Euthanasia as solution for progressive, fatal, incurable disease

Man in the Netherlands euthanised due to his alcohol addiction. It makes sense within the current paradigm.

It’s not just the ‘chronic primary brain disease‘ or ‘incurable, progressive, fatal disease‘ or the ‘selfish, dishonest, incapable, unmanageable, powerless, insane, defective, stupid‘, or the insane amount of financial resources that ineffective ‘treatment’ consumes, or how pointing out the absurdity of any of those things will earn you an ominous psychiatric evaluation … it’s a combination of all those things that make death seem like a logical choice. The cult does not help in their response to suicide: “This is what happens when you don’t work the program. Why didn’t he just go to a meeting/stay in treatment?”

Here is an argument against the disease model by addiction researcher Steven Slate.

Surgeon General’s Addiction Report

I noticed a few things about FACING ADDICTION IN AMERICA, The Surgeon General’s Report on
Alcohol, Drugs, and Health.

or religion

1. The non-discrimination notice (page 4) from the Health and Human Services Office for Civil Rights leaves out the word ‘religion’. On the OCR’s website, religion is mentioned, but in this report, they strangely leave that word out. “HHS complies with applicable federal civil rights laws and does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, or sex. HHS does not exclude people or treat them differently because of race, color, national origin, age, disability, or sex. ”

You can still file a complaint about religious coercion or discrimination here, even if you are led to believe from this report that the Department of Health and Human Services is exempt from complaints about religious coercion or discrimination.

2. The very relevant issue of religiosity in Alcoholics Anonymous (and all 12-step programs) is completely avoided. The report only has this to say, which most state Supreme Courts have disagreed with: “Within some communities, recovery is seen as being aligned with a particular religion, yet in other communities such as the AA fellowship, recovery is explicitly not religious but is instead considered spiritual.”

This is blatantly disregarding a very serious and very public issue with 12-step programs, which is that they are religious activities even while they continue to deny being religious activities. This is not the only thing that 12-step programs lie about…

3. The report includes blatant misrepresentation of statistics, such as: “About 50 percent of adults who begin participation in a 12-step program after participating in a treatment program are still attending 3 years later. Rates of continued attendance for individuals who seek AA directly without first going to treatment are also high, with 41.6 percent of those who start going to meetings still attending 9 to 16 years later.”

If this were true, then there would be a lot more than ~1.3 million people in AA, because every year around 1 million people are forced into AA through ‘treatment’ programs like drug court, rehab, mental health professionals, EAP programs. In fact, the dropout rate is extremely high, and also, the people that are in AA are not necessarily getting better. They may not even want to be there, in many cases, and attendance does not equal sobriety.

4. The report tries to make the ‘recovery movement’ a collection of shared values and beliefs, saying: “Some people who have had severe substance use disorders in the past but no longer meet criteria for a substance use disorder do not think of themselves as operating from a recovery perspective or consider themselves part of a recovery movement, even if they endorse some or all of the beliefs and values associated with recovery.” This is like how the movie The Anonymous People makes the 12-step community look much bigger than it is, by speaking for the vast majority of people who reject AA but do not reject ‘getting better’. Getting better often involves deprogramming from AA cult brainwashing and extricating themselves from abusive or controlling sponsors or treatment rackets. The values and beliefs are described as:

* People who suffer from substance use disorders (recovering or not) have essential worth and dignity.

This is not actually how the recovery movement works. People who are not ‘in recovery’ (in AA, according to AA traditions, or who deny being part of the ‘recovery movement’) are regularly shunned and insulted by AA members. It’s Tradition Three, in fact. You can see clear examples of this by the refusal of 12-step communities (and AA World Services itself) to acknowledge the worth and dignity of documentaries clearly concerned with helping people even if it means criticizing AA, such as The Business of Recovery and The 13th Step.

* The shame and discrimination that prevents many individuals from seeking help must be vigorously combated.

A whole lot of people *have* been to treatment and don’t want to be converted to the 12-step religious movement (Twelve Step Facilitation involves two goals: “Acceptance and Surrender” see the Project MATCH PDF manual for TSF.)

* Recovery can be achieved through diverse pathways and should be celebrated.

