Guest guest Posted March 2, 2000 Report Share Posted March 2, 2000 Mikena@... wrote: > > > Any SMART group which continues to sign court/employer mandatory > > attendance slips is, like AA, indirectly supporting coercion and > > control-freakism. > > > But also keeping some poor soul out of jail. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Bad point, Mike. If A.A. made a formal policy- a 13th Tradition, if you like- that banned the signing of slips, it would not mean even one more person in jail for even one more day. A.A. doesn't keep law-breakers out of jail, probation/ parole does. If signed slips were unavailable, those agencies would simply redefine their procedures. The only thing A.A. accomplishes through the signing of slips is to report people's religious activities to the authorities. To support that policy is despicable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 29, 2000 Report Share Posted March 29, 2000 " sue styd " wrote: original article:/group/12-step-free/?start=14224 > A fellow who was court-ordered to AA has been attending SMART > instead. The courts had accepted his slip signed by SMART. > --------------------------- SMART is a pretty cool alternative. But I am troubled by the statement above. I also was " allowed " to have my coerced attendance slips signed by SMART coordinators instead of AA chairs (after filing my lawsuit). I personally cannot feel thrilled with this. I did not feel any need for SMART meetings, did not have any problem with drinking by that time, and experienced the required time away from home (including travel time, about 3 hours, two evenings a week) as intrusive and damaging to my relationship with my son. Coerced " help " is WRONG!!! Why should any sane adult have to have a set number of attendance slips signed as " proof " they are being " helped " ?? Especially from support groups which describe themselves as " voluntary " , " take what you need and leave the rest " , or in the case of SMART, that " we discourage developing a dependency on meetings, and feel everyone should decide for him/herself how long to attend " ? Coerced attendance satisfies the fantasies of the person/entity doing the coercing, but does very little good for the coerced attendee. The only way to put an attend to the infantilizing practice of requiring X number of meetings per week for Y number of weeks, with proof, is for meeting chairs and facilitators to start doing something such as the following: sign the FIRST slip presented by the coerced attendee, and to it attach a note to the court, EAP, or whatever offending agency, stating that SMART (or whichever support group) is a voluntary group for mature adults which is supposed to be attended anonymously, that whether one needs to attend recovery support meetings, and/or for how long, is a totally individual decision and varies from person to person, and that therefore SMART (or whichever) cannot participate in the practice of signing coerced-attendance slips. Any SMART group which continues to sign court/employer mandatory attendance slips is, like AA, indirectly supporting coercion and control-freakism. ~Rita ----------------------- > > Went to the SMART meeting last night, which is becoming > sparsely attended due partially to the fact that this IS > the goal. One DOES " graduate " and gets on with their life. > When people are not there, it is not asssumed that they are > drinking, it is assumed that they have better things to do. > > I am happy to report that the " newbie " there was a chemical > dependency counselor. He was disturbed by the idea of > referrring everyone to 12-step programs. He is now searching > out alternatives that he may offer. He left with a ton of > SMART literature and promises to return next week to learn > more. > > A fellow who was court-ordered to AA has been attending SMART > instead. The courts had accepted his slip signed by SMART. > > When someone drinks again at SMART, they do not lose their > sobriey or their " chip. " There aren't any damn chips. One > fellow drank again after one year. He is considered to have > " one year, less a few days. " With this refreshing approach, > he seems to be back on track, rather than heading towards a > downhill spiral. > > It's so nice to have this alternative. > > Sue > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 29, 2000 Report Share Posted March 29, 2000 " Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere " Luther King (morbid trivia: I happen to have been born April 4, 1968 the morning Dr. King was shot) > >Reply-To: 12-step-freeegroups >To: 12-step-freeeGroups >Subject: Re: SMART meeting >Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 14:42:44 -0800 > > > I also was " allowed " to have my coerced attendance slips signed by >SMART coordinators instead of AA chairs (after filing my lawsuit). I >personally cannot feel thrilled with this. I did not feel any need for >SMART meetings, did not have any problem with drinking by that time, >and experienced the required time away from home (including travel >time, about 3 hours, two evenings a week) as intrusive and damaging to >my relationship with my son. > > Coerced " help " is WRONG!!! Why should any sane adult have to have >a set number of attendance slips signed as " proof " they are being > " helped " ?? Especially from support groups which describe themselves as > " voluntary " , " take what you need and leave the rest " , or in the case of >SMART, that " we discourage developing a dependency on meetings, and >feel everyone should decide for him/herself how long to attend " ? >Coerced attendance satisfies the fantasies of the person/entity doing >the coercing, but does very little good for the coerced attendee. > > The only way to put an attend to the infantilizing practice of >requiring X number of meetings per week for Y number of weeks, with >proof, is for meeting chairs and facilitators to start doing something >such as the following: sign the FIRST slip presented by the coerced >attendee, and to it attach a note to the court, EAP, or whatever >offending agency, stating that SMART (or whichever support group) is a >voluntary group for mature adults