July 05, 2005

• "if you answered as few as 3 of these questions with a Yes it is a definite sign that your drinking patterns are harmful and considered alcohol dependent or alcoholic." But if I answer Yes to all of them, that's okay. Right?
• Do you turn to inferior companions and environments when drinking? Define "inferior."
• Answering 3 questions in the affermative would be far more significant if the questions had equal levels of significance. Do you: Get out of bed each morning? Dive a car? Molest Children? "If you answered yes to two or more of these questions with a Yes it is a definite sign that you are a child molester." There is a World of Help Availible!
• Define "remorse". If it's piercing headache, then yes. If it's temporary blindness, then no.
• Maybe it's *hic* YOU who's got the problem. *pokes Skrik in the chest 4 or 5 times*
• hmm... just for the sake of argument, buck09, I wonder which 3 of those statements one could say yes to, and be certain not to have a problem? I'll say I answered yes to to questions I'd consider borderline, "Do you drink because you are shy with other people" and "Do you drink alone?" but I think an important distinction to be made here is that when a screening quiz like this uses the phrase "do you drink..." the implication is "do you habitually or often drink...", in which case I'd have to answer no. Big difference there.
• Dive a car? Why yes, I did drive a car off a cliff back in '90. It fell several hundred feet before nose-diving into a shallow lake.
• I answered the questions as I would have answered them eleven years ago (just before quitting drinking) and then I answered them with absolute honesty as to how my life was eleven years ago. I would have had 2 out of 20 if I had filled this out eleven years ago. If I had filled it out eleven years ago and been honest, then I would have had 10 out of 20. These things can be fun to make fun of, but they are so easy to cheat on when examining yourself.
• hmm... just for the sake of argument, buck09, I wonder which 3 of those statements one could say yes to, and be certain not to have a problem? That's the problem - this is a diagnostic test, which requires a person trained to ask follow-up questions and intrepret the results. Execpt that some marketing wonk found this diagnostic test and used it for anti-drunk propiganda, dismissing the role of the test administrator in favor of "if you answered yes 3 times, you're a drunk". Which is completely asinine. Context is key here - when used as anti-drunk propiganda, it's just plain stupid. You know, all the trendy causes now have colored ribbons, what color has the anti-drunk zealots chosen, if any? May I suggest technicolor?
• The only reason I'm always drunk is cos I can afford to be.
• What price is freedom?
• If I had filled it out eleven years ago and been honest, then I would have had 10 out of 20. Which leads to another problem, which is the assumption that the person is honestly introspective. I've known a few alcoholics, and I can say for certain, that they would have answered "no" to these questions: Is drinking affecting your reputation? Have you ever felt remorse after drinking? Does your drinking make you careless of your family's welfare? Has your ambition decreased since drinking? Has your efficiency decreased since drinking? Is drinking jeopardizing your job or business? When the answer, to any impartial observer, would have been a huge y-e-s.
• anti-drunk zealots Yes, damn those zealots for making a web page! Next they'll be invading your backyard, pissing in your bathtub, and poisoning your kittens. Is there anything these horrible zealots won't do?
• They won't shutup.
• Is there anything these horrible zealots won't do? Getting shitfaced enough to warrant a 4am stomach pump at the local hospital perahps? It just seems to me is that the things that offend others the most are the things with which they struggle the least.
• Ultimately, alcoholism is singular in that it requires the affected person to self-diagnose before effective treatment can be implemented. Tick charts are a tool to that end I guess.
• Doesn't seem asinine or zealous to me, but who am I to say, just a person raised by a family fully half of whom are/were drunks. Of course a simple quiz like this is no match for professional assessment, but I don't think anybody intends it to be. If there's one person out there who is just on the brink of realizing he needs to make a change, and this might lead him to speak to a trusted friend or professional, then it's good to see it's out there. I'd guess that the risk of a false positive in a self-assessment of alcoholism is pretty low.
• Addiction is, by definition, a dependance on something that overrides your will to interrupt the dependance. Some seem to think that addiction is an expression of their will, when by definition it is an abdication of it.
• I drink too much because you've been such a huge dissapointment to me, son. Now clean up your room.
• The only reason I'm always drunk is cos I can afford to be. posted by Chyren at 05:25PM UTC on July 05, 2005 You'd be surprised how much that snark resembles some peoples' lives. After getting a dui, I was required to sit in on a few AA meetings, and I heard stories like the one of a guy who inhereted his parents estate, quit his job and drank it all away in ten years. Scary shit and peacay is spot on about self diagnosis. You don't need a serious problem to resort to willful ignorance about the concequences of such behavior. In a way, I'm almost glad for my little encounter with the law, as it smacked a little sense into me at relatively little personal cost.
• You'd be surprised how much that snark resembles some peoples' lives YOU'D be surprise how much it resembles HIS life.
