Tag: AA criticism

  • Are the 12 Steps Safe for Trauma Survivors?

    Are the 12 Steps Safe for Trauma Survivors?

    When the 4th and 5th steps are done without support for the symptoms of PTSD, they have the potential to retraumatize.

    Trauma is a current buzzword in the mental health world, and for good reason. Untreated trauma has measurable lasting physiological and psychological effects, which makes it a public health emergency of pandemic proportions. Trauma is an event or continuous circumstance that subjectively threatens a person’s life, bodily integrity, or sanity, and overwhelms a person’s ability to cope.

    PTSD and Substance Use Disorder

    Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is a condition caused by experiencing or witnessing a traumatic event. Symptoms include nightmares, flashbacks, anxiety, intrusive thoughts about the trauma, hypervigilance, and avoidance of triggers which remind you of the event. Substance use disorders (SUD) are frequently co-morbid (co-occurring) with PTSD. Many people with PTSD self-medicate with mind-altering substances to alleviate symptoms but getting high or drunk only works for so long. Substance use disorders often evolve from using substances as a maladaptive coping tool.

    There are many physiological correlations between psychological trauma and SUD. For example, there are similarities in gray matter reduction for both the person with PTSD and the person with an alcohol use disorder. Although the neural mechanisms of addiction in PTSD patients are not fully understood, research has found that in the prefrontal cortex, dopamine receptors may be involved in both conditions. Memories related to fear and reward are both processed with the help of these specific receptors. It could be that the processing of traumatic memories affects the dopamine receptors, making them more sensitive to reward-triggering substances.

    Sometimes, people with a dual diagnosis of addiction and PTSD find their way to 12-step programs like Alcoholics Anonymous. These programs are widespread, free, and require no commitment, which makes them more accessible than other types of treatment. AA’s worldwide membership and lasting existence has caused the program to be of interest to researchers for decades. Previous research has found positive correlations between AA participation and abstinence. There is less research on how 12-step programs interact with trauma recovery.

    Studies on relapse factors have found that common predecessors to relapse in adults include anger, depression, and stress, among others. Recalling traumatic experiences, for someone with PTSD, can cause intense physiological and psychological reactions characterized by these same feelings: anxiety (stress), depression, anger, and frustration. It’s a combination that puts people with both trauma and addiction at a higher risk of relapsing.

    Guilt, Shame, and AA

    There are two sets of steps in 12-step programs that involve memory recall and direct involvement with others: Steps 4 and 5 and Steps 8 and 9.

    Step 4 says: “Made a searching and fearless moral inventory of ourselves.” That step is followed up by sharing that inventory in Step 5: “Admitted to God, to ourselves and to another human being the exact nature of our wrongs.”

    Later, Step 8 says: “Made a list of persons we had harmed, and became willing to make amends to them all.” To deal with that list, Step 9 directs people: “Made direct amends to such people wherever possible, except when to do so would injure them or others.”

    The gist with these steps is that they look at both the resentment/anger the person feels towards others (which always involves taking responsibility for part or all of the event that caused the resentment and anger), and also the “harms” the person caused others. But there is no direct guidance on how to ensure a realistic and safe assessment of past events is made. The AA book presents this step as if someone with a substance use disorder has the tendency to blame others. People with PTSD are wracked with self-blame, and it is self-blame and shame which fuels many people’s addictions, but shame is not explicitly addressed in the steps.

    Guilt is very commonly experienced by people with PTSD. Survivor guilt can be a bit of a misnomer; PTSD develops from situations that are subjectively experienced as traumatic, but these circumstances don’t have to involve death (although they certainly can and do for many people). Simply surviving can feel like something the person is not worthy of. They may feel guilt when they don’t stay in the pain and anxiety.

    Shame is also common in trauma survivors, especially in people who have been sexually assaulted. Trauma survivors must restore a positive sense of self to find healing. Judith Herman, the author of Trauma and Recovery: The Aftermath of Violence—from Domestic Abuse to Political Terror, explains that “the survivor needs the assistance of others in her struggle to overcome her shame and to arrive at a fair assessment of her conduct.” It becomes important, as the trauma reveals itself, to see it clearly for what it was so the person can integrate those experiences into their individual life stories.

