the anti-12 Step posters here actually inform themselves about AA philosophy, they'll discover that the 12 steps are a "suggested" programme of recovery. I hope I don't have to explain what "suggested" means and the implications for someone who wants to avail of the 12 Steps, but if posters can't figure it out for themselves. I'm happy to help.

One poster suggests that AA's research into success rates is suspect because their data-set doesn't include former AA members. The second "A" in their title stands for "Anonymous". This means that no register, central or local, of AA members exists or existed, making a longitudinal study of former memers impossible. The fact that the poster hasn't grasped this basic fact about the organisation speaks volumes about the value of the post.

I've referred clients to AWARE, AA, NA, GA, etc. Some found the meetings helpful, others didn't. I've encouraged female clients who might have stuff they deem unsuitable for sharing in mixed company to make their own "Women's AA". I've had gay clients with similar reservations and I suggested they have their own group for sensitive stuff and to attend AA for more general stuff.

Over the years dozens of my clients have found AA useful and helpful. A few who initially rejected AA / 12 steps outright, found their way back by using the "just take what you need and leave the rest"* philosophy of the "suggested" programme.

*With thanks to Robbie Robertson, "The Night They Drove Old Dixie Down"

sawdoubters

I hope to god its not religious

taytothief

When you start giving life advice to people on something like addiction, when most of you haven't a fcukin clue what A.A. is like, you're no different then a Christian suggesting for or against something based on purely Catholic belief or dogma.

OP, God is not essential to the 12 step program or to A.A.. I know this as fact. The benefit of A.A is the people, and the effect sharing with them has on you. You can go to a meeting with absolutely no obligation to return for another. You don't have to speak or take part in any way, and you can get up and walk out at any time. Go and check it out, and do not take as gospel what some people have posted here. Some atheists in this thread appear to be so caught up in their hatred of religion that they're putting the welfare of individuals in jeopardy. Which is kind of ironic... A.A. is known to work for people. There are countless alcoholics and addicts who will tell you they'd be lost without their meetings. And, of course, not every single one is religious.

mathepac

Verygames11 wrote: »

Hey all, I'm getting my life back on track and I'm trying to kick my alcohol addiction.
I was thinking of going to an alcoholics anonymous meeting but I'm a bit put off by "The Twelve Steps" that help people give it up ...

Why jump ahead, why anticipate problems?

Step 1. “We admitted we were powerless over alcohol— that our lives had become unmanageable.” This step sounds kinda like the first sentence in your post, the main difference being the collective and inclusive "we". The reason the step is worded this way is to break down the notion of isolation and loneliness addicts / alcoholics sometimes feel. "I'm different / odd / I don't fit in / I'm less than other people". Go to a few meetings, (as pointed out above you don't have to speak) listen to the stories and see if you really are different to people in the rooms. Move around to different groups and find one you feel comfortable in. You'll be amazed at the number of meetings and members there are.

nozzferrahhtoo

mathepac wrote: »

To give the lie once and for all about the religiosity of any 12-step programme

Please read the 12 steps yourself. They do not just mention "god" but also attributes of this god and its capabilities. It has the attribute of the male sex. It has the attribute of being able to intervent and change things. It has attributes of intelligence, intent, and ability to hear your appeals.

It is about as religious as religious can get.

mathepac wrote: »

One poster suggests that AA's research into success rates is suspect because their data-set doesn't include former AA members. The second "A" in their title stands for "Anonymous".

So what? The point was that the lack of that data being included will dilute the usefulness of the results of such studies. Explaining reasons or excuses as to WHY that data is absent in no way addresses the implications and effects of that absence.

If the data is flawed, the data is flawed. Excuse making as to WHY it is flawed is irrelevant and does not for one moment change the fact that the data is flawed.

The fact that you haven't grasped this basic fact about the organisation speaks volumes about the value of your post.

taytothief wrote: »

When you start giving life advice to people on something like addiction, when most of you haven't a fcukin clue what A.A. is like, you're no different then a Christian suggesting for or against something based on purely Catholic belief or dogma.

And what about people who have never had cancer who do research and implement best practice guidelines on how to best and most effectively treat it?

You appear to think that unless you suffer from a condition yourself that you are precluded from commentary on treating that condition. Tosh. We have disciplines like Epidemiology for a reason. There are effective and long honed methodologies for evaluating the effectiveness of a treatment plan or plans and improving those plans iteratively based on those results.