• huh, I didn't realize Chyren was a dude... just one more surprise for ol' pie this morning.
• More of a bloke than a dude, I'd say. But then what do I know? I got 7 out of 20 on the test.
• /replace drinking = the internet /replace drink = log in My name is Flagpole, and I was there, brothers, I was there...
• What spectrusery said. If someone's even bothering to take a self-assessment, then they feel that there might be a problem with their drinking. Asking themselves these questions is a step in the right direction, even if they're not honest with themselves the first time. If the questions plant a seed for further introspection, so much the better. Oh, and thanks for the vomit link, buck09, it was just what I wanted to look at while eating lunch!
• You drunk fuckers, stop that!
• Take me drunk I'm home!
• Think you've got it bad Koko? Shortly after opening buck09's link, my boss' dog puked up his breakfast in front of my desk. I can still smell it!
• I have a lot of experience with alcoholism in my family, my mother is a chronic alco apart from mental illness -- and have even attended AA meetings in my early 20s, thinking that I may have been alcoholic (I now regard 12 step with some scorn). I am satisfied that I am not alcoholic, however, on close observation of family members and others in AA, on medical advice from my neurologist, plus the fact that I was teetotal for nearly 10 years without any problems, cravings or what-have-you. I admit I am atypical, however. I don't need to be preached-to, thanks all the same, pieisexactlythree. I have seen first hand the seriousness of the disease. Having said that, I do enjoy a drink and am not shy about it. My joking about this post is simply because I regard this test as rather ridiculous. spectrusery's points are sensible and well seen, but to be honest with you, I think this test is about as much use as tits on a frog to anyone with a serious addiction. Most alcoholics don't confront their problems at all, those that do usually do so either by intervention of loved ones or in some kind of cathartic type event. Unspecific, broad internet tests may be more harmful than helpful. Someone in denial would not answer any of those questions honestly, and the false result could be an enabler for more binging. I have worked, some years back, as a counselor to drug addicts, because I have some experience of addictions other than alcohol. I regard this kind of test as a bit of quackery because it dilutes a hugely complex set of problems down into a set of narrow behavioural categories that in reality may or may not represent some kind of pathology. Crack the tubes!
• a guy who inhereted his parents estate, quit his job and drank it all away in ten years. How much of it did he spend on booze, and how much on (other?) stupid shit? I've known people who'd fit the "alcoholic" profile who were very financially responsible, and sober people who weren't. Otherwise, I'm with Chyren on this "test".
• I think it had more to do with quitting his job to concentrate on drinking full-time, imo More of a bloke than a dude, I'd say. For some reason I'd pictured Chyren as a malevolent, acid-tounged, chain-smoking goth chick...
• The real horror of addiction is that the worst addicts are not hooked on crack or booze, they are hooked on ill behaviours, erroneous beliefs or other totally malfunctional thought patterns. Addictive behaviour is rife. Once you learn to recognise it you see it everywhere, and the killer is that most people will replace one addiction, say thru 12-step or therapy, with some other addiction of another kind. You see this in these destructive relationships, too.
• malevolent, acid-tounged, fat ugly australian...
• Chy, you make some very good points, and I'm the first to admit I understand fuck-all about addictions, though I've had close relationships with addicts. Perhaps it's this outside-in POV clouding my judgement, but I still feel that asking oneself questions about one's thought processes in regards to drinking might lead to better things, such as wanting a better quality of life, and recognizing problems the drinking causes. Granted, the more serious addict won't take the questions seriously, but then the serious addict is not likely to seek any help until something catastophic happens. Probably these questions are better suited for compulsive drinkers, rather than full-on addicts. On the other hand, I probably don't know what I'm talking about.
• fat ugly australian A pleonasm if I ever heard one. *ducks*
• I have the same reservations about these cookie cutter tests that I've had ever since I was a teen and reading shit like this on posters in my guidance counselor's office. I am the most casual drinker I have ever known, only drinking when there is an occasion (drank last night for the 4th, before that it had been at least 3 months), and even I can say yes to some of these. Do you turn to inferior companions and environments when drinking? What the fuck is that supposed to mean? By what standard do I (or the ppl who wrote this test) judge what is inferior? I sometimes hang out with my little sister (who digs on Linkon Park, Eminem, Pimp my Ride, and Dubya) and drink, cause she like to party, and she has hot friends. I have also had conversations with crack heads, hepatitis C sufferers, and the crazy dude that was baker acted last week, all while I was sober. Which one means I have a problem? Do you drink alone? I have gotten drunk by myself quite a few times, yes. Do I drink cause I'm shy? Yeah. Maybe more like disgusted and unimpressed, and have to booze up to deal with the redneck/punk rawk/ludakris MTV wannabes around my hometown if I want to go out. Goes hand in hand with the inferior companions and environments, I guess. Have I ever felt remorse after drinking? Yeah... one time I puked all over my friends couch, while passed out, then screamed and laughed at him as he cleaned it up. But it was Boone's Farm wine. Who could blame me? There are only a few questions, I feel, that are truly indicative of a possible alcohol addiction on this test. On preview: Chyren. Making the world a more eloquent place.