    AA literature is very focused on decreasing ego and on disrupting the selfishness of the person with the addiction. This is not necessarily a helpful baseline for traumatized folks; it can be harshly critical. The feeling of being judged can deepen the rift between the survivor and others. Herman writes, “Realistic judgements diminish the feelings of humiliation and guilt. By contrast, either harsh criticism or ignorant, blind acceptance greatly compounds the survivor’s self-blame and isolation.”

    The primary text of Alcoholics Anonymous (the “Big Book”) suggests alcoholics review their past sexual life when creating a life inventory in Step 4. For the overall inventory, the book suggests that the reader completely disregard “the wrongs others had done” and to look only at “our own mistakes.” Even in situations where a person caused harm to the reader, the reader should “disregard the other person involved entirely” and find “where were we to blame?” These suggestions can be dangerous for survivors of intimate partner violence or child abuse who have been told that they were to blame for the abuse they suffered.

    The book further details what to ask yourself when making an inventory of your sexual conduct:

    “Where had we been selfish, dishonest, or inconsiderate? Whom had we hurt? Did we unjustifiably arouse jealousy, suspicion or bitterness? Where were we at fault, what should we have done instead?” It is worrisome that a sex inventory is taken to find out how “we acted selfishly” when one-third of women and one-sixth of men have been sexually assaulted or raped. An estimated half of women who experience a sexual assault will develop PTSD. One study found that 80 percent of women with SUD who seek inpatient treatment have been physically or sexually assaulted and nearly 70 percent of men have experienced either physical or sexual abuse.

    How the 12 Steps Can Harm People with PTSD

    Because remembering past traumas makes the brain’s reward center more receptive to the effects of drugs, Steps 4 and 5 need to approached with extreme caution for people who have experienced trauma. Ideally, these steps jumpstart healing; but when they are done without support for the symptoms of PTSD, they have the potential to retraumatize. As the person shares their trauma with someone else, hopefully the listener is compassionate and willing to point out where things were not the addict’s fault—at all. A child survivor of molestation had no agency in the assault, and it is unconscionable to tell that child, now grown, that they need to determine where they were at fault. It is not possible to “disregard the other person involved entirely” when an event only occurred because of the other person. Sometimes we need to recognize this fact and say to ourselves (or hear from someone else): “You had no part in this, you were a victim at that time.”

    In Steps 8 and 9 we are to list and resolve harms done to others. If step 4 and 5 didn’t properly address where our fault doesn’t lie, we may be inclined to list abuses and harm done to us as wrongs we did. It says not to make amends if it will cause harm to others, but we need an additional specification not to make amends if it will cause harm to ourselves. If you owe an abusive ex-partner money, are you supposed to pay them back if you’ve cut off all contact? These are issues that require careful consideration. Sharing both lists with a compassionate person has the potential to help survivors recover. Sharing both lists with someone who is too harsh in their suggestions and assessments has the potential to push those in recovery back into active addiction.

    The care of a loving, compassionate, and knowledgeable supporter, like a sponsor, can help sort out these dangerous triggers. Since such a large percentage of people in 12-step programs have experienced trauma, sponsors should be able to provide trauma-informed care; otherwise, going through the steps may end up retraumatizing their sponsees and leaving them vulnerable to relapse. Yet, there are no qualifications for sponsorship, and no way for someone new to the program to be aware of these potential pitfalls. There are so many variabilities to the 12 steps and how they are implemented. The way in which someone interprets the language of the steps can change how people understand themselves and their history. Trauma-focused recovery can be lost in the mix and deserves more explicit attention.

    View the original article at thefix.com

  • There's Nothing Wrong With You If AA Doesn’t Work

    There's Nothing Wrong With You If AA Doesn’t Work

    It isn’t that you’re incapable of being honest with yourself, or that you’re not working a “program” well enough. You are not too broken, or too far gone.

