to consider aa a dangerous cult?

[Kirkers]

I am ready to be attacked by cult members.

I have read 'theorangepapers' online which is very well researched, and 'twelve step horror stories' (also available to read online) and they prove to me (on top of my own experience) that aa does much more harm than good. In every proper, conrolled experiment aa produces worse results than any other treatment, including doing nothing. It is unquestionably a cult(Google, 'is aa a cult'). Yet 93% (I am not sure about that figure, sorry) of treatment centres follow the same model. That would be the £10 billion treatment industry.

I hope this isn't too off topic for mumsnet. They do involved children too. It is awful.

I first came to mumsnet following the Julie/Jake Myerson thread. The detective work that went on was phenonmenal. Is there anyone out there breastfeeding or too pregnant to move who could look into the orange papers and tell me I'm not Erin bigchest Eronovich.

This is an absolutely genuine request for feedback from people who are prepared to consider the actual black and white evidence of this extraordinarily powerful organisation.

Thanks.

How on earth could they take part in an effectiveness study? That would breach anonimity, the absolute most important principle in AA.

This is a truely bizarre thread.

Corporate AA or AA is a corporation is basically stating the samething.Heads of Corps?Charity can and do make loads of money. They can make choices to protect the vulnerable and investigate.

Considering Miflaw your mean spirit you have displayed I will not chat with you about myself personally. This is not needed to make my point as there is enough evidence to proof my points.

serinity-Bill W. was smart in setting up AA as an Anonymous org.I believe he saw the writing on the wall and saw the liability issues.It is by no way just a coincidence that AA has an upside down Corporation. It takes off any liability to them-or it at least tries to. They have been sued regardless.
But Bill W. set it up in my opinion to protect the AA from being sued and held accountable.

Also, I think AA is incredibly valuable and would go with the "anything that keeps you off the booze" view, but I also think the medical community know very little (relatively) about addiction and I think it's inevitable that effective treatment will be discovered eventually and AA will b redundant. Which I'm sure they'd not be concerned about, if something better worked. I often think we need a bit of a sexy markting campaign ala cancer research uk to gt money raised for addiction studies so the real work can start...

RWDC-It is aworry that many our referred to 12 step with such a lack of studies. But the 5% figure is from AA itself.

Go to the follow the money thread on www.stinkin-thinkin.com that has research on how much money that corporate AA makes.

Of course they can take part in studies! All studies on medical treatments are anonymous and the data is kept confidential! Subjects don't even have to be named. That is a massive cop-out on their part if they use that as an excuse. Any other psychological treatments will be studied for efficacy, including other addiction treatment programmes, so why not AA? If there is absolutely no real evidence it works how can it be endorsed as a safe treatment for alcoholism?

Actually there are other treatments that have worked and been more effective-but AA is scared of that because they would make less money and not be able to push there religious agenda. AA makes you feel they are the only way and if you do not go to meetings you will die. They dont like meds,they dont like therapists.They feel threatened by progressive treatments that do not tell people that they are powerless and only their higher power-even if its a doorknob can help you.

Exactly-I dont think it is a safe treatment.Plus AA will even state they are not professionals,have zero formal training in this.Yet the general population thinks they are the beginning and end of treatment which is FALSE.

But even if they stay anon, AA are still supplying subjects through their organisation! People wouldn't want to go.

I have to say I was all for AA and just accepted is as the default route for people with alcoholism, but after having learned about it at med school I was a bit

I had heard and read about the 12 steps before, and always thought they sounded a bit odd but assumed it was a tried and trusted method with undeniable success, so when I read that there was no solid evidence that existed to prove this I was a bit

If it works for someone then fair enough but to hear an organisation that has such unorthodox methods is not prepared to put them to the test is a bit fishy. AA stems from "Temperance Societies" that sprung up in the US during the prohibition and were heavily religious so in a way they are based on extreme religious views, and thus a bit cult-like...