And the simple fact of the matter is that when such methodologies are implemented with regards to AA, the success rates are simply embarrassingly low.

taytothief wrote: »

Some atheists in this thread appear to be so caught up in their hatred of religion that they're putting the welfare of individuals in jeopardy.

You are stuffing a straw man with ad hominem here and coming to a statement that is the EXACT antithesis or reality. It has nothing to do with a hatred of religion. At. all.

It has EVERYTHING to do with a knowledge of epidemiology and the reasons why we engage in such methodologies. It has everything to do with the welfare of people in jeopardy. It has everything to do with the onus, that is incumbent upon us all, to refer vulnerable people in need to the treatments that have been shown to be the safest and most effective.

If someone has cancer do you send them for top of the range cancer treatments that have been shown to be the most effective? Or do you tell them to sit in a pool of scented water and rub rose petals on their nipples?

You send them for the best treatment and you warn them off treatments that have been shown to be ineffective and/or positively damaging.

THAT is what drives the anti-AA comments. Not some imagined anti religion agenda you want to assign in your head to the speaker in order to dismiss their objections with the mere wave of a hand.

nozzferrahhtoo

sopretty wrote: »

I feel the need to post my opinion, as I feel that AA can potentially save some lives.

Hard to say. With a success rate of 5%... which is the same success rate as no intervention at all.... the above statement from you is iffy at best.

The fact is that ANY methodology "could potentially save some lives". So what you are saying is... pedantically at least..... 100% accurate. But this has nothing to do with AA.

To steal an example once again from another poster I read some time ago..... If I were to get 1000 severe and in danger of death alcoholics and simply tell them "Every time you get the urge to drink state at a pink dot on an orange page and hum the american national anthem while doing the Mumba"..... I am going to save some lives. At least 5% if not more of that 1000 people are going to find this solution actually worked for them. So my solution "could potentially save lives".

Does that change the fact it is complete nonsense that I simply pulled out of the wrong orifice of my body? No. Nor does it change the fact that it is highly irresponsible of me to implement.... en masse.... a treatment program that is demonstrably nonsense.... has no supporting figures or best practice guidelines.... and is likely in the long run to cause a lot more harm than the good of a handful of "success" testimonies.

Geomy

Well it looks like the addiction has a 95% success rate, and any presently known solution has a 5% rate...

sopretty

Nozzferratthoo - the thing about AA is, that every single member has walked in those doors, beaten, broken and hopeless. When you hear anyone doing a chair (basically telling their story/experience of addiction and recovery), particularly the old timers, you will generally hear statements about their first encounters of AA, where God might have been mentioned during the meetings, where they said to themselves 'Jaysus - is this the Moonies or what?' 'Oh FFS, this lot must be <insert name of any random religion here>' or 'This is a bloomin' cult - get me out of here!'
Alcoholics in addiction are possibly the most irreligious bunch you could come across.
I would say these days that a vast majority of members have struggled with the spiritual aspect. There is no need to force that. Most of the long-timers I know just stayed sober a day at a time, and the rest fell into place eventually.

Bill (I think?) had gotten sober and had his spiritual experience. But then he found himself craving a drink! Again! So, he got the notion he'd try to find another alcoholic who needed help. He found one (was it Bob?), chatted to him, and stayed sober. He got through the craving (if you have never experienced a craving or compulsion, the significance of that will be lost on you probably - but it's like every cell in your body, including the particularly vocal cells in your brain are SCREAMING AT YOU TO JUST HAVE A DRINK!!!)

That is how AA grew organically. Speaking with other alcoholics kept them sober.

AA is not a group of psychiatrists/psychologists/medics/quacks 'marketing' their way. AA is a group of cynical, skeptical, previously desperate drunks, who have managed to stay sober. There are no dues or fees in AA. It is entirely self supporting and non-profitable.

The book suggests a programme of recovery (a list of steps which helped the first 100 people to get and stay sober).

The 12 traditions of AA are extremely important to AA. It's quite the miracle when you think of it. Millions of raging alcos managing to keep manners on themselves

For me, in the early days there were two things that I found great concepts. The first one was to go in and listen and look for similarities in what people were saying, rather than differences, to my own story. I really didn't have to try too hard
And secondly, the concept of 'a day at a time'.

