I was overjoyed to see that Salon.com published a large excerpt from the first chapter of my book. (The headline may still be on the front page!) Until I saw the title: Addiction is Not a Disease. Good so far… Then: How AA and 12-step programs erect barriers while attempting to relieve suffering. Not so good.
They got the phrasing directly out of the excerpt (i.e., the book), so I can’t fault them on that. But now I understand the double-edged buzz/sting of being taken out of context. Nice to be taken… Thanks, guys! But does it have to be out of context?
There’s been enough AA bashing in the last…I have no idea how many years….to just give it a rest. Anyone knowledgeable about the addiction field knows that their success rates are far from stellar: estimated at 5-10% by Lance Dodes (an articulate critic) and other sources. Take a closer look and you’ll see that the way they estimate success is rather stringent, as it depends on total abstinence, and many of us believe that AA/12-step groups do not serve a cross-section of addicts. They serve those who are in the worst trouble. And they’re free. And they’re a support group, not a treatment organization. Etc. Etc.
It’s true that there’s been a sort of merger between 12-step programs and the disease model, mostly manifested in institutional settings such as residential rehabs. This has been going on for decades, due mostly to the influence of mainstream medicine and the coercive power of the court system. It’s exemplified by the doctrine that addicts had better follow the 12 steps in order to fight off their disease — or else. Of course I oppose this view. But it’s not the heart of AA/12-step philosophy as I understand it. Rather, it’s an unfortunate branch in the evolution of a rehab industry that often feeds off the worst of both worlds.
If you want to get an even-handed picture of the pros and cons, truths, myths, and lies about AA/12-step, I suggest you go to Anne Fletcher’s recent article: Setting the AA Record Straight.
I wanted to set my own record straight. Salon.com has a huge circulation. I respect a lot of their coverage, and I’m always up for healthy debate.
But, as my readers know, my book is about reframing addiction as a learning process, countering the dominant view of addiction as a disease, showing why this reframing is scientifically valid, showing why it makes sense in the lives of those affected, and suggesting implications for new perspectives in the science and treatment of addiction.
It’s not about AA.
Leave a Reply to Truthfulone Cancel reply