Psycho-Babble Faith Thread 395948

Shown: posts 1 to 21 of 21. This is the beginning of the thread.

 

12 step programs

Posted by Cass on September 27, 2004, at 17:40:24

Are any of you in 12 step programs? They really change people's lives. I know it has changed my husband's life. I accompany him to his 12 step meetings often, and I love the support and acceptance I feel there. He was involved in 12 step programs long before I met him. I've never found a 12 step program that seemed quite right for me. I'm not an alcoholic (although I did drink excessively at one point in my life). I haven't been victimized by an alcoholic, so I don't fit in at Al Anon, and I'm not sure I really belong at CoDependence Anon either. I'm not a complulsive over eater, at least not to any severe degree.

I do come from a very disturbing family background, but I've never heard of a group just for that. The focus seems to be on children of alcholics.

I'd like to work on my spirituality by "working the steps", but it seems strange to do it independent of a group.

Which leads me to this: I feel like I should justify why this post belongs on the faith board. To anyone who doesn't know, 12 step programs require that members find their "higher power" and surrender to that higher power. I think that's the most transformative thing about the programs.


I need to surrender.

 

Re: 12 step programs

Posted by tabitha on September 28, 2004, at 1:56:51

In reply to 12 step programs, posted by Cass on September 27, 2004, at 17:40:24

Hi Cass, did you ever try a CoDA meeting? I know when it started it was geared toward partners of addicts, but the ones I went to said they were for anyone who wants healthy relationships. I took that to include relationship with yourself and your spirituality. It really seemed like it was a 12-step program that was open to everyone.

 

Re: 12 step programs » tabitha

Posted by Cass on September 28, 2004, at 23:11:55

In reply to Re: 12 step programs, posted by tabitha on September 28, 2004, at 1:56:51

Dear Tabitha,

I have never been to a CoDA meeting. After reading your post, I went to the CoDA website for my area. I was reading about it. I fit some of the characteristics, but I do not fit any of the controlling aspects. Although I still don't know a great deal about codependence, it seems like codependent relationships consist of a controller who disrespects the autonomy of the other person, and the person who stays in the relationship even though it is bad for them. In the past, I have often been the latter. As I've gotten older and stronger, I've managed to get those controllers out of my life or let them know that if they get out of hand, the relationship will end. In any case, I thank-you for your input because I learned a little bit about codependence, and I think the group is probably appropriate for me.
There don't seem to be many meetings in my area, but I am going to go check one out.

 

Re: 12 step programs

Posted by SLS on September 29, 2004, at 7:10:00

In reply to Re: 12 step programs » tabitha, posted by Cass on September 28, 2004, at 23:11:55

> I still don't know a great deal about codependence, it seems like codependent relationships consist of a controller who disrespects the autonomy of the other person,

Not really. It refers to a relationship between the addict and the facilitator. The facilitator maintains the ability for the addict to continue their behavior. Both represent roles in a dysfunctional relationship. The addict is not necessarily a person who suffers from substance abuse. They can simply be the one bringing home anger every day and abusing the other members of the family physically or emotionally to displace it. Often, there is an element of control to the role of the facilitator. The addict becomes dependent on the facilitator for maintenance of the addiction (abuse) while receiving in return feelings of self worth.

That's a pretty lame attempt at an explanation. Sorry. But it serves to demonstrate that the dynamics of a codependent relationship need not contain substance abuse or disrespect by the addict for the autonomy of the facilitator.

This should do a better job of explaining it:

http://www.allaboutcounseling.com/codependency.htm

It is very cursory, but accurate.


- Scott

 

Re: 12 step programs » SLS

Posted by Cass on September 29, 2004, at 20:04:13

In reply to Re: 12 step programs, posted by SLS on September 29, 2004, at 7:10:00

I'm actually pretty confused now, but I'll do some ore reading, and maybe I'll learn more.

 

Re: 12 step programs thank you that was excellent!

Posted by Jai Narayan on September 30, 2004, at 9:10:10

In reply to Re: 12 step programs, posted by SLS on September 29, 2004, at 7:10:00

thanks, I went to the site and copied it. I want to make sure I get this stuff into my head. I am working on these issues.
EMDR got me really far now I need to learn how to have these skills.
Thanks Scott.
Jai the woman who keeps evolving

 

-Cass- I redirected my response to pbSocial (nm)

Posted by 64bowtie on October 9, 2004, at 17:42:24

In reply to 12 step programs, posted by Cass on September 27, 2004, at 17:40:24

 

Think of codependence as Co-Obligation (nm) » Cass

Posted by 64bowtie on October 9, 2004, at 17:45:17

In reply to Re: 12 step programs » tabitha, posted by Cass on September 28, 2004, at 23:11:55

 

Re: 12 step programs » Cass

Posted by JLx on October 10, 2004, at 16:08:12

In reply to 12 step programs, posted by Cass on September 27, 2004, at 17:40:24

> Are any of you in 12 step programs?

