cautiouslyoptimistic wrote:
...AA is sure not my preferred route. But some people claim to be helped by them, and that can't be a bad thing. From THEIR perspective, the idea of being able to just drink socially is a dangerous bit of denial. One thing I agree with AA on is that if TSM turns out not to work for me, there is only ONE way for me to avoid the affects of alcohol and that is to not drink at all. So I can see how from their point of view, coming to AA to basically discredit it and spread what they consider dangerous misinformation would not be deemed helpful to their members...
Yes, some people are helped by it, and absolutely that is a good thing. It’s just a shame that AA can’t be as objective and rational as you are. It could have saved me so much misery if AA's message was something like: “The 12 steps way is our preferred route and we think it's the best, but some alcoholics claim to be cured by Naltrexone, and if that’s true it can’t be a bad thing.”
I, like you, can understand AA's fear of something like TSM. As an AA member there were times
I myself declared that any non-AA route was risky, and that any drug-therapy route was deadly dangerous. I was sincere and I meant well –
I just didn’t know what the hell I was talking about! I had never tried Naltrexone. In fact, I had never tried anything except white-knuckling it alone or recovery (attempts) via AA. But even though I had never tried any other way, in AA I was brainwashed into accepting that AA's solution was
the only real answer for any
true alcoholic. And every time I relapsed I thought it was my fault. Eventually, I not only totally believed that I was “powerless” - I also “came to believe” that I was utterly
hopeless.
AA's intentions might be sincere and good, but their best intentions helped pave the road to hell for me, by totally convincing me that it was
AA’s way or NO WAY at all. My desire to speak up about TSM to AA is not rooted in the desire to discredit their entire program. But I would very much like to discredit their adamant stance against alternatives they know nothing about. Since AA constantly preaches “turning it over” to “God” it seems utterly absurd that they refuse to accept the possibility that “God” might provide more than one narrow way out of the misery of alcoholism. (I myself am no longer a believer, but I can at least admit to that possibility.)
As of this post, I've been using TSM for 1 month, and the results have been absolutely stunning for me. I no longer feel compelled to drink every day. Out of the last 11 days, I have had TEN alcohol-free days
without even trying. Just as amazing to me is that when I *do* drink, I am able to STOP! (I no longer drink until I pass out, and more and more frequently I stop after 2 or 3 beers -simply because I don't want any more.) I realize I may still experience some spikes and difficulties, but in any case, I now have
real hope.
It sickens me to think of how many other people there are who, just like me, leave AA convinced that all hope is gone. I understand AA's point of view, but
part of that view desperately needs to change, and it totally
could change without discrediting their whole program. All they would need to do is broaden their imaginations enough to admit that any all-powerful "God" would be capable of providing
more than one narrow way. (Currently all they will admit to is that their "God" allows people to use more than one name for "Him".). But anyway, if AA would genuinely practice what they preach (turning everything over to their "God")- they would have no reason to be so fearful of other solutions, nor would they feel so compelled to defend every old scrap of stale AA dogma.