    I spoke to a friend, Damien, last week. He was devastated at losing someone close to him to alcohol use disorder. What is particularly harrowing about this person’s passing is that it might have been prevented. Damien’s friend was repeatedly pushed toward Alcoholics Anonymous (AA), even though it clearly wasn’t the right fit for him. Just like many others, instead of being supported by peers and professionals and given alternative options, this friend was left feeling that the problem was him.

    “It’s really frustrating to see friends die because the default treatment option doesn’t work for them,” Damien says. “We are losing far too many people with substance use disorder who find 12-step incompatible with their life experiences and belief systems.”

    He goes on to say, “It’s not because they aren’t willing. It’s not because they can’t ‘get it.’ It’s because, for many people, treating addiction requires more than hope, spirituality, and fellowship. And yet, the only option most are presented with is founded on those three pillars. If the recommended treatment for bacterial infections had the same success rate as the 12 steps, then antibiotics would not be our go-to treatment plan for staph infections.”

    My overarching message is: There is nothing wrong with you if AA doesn’t work. It isn’t that you’re incapable of being honest with yourself, or that you’re not working a “program” well enough. You are not too broken, or too far gone. You simply haven’t found the right pathway for you.

    These kinds of beliefs stem from the Big Book of Alcoholics Anonymous, which states: “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.” [emphasis added]

    During my five years of attending countless AA and Narcotics Anonymous (NA) meetings, I have heard many members criticize those who come in and out of the rooms but return to using in between, categorizing them as unwilling, or incapable of being honest. “They just need to surrender to the program and work it like their life depends on it,” was the kind of statement I heard over and over again.

    I threw myself into the program because there were no other options for me in the northwest of England. I was so desperate to find something that would help me that I believed anything members said, even if there was no evidence to back it up. I did a fair amount of perpetuating these myths too. I was instructed to ignore my instincts and critical mind (because that was my “disease talking”), and do what I was told. Giving away my free will to a person in the sky or a church basement seemed weird, but I went with it for several years. After all, it had worked for many other members.

    With a period of sobriety under my belt, I couldn’t ignore my inner doubts any longer. They became louder. It was as though, even after years in recovery, I suddenly woke up. And I started to slowly unpack all the myths I’d been told.

    In particular, I tried to unpack “it works if you work it.” There is substantial evidence that shows there’s no one-size-fits-all method when it comes to recovery. If this program were suitable for everyone with substance use disorders, its success rate would be much higher. The fact is that success rates of 12-step programs vary wildly, from as low as 5 to 8 percent, with dropout rates from 69 to 86 percent, to as high as 42 percent after four years. I should point out that these dropout rates are a reflection of the attrition rates of addiction treatment generally. This underscores the point that the way we treat addiction isn’t appropriate for everyone and we need to get better at personalizing care based on individual circumstances.

    When I moved to the U.S., it was like my world opened up. I saw that despite what I’d been told in AA — that it was the only method for successful recovery — there was actually an open landscape of diverse recovery pathways.

    A leading study shows that tens of millions of Americans have successfully resolved an alcohol or drug problem through a variety of traditional and nontraditional methods. That means:

    • 9 percent recovered with “assisted pathway use” that consisted of mutual-aid groups (45.1 percent), treatment (27.6 percent), and emerging recovery support services (21.8 percent). 95.8 percent of those who used mutual-aid groups attended 12-step mutual aid meetings.
    • Just under half of those who did not report using an assisted pathway recovered without the use of formal treatment and recovery supports.

    I’m aware that an ideal model of treatment, individualized based on the person’s particular medical and psychological needs, is not always available to most people. Not all of us have the luxury of therapeutic treatment from a psychologist or psychiatrist. This is another reason mutual-aid groups are the most accessible form of recovery pathway — they’re free! We’re fortunate in the U.S. to have plenty of other support groups that are not all based on religion, and some have a solid evidence-based program. They include Refuge Recovery, LifeRing Secular Recovery, SMART Recovery, Moderation Management, Wellbriety — among many others listed here — and they have been shown to be equally as successful as 12-step groups.

    study comparing 12-step groups to alternative mutual aid groups found that LifeRing, SMART, and Women for Sobriety were just as effective as 12-step groups. Study author Dr. Sarah Zemore and her team reported that “findings for high levels of participation, satisfaction, and cohesion among members of the mutual help alternatives suggest promise for these groups in addressing addiction problems.”