MIFLAW - Sorry only just got back to this thread. Thanks for acknowleging (sp?) that. It means a lot actually

Run et al - Why does it matter so much to you? - if you don't agree with AA, for what ever reasons, then just don't go. Nobody - from Bill W to the bloke down the road who's been sober for just a few days - is telling anybody to do anything. AA is a group of people who share experience of how it worked for them, and what they did and what happened to them as a result. I personally believe that anyone who follows the suggestions by AA will get sober and stay sober - but I don't expect everyone to agree with me, any more than i expect them to agree with any other personal opinion.

Oh and for the record (not sure if i said this before or not) GOD, for me, is Group Of Drunks, ie the people at the meeting I go to. My 'higher power' is that same group of drunks.

Here's a meta-analysis for you, showing that out of 48 treatment options, AA and 12 Step facilitation ranked 37th and 38th in effectiveness.
www.behaviortherapy.com/whatworks.htm

I care about the women and children being sexually abused and raped.Is that so haed to understand? People have been scammed and lost loads of money from AA members as well.AA is doing nothing to warn people or protect the children.Someone needs to get the word out.

To say it is just people sharing experiences etc is so not true. They are playing therapist without a license and not doing background checks.

That is really sad-a group of drunks is your higher power.

This is why so many people fall prey and are victimized in AA is because for many their higher power is the group of drunks.

They are playing therapist without a license and not doing background checks.

Who is 'they', run? An AA meeting is a group of alcoholics. Nobody is in charge, nobody runs it as such, and nobody professes to do so. I really don't understand who you think should do these backgroud checks?

I do however, agree with you that women and children being sexually abused and raped is horrible, obviously, but that is a seperate issue. Woman should be aware of their safety and that of their children at all times anyway, shouldn't they? Not only or especially at an AA meeting?

Women go to AA for help. Newcomers (women, children, AND men) are vulnerable and desperate for help. They are taught to listen, and "do what it takes" to get sober. This is their new chance at life....Abuses and sexual harassment in meetings that even vultures in general population know about it. Google "alcoholics anonymous" and "pick up girls". Predators chat about this!

run you're obviously not interested in even trying to understand what I'm saying. You are either deliberately missing the point or you're not listening. I'm not prepared to argue with you any further. There is no point.

I do concede that AA is a peer run/led support system, as are lots of organisations such as the Samaritans for instance. People do not necessarily need to be medically trained to help people. But their methods do seem to be quite dogmatic cosidering there is not much evidnce to back them up - and that is bad practice really.

My brother is a Samaritan and they all need a CRB check.

AfternoonsandCoffeespoons says"Who is 'they', run? An AA meeting is a group of alcoholics. Nobody is in charge, nobody runs it as such, and nobody professes to do so. I really don't understand who you think should do these backgroud checks?"

That's the point. Someone should be in charge and it should be "run" by an authortitative figure so that criminals don't walk in pretending to be spiritual, moral (sober) and take advantage of others. The should profess that they do this and they (AA corporate) should actually do it. Long time sober people are regarded as knowledgable, trusting, caring, moral, etc just because they don't drink (or say they don't drink). They and others think that they are miracles.

Newcomers are taught to trust, disregard their own thinking, to learn from the "winners". They are broken when they walk in and broken down further when attending meetings. Predators sniff this out. This is opportunistic for them.

"They" is AA of course. Alateen does backgound checks-but Alanon does not-AA or NA does not,even though they deal with minors as well.But all kinds of groups have to get background checks and AA should be no exception.

Of course women should always be careful.But AA gives both men and women a false sense of security that AA is a safe haven for them.Because of that people tend to ket their guard down and become victims of abuse from people they were told to trust and tell them everything while doing their 4th step.men are sexually abused in AA as well.Gay men tend to be victims as well.

donewithit-thank you-I could not have said it better myself!

Really? When I was a Samaritan we didn't need a CRB. I left in 2007 though.

Yep. Even our churchwardens had to have them.