The ‘recovery movement’ has a very specific definition of what Recovery is. It always means acceptance of AA (as rejection of AA is seen as ‘misunderstanding’, ‘negativity’, ‘whining’ rather than informed decision-making). People who do not consider themselves as part of the ‘recovery movement’ do not accept that it is ‘many paths leading to AA’. In practice, the ‘recovery movement’ (NRAM), is about creating a culture of abstinence and growing more and more 12-step organizations that ‘facilitate’ 12-step involvement.

* Access to high-quality treatment is a human right, although recovery is more than treatment.

Again, this assumes that there is broad agreement that addiction is a lifelong disease which needs a lifetime of the 12-Step Program of Recovery to manage. There is NOT.

* People in recovery and their families have valuable experiences and encouragement to offer others who are struggling with substance use.

This is not necessarily true. There may be no value to what a person ‘in recovery’ has to offer someone who is struggling. The person ‘in recovery’ may never have really had a problem and may just like to control sponsees. A lot of families of people ‘in recovery’ have been discarded for the new AA family, and they may not encourage others to become born-again Christians shunning ‘enablers'; or they may actually have a grim prognosis for anyone using drugs, based on their dead family member who went through dozens of treatment programs.

5. One more example of misrepresentation (there are many): “A leading example of recovery-supportive houses is Oxford Houses, which are peer-run, self-sustaining, substance-free residences that host 6 to 10 recovering individuals per house and require that all members maintain abstinence. They encourage, but do not require, participation in 12-step mutual aid groups.”

Again, this is basically dishonest. The fourth tradition of Oxford Houses is: ” Oxford House is not affiliated with Alcoholics Anonymous or Narcotics Anonymous, organizationally or financially, but Oxford House members realize that only active participation in Alcoholics Anonymous and/or Narcotics Anonymous offers assurance of continued sobriety. further … “Every Oxford House member attributes his sobriety to Alcoholics Anonymous and/or Narcotics Anonymous. Each Oxford House member, as an individual, considers himself a member of AA and/or NA. Without that, sobriety would be short-lived.“. You also lose basic human rights at an Oxford House; you can be immediately evicted for any ‘slip’ (which you’ve been learning is a disease you have no control over…). The first time I went to a psychiatric hospital, I roomed with a man who was just kicked out of his sober home for getting drunk.

“It is not in the rules,” McGuire says, “but we all accept that the only way to stay sober is through a 12-step program, and we hold one another accountable. If someone is not going to meetings, they will be confronted.”

James Garrett LCSW-R — It ‘Works’ if You’re Paying Him, He Makes You Pay if You Don’t

UPDATE 10/31/18: This is new information that Samaritan Counseling should have been aware of (and possibly were) during the years they have spent censoring and ignoring my concerns…

CR-00249-13 – James A. Garrett – plead guilty to Offer File False Instrument 2nd, a class A misdemeanor in full satisfaction. On 7/21/14 a sentence of $500 fine was imposed. Mandatory surcharges and fine were paid in full.

During the time James Garrett was arrested on felony charges and plead guilty to a reduced ‘misdemeanor’ crime involving lying about his treatment, Samaritan Counseling insisted I continue ‘treatment’ with him, completely refused to hear my complaints on multiple occasions, and finally terminate-referred me to James Garrett. Samaritan Counseling has still not acknowledged any of these facts.


Samaritan Counseling (a ‘faith-based’ organization of state licensed social workers) forced me into ‘addiction treatment’, forcing me to pay for more and more treatment and to say that it was helpful to me even if it wasn’t.

Samaritan Counseling continued to insist I engage in treatment with this fraudulent provider even after he was charged with five felonies by state police for falsely reporting treatment success for money. I wasn’t on probation, but I was in a similar situation. They kind of manufactured a ‘probation’ for me by making me feel I had done something wrong by rejecting 12-step rehab, by shunning me from ‘non-addictions’ therapy until I was re-indoctrinated and compliant. When I made it clear that I was never going to become an Alcoholics Anonymous member after this nightmare, I was permanently banned from communications with Samaritan Counseling — the ‘natural consequence‘ of not ‘following all of [Jim Garrett’s] recommendations’ (which include not filing any complaints because that indicates ‘resentment’).

