Critics point to 12-step fellowships as being a negative influence on active involvement of members in mainstream society. This article summarizes that criticism and contrasts experiences of community-involved members from Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) with those of members of Narcotics Anonymous (NA). We asked these participants to reflect on how their non-fellowship community service had been influenced by their recovery in a 12-step fellowship. Few from either fellowship experienced discouragement of community activity outside the fellowship. The NA sample differed from the AA sample in some ways. NA members had less time in their fellowship and perceived their activity as relating to skills and encouragement they found in it. AA members were very long-term participants who saw their community work as one way of giving back what they had been given by their 12-step recovery. These findings suggest that long-term participation in a 12-step fellowship can lead members to wider participation in the community.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Alcoholics Anonymous World Services (1953). The twelve steps and twelve traditions.New York: Author.
2.
Alcoholics Anonymous World Services (2001). Alcoholics Anonymous: The story of how many thousands of men and women have recovered from alcoholism (4th ed). New York: Author.
3.
Alcoholics Anonymous World Services. (2002a). Estimates of groups and members.Box 459: News and Notes from the General Service Office of A.A.,48 (3), 3.
4.
Alcoholics Anonymous World Services (2002b). Prison chief sees AA as a lifeline to the alcoholic.About AA. Retrieved April 13, 2002, from http://www.aa.org.
5.
Alcoholics Anonymous World Services (2003). 2001 membership survey. Retrieved April 13, 2003, from http://www.aa.org.
6.
BeauchampD.E. (1980). Beyond alcoholism: Alcohol and public health policy.Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
BorkmanT. & SchubertM. (1995). Participatory action research as a strategy for studying self-help groups internationally. In LavoieF., BorkmanT., GidronG. (Eds.), Self-help and mutual aid groups: International and multicultural perspectives (pp. 45–68). New York: Haworth.
9.
BufeC. (1991). Alcoholics Anonymous: Cult or cure?San Francisco: See Sharp Press.
10.
EastlandL.S. (1995). Recovery as an interactive process: Explanation and empowerment in 12-step programs.Qualitative Health Research,5 (3), 292–314.
11.
HolstiO.R. (1969). Content analysis in the social sciences and humanities.Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
12.
KaskutasL.A. (1996). Predictors of self-esteem among members of Women for Sobriety.Addiction Research,4 (3), 273–281.
13.
KaslC. D. (1992). Many roads, one journey: Moving beyond the 12 steps.New York: HarperCollins.
14.
KlawE. & HumphreysK. (2000). Life stories of Moderation Management mutual help group members.Contemporary Drug Problems,27, 779–803.
15.
KurtzE. (1979). Not-God: A history of Alcoholics Anonymous.Center City, MN: Hazelden.
16.
KurtzL.F. (1997). Recovery, the twelve-step movement and politics.Social Work,42 (4), 403–405.
17.
KurtzL.F. (2001). Peer support: Key to maintaining recovery. In CoombsR.H. (Ed.), Addiction recovery tools: A practical handbook (pp. 257–272). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
18.
LewisD.C. (1999). Advocacy and 12-step anonymity.Brown University Digest of Addiction Theory and Application,18 (2), 12.
19.
MäkeläK. (1996). Alcoholics Anonymous as a mutual-help movement: A study in eight societies.Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press.
20.
MatonK.E. & SalemD.A. (1995). Organizational characteristics of empowering community settings: A multiple case study approach.American Journal of Community Psychology,23 (5), 631–656.
21.
MesserJ. & BorkmanT. (1996, November). Functions and limits of private and public benefit in creating social capital: The role of self-help mutual aid in building community capacity.Paper presented at the 25th Annual ARNOVA Conference,New York, NY.
National Center for Education Statistics (1997). Adult civic involvement: National household education survey. Retrieved May 17, 2003, from http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp.
27.
OlsonN. (2003). With a lot of help from our friends: The politics of alcoholism.Lincoln, NE: Hindsfoot Foundation Series on the History of Alcoholism Treatment.
28.
Project Match Research Group (1997). Matching alcoholism treatments to client heterogeneity: Project MATCH post-treatment drinking outcomes.Journal of Studies on Alcohol,58 (1), 7–29.
29.
PutnamR.D. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community.New York: Simon & Schuster.
30.
RoomR. (1993). Alcoholics Anonymous as a social movement. InMcCradyB.S. & MillerW.R. (Eds.), Research on Alcoholics Anonymous: Opportunities and alternatives (pp. 167–187). New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers Center of Alcohol Studies.
31.
StraussA. & CorbinJ. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
32.
de TocquevilleA. (1969). Democracy in America (G. Lawrence, Trans.). Garden City, NY: Anchor Books. (Original work published in 1835.)
33.
WhiteW.L. (1998). Slaying the dragon: The history of addiction and recovery in America.Bloomington, IL: Chestnut Health Systems.
34.
WhiteW.L. (2000, April). Toward a new recovery movement: Historical reflections on recovery, treatment and advocacy. Paper prepared for the Center for Substance Abuse Treatment Recovery Community Support Program Conference, “Working Together for Recovery.” Available at http://www.facesandvoicesofrecovery.org.