I was involved in 12-step programs for several years and spent many an hour in meetings of various groups. I am struck by the fact that you go to meetings with your husband. Are these "open" meetings?

If he's an addict/alcoholic most people in the program would probably suggest Al-Anon for you, even though he's in recovery. It's something of a misnomer to say that Al-Anon is for people who have been "victimized by an alcoholic". Official literature says "affected by" which is more than a matter of semantics because what people learn in Al-Anon, ideally, is how NOT to see themselves as victims while also acknowledging the problem. Al-Anon helps one to see that whatever problem you are having as a result of an alcoholic's (or anyone's) behavior, is your problem and responsibility. This is a radical notion to anyone who thinks that "I'll be ok when someone/something else changes".

While it's true that it's often acute distress that compels people into meetings initially, meetings can vary a lot in their tone and emphasis. Some have a lot of old-timers, for instance, who continue to go to meetings to help others and as a type of church-like weekly reminder to stay on a good path. As they say, "take what you can use and leave the rest".

> I'd like to work on my spirituality by "working the steps", but it seems strange to do it independent of a group.

One of the things that makes the 12-steps powerful, imo, is the fellowship. It's also the drawback though, in that one must feel part of the defining characteristics of the group.

> Which leads me to this: I feel like I should justify why this post belongs on the faith board. To anyone who doesn't know, 12 step programs require that members find their "higher power" and surrender to that higher power. I think that's the most transformative thing about the programs.

Did you know that AA has been recognized by some courts as a religion or religious group? This has come up when people have been court ordered to attend AA for drunk driving. Some have successfully fought it on grounds that that violates their First Amendment rights. Some others view AA and other 12-step groups as cults. (My personal opinion is that it's a religion, but not a cult)

> I need to surrender.

You might like the books of Wayne Dyer, such as "Your Sacred Self" and "There's a Spiritual Solution to Every Problem". Like AA, Dyer draws on many spiritual traditions. Reading between the lines, I think he's also a former 12-stepper.

JL

 

Re: 12 step programs » JLx

Posted by Cass on October 10, 2004, at 17:21:51

In reply to Re: 12 step programs » Cass, posted by JLx on October 10, 2004, at 16:08:12

Hi JL,

Thanks for your input. I appreciate it.

Yes, all of the meetings I went to with my husband were open meetings. The members were very welcoming to me even though I was not in the program.

I clicked on the link for "Your Sacred Self", but it took me to a book called "Sacred Contracts". Funny, huh?

To me, it seems that some people associated with alcoholics truly are victims. If someone beats up their spouse in a drunken rage, or verbally abuses their children or does other destructive things, I would call those people victims. Same goes for those who are victimized by dysfunctional people. It seems like there is this unwritten rule that seeing oneself as a victim is a sin, but the way I see it, some people have truly been victimized, and there is no shame in making that observation. If a person sees themself as a perpetual victim, in all circumstances, that's different. That's unhealthy. But what's wrong with calling a spade a spade if someone has been victimized? Why can't they admit it? What's wrong with saying it?

Like I said, fortunately I've never been victimized by an alcoholic, but I was certainly victimized by some "dysfunctional" parents when I was young, and I was somewhat psychologically victimized in some adult relationships I had, although I do take some responsibility for staying in an unhealthy relationship too long. I feel no shame in that I have been victimized. It's the simple truth. Do you think these 12 step meetings would want me to blame myself or say that I somehow brought it on myself? I'll gladly take responsibility for my own behavior, but why should I take responsibility for someone else's?

 

Re: 12 step programs » Cass

Posted by JLx on October 11, 2004, at 9:12:29

In reply to Re: 12 step programs » JLx, posted by Cass on October 10, 2004, at 17:21:51

Hi Cass,

> I clicked on the link for "Your Sacred Self", but it took me to a book called "Sacred Contracts". Funny, huh?