James Garrett is the co-author (with Judith Landau) of the 12-step interventionist’s manual Invitational Intervention (the ARISE method, which is like an extended Johnson intervention except that it denies it is coercive).

David Olsen, Oona Edmands, and Jenness Clairmont of Samaritan Counseling fell for this false equivalence of ‘treatment engagement’ with ‘sobriety’ — hook, line, and sinker. Or, they knew exactly what was going on and were used to getting away with it…

How is it that the State Police thought something was seriously criminally wrong here, but nobody in New York State Education Department or the Justice Center see any problem at all?

Jan 15 2014:

“SCHENECTADY — A certified substance abuse service provider has been accused of faking the results of drug tests that were supposed to be conducted on a Schenectady County probationer.

James A. Garrett, 65, of Averill Park, was charged this week with five felony counts of offering a false instrument for filing. He’s accused of providing the false information on five separate dates between August and December, according to papers filed in court.

In the documents, Garrett is accused of falsely certifying the probationer “was attending individual sessions, maintaining abstinence from alcohol and testing negative for drugs,” according to court papers.

The case was investigated by state police.

“Essentially, he was providing documentation that urine samples were submitted and OK when he wasn’t in fact performing that service,” state police spokesman Trooper Mark Cepiel said.

Garrett is accused of then receiving compensation for the fake results.

Garrett appeared Monday in Schenectady City Court and pleaded not guilty. He is being represented by attorney John Della Ratta. Della Ratta could not be reached for comment Tuesday.

Garrett is on the state Office of Alcoholism and Substance Abuse Services list of “Providers of Clinical Screening and Assessment Services for the Impaired Driving Offender,” according to a spokeswoman for the agency. He did that work on his own, not for a larger company, police said.

Schenectady County spokesman Joe McQueen said Tuesday county Probation Department officials checked and no other county probationers used Garrett, who was based outside of Schenectady County. The probationer is responsible for arranging for the services.

Garrett is also listed with the state Department of Education as a licensed clinical social worker. He has been a certified social worker since 1979, records show, and he is registered through 2016.

The alleged scheme was revealed by the probationer himself, prosecutors said. It was unclear what led to the revelation.

The probationer is identified in papers as Alan Cuomo. Cuomo, then 47, of Rotterdam, was arrested in 2012 in Guilderland and charged with driving while intoxicated. He pleaded guilty to felony driving while intoxicated and was sentenced to five years of probation, records show. His probation was then transferred to Schenectady County.

Schenectady County prosecutor William Sanderson said Tuesday that Cuomo is not expected to face separate criminal charges since the activity would likely still be going on if he hadn’t come forward. But Cuomo is expected to face a violation of his probation, which could result in jail time.”

James A. Garrett, Averill Park, NY
Profession: Certified Social Worker; Lic. No. 020876; Cal. No. 17669
Regents Action Date: November 9, 2001
Action: Application for consent order granted; Penalty agreed upon: 2 year suspension, execution of suspension stayed, probation 2 years.
Summary: Licensee admitted to charge of having been convicted of Criminal Facilitation in the Fourth Degree, a Class A Misdemeanor.

CR-00249-13 – James A. Garrett – plead guilty to Offer File False Instrument 2nd, a class A misdemeanor in full satisfaction. On 7/21/14 a sentence of $500 fine was imposed. Mandatory surcharges and fine were paid in full.


Someone is Lying and it Ain’t Me

Faced with complete contradiction, consider how you might determine who’s lying:

Client v. Addiction Specialist

“Would he (asking the other) tell me that rejecting treatment leads to certain death?”

“Would he (asking the other) tell me that working the treatment (steps) will lead to the Promises?”

You can make sense of the solution to this riddle by considering how quickly AA members will assign false words and experiences to others based on their own lies: “12-stepper Jim said I’m doing well.” “You’re DONE with Jim’s treatment? Good, I’m glad treatment with Jim is working out”, “Client A is not credible because she admitted to only sometimes being honest with self and others on worksheet connected to treatment (client is a LIAR)”. “It has saved millions. The alternative is jails, institutions and — bum bum bummm — Certain Death!”