which is supposed to be attended >anonymously, that whether one needs to attend recovery support >meetings, and/or for how long, is a totally individual decision and >varies from person to person, and that therefore SMART (or whichever) >cannot participate in the practice of signing coerced-attendance slips. > > Any SMART group which continues to sign court/employer mandatory >attendance slips is, like AA, indirectly supporting coercion and >control-freakism. > >~Rita > ______________________________________________________ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 29, 2000 Report Share Posted March 29, 2000 miken-@... wrote: original article:/group/12-step-free/?start=14250 > In a message dated 3/29/00 5:55:16 PM Eastern Standard Time, > railroadrita@... writes: > > > Any SMART group which continues to sign court/employer mandatory > > attendance slips is, like AA, indirectly supporting coercion and > > control-freakism. > > > But also keeping some poor soul out of jail. > ---------------------------- And why would you think that following my suggestion, i.e. of signing the first slip and adding " Mr. Herb Levy attended tonight's meeting of SMART Recovery. However, as SMART is a voluntary support group, and we feel recovery group participation is not necessary for all people to stay sober, we will not condone or participate in coerced attendance, and will not sign any further attendance verification for Mr. Levy " , would put Herb Levy in jail? And if you do believe that the conscientious objection of a SMART or other meeting coordinator will put someone in jail (or get them fired), then are you saying that SMART is part of the criminal justice system (or of company managements)? This issue is very important and emotional to me; my company's EAP required me to attend, IN ADDITION TO paid " treatment " , 9 months of recovery group attendance in order to keep my job. If the coordinators had written a note such as the above, the EAP could not have required this; after all, they are not the boss of, and have no power over, the meeting coordinators. Do you disagree with this? ~Rita Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 29, 2000 Report Share Posted March 29, 2000 Indeed, I would very upset if I had been " sentenced " to attend recovery groups when they were not needed as in your case Rita. In my case, I opted to attend court ordered AA instead of going to jail. I have never regretted that decision. What I do regret is that I did not have a choice in my recovery program. It was AA or jail. No choice. I speak for myself only when I say that having to get that slip signed was helpful to me. It forced me to stay abstinent long enough for me to decide that it was a pretty good idea. Out of curiousity, I would wonder how many here " sobered up " on their own accord. Very few, I would expect. It seems to usually be someone else's idea, not our own. And so, for me, the court system made that decision. Did they take away my rights? Sure. People who drive as drunk as I did shouldn't have any anyway. I was a danger and I'm real darn lucky I didn't kill anyone. What is the solution when it comes to alcohol dependent drunk drivers? Jail? Court ordered AA? Or perhaps an alternative, which I wish I would have had. Sue >Subject: Re: SMART meeting >Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 17:08:04 -0800 > > >miken-@... wrote: >original article:/group/12-step-free/?start=14250 > > In a message dated 3/29/00 5:55:16 PM Eastern Standard Time, > > railroadrita@... writes: > > > > > Any SMART group which continues to sign court/employer mandatory > > > attendance slips is, like AA, indirectly supporting coercion and > > > control-freakism. > > > > > But also keeping some poor soul out of jail. > > >---------------------------- > > And why would you think that following my suggestion, i.e. of >signing the first slip and adding " Mr. Herb Levy attended tonight's >meeting of SMART Recovery. However, as SMART is a voluntary support >group, and we feel recovery group participation is not necessary for >all people to stay sober, we will not condone or participate in coerced >attendance, and will not sign any further attendance verification for >Mr. Levy " , would put Herb Levy in jail? > > And if you do believe that the conscientious objection of a SMART >or other meeting coordinator will put someone in jail (or get them >fired), then are you saying that SMART is part of the criminal justice >system (or of company managements)? > > This issue is very important and emotional to me; my company's EAP >required me to attend, IN ADDITION TO paid " treatment " , 9 months of >recovery group attendance in order to keep my job. If the coordinators >had written a note such as the above, the EAP could not have required >this; after all, they are not the boss of, and have no power over, the >meeting coordinators. Do you disagree with this? > >~Rita > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ >Good friends, school spirit, hair-dos you'd like to forget. >Classmates.com has them all. And with 4.4 million alumni already >registered, there's a good chance you'll find your friends here: >http://click./1/2622/1/_/4324/_/954378495/ > >-- 20 megs of disk space in your group's Document Vault >-- /docvault/12-step-free/?m=1 > ______________________________________________________ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 29, 2000 Report Share Posted March 29, 2000 " elizabeth b. " wrote: original article:/group/12-step-free/?start=14282 > " Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere " > Luther King > (morbid trivia: I happen to have been born April 4, 1968 the > morning Dr. King was shot) My brothers 12th birthday. Pity they didnt shoot him instead. Pete from a " dysfunctional " aka abusive family Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 30, 2000 Report Share Posted March 30, 2000 I believe Mike honestly thinks that by signing the slips AA is doing someone good. ly I don't understand that position. To me what you've pointed out below is excruciatingly obvious. If AA were to stop signing slips the courts would have no choice but to redefine the policy to exclude slips. Continuing to sign the slips only ensures two things. 