Sorry, I must not have identified the right book on edit. "Your Sacred Self"

> To me, it seems that some people associated with alcoholics truly are victims. If someone beats up their spouse in a drunken rage, or verbally abuses their children or does other destructive things, I would call those people victims. Same goes for those who are victimized by dysfunctional people. It seems like there is this unwritten rule that seeing oneself as a victim is a sin, but the way I see it, some people have truly been victimized, and there is no shame in making that observation. If a person sees themself as a perpetual victim, in all circumstances, that's different. That's unhealthy. But what's wrong with calling a spade a spade if someone has been victimized? Why can't they admit it? What's wrong with saying it?

Well, you're talking about two different things there -- seeing others as victims and seeing oneself as a victim. If someone is raped or beaten, obviously the outside perspective is that they were victims of assault. This is fact, but it's also a matter of perspective. To the extent that a victim continues to self-identify as a victim, they'll stay stuck. One 12-step meeting I used to go to was "Incest *Survivors* Anonymous".

> Do you think these 12 step meetings would want me to blame myself or say that I somehow brought it on myself? I'll gladly take responsibility for my own behavior, but why should I take responsibility for someone else's?

Many people come into Al-Anon saying, in effect, "I'm here because of so and so. How do I get him/her to stop this behavior? My life is chaos and I'm so unhappy. He/she needs to change...then I can be happy, then my life will be better."

What Al-Anon will gently teach is, "You're here because you have a problem with so and so. You cannot make another person change. As long as your happiness depends on that other person changing, you have a problem. It's YOUR problem. The only person you can change is yourself. That's your way out of this chaos and unhappiness."

I remember the first time a therapist said to me at 18 when I was complaining about how unhappy my mother "made" me, "Why do you give her so much power?". What do you mean, "give her"?, I said, she just has it! :)

I was quite a veteran of therapy when I started in 12-step programs and I was amazed at how much therapy goes on there -- for free.

JL

 

Re: 12 step programs » JLx

Posted by Cass on October 11, 2004, at 11:51:21

In reply to Re: 12 step programs » Cass, posted by JLx on October 11, 2004, at 9:12:29

I do see your pont now, JLx. Although at this point, I don't have any idea how not to give a victimizer power over me except to exclude the person from my life. That's where I'm at right now. There is really no one in my life who makes me miserable on a regular basis because I have ended my relationship with them.

You write, "What Al-Anon will gently teach is, 'You're here because you have a problem with so and so. You cannot make another person change. As long as your happiness depends on that other person changing, you have a problem. It's YOUR problem. The only person you can change is yourself. That's your way out of this chaos and unhappiness.'"

It seems like Al Anon is teaching something almost mystical, to be detached like a buddha. THAT is something I truly do not know how to do.

 

Re: 12 step programs » Cass

Posted by JLx on October 11, 2004, at 21:38:10

In reply to Re: 12 step programs » JLx, posted by Cass on October 11, 2004, at 11:51:21

> I do see your pont now, JLx. Although at this point, I don't have any idea how not to give a victimizer power over me except to exclude the person from my life. That's where I'm at right now.

It's very hard to change. That's why meetings can be so helpful. A very common topic at Al-Anon was always "detachment" and letting go.

> You write, "What Al-Anon will gently teach is, 'You're here because you have a problem with so and so. You cannot make another person change. As long as your happiness depends on that other person changing, you have a problem. It's YOUR problem. The only person you can change is yourself. That's your way out of this chaos and unhappiness.'"
>
> It seems like Al Anon is teaching something almost mystical, to be detached like a buddha. THAT is something I truly do not know how to do.

Hmm...well, don't forget, that's my interpretation. Someone else might describe it differently. But yes, I was thinking the same thing when I wrote it, "sounds like Buddhism". It's also cognitive therapy too -- change the way you feel by changing how you think. I remember my sponsor saying to me once, "feelings are not facts". I'm reading "Feeling Good" right now, and there was that same quote in a discussion of the thinking distortion of "emotional reasoning".

I went to Al-Anon initially because of the advice in "Women Who Love Too Much" -- "if you have ever been involved with an alcoholic, go to Al-Anon". I'd never had the kind of tumultous, abusive relationship where I was just nuts over the drinking thing so I never would have thought of going otherwise, despite the fact that there's also a lot of alcoholics in my family, including my brother who I was close to at the time. The ideas are just very useful in many areas, such as how to deal with a difficult co-worker. A pity I forgot most of it this winter when someone was "driving me crazy"! ;)

JL

 

Re: 12 step programs

Posted by mi nación malvada on October 12, 2004, at 0:52:19

In reply to 12 step programs, posted by Cass on September 27, 2004, at 17:40:24

Cass, thanks for your kind words on that other page. I am familiar with 12 steps programs and have reviewed meta-analysis of most of the research that measured the efficacy of those programs in comparison to other approaches for behavioral modification among people damaged by alcohol consuumption. The meta-analsis suggests they are not very effective - certainly not as effective as more direct interventions by trained professionals.