So, basically, while I'm not endorsing nor defending AA, I'm just trying to explain a bit more about it to anyone interested. Some members are hilarious, some are serious, some are religious (no higher rate than any cross section of our society), some are as mad as a box of frogs, but while I don't like all of them, I have a heck of a lot in common with them! The vast majority of them are gifted story-tellers too lol.

nozzferrahhtoo

sopretty wrote: »

Nozzferratthoo - the thing about AA is, that every single member has walked in those doors, beaten, broken and hopeless.

And if the figures are to be believed 95% of them walked out the same way.

What worries me about the "first impressions" people get, like the ones you describe in your first paragraph, is "How many people got scared off the group by this and not only never returned.... but then lost all confidence in groups of that sort entirely????".

We will never know of course because AA does not record drop out numbers very well.... or at all..... but we have to acknowledge the risk that if people are being put off by this they might never go back. Not just to AA but ANY group. And this is not good.

The advice we get time and time again from AA supporters on forums is "Shop around". If you do not like one group try the next one, and the next. This is great advice! The problem is are the people who really need that advice actually getting it? Or are my fears in the paragraph above common? Again we do not know, but anecdote while not evidence, is persuasive enough to have me concerned.

But what I said in an earlier post can not be stressed enough. Many charlatan and bogus programmes in MANY areas (alternative medicine, new fangled diet regimes, self help groups and much much more) are never 100% nonsense. They are always built around a core that displays some utility and sense. The ones that are not, simply do not catch on. The business model of the self proclaimed nutrition experts of the world is the single best example of this, but by no means the only one.

And at it's very core AA is simply a mutual self help social support group. And this is a good thing. And it IS going to help some people. No doubt about it. I would be a fool to suggest, or even imply, otherwise.

But like many of the dietry plans by these charlatan nutrition experts, around that sensible core they build a construct of nonsense, unsubstantiated woo, and at times positively harmful tenets.

So when people come into threads like this saying things like "But AA does help some people!!!!" they are A) missing the point that people not happy with AA are actually making and stating the obvious and espousing things that people speaking against AA already accept and know.

So in essence when you go on about Alcoholics speaking to Alcoholics... and the benefits of this.... you are effectively "preaching to the choir" as the cliche goes. I absolutely know, acknowledge and accept that fact 100%.

sopretty wrote: »

Millions of raging alcos managing to keep manners on themselves

I would simply be curious as to the source of your figures here. Millions? really? With a 5% success rate? That means 95 times "millions" are attending AA? Where do they even have the space to house this number of people exactly?

nozzferrahhtoo

Geomy wrote: »

Well it looks like the addiction has a 95% success rate, and any presently known solution has a 5% rate...

Not really. Some studies have shown that self help groups.... of which AA is only one..... when done in conjunction with professional therapy.... can be a good bit more effective than 5%.

There are also some promising sounding drugs on the market but lots more work has to be done there. As you will see in the Penn and Teller video above the AA offices spoke out strongly against use of such drugs. Similar to how they once spoke out strongly against using professional therapy in conjunction with their own. One thing we can say pretty confidently about AA is that they historically have not been great at playing with others.

gaynorvader

If you don't think AA is going to be your thing, chances are it won't be. If you go in with a negative view of it it is unlikely to help you. Luckily there are many other options. I'd highly recommend nozzferrahhtoo's advice with regards to getting counselling in addition to whatever else you try. I fundamentally disagree with the AA system in that it asserts that "you are powerless". You're not powerless, just by seeking help you have shown power over alcohol.

sopretty

AA's literature specifically states 'we do not hold a monopoly on recovery'. It also has something in it about the NEED for other professional/medical help in some cases (can't quote it exactly).

As regards the amount of people put off by the God thing, I'd say that it is surprisingly low. For the simple fact that recovered or recovering alcoholics will give any newcomer a very balanced introduction to AA.

In terms of the millions of alcoholics, I'm talking about the amount who have recovered since AA was founded. You really should read the AA big book. It's an interesting read!

All that said however, when AA started out, it had a very high percentage of recovery, as those who joined, went fairly quickly through the 12 steps. Nowadays, some groups can take the focus off the steps (as they had put people off AA). Recovery with just attending meetings and not doing the steps does seem quite low these days. This is a debate which would divide most AA members though.