    Despite my reporting about AA’s success rate and some of the myths perpetuated by the fellowship, I’m not here to bash AA. I’m here to shine a light on the false statement that it is the only successful way. There are many others. For those AA does work for, I respect your path. We just need to have a clearer picture of what recovery looks like so when someone is suffering, instead of saying they are the problem, we can be better informed to direct them to what may be a more suitable pathway. After all, we all have the same goal: recovery.

    View the original article at thefix.com

  • Alcoholics Anonymous: A Different Perspective

    Alcoholics Anonymous: A Different Perspective

    Rather than seeking knowledge through scientific methodology to gather more and more evidence regarding the factual attributes of successful recovery, AA emphasizes scripture, tradition, and the word of authority figures.

    I recently read an essay on another recovery-oriented site, a site whose focus is on people in 12-step recovery yet who are disinclined to religion. The topic was “moments of clarity.” Now, this phrase, for those who have spent years in the 12-step subculture, has obvious connotations. Having the knee-jerk, familiar response to the phrase is one of those cult-like behaviors which make me happy I am no longer an AA member, no longer speaking the lingo nor “drinking the Kool-Aid.” For this free-thinking addict/alcoholic, 60 years old and having spent more of my life in recovery than out, it brought to mind something very different from what was intended. This was a profound and life-changing experience I had, in which the following truths hit me like the proverbial ton of bricks:

    1. I am an atheist.
    2. Alcoholics Anonymous is a religion, like Christianity and Islam.
    3. Such religions tend to impede the development of scientific knowledge regarding natural phenomenon.
    4. Alcoholism, addiction, and the process of recovery are entirely natural phenomenon.
    5. AA has a very low success rate.

    Before going on, I should make clear that I am not merely another AA-basher. I am a former long-term member and Alcoholics Anonymous was central in my life for decades. I learned a great deal, much of which I utilize to this day. I also mean no disrespect whatsoever to the author of the original essay, and I apologize for being tangential. I have problems with the “program,” but not with any individual members. My focus is on all those who suffer because, like myself, they are forced to choose between the rock of active addiction and the hard place of joining what is essentially a Christian sect.

    Alcoholics Anonymous as Religion

    “If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck…”

    • Twelve Steps

    The chapter We Agnostics is a thinly veiled effort at proselytizing by a devout Christian. Its goal is to use the concept of “open-mindedness” to convince readers to buy into the dualism of old-time religion, with its antiquated belief in the existence of both a natural and a supernatural realm, complete with supernatural entities or “higher” powers. Attaching “as we understood him” to a couple of steps is similarly disingenuous. It is nothing more than a manipulative sales pitch by a professional salesman, one which pales in the shadow of the heavy-handed religiosity of his “12 steps of recovery.” So, for example, in Bill Wilson’s steps you will find: 

    God four times,
    Him or His four times
    Prayer and meditation
    Spiritual awakening and
    A power greater than ourselves.

    Surrender of the personal will, faith in God, confession, prayer and meditation, ultimately even proselytizing and missionary work are promoted as essential attributes of recovery. Here again, the steps promote religious dualism, with its denial of the value of naturalistic, or scientific, knowledge. Even in the 21st century I distinctly recall hearing this erroneous, anti-science perspective espoused in meetings, with god and the supernatural realm presented as the source of all the good stuff, while the natural realm and the animal known as Homo sapiens served as the source of all the bad.

    • Scripture

    The highlighting, underlining, and prodigious dog-earing; treating the book as a sacred object like the Quran; studying and re-reading, with study groups like the Bible; carrying it everywhere; quoting and citing as if anything between the covers is self-evidently true or “gospel,” so to speak; and the unwillingness to change a word of the first 164 pages: all of these attest to a belief in the Big Book as the kind of scripture or divine word which serves as the foundation for religious traditions like Christianity, Islam, and others. I can recall many times in the rooms when I heard the view that the Big Book was divinely inspired, the ludicrous notion that a supernatural entity was speaking through Bill Wilson when he wrote Alcoholics Anonymous.