That does not mean they are not effective for some people. In a book about treatment of alcoholism from Johns Hopkins University, an author concluded, rather frankly, that the programs work as a sort of "surrogate addiction."

The role of faith in 12 steps groups is not addressed in the Johns Hopkins text.

I would suggest the groups work primarily by providing social support, which, if we are extremely honest, is nothing different from crowd dynamics and peer pressure. It's simply a matter of choosing which peers one will allow to apply pressure.

Systems of faith tend to serve as binding agents for groups. AA has drawn a loose enough definition that faith can be general and vague, but still requires submission to group authority, vicariously, through submission to authority of a "higher power".

The "higher power", in my understanding, serves to identify an authority beyond the human realm; a realm which most of us -- if we are honest --recognize to be infected by arbitrary, often capricious authority. The 12 step programs don't require that we identify this higher power as anything more than our own inner voice - what is important for the operation of the group is collective surrender. Whatever is this "higher power" we embrace, it serves to legitimize the authority of the group, whose primary authority in turn is in the area of pressuring us to behave in a certain way.

Now, I read the warning against so-called agnostics and atheists discussing faith on this page. But the person who wrote those prejudicial phrases embraces a belief that "all have sinned and come short of the glory of god." My faith is not much different - my faith holds that our language, and our linguistic constructs, are grossly imperfect and never nearly as coherent as we pretend them to be. My faith holds that my rationale and my language is no more coherent than that of a bug, and expects to find no better rationale among any of my language-weilding human peers. That my faith belittles the integrity of my language tends to serve and adore (obligatory worship here, so F.O. doctor) the flow of life that existed before humans deigned to name everything and tried to fit all of reality into idealized categories. My faith holds that my life matters nothing at all and that life itself has no inherent meaning whatsoever. It's probably not a very good religion for nation-building but if I am going to have faith, I want it to be in something I can truly honestly believe.

 

Re: 12 step programs » mi nación malvada

Posted by Cass on October 12, 2004, at 18:48:13

In reply to Re: 12 step programs, posted by mi nación malvada on October 12, 2004, at 0:52:19

> Cass, thanks for your kind words on that other page.

You're welcome.

>The meta-analsis suggests they are not very effective - certainly not as effective as more direct interventions by trained professionals.
That does not mean they are not effective for some people.

I suppose that could be true. It may not work for everyone, but I do know that my husband's devotion to AA principles saved his life.

>In a book about treatment of alcoholism from Johns Hopkins University, an author concluded, rather frankly, that the programs work as a sort of "surrogate addiction."

There may be that element to it. I've noticed that many members are compulsive about attending meetings, but for severe alcoholics, their life depends on it.


> The "higher power", in my understanding, serves to identify an authority beyond the human realm; a realm which most of us -- if we are honest --recognize to be infected by arbitrary, often capricious authority. The 12 step programs don't require that we identify this higher power as anything more than our own inner voice - what is important for the operation of the group is collective surrender. Whatever is this "higher power" we embrace, it serves to legitimize the authority of the group, whose primary authority in turn is in the area of pressuring us to behave in a certain way.

This is a very objective, analytical view. I can't argue with the dynamics you describe, although, like I said, I am not a member of the program.


>...my faith holds that our language, and our linguistic constructs, are grossly imperfect and never nearly as coherent as we pretend them to be. My faith holds that my rationale and my language is no more coherent than that of a bug, and expects to find no better rationale among any of my language-weilding human peers.

Is there a connection to surrender in that idea? Knowing that we can't express or comprehend the "higher power", we simply surrender to its power.

>My faith holds that my life matters nothing at all and that life itself has no inherent meaning whatsoever. It's probably not a very good religion for nation-building but if I am going to have faith, I want it to be in something I can truly honestly believe.

Is this existentialism?

Thanks for all your input, mi nacion malvada. It was very interesting. You're obviously extremely educated and intelligent.

 

Re: 12 step programs » mi nación malvada

Posted by JLx on October 12, 2004, at 20:57:47

In reply to Re: 12 step programs, posted by mi nación malvada on October 12, 2004, at 0:52:19

> Cass, thanks for your kind words on that other page. I am familiar with 12 steps programs and have reviewed meta-analysis of most of the research that measured the efficacy of those programs in comparison to other approaches for behavioral modification among people damaged by alcohol consuumption. The meta-analsis suggests they are not very effective - certainly not as effective as more direct interventions by trained professionals.