Really, the steps of AA are to give you a way to handle life sober. They aim to have the same effect on you as a drink would have had (or a similarly soothing effect).

Alcoholism is an horrific illness. That little voice in your head that wants you to drink will come up with a million different excuses. One of them could be - "I'm not going to AA - they're a bunch of religious zealots - another pint there please barman?". Another one of them could be - "sure only 5% recover from alcoholism - I guess I'm in the other 95% - woohoo - party on!!".

All rehabs that I am aware of in Ireland will recommend attendance at AA in terms of their aftercare and long term recovery. My own psychiatrist (addiction specialist) told me that in his experience, people who attend AA 'generally' do better than those who don't.

It can be the luck of the draw sometimes with regards how much you would enjoy a particular meeting.

Nozzferrathoo - have you ever attended an open meeting of AA? I'm assuming you are not alcoholic and just have a particular interest? Please correct me if I'm wrong - I shouldn't be assuming!

nozzferrahhtoo

sopretty wrote: »

AA's literature specifically states 'we do not hold a monopoly on recovery'.

And yet the same literature speaks against using other means of recovery in parallel such as professional psychotherapy. So you will have to forgive me if I so not put much stock in them claiming the above, if it is true they claim it.

sopretty wrote: »

It also has something in it about the NEED for other professional/medical help in some cases (can't quote it exactly).

Again I am not sure I believe this. There is an article in Scientific American which clearly states "After reviewing the literature, we found that AA may help some people overcome alcoholism, especially if they also get some professional assistance, but the evidence is far from overwhelming, in part because of the nature of the program."

It notes that ""56 percent were abstinent versus 39 percent of those who did not see a therapist—an indication that seeing a professional is also beneficial.""

But it also notes that "They are to accomplish these difficult goals without professional help. No therapists, psychologists or physicians can attend AA meetings unless they, too, have drinking problems."

So I am being told two polar opposite things by two polar opposite sources. The article strongly suggests AA is against such professional help in conjuction with the program. Also reading the 4th Edition of the "Big Book" on line, it is packed full of "testimony" and those testimonies are simply riddled with stories of how the medical profession failed them, did not understand or relate to them. Anyone reading this book will come away with a general mood of being anti main stream solutions.

sopretty wrote: »

As regards the amount of people put off by the God thing, I'd say that it is surprisingly low.

I doubt it but I have no figures to call it on either way. Anecdote is not evidence, but anecdotally I have read so many forum posts of people who went to AA.... were put off by the god and bible bashing.... and never went back that I simply have become awash with a feeling of dread in this regard. I would love to get hard figures on the matter but as another user noted.... as many have before..... it is notoriously difficult to do so.

sopretty wrote: »

In terms of the millions of alcoholics, I'm talking about the amount who have recovered since AA was founded.

Again what is the source of these figures? With a 5% success rate... to have "millions" of recoveries since the first edition of the book you would have to have a truely massive number of people who tried it. So what are the figures. "Millions" sounds vague hyperbole to me.

sopretty wrote: »

You really should read the AA big book. It's an interesting read!

You incorrectly assume I havent.

sopretty wrote: »

All rehabs that I am aware of in Ireland will recommend attendance at AA in terms of their aftercare and long term recovery.

Sure. And the US courts mandate it sometimes too for criminals who have alcohol issues. But the tide is slowly turning on that one too. Name dropping who recommends it does not help. I would like to hear their justification on WHY they recommend it. Is it personal recommendation by nurses on the ground? Or it it common best implemented practice to recommend it? If so on what basis? What is in their literature on the subject?

sopretty wrote: »

My own psychiatrist (addiction specialist) told me that in his experience, people who attend AA 'generally' do better than those who don't.

The whole reason we have the field of Epidemiology is so that doctors and professionals do not make medical recommendations off the back of "In my experience".

sopretty wrote: »

Nozzferrathoo - have you ever attended an open meeting of AA? I'm assuming you are not alcoholic and just have a particular interest? Please correct me if I'm wrong - I shouldn't be assuming!

I am going to refuse to answer this for one single but strong reason. I believe what people are saying should be evaluated on the merits of what they are saying.... not on the merits of who is perceived to be saying it. I wish people to read what I write and evaluate it on its own merits.... and not be clouded by who they think I am while writing it.