• true that self-awareness is the first step to fixing up ones' problems, Koko. I think, by that stage, you're really not on the internet doing a quiz, but perhaps I am being a bit too overzealous in my opinion. If it works for some, then it's good.
• What if I've always been unambitious, inefficient, careless of my family, bad with money and yet I love my inferior companions?
• trig makes a good point, which I also noted but forgot to mention. Who decides who is inferior? That's terrible. Who are these inferior types? People in pubs, presumably. What was the other thing.. oh yeah, in DSM IV, alcoholism is defined by the physical effects such as withdrawal & recovery, associated illness and so on, rather than behavioural effects (though they are part of it). I forget the gist. Anyway, enough of this gay banter.
• Most of the questions are pretty stupid, though. The list could be shortened.
• who digs on Linkon Park, Eminem, Pimp my Ride, and Dubya Hey, hey. Whoah. Hey. Whoah. Pimp my Ride is fucking awesome.
• I wouldn't fuck your ride, no matter how persuasive the pimping was.
• Of course, you might be able to turn this honey [video clip] out with some success. Funny, it looks like the kind of car a pimp might drive, sans purple paint job and leopard seatcovers...
• The "inferior companions" refers to people that you would never hang out with if you were sober, but you hang out with them when you drink merely because they will drink with you. I know I did that a bit, too, and I do think that it is indicative of a problem.
• MonkeyFilter: about as much use as tits on a frog.
• Hi, petebest!
• Pimp my Ride is fucking awesome. Is that the UK version with Westwood you're talking about there?
• I always picture Chy as a large, haggard ogre with overalls and barefeet.
• Do you drink alone? You can answer "no" if you're logged into #mofirc while doing it, right?
• I'm sitting alone in a two-bedroom apartment I share with this girl. We never speak. I've been sitting here for hours thinking fuck-all. I'm drinking this cheap Irish vodka. I think it is flavored with some crap lime flavor. My head is swirling - thoughts twirling. All I have is my five year-old iMac and this internet connection to keep me going. About.com... Fuck! What's wrong with me!? I wonder if I'm an alcoholic? Fucking hell! I'm a fucking alcoholic!
• A certan question on one of these boilerplate "tests" stopped me cold once. It was "do you look forward to drinking?" Well, yes, I liked my glass of wine relaxer in the evening. But it evolved to a bottle. I am getting a bit scared, but no one to confide in, really. So I'll just be defiant, and control the situation, and hope that the family "bug" hasn't bit me. Too much information, but these smug little questionnaires seem like Carrie Nation tapping me on the shoulder. Had to vent.
• Why is this a FPP? Is Skrik calling us all alkies? Or is he trying to help a certain monkey? I just don't get it.
• Why is this a FPP? ... I just don't get it. Skrik's intention with this post seems reasonably transparent to me. It is metacommentary on the recent spate of questionable posts -- Jerry Junior's tatto post, the retributive posts that followed, quid's suck-on-my-balls post, etc. He is telling us that we are behaving like drunks, and that there is a world of help available. Fairly obvious stuff.
• I found it to be a personal attack by yet another net nanny. And I sure as hell don't care to be lectured. I think you're hyperextending yourself in defense of nanny Skrik.
• I'm thirsty! Anyone else?
• I must have missed quid's ball sucking post...any good?
• Wolof, I always thought better of you.
• I'm sorry for your loss.
• Personal attack? For it to be a personal attack, doesn't it have to be, well, about you?
• I'm thirsty! Anyone else? I'm having one of these, it hits the spot...
• I'm having bourbon. I plan to have a beer before bed.
• I also discovered mohitos this summer. Daaaaaaaaaamn tasty. Best drunk alone while crying and listening to Morrisey. With a gun.
• Monkeyfilter: Best drunk alone while crying and listening to Morrisey. With a gun.
• I have a friend who is an alcoholic, I also know a few others, all of the people that I know have been let down and abused by our local A.A. Local knowledge has it that the AA groups are used by predatory men to find vulnerable women and that has been our experience. My friend went there for help and was in even a worse state of mind when she left. I searched the internet and found that many people feel the same way: http://www.moonmac.com/Cult_Called_AA.html http://oldweb.uwp.edu/academic/criminal.justice/aacult01.htm
• I am so terribly, terribly thirsty. Damn it.
• goeter, I always thought better of you.
• (I mean "beter".)
• "She's an alcoholic".