The last I heard (and I admit it's been a few years since I was an active 12-stepper) the treatment centers were using some variation of the 12-steps if not actual AA meetings themselves. AA was formed because doctors and psychiatrists of the day were spectacularly unsuccessful in treating alcoholism.

What are the other behaviorial modification approaches and direct interventions that are now successful?

I also note that I think it's extremely hard to measure the efficacy of a self-help, voluntary spiritual program where the goal is not simply to quit drinking. Central to the self-help paradigm is that one must be ready. And how does one measure that a seed was planted? It's fairly common for people to cycle through rehab or AA several times before it "takes", for instance.

AA is not going to be everyone's cup of tea, but I would encourage anyone with a serious addiction or related problem to put it to the experiential test.

> That does not mean they are not effective for some people. In a book about treatment of alcoholism from Johns Hopkins University, an author concluded, rather frankly, that the programs work as a sort of "surrogate addiction."

I would agree with that, but also note that a more healthy surrogate addiction may be just the transition that some people absolutely need.

> The role of faith in 12 steps groups is not addressed in the Johns Hopkins text.

Then I would question their understanding. Anyone in "the program" would tell you it's a spiritual program. Faith is integral.

> I would suggest the groups work primarily by providing social support, which, if we are extremely honest, is nothing different from crowd dynamics and peer pressure. It's simply a matter of choosing which peers one will allow to apply pressure.

The social support is a major factor, I agree, but I think peer pressure is something of a misnomer. While there is some pressure to adhere to the tenants of the program itself (or else why be there?) most people experience a freedom from the kind of pressure they've been burdened with from the problem that's brought them there and how it has affected their lives. It's more than just a passing comfort to be with people who REALLY KNOW your own kind of pain.

>The 12 step programs don't require that we identify this higher power as anything more than our own inner voice - what is important for the operation of the group is collective surrender. Whatever is this "higher power" we embrace, it serves to legitimize the authority of the group, whose primary authority in turn is in the area of pressuring us to behave in a certain way.

The idea of surrendering to a higher power is to get beyond one's ego. Everything is perception, but in general, I would say that it's probably not listening to one's own inner voice so much as attempting to listen for something other than our voice.

"Be still and know that I am God" Psalms 46:10

Look within.
Be still.
Free from fear and attachment,
Know the sweet joy of living in the way.
--Buddha

When the five senses and the mind are still, and reason itself rests in silence, then begins the Path supreme. –Katha Upanishad

"Reason itself rests in silence". I like that.

I think what many people who study AA from outside fail to appreciate is that it IS a spiritual program. The language of the 12-steps is clumsy and the binding ingredient of addiction (or whatever the purpose of the group) complicates the picture, but at its heart it's teaching a method to transcend the ego-self, to achieve faith.

The first three steps are often shortened to:

First we came,
Then we came to,
Then we came to believe.

>My faith holds that my life matters nothing at all and that life itself has no inherent meaning whatsoever.

Do you mean this as an acknowledgement of perceived fact, or is this your chosen philosophy?

JL

 

Re: 12 step programs » JLx

Posted by mi nación malvada on October 12, 2004, at 23:16:26

In reply to Re: 12 step programs » mi nación malvada, posted by JLx on October 12, 2004, at 20:57:47

> >My faith holds that my life matters nothing at all and that life itself has no inherent meaning whatsoever.
>
> Do you mean this as an acknowledgement of perceived fact, or is this your chosen philosophy?
>
> JL
Its more a matter of having looked everywhere and not having found any meaning. The faith comes into play sort of like knowing that I looked for my lost keys everywhere, but not checking again under the sofa cushions because I already looked there and I have faith that they didnt' appear there since I last looked. That is more or less acknowledgement of a perceived fact, with faith that I can never really know all the facts.

> What are the other behaviorial modification approaches and direct interventions that are now successful?
>
Without digging up the literature, I can offer that the most successful approach is brief motivational interviews. They have been tried in several forms, to effect a variety of behaviors, first with diet and lifestyle for diabetics and heart patients and then latter in the context of alcohol-related pathologies. Google (www.google.com) the phrase to learn more, but essentially, the interviews explore reasons an individual wants to change (or not) and emphasizes that only the individual can affect change, then explore specific tactics for change. The process works in part because it is a repeated exercise. Few people recover from substance addictions after their first exposure to any treatment regime. That is part of the miracle of AA -- it provides a cost effective means of offering sustained interest in a person's change. Brief interviews work the same way - they don't invest lots of money in hour-long therapy sessions, but rather provide the necessary information in an affordable package that can be delivered as often as is needed to be effective. What hasn't been tried or tested, to my knowledge, is self-help groups such as AA where individuals enjoy specific training (aside from participation in group processes) in how to converse with individuals suffering from self-destructive behavior.