I have a strong interest however in Epidemiology and other such methodologies and practices. That is to say: The methodologies by which we evaluate cures or treatments for ailments..... any kind of ailments.... for efficacy and side effects. And it is that interest I bring to bear on the subject of AA. Not any personal investment, experience, or perceived anti religion bias.

sopretty

"THIS fourth edition of “Alcoholics Anonymous” came off press in November 2001, at the start of a new millennium. Since the third edition was published in 1976, worldwide membership of A.A. has just about doubled, to an estimated two million or more, with nearly 100,800 groups meeting in approximately 150 countries around the world."

That is taken directly from the book you claim to have read. From the 'Foreword to the 4th Edition"

I will root through the book to find the exact quotes I referred to in response to your other queries.

gaynorvader

sopretty wrote: »

"THIS fourth edition of “Alcoholics Anonymous” came off press in November 2001, at the start of a new millennium. Since the third edition was published in 1976, worldwide membership of A.A. has just about doubled, to an estimated two million or more, with nearly 100,800 groups meeting in approximately 150 countries around the world."

That is taken directly from the book you claim to have read. From the 'Foreword to the 4th Edition"

I will root through the book to find the exact quotes I referred to in response to your other queries.

Meaning it was helping around 100,000 in 2001. (5% of 2M is 100,000)

sopretty

http://www.aa.org/bigbookonline/en_bigbook_chapt2.pdf

If you can read pages 26 to 28, it covers the reasoning behind the 'spiritual' side of AA and explains it better than I have done!
I won't copy the text in here as I don't want to shove AA down anyone's throats!

sopretty

gaynorvader wrote: »

Meaning it was helping around 100,000 in 2001. (5% of 2M is 100,000)

Perhaps. 100k a year is a fair few over the last 80 odd years! Anyway, look, if you feel AA doesn't help people, fair enough. I'm not going to argue with you!

gaynorvader

sopretty wrote: »

Perhaps. 100k a year is a fair few over the last 80 odd years! Anyway, look, if you feel AA doesn't help people, fair enough. I'm not going to argue with you!

It's not 100k a year for 80 odd though, the book says that it had doubled in 25 years. I'm just pointing out that saying that millions are helped is hyperbole. I'm sure it does help people, but it's not the best solution for everyone.

nozzferrahhtoo

sopretty wrote: »

"THIS fourth edition of “Alcoholics Anonymous” came off press in November 2001, at the start of a new millennium. Since the third edition was published in 1976, worldwide membership of A.A. has just about doubled, to an estimated two million or more, with nearly 100,800 groups meeting in approximately 150 countries around the world."

5% of 2 million is not "millions". Millions is the plural of million. That means AT LEAST 2 million. That means you would need 40 million members in order to claim 5% recovery as "millions".

Further membership is not the same as being a recovered alcoholic. Hell some people SHOW UP to these meetings drunk at times. Many more are only there by court mandate and have no interest in getting "cured". They attend merely to fulfill the law and avoid confrontations with their parole officers. So citing membership figures, however accurate or not, is actually not addressing anything about how many people AA actually helps.

Further again.... how are the figures above compiled? How is attendance and membership measured exactly? They throw out the figure 2 million. What is it based on?

Further again again.... because there is no regulatory body..... as pointed out on this thread already..... some people are setting up meetings and running them in their own fashion. They are "AA" in nothing but name only. They stick "AA" on the door but nothing inside distinguishes it as "AA" in any way. Are these clubs and attendees included in this pulled out of thin air figure?

sopretty

gaynorvader wrote: »

It's not 100k a year for 80 odd though, the book says that it had doubled in 25 years. I'm just pointing out that saying that millions are helped is hyperbole. I'm sure it does help people, but it's not the best solution for everyone.

Fair enough - I don't even know what hyperbole means lol.
I'm more concerned with answering the OP's query about whether AA is religious or not.
To be quite honest, I have used the poor statistics as an 'excuse' to not attend AA. Or to continue drinking, more accurately!
I would have given Dr. Phil a good run for his money in arguing the non merits of rehab facilities, recovery rates in AA etc! Where there is a will to drink, there is a way to excuse it!

Dr Phil: I am going to organise rehab for you.
Moi: The success rates of those places are very low.
Dr Phil: Do you want help?
Moi: No!!!!!!!!!!!!! There is NO HELP. Leave me alone to get drunk and die off eventually.....

I would never say that AA is the ONLY way to get sober.