    • Tradition

    Rather than seeking knowledge through scientific methodology to gather more and more evidence regarding the factual attributes of successful recovery, AA emphasizes scripture, tradition, and the word of authority figures. These are the criteria that many religions use to justify “knowledge” as they understand it. Ironically, even though America is one of the greatest scientific nations in history, we also suffer a populace which is largely hostile to science and academics. The members of AA comprise a microcosm of this larger population.

    • Faith is NOT a Virtue

    Faith is claimed to be a virtue, but in the 12-step context it is actually the acceptance of something for which zero evidence, facts, or data exist. That is, the adulation of ignorance, a trait which walks hand-in-hand with America’s mistrust of science and of academics more generally. This approach teaches us to be mistrustful of science, yet obedient and sheep-like with religious authority. The main reference to science in the “first 164 pages” is one line which states that “science may one day cure alcoholism, but it hasn’t done so yet.” Importantly, this one reference is often read sarcastically, with derisive snickers and mocking asides, illustrating a cocky certainty of its implausibility.

    • Authority and Obedience

    As with religions like Christianity and Islam, unquestioned obedience to authority figures is of the utmost importance in Alcoholics Anonymous. We are all familiar with the phrase “take the cotton out of your ears, and put it in your mouth.” In some places this is an actual rule, with newcomers in their first 30, 60, or 90 days advised to only listen. Unquestioned obedience to authority is a major distinction between religious perspectives and secular, humanist, and scientific approaches. The adulation of Bill, of Bob, of circuit speakers and old-timers, of sponsors, the use of quotes as meeting topics, and the current emphasis on temporally-measured sobriety, encouraging both pride and the development of a hierarchy, all convincingly mirrors the religious emphasis upon blind faith and obedience to the words of authority figures.

    • Conservatism

    Conservatism in this context means a profound reticence to change. I believe that the Catholic Church recently apologized to Galileo, only 450 years overdue. Both Christianity and Islam still treat women as if we were living in Biblical times. This intransigence, this resistance to progress, is one of the primary characteristics of Alcoholics Anonymous. AA causes people to become narrow-minded and inflexible, unable to consider new, different, or contrary approaches to treatment methods. When I have broached these subjects with current members, they have consistently become defensive and “circled the wagons.”

    Religion as Impediment

    “So what?” you might ask. “So what if AA is a religion?”

    The problem is, as a result of their fundamental dualistic nature, these types of religions stand in the way of us acquiring knowledge and, in particular, cultivating a more naturalistic, scientific understanding of addiction, alcoholism, and the truly essential attributes of recovery.

    Problems and Solutions

    You admit you have a problem. Then you find a “spiritual solution.” What do you do? In AA, as with Islam and Christianity, you are discouraged from seeking an alternative solution. You are even encouraged to proselytize, to go out and “spread the good news.” Religious converts, recipients of the “one true word,” are trained to be blind, even hostile, to alternatives, particularly naturalistic ones, while enthusiastically promoting the one and only true supernatural solution.

    So around 8 or 10 years into sobriety we go and get our counseling certificates, then get a job working or volunteering at a nearby treatment center. The faculty, staff, and volunteers at the facilities, and at the couple of behemoths in the addiction treatment field, are largely AA members, AA trained, and generally convinced that with the 12 steps and our “spiritual solution,” the problem has been solved. I believed this too, for many years. This fundamentally biases the treatment process, leaning it towards 12-step and away from any alternatives.

    Conservatism Revisited

    Another consequence of AA’s conservative bent is that people in the program become so convinced that the Big Book and the program are perfect exactly as they are, that they do not hear what atheists or skeptics like myself have to say. This is a form of cognitive bias called confirmation bias, which simply refers to how, even when confronted with facts or data challenging their beliefs, people will nonetheless cling to their original views. In fact, people will even double-down on their faulty original position when confronted with fully rational, fact-based alternatives. This bodes ill for our efforts to update recovery by embracing more empirical, evidence-based knowledge, especially if it conflicts with AA tradition, scripture, or authority.