> The last I heard (and I admit it's been a few years since I was an active 12-stepper) the treatment centers were using some variation of the 12-steps if not actual AA meetings themselves. AA was formed because doctors and psychiatrists of the day were spectacularly unsuccessful in treating alcoholism.
>

Yes, AA and other forms of mutual self-help are a standard part of most long-term substance-related treatment modalities. But the shared element of the programs is not the reliance on a "higher power" but rather, the availability of peer support. That does not necessarily mean faith is not an important part of the process, but the requirement of faith among some self-help groups is not necessarily evidence that faith is the reason groups work. there is no evidence, to my knowledge, that self help groups that appeal to faith are any more effective than self-help groups that rely purely on social and behavioral considerations. We would need to travel beyond the united states, perhaps to the Peoples Republic of China, to find self-help groups that are predominately materialist in their world view. Regardless sustained western efforts to hurt and put down believers in Communist ideology, put-downs that are well documented by civil scholars and journalists world-wide, self-help approaches there under materialist ideals have served to bring that greater half of the world's population from unstable life under the rule of emporers to the thoughtful, compassionate and considerate culture it is today. There, faith has been in materialist ideals and in the human spirit. Any faithful spiritist who has no tolerance for faithful materialism, as is stated at the top of this page, should be driven from the comfort and privilage of a civil state.
> I also note that I think it's extremely hard to measure the efficacy of a self-help, voluntary spiritual program where the goal is not simply to quit drinking. Central to the self-help paradigm is that one must be ready. And how does one measure that a seed was planted? It's fairly common for people to cycle through rehab or AA several times before it "takes", for instance.


It was not easy for researchers to compile and weight evidence for various treatment modalities, either, but by using the best of scientific procedures, and by exhaustively reviewing the available research, at least two major meta-studies have reached more or less consistent results. They did succeed in creating a well-designed comparitive analysis relative to the behavior in question - self-destructive consumption of ethyl alcohol. They did not attempt to measure spiritual growth, nor in these studies, social integration beyond destructive alcohol-related habits.


> AA is not going to be everyone's cup of tea, but I would encourage anyone with a serious addiction or related problem to put it to the experiential test.
>

I wouldn't steer them away from AA, unless they hung up on the issue of a higher power, or the overuse of nicotene and caffiene among many AA groups. But I would advise anyone with a public health budget to spend to invest my tax dollars in training professionals who come in contact with those suffering from alcohol consumption - probation officers, social workers, physicians, teachers and even cops - in the specific tactics of breif motivational dialogues.


> I would agree with that, but also note that a more healthy surrogate addiction may be just the transition that some people absolutely need.

That is probably why the JH text advised it.

>>It's more than just a passing comfort to be with people who REALLY KNOW your own kind of pain.


That is beyond my area of expertise. I don't know anything about being among people who REALLY KNOW my kind of pain. The older I've gotten the more isolated I have become with my particular suffering.


> >The 12 step programs don't require that we identify this higher power as anything more than our own inner voice - what is important for the operation of the group is collective surrender. Whatever is this "higher power" we embrace, it serves to legitimize the authority of the group, whose primary authority in turn is in the area of pressuring us to behave in a certain way.

> The idea of surrendering to a higher power is to get beyond one's ego. Everything is perception, but in general, I would say that it's probably not listening to one's own inner voice so much as attempting to listen for something other than our voice.
>

Well, the "inner voice" angle works for several AA members I've met who don't embrace monotheistic faiths, and it has been accepted among AA groups I've encountered in a few states. Neurobiologically, there is some basis to the value of getting beyond the ego to listen to an inner voice. The ego is related to our social context. The "inner voice" can be informed by deeper experiences beyond the realization of our ego - that is where we map the voices of our ancestors, which some faiths hold to be our connection with whatever they describe as deity.

