Here is the former Drug Czar Robert DuPont. At 6:30 you can hear about the ‘between the eyes repeatedly with a 2×4′ method of getting professionals into ‘Recovery’, which got Talbott sued (successfully) for false imprisonment and medical malpractice in 1999. DuPont was also a consultant for the Straight, Inc. program that was shut down by multiple lawsuits alleging abuse and malpractice, several of which were successful. He is part of a long history of this abusive industry.

Investigator Patrick Flynn told me on the phone when he was closing out my case that 1. My therapist denied everything so it was “he said she said” and 2. ‘We don’t look into the AA thing’. So, after three attempts at getting New York State to acknowledge a very serious problem with two-hatting therapists over the course of two years, this has always been and is still their official position, regardless of how it is clearly willful negligence.

New York State should, of course, acknowledge facts like:

– Treatment coercion is illegal. When networks of people are coached to impose ‘consequences’ for not entering treatment, it’s still coercion even if you say it’s not. It may even be a form of insurance fraud.
– Religious indoctrination into AA is a First Amendment violation, as well as a bad treatment for most conditions. It is ineffective and should not be protected from malpractice and fraud complaints.
– The 12-step treatment industry is psychologically abusive and extortionist in its approach. This is verifiable and not up for debate. ‘Treatment’ is life-and-death necessity until it fails or it’s questioned, and then suddenly “AA isn’t treatment”.

Finally, other abuses are easily hidden under the guise of ‘help’ in a 12-step organization, and also often arise out of the confusion that 12-step programs create. It is not necessary to lie to your clients, seduce them, or punish them to ‘motivate change’. The ‘unforced forces’ of better arguments have their own power.

In my opinion, it should be standard practice for New York State Education Department to inform therapists accused of 12-step coercion that this is not acceptable for a variety of reasons and they are being warned and will face consequences to their license status if new complaints arise. It’s the f*cking EDUCATION department; they need to be setting some standards for basic knowledge about treatment options.

There are a couple of recent documentaries on the culture of Alcoholics Anonymous (see The 13th Step the film which documents systemic psychologically damaging dynamics), and the $35 billion dollar business arm called the ‘rehab’ industry (thebusinessofrecovery.com which documents deceptive business practices). Those films have only started being distributed in the last year, and not widely. A book called The Sober Truth: Debunking the Bad Science behind AA and the Rehab Industry by Lance Dodes also takes a good critical look at evidence.

While these are newer attempts to inform the public about real problems with AA, complaints are not new and have been increasing. Rehabilitation programs like Straight, Inc. in the eighties were controversial and faced lawsuits for false imprisonment and abusive practices. In 1999 a doctor won a case against a rehab program for false imprisonment, fraud and medical malpractice. In 2001 the Department of Justice issued a statement that any use of DoJ funds to indoctrinate religion (specifically 12-step programs) was a violation of the 1st Amendment, yet my own investigation found that state programs are still very actively involved in spreading the AA message.

Several cases have set precedent that it is illegal for judges to order people to AA, and yet they still do it. Many doctors who have heard about getting help with an addiction problem entered into Physicians’ Health Programs only to find that they will lose their licenses if they don’t attend a 90-day rehab (at their own expense), 3 AA meetings a week (for years) or try to dispute mandatory, random drug tests (paid for by them). These programs establish behavioral contracts with the license as leverage and any violation adds YEARS to the contract and severe consequences (such as loss of license, with no ability to dispute or argue). (see disruptedphysician.com ) Doctors, nurses, pilots who have lost their livelihood, when they don’t kill themselves, sometimes realize they have nothing to lose anymore and decide to speak out. Many of them straightforwardly identify the system as a racket, unfair, and ‘kafkaesque’.

Sober living environments are presented as a treatment option, and often turn out to be not much more than slumlording as a non-profit — no actual treatment, no medical oversight, but maybe a pee testing scheme to make money for each ‘head’ from insurance companies. These places are often even considered ‘rehabs’ or halfway houses but often are nothing but houses with AA members in them.

AA through its pamphlets teaches members how to promote these professional systems and rehabs through the media, and yet denies any involvement or responsibility. What is called the New Recovery Advocacy Movement is the cultural cooption of AA alternatives (like MM and SMART) and tries to gather them all under the umbrella of ‘spiritual recovery’ and the rehab and sober living industry. One example of this is a movie called The Anonymous People which found some data about 20 million people in America being considered ‘in recovery’ because they had a substance use issue and resolved it, and used that to enhance the image of ‘Recovery Culture. In reality there are only about 2 million people in AA and the majority recover without treatment or religious conversion, and there is even evidence that treatment is counterproductive. I could go on and on.

This is all to say that someone approaching AA with a methodological atheist standpoint will be tempted to reinterpret AA in secular terms assuming that the interpretation will explain ‘how it works’, when it actually doesn’t (as treatment). The assumption that it works in the first place is only an assumption. Even the concept of needing a support group is mostly an invention of AA, and prematurely assumed to be an important aspect of any secular approach.

A closer look at evidence, even the positive evidence such as experts claiming it works or that “they don’t force people into AA anymore” doesn’t stand up to scrutiny, and these dynamics (such as the fact that critics may never be allowed to BE professionals in the recovery industry and may in fact not want a piece of it) does more to explain how racketeering, censorship and misinformation works than how a treatment for ‘alcoholism’ works.