1. Continuance of the policy. 2. Forced recruitment of people into AA. Where AA gets a crack at indoctrinating them. Moving AA from a position of attracting new members to coercing them. All under the guise of helping them. This seems somewhat of a circular argument to me. We sign the slips to help the needy alcoholic stay out of jail while at the same time we realize if we didn't sign them the courts would stop forcing those needy alcoholics to get them signed in the first place which means we wouldn't have to sign them in the first place which means they might not get the help they need so we sign them which brings us back to step one. I suppose some may not realize that not signing the slips would bring an end to the requirement. I must confess I'm curious as to what they believe would happen. I'm sitting here telling myself that they can't possibly believe that all the people effected would go to jail. What kind of logic is that? I have not doubt that, for the most part, the people doing the signing think they're doing good. I think the question to ask here is Who/What is getting the most benefit by signing the slip? Just a few thoughts from the meandering's of a madman. Re: SMART meeting Mikena@... wrote: > > Any SMART group which continues to sign court/employer mandatory > > attendance slips is, like AA, indirectly supporting coercion and > > control-freakism. > > * But also keeping some poor soul out of jail * Bad point, Mike. If A.A. made a formal policy- a 13th Tradition, if you like- that banned the signing of slips, it would not mean even one more person in jail for even one more day. A.A. doesn't keep law-breakers out of jail, probation/ parole does. If signed slips were unavailable, those agencies would simply redefine their procedures. The only thing A.A. accomplishes through the signing of slips is to report people's religious activities to the authorities. To support that policy is despicable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 1, 2000 Report Share Posted April 1, 2000 Hi Sue. Can't argument about your use of the laws to serve your interests. But I don't think there should be an opportunity to convert punishment into treatment. These two things should IMO be kept apart, but there should always be an offer for treatment. This would mean that the punishment had to be reduced for all, and that anybody truly sorry for their offense could get help preventing more transgressions. But by mixing these things, treatment could be associated with punishment, and this would counteract the fundamentals of treatment principles. And create a society of hypocrites. To me, this is more a question about human dignity than gaining some minor benefits. Ultimately, a society without individual dignity, which implies to take your sentence, could easily transform into fascism and racism. Bjørn sue styd wrote: Indeed, I would very upset if I had been "sentenced" to attend recovery groups when they were not needed as in your case Rita. In my case, I opted to attend court ordered AA instead of going to jail. I have never regretted that decision. What I do regret is that I did not have a choice in my recovery program. It was AA or jail. No choice. I speak for myself only when I say that having to get that slip signed was helpful to me. It forced me to stay abstinent long enough for me to decide that it was a pretty good idea. Out of curiousity, I would wonder how many here "sobered up" on their own accord. Very few, I would expect. It seems to usually be someone else's idea, not our own. And so, for me, the court system made that decision. Did they take away my rights? Sure. People who drive as drunk as I did shouldn't have any anyway. I was a danger and I'm real darn lucky I didn't kill anyone. What is the solution when it comes to alcohol dependent drunk drivers? Jail? Court ordered AA? Or perhaps an alternative, which I wish I would have had. Sue >Subject: Re: SMART meeting >Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 17:08:04 -0800 > > >miken-@... wrote: >original article:/group/12-step-free/?start=14250 > > In a message dated 3/29/00 5:55:16 PM Eastern Standard Time, > > railroadrita@... writes: > > > > > Any SMART group which continues to sign court/employer mandatory > > > attendance slips is, like AA, indirectly supporting coercion and > > > control-freakism. > > > > > But also keeping some poor soul out of jail. > > >---------------------------- > > And why would you think that following my suggestion, i.e. of >signing the first slip and adding "Mr. Herb Levy attended tonight's >meeting of SMART Recovery. However, as SMART is a voluntary support >group, and we feel recovery group participation is not necessary for >all people to stay sober, we will not condone or participate in coerced >attendance, and will not sign any further attendance verification for >Mr. Levy", would put Herb Levy in jail? > > And if you do believe that the conscientious objection of a SMART >or other meeting coordinator will put someone in jail (or get them >fired), then are you saying that SMART is part of the criminal justice >system (or of company managements)? > > This issue is very important and emotional to me; my company's EAP >required me to attend, IN ADDITION TO paid "treatment", 9 months of >recovery group attendance in order to keep my job. If the coordinators >had written a note such as the above, the EAP could not have required >this; after all, they are not the boss of, and have no power over, the >meeting coordinators. Do you disagree with this? > >~Rita > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ >Good friends, school spirit, hair-dos you'd like to forget. >Classmates.com has them all. And with 4.4 million alumni already >registered, there's a good chance you'll find your friends here: >http://click./1/2622/1/_/4324/_/954378495/ > >-- 20 megs of disk space in your group's Document Vault >-- /docvault/12-step-free/?m=1 > ______________________________________________________ eGroups.com Home: /group/12-step-free www. - Simplifying group communications Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.