An article in the April 2015 issue of Atlantic Monthly (The Irrationality of Alcoholics Anonymous") might kill a lot of alcoholics. Especially if they read and believe what it says.
The author, Gabrielle Glaser, makes the case that Alcoholics Anonymous is ineffective. She cites other treatments that she claims work better. And she says the science is there.
Some supposedly teach alcoholics to drink in moderation. The others involve various treatment methods - including drugs.
She lauds these science based approaches for treating alcoholism. But something she fails to mention is how to pay for these treatment programs and therapies. After all, AA is free - though one can donate.
The bulk of those I've met in meetings have little money. How will they pay for expensive drugs like Vivitrol? Or Naltrexone?
Now I agree with some of what she says. For example there are no scientific studies about AA's success rate. Duh. The program is "anonymous" for a reason. Thus, there are no studies.
And she fails to discuss the strong support system in AA. There's no treatment where one has a free sponsor to support recovery. And they're there 24 hours a day if needed. In AA one can find help with almost anything. One just has to ask.
Treatment programs, doctors, therapists, and counselors immediately stop helping if a client can't pay. And that's okay. That's how the medical business works; they have to eat too.
In reality, many medical interventions have a marginal long-term success rate. Does that mean we should stop treating people? Just because the treatment isn't 100% successful?
People like Glaser should pay homage to Bill W. and Doctor Bob and honor them for those they've helped.
Because no has found anything offering the same positive results as AA - and at no cost.
Click here to email John