> Look within.
> Be still.
> Free from fear and attachment,
> Know the sweet joy of living in the way.
> --Buddha
>
> When the five senses and the mind are still, and reason itself rests in silence, then begins the Path supreme. –Katha Upanishad
>
> "Reason itself rests in silence". I like that.
>
> I think what many people who study AA from outside fail to appreciate is that it IS a spiritual program. The language of the 12-steps is clumsy and the binding ingredient of addiction (or whatever the purpose of the group) complicates the picture, but at its heart it's teaching a method to transcend the ego-self, to achieve faith.
>

Likewise, those who experience AA from the inside might not recognize the magic that is worked purely in the physical realm, though that magic might involve supplication to some other realm. To cite a fundamental tenent of formal logic, the correlation of faith with recovery doesn't mean faith was the causal factor. In the end, the question of whether faith is the cause of cures in faith-based modalities is irrelevant to the question of whether there is merit in faith. Faith holds that the object of faith is true, regardless whatever obstacles intervene.


I also suspect some who are familiar with theistic systems of faith might underestimate the spiritual nature of some peoples relationship with a world they beleive is entirely consistent with physical realities, though the intricate nature of those realities might not be well described in our lifetime or anytime in the near future. I am offended, hurt and put down when people associate my atheistic and agnostic tendencies with a lack of faith. If I had no faith, I could never trust other drivers at high speeds on two-lane roads. And I would be saving for retirement rather than trusting the material world to care for me and toss me out when it is done with me.


My faith has allowed me to let go of whatever objects I beleived in, including deities, and allowed me to believe that I am alive, regardless the fact my life is meaningless, and when I die, that event will be equally meaningless.

 

Re: 12 step programs » Cass

Posted by mi nación malvada on October 12, 2004, at 23:27:03

In reply to Re: 12 step programs » mi nación malvada, posted by Cass on October 12, 2004, at 18:48:13

>
> Is this existentialism?
>
> Thanks for all your input, mi nacion malvada. It was very interesting. You're obviously extremely educated and intelligent.


Not so well educated to recognize that my values are existential, though they might very well be. You are probably wise enough to know education might not equate with academic affiliation. I remember studying existentialism, but found the study to be rather, well, meaningless.

 

Re: blocked for week » mi nación malvada

Posted by Dr. Bob on October 13, 2004, at 0:11:32

In reply to Re: 12 step programs, posted by mi nación malvada on October 12, 2004, at 0:52:19

> an author concluded ... that the programs work as a sort of "surrogate addiction."

Please don't post anything that could lead others to feel accused or put down. I've asked you to be civil before, so now I'm blocking you from posting for a week.

If you or others have questions about this or about posting policies in general, or are interested in alternative ways of expressing yourself, please see the FAQ:

http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#civil

Follow-ups regarding these issues should be redirected to Psycho-Babble Administration. They, as well as replies to the above post, should of course themselves be civil.

Thanks,

Bob

 

Re: 12 step programs » mi nación malvada

Posted by JLx on October 13, 2004, at 12:02:31

In reply to Re: 12 step programs » JLx, posted by mi nación malvada on October 12, 2004, at 23:16:26

> Without digging up the literature, I can offer that the most successful approach is brief motivational interviews.

Briefly reviewing some of the sites that came up on Google, it appears that this is used most often with people identified as problem drinkers, such as college students binge drinking or others who come into Emergency Rooms with alcohol related accidents and so forth. I can see how this might be effective with this population.

One other purpose of the interviews appears to be to screen people for traditional treatment, which is a good idea as I think that there are important degrees of dependency and attendant problems.

>What hasn't been tried or tested, to my knowledge, is self-help groups such as AA where individuals enjoy specific training (aside from participation in group processes) in how to converse with individuals suffering from self-destructive behavior.

I'm not sure what you mean by that. Self-help is self-help, the responsibility to get better is personal and all are equal in the problem. Introducing the idea of one person having specific training to interact with another for a specific purpose centered on the other person getting better would change the dynamics of the group considerably, imo.

>there is no evidence, to my knowledge, that self help groups that appeal to faith are any more effective than self-help groups that rely purely on social and behavioral considerations.

Hmm...I wonder how that could even be studied. I do think it's great that there are other options.

> It was not easy for researchers to compile and weight evidence for various treatment modalities, either, but by using the best of scientific procedures, and by exhaustively reviewing the available research, at least two major meta-studies have reached more or less consistent results. They did succeed in creating a well-designed comparitive analysis relative to the behavior in question - self-destructive consumption of ethyl alcohol. They did not attempt to measure spiritual growth, nor in these studies, social integration beyond destructive alcohol-related habits.

Various treatment modalities as well as selected populations? Iow, did they recognize degrees of dependency? I think there are some people who can successfullly reduce their drinking, for instance and others who have to stop entirely becaues it's all or nothing for them. These are two different treatment populations, imo.