    Anti-Naturalistic Thinking

    These religious traditions started out as pre-scientific efforts to understand ourselves, the greater cosmos, and our place within it all. Their most significant error was the introduction of the afore-mentioned dualism, an imagined schism between the natural and the supernatural. Ever since Darwin, we have known that the 100% natural animal Homo sapiens builds new knowledge on top of old knowledge, accumulating knowledge over time until we figure out how to solve all manner of worldly, natural problems. This includes curing diseases that were once deemed completely beyond our comprehension or scope, requiring prayer, sacrifices, and incantations to mysterious gods.

    Rather than attributing meaning to the words “bless you” when someone sneezes and seeking to bring supernatural elements to bear on the demonic entities which allegedly cause a person to become sick, we have instead discovered the germ theory of disease. I am simply suggesting that we stop thinking in such medieval, archaic terms when it comes to addiction, alcoholism and recovery and instead fully embrace empirical, scientific methods which might yield more fruitful results.

    God of the Gaps

    The strongest argument for religion as an impediment would be the “god of the gaps.” For millennia humanity has inserted supernatural answers into the gaps in our knowledge. If a hurricane blows or an earthquake hits, god (or, if you prefer, a higher power) did it. However, over time, naturalistic answers have replaced supernatural answers, one by one, consistently, and with far more accuracy.

    Complex psycho-social maladies like ours are particularly mysterious and therefore highly prone to such supernatural interpretations. AA’s founding fathers were steeped in a social context in which radical personal transformations were deemed mysterious and supernatural. We had absolutely no idea what was involved, so we labeled such experiences as “psychic” (Silkworth) or “spiritual” (Jung), which merely perpetuates the fallacious dualism, as a result of both the unclear meanings and supernatural undertones of such key terms.

    Over the course of human history our questions have found their best, most accurate answers not in the supernatural but instead in knowledge gained through approaches emphasizing the scientific method. As atheist author Greta Cristina and others have wisely observed, there exist precisely zero accounts of this process moving in the opposite direction. Nonetheless, AA remains an obstinate hold out.

    It’s time to embrace facts and data, to give science a real shot at addressing this global scourge. AA members must become more open to approaching the problem anew. If, when confronted with Galileo holding that the earth revolved around the sun, the church had simply said “well, let’s check out what the evidence says,” that would have been great. But they did not. Instead, like AA members have done to me—and I’m no Galileo—they cry “trouble maker” and play hear no evil, see no evil…

    Alcoholics Anonymous as a Failure

    None of the above would matter if Alcoholics Anonymous really, truly worked.

    But it does not.

    I was told by the senior counselor in my second treatment center that only 10% of us would “make it”. That’s an admitted failure rate of 90%. This was not merely manipulative sales-speak. Such extremely poor success rates are similar to what a variety of differing studies have found. We all know this, anecdotally. If you look, you can see that the only thing busier than the coffee pot at an AA meeting is the revolving door. And such disheartening research does not even scratch the surface of our failure, as most of the world’s millions of addicts and alcoholics never even darken the doorways of AA in the first place, for a number of very good reasons.

    “It works if you work it” is a classic example of the kind of un-falsifiable claim which characterizes religious traditions. Scientific claims, on the other hand, are characterized by falsifiability, which simply means that they can be tested. Then we can either discard them, modify them, or build upon them. It is by utilizing precisely such scientific approaches that we have discovered cures for polio, small pox, malaria, and so much more. The more complex, psycho-social disorders, such as depression or bi-polar disorder, are likewise yielding to our efforts to address them as purely natural phenomenon.

    By any and all measures, there is a staggeringly large amount of room for improvement. The religious perspective merely serves to block our way at this point in history. In the short time it took you to read this essay, thousands of lives were shattered or ended. It’s time to move on and aggressively seek empirical, naturalistic solutions to this deadly global scourge.

     

    Thoughts? Rebuttals? Please share in the comment section below.

    View the original article at thefix.com