The Science of Choice in Addiction
The Irrationality of Alcoholics Anonymous
Overview of AA Critique
AA’s all-or-nothing approach made J.G. feel like a defeated misfit. In part, AA was alienating for J.G. because he had no faith in God when AA emphasizes surrendering to a Higher Power.
AA told J.G. he had no other treatment options: “Either embrace AA or die.”
J.G. eventually left AA and found effective treatment elsewhere.
AA’s claims of success are less than other studies’ findings. Some claims for AA are as high as 75%.
However, Harvard’s Lance Dodes arrives at a success rate of 5-8%.
According to The Handbook of Alcoholism Treatment Approaches, AA is ranked 38 out of 48 methods.
Alcoholics suffer high rates of mental health problems. AA is not equipped to address these.
AA truisms and wisdom have become culture’s sacred cow. You’re not allowed to criticize AA without being branded an insensitive lout who is “killing people” by discouraging them from joining AA.
This is an emotional, not a rational or critical thinking approach to disagreement.
The AA dogma that you must “hit rock bottom” before you really seek recovery is a dangerous message, according to many addiction treatment professionals. It would be like telling a 250-pound man to gain even more weight, soaring to 650 pounds, before he “got serious” about losing weight. By that time, he might be dead.
AA is criticized for it’s “one size fits all” approach, what is also called the Procrustean method.
AA offers either/or fallacy or false binary equations: Either you are an alcoholic or you are not. However, many addiction specialists claim that alcohol addiction exists on a spectrum.
A lot of medical professionals force their patients to use AA at the exclusion of other treatments. Some AA environments are dangerous and abusive, especially toward women, according to a report in Pro Publica.
Finland is effectively using United States neuroscientist John David Sinclair medical approach, which focuses on blocking dopamine during alcohol ingestion with the use of an opioid antagonist naltrexone.
Blocking dopamine in the brain through drugs is considered by many a scientifically proven treatment. In contrast, AA uses a non-scientific approach: You must undergo a spiritual makeover, come clean, be honest, makes amends with others, and experience a spiritual rebirth to stay away from addictive behavior. This belief is a sacred cow, but it’s not science.
In critical thinking, we must have credible evidence to support our claims. Is AA using credible evidence to support its claim that AA is the only way to treat addiction?
Counterarguments:
We all know family and friends who’d be dead if it weren’t for AA. They must be doing something right.
There is something to be said about changing one’s spiritual orientation, rather than using drugs, to free oneself from addictive behavior.
AA has a track record of providing a support group for people who can’t deal with their addiction on their own.
Comments