>But I would advise anyone with a public health budget to spend to invest my tax dollars in training professionals who come in contact with those suffering from alcohol consumption - probation officers, social workers, physicians, teachers and even cops - in the specific tactics of breif motivational dialogues.

Yes, that seems like an excellent idea.

> That is beyond my area of expertise. I don't know anything about being among people who REALLY KNOW my kind of pain. The older I've gotten the more isolated I have become with my particular suffering.

Well, one reason why I come here to this site is because there are people with shared problems who I feel I can relate to. Is your particular suffering beyond the scope of this site?

> Well, the "inner voice" angle works for several AA members I've met who don't embrace monotheistic faiths, and it has been accepted among AA groups I've encountered in a few states. Neurobiologically, there is some basis to the value of getting beyond the ego to listen to an inner voice. The ego is related to our social context. The "inner voice" can be informed by deeper experiences beyond the realization of our ego - that is where we map the voices of our ancestors, which some faiths hold to be our connection with whatever they describe as deity.

Sure, I was just noting that the idea of a spiritual "inner voice" has a different context/source than our usual mental chatter.

>the correlation of faith with recovery doesn't mean faith was the causal factor.

Of course.

>In the end, the question of whether faith is the cause of cures in faith-based modalities is irrelevant to the question of whether there is merit in faith. Faith holds that the object of faith is true, regardless whatever obstacles intervene.

Hmm...I have to quibble with that last, at least when it comes to 12-steps. The uniqueness of its approach to a "higher power" is first in acknowledging that it's self-chosen and can be "anything". And secondly that you don't have to FIRST believe, but just act as if you do. It's that action and your own experience that validates the "faith". Of course, it requires a willingness to try it in the first place, which may involve some degree of faith in the group otherwise it just sounds like nonsense. But if you're desperate and have tried and failed over and over and over with other approaches (which is the population that I think AA works best for) it can seem worth a try.

From what I can see, many people who believe in God, such as within Christianity or Islam, who then pray to God and receive benefits of some sort (peace of mind, guidance, comfort) then believe that that means that their image of God is real. "I asked Jesus Christ to come into my heart, I felt him, accepted him as savior and became born again...Jesus is Lord". (The subjective comes to be seen as objective.)

What AA says is that believing in *A* higher power, any higher power as you chose to define it, also has those benefits. (The subjective is acknowledged and stays subjective). This is an important distinction and is why the program can work for atheists and agnostics. It's like Buddhism in that it says this is experiential -- do it and test the belief yourself.

The 12-step program opened the spirituality door for me, but didn't subsequently convince me that there is a deity so much as persuade me -- through experience -- of the desirability of living a life with a spiritual dimension, something I had no interest in before when I knew I didn't "believe in God".

>I am offended, hurt and put down when people associate my atheistic and agnostic tendencies with a lack of faith.

I don't blame you. The use of language in describing spirituality/faith/belief is very problematical.
I see you've been given a one week ban (unfairly for that particular comment, imo). I hope you come back to this board, as I'm enjoying the discussion.

JL

 

Re: 12 step programs

Posted by Joslynn on October 22, 2004, at 9:24:19

In reply to 12 step programs, posted by Cass on September 27, 2004, at 17:40:24

Hi Cass. I go to 12-step groups and they have helped me immensely, though I still have a long way to go.

I go to ACoA meetings because my father is alcoholic. However, in the ACoA meeting I go to, we start out by saying it's for ACoAs and anyone else from a dysfunctional family. I also catch an AlAnon meetings sometimes. It's for the families and friends of alcoholics,, anyone who has been affected by alcoholism in a friend or family members, and that's the only requirement. A person doesn't have to view themselves as a victim or not as a victim. It doesn't get that abstract. As the spouse of an alcoholic, you definitely qualify to go.

Sometimes I will also go to CODA. In the preamble to that meeting, it simply says it's for anyone desiring healthy relationships. The partner of an addict is only one version of someone with codependency, by the way. An author once said that a codependent doesn't need another person to be codependent, they can be codependent with a lamp post!

But really, the best way for you to determine whether or not the meetings are for you is to attend at least six meetings. Then you can decide. I can share my experiences, you can do research, find things on the internet, etc., but the best way to decide is to go to the meetings.

Regarding AA, my father did eventually join and has been sober for almost 20 years.


This is the end of the thread.


Show another thread

URL of post in thread:


Psycho-Babble Faith | Extras | FAQ


[dr. bob] Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD, bob@dr-bob.org

Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.