The only way that I personally have gotten sober is through attending AA. I have attended CADS counselling for 3 years, attended a rehab (unfortunately a religious one! - only one I could afford!), been admitted to detox in a general hospital and also admitted to a psychiatric hospital while detoxing. None of these attempts have succeeded in getting me sober! The only thing that worked for me, and just me personally, were AA meetings.

nozzferrahhtoo

sopretty wrote: »

To be quite honest, I have used the poor statistics as an 'excuse' to not attend AA. Or to continue drinking, more accurately!

The latter is unfortunate. The former not. I would heartily agree with the former. However I would not use it as an excuse to continue drinking.... but to look at other similar groups with better figures and attend them instead.

If someone told me to rub rose petals on my nipples to cure cancer and told me this has shown a success rate of 5%.... I would not use this figure as an excuse to keep suffering from cancer. I would instead research OTHER cures on offer to me.

So my advice... were it to be asked for that is..... would be to look at other groups and see their success rates.

sopretty wrote: »

The only thing that worked for me, and just me personally, were AA meetings.

Then you are one of the 5%. Well done. You beat the drink and your personal choice of support was 5%. But that says nothing really. As I said if I came up with a ridiculous programme like staring at a dot on a page, while sitting in pink water, humming a mumba tune.... there will be some number of people who would join threads about me program saying "The only thing that worked for me, and just me personally, was Nozzferrahhtoos Page Dot Technique".

Statistically it is just an accepted fact that no matter how nonsense or even harmful a programe is.... you will find people testifying to its efficacy.

kylith

sopretty wrote: »

The three pertinent ideas were:
A - that we were alcoholic and could not manage our own lives
B - that probably no human power could have relieved our alcoholism
C - that 'God' could and would if he were SOUGHT (note for a start, that this one doesn't stipulate that 'God' must be 'believed in!')

A) Convincing people that they are powerless to take control of their lives can't be helping them.

Every person who has ever overcome an addiction has done it through their own human power, and convincing them that they haven't and can't can't be helping them either.

C) How the feck can you seek something that doesn't exist? How do you look for something without believing it exists? And on top of that it's encouraging people to abdicate responsibility "You can't cure yourself, but God can, but you have to give yourself over to him.

Much better, imo, to empower people to realise that they do have control over their actions, that they themselves can overcome this with help and support, not supernatural codology.

sopretty

kylith wrote: »

A) Convincing people that they are powerless to take control of their lives can't be helping them.

Every person who has ever overcome an addiction has done it through their own human power, and convincing them that they haven't and can't can't be helping them either.

C) How the feck can you seek something that doesn't exist? How do you look for something without believing it exists? And on top of that it's encouraging people to abdicate responsibility "You can't cure yourself, but God can, but you have to give yourself over to him.

Much better, imo, to empower people to realise that they do have control over their actions, that they themselves can overcome this with help and support, not supernatural codology.

While everything you are saying is completely logical, my brain when it comes to drink is the furthest thing from logical that you could come across!
The problem with me, as an alcoholic, and I'm only speaking for me!!!! is that I personally am extremely sensitive and extremely anxious in general. I tend to blame myself for everything that goes wrong. This becomes superbly evident to me when I am sober!
I'll just give you an example of how the 'higher power' concept works for me.

I ring an old friend, they don't answer the phone. I spend the next few hours (or days!) wondering what had I done to them. I don't think to myself, 'they're busy'. I don't think to myself 'they forgot to ring me back'. I think 'Oh ****e, I've done something to annoy them - crap - what did I do? - how am I going to stop my life going wrong - should I ring them again? Should I wait? Should I text them? Should I ring/text a mutual friend? No no no - you're over-reacting - you're worse than a stalker!!! For God's sake calm the F down - Oh ****e - what did I do? Have they told anyone? - Fcuk this - I can't handle this - will someone get me a drink??????'.

Now, when I can properly 'hand over' to 'God', I take the responsibility off myself so to speak. So, in the exact same scenario as above, instead of the usual ramblings of my brain, I tell myself, 'Ok - whatever has happened, it is God's will. You are very likely to be over-reacting. It is highly likely that they were busy and forgot to ring you back. Whether you did or not, it is not the end of the world. Even if you did upset them, it's done now and you need to relax'.

Do you see how the higher power concept (power outside of yourself) comes in handy to the old alcoholic brain?