The argument that someone must be lying also raises some interesting legal considerations and potential misjudgements, so for the New York State Supreme court to conclude that rehab clients are not credible (in ‘denial’, not honest with self…), especially based on ‘evidence’ of defective character manufactured in the course of typical 12-step treatment, in relation to the assumption of rigorous honesty among 12-step treatment providers, should probably be revisited.

Samsaratan Counseling

I filed a complaint with the Justice Center which was formed to collect complaints against OASAS and the NYS Education Department and other organizations that cannot seem to manage complaints. I filed it against the NYS Education Department Office of Professions for basically refusing to investigate ‘the AA thing’ (as the investigator said…’we don’t look into that‘), and that the complete refusal to even acknowledge this complaint had led me to be hospitalized for suicidal ideation multiple times over the past few years, each time after having my complaint ‘officially’ disregarded. Thursday morning at about 5:30 am the Oakland Police called my phone and told me to meet them at my door. About eight cops told me that someone told them I was dangerous to myself, but could not tell me who did. I told them about my complaint and that i was not going to kill myself, that this was just yet another complaint that I have been trying to get someone to acknowledge for about 2.5 years now… but they proceeded to handcuff me, put me into a police car until an ambulance came, then drove me to a psychiatric hospital. I told them I did not agree to go. So, I was there for the last five days, where I was again expected to enroll in a AA treatment center called Cherry Hill in the AHS system. I refused. Today I was discharged, and found my way home with no shoes, keys or wallet. I’ll be waiting for the ~$30k bill that MediCal will probably be paying.

Here’s an investigative report on the hospital I was involuntary sent to last week (yes I slept on that floor in that room, but I did have a cot):

Then I got a letter stating that my condition as described by the hospital did not merit inpatient treatment. So that’s another mystery.


It seems that even if the psychiatric doctors no longer think I’m insane, somebody (probably someone in New York State government or from Samaritan Counseling Center, or both) still wants me to be ‘treated’ instead of acknowledging my complaint.

I had already gone bankrupt the year before for an about 7 day stay at this John George place and getting this bill for $4440/day (the first two of which I did sleep on that floor). IMAG0030

Anyone v. NYS Office of Alcoholism and Substance Abuse Services (OASAS 13-Stepping)

Amos Doctor v. OASAS (PDF) (Doctor appears to be the surname)

Here is a case of sexual harassment by an OASAS counselor where the AA curriculum of admitting ‘honesty’ problems was used to completely undermine the complaint.

“At the conclusion of that hearing, the arbitrator dismissed all four charges and specifications against petitioner finding, among other things, that the testimony offered by client A and the intern was not credible. Specifically, the arbitrator noted that client A admitted that she had “feelings” for petitioner and that she had acknowledged – on a self-assessment form completed in connection with her treatment – that she was only sometimes honest with herself and others.”

(Client C was also found to have admitted she was ‘honest with herself and others only some of the time’). The intern was also found to be ‘not credible’.

So, after being told to depend on a sober person for her very life, and then being told that the reason she doesn’t recover is because she has problems with being honest, her complaint is thrown out because she had ‘feelings’ for her counselor and had admitted as part of her 12-step ‘work’ that anything she says might be a lie.

This is How it Works. New York State doesn’t look into the ‘AA thing’. But actually, my whole blog is about this exact dynamic: client develops feelings for the person supposedly saving his/her life, counselor gets off on it, client gets confused by being constantly described as powerless, insane, defective, selfish and dishonest, then counselor denies everything and says addicts just make shit up out of nowhere for no comprehensible reason.

So, I guess it’s only OK to fool around with clients if the client has admitted on paper that s/he is “constitutionally incapable of being honest”, according to New York State Supreme Court. Doing the mandatory AA homework is equivalent to signing all your rights away. In AA, ‘honesty’ is directly correlated to ‘sobriety’, and people who are not helped by the program (or the ‘treatment’ providers) are encouraged to admit problems with ‘honesty’ and confess their thoughts and feelings, which are then inevitably used against them.

‘Those who do not recover are people who cannot or will not completely give themselves to this simple program, usually men and women who are constitutionally incapable of being honest with themselves. There are such unfortunates.’