• zqwerty, not that I doubt your veracity (and I didn't follow the links) but perhaps one might observe that your sphere of experience is small and also, that one probably shouldn't believe everything written on the internet. I have no beef, I am not proselytizing but that particular 80-odd year old organization AA is one of the most amazing social phenomenons of the 20th century, if not all time and for every negative story bandied about I would feel confident in assuming that there are 50 or 100 unsung success stories. Now, I'm not going to castigate you in any way because I think this is a serious subject (content of the FPP notwithstanding) and deserves discussion rather than vilification, but I'd invite you to consider the possibility that circulating anecdotal stories from a small sample space is not only potentially detrimental to those desperate people who may be blindly reaching out for some helpful beacon, but is also wholly negative in that it serves to merely criticize the gold standard treatment fraternity without offering any ecouragement or advice as to alternatives. And I certainly acknowledge that alcoholism is a complex enough phenomenon that different people will likely respond to different treatment modalities. It's been my experience in life that we are all apt at times to blithely accept snippets of anecdotal reports as being 'inside knowledge' or proven facts which is of course all right when it refers to something like War of The Worlds or the somesuch, but there's possibly bad consequences about which we can't be sure, when we circulate and repeat throwaway lines when the subject is as grave and ubiquitous as alcoholism. *2c spent*
• I found it to be a personal attack by yet another net nanny That's either a subtle joke, or a step before a cry for help. It was nothing personal, I assure you.
• Shamina, not every post is about you. Skrik's posting history should tell you that he's not the shrill, moralizing type. You seem to have a need to "vent" alot in threads. Maybe you should get some professional help for your emotional issues?
• posted by mecurious, "Addiction is, by definition, a dependance on something that overrides your will to interrupt the dependance. Some seem to think that addiction is an expression of their will, when by definition it is an abdication of it." But isn't abdication the act of giving up power? Isn't that a choice - even if made under enormous duress? If we give our power to the substance or behavior then wouldn't that be an expression of will even though that expression was the result of abdication?
• If I make a conscious decision to get drunk, knowing the consequences, then that is an act of will. If I give in to an urge to get drunk, because I 'need' it, despite knowing the consequences, I would say that is an abdication of it. But it's never as simple as that; people don't usually have the kind of self-analytical nature to perceive these motives and layers of behavioural conditioning within themselves. You need to learn or be taught how to do that. In AA they tell you that you have no power over your addiction and you have to surrender your will to a 'higher power', in therapy they teach you to be aware and integrate the urges and try to understand what causes them.
• But isn't surrendering your will an act of will? A choice? I mean, whether you surrender it to the substance or behavior or surrender it to a "higher power" you're still making a choice even if you're unaware of what motivates it, right?
• No. It's no more an act of will than being a part of a human pyramid at guantanamo.
• Which part is no more an act of will? The surrendering to a higher power or to the substance?
• Hmm...I guess my point in asking these questions is that I suspect addictions are the result of choices and that no matter how strong the urge is, we still choose when we continue to indulge in them. It's like there are choices all around. We choose to get help, we choose not to, we choose to surrender, we choose not to. There's power in choosing even when what you choose eats you alive. And it's that same power that can save you. And since it doesn't come from any place but you, you never have to give it to drugs, booze or a higher power. Unless you choose to.
• hikikomori, that is oversimplifying a little. An addiction occurs when the body experiences physical craving for the substance, and not taking it will result in withdrawal symptoms. The craving is not entirely mental; the body has acclimatised itself to regular intakes of the substance as well. So yes, it is a choice; but it is more like an uphill struggle to not give in to the addiction. So, while theoretically you are right in saying that an addict has the power to choose whether to give in or not to his/her addiction, the reality is not so easy. Former drug addicts have admitted that ten, fifteen years after stopping, the craving is still there, everyday. Imagine having to live with that monkey on your back, every hour of your waking life.
• hikikomori, don't you think that if a phenomenon so universally detrimental to societies, families and individuals as alcoholism was in actual fact a logical behaviour, that the millions of poor souls who have succumbed to the disease (see W.H.O.) would simply have chosen not to drink? Otherwise it seems as if you are being condescending in your attitude and I suspect that is not the case. Just because it is difficult to understand, doesn't mean that approaching it with reductionist logic will make it any less opaque for those of us who are not afflicted.
• Actually, giving in to addiction is akin to falling asleep when you're very, very tired. You can make the choice to stay awake, even though every cell in your body wants to fall asleep. And if you are very determined, you can stay awake. But once you relax, even a bit, you fall asleep. Was that moment of relaxation willed? Was falling asleep willed?
• Well said Alnedra.
• "hikikomori, that is oversimplifying a little." I suspected as much. ;) "Imagine having to live with that monkey on your back, every hour of your waking life." I do. But I make the choice every day not to surrender to it. I realized that I had made a series of choices from the beginning and throughout those years of my addiction and that I could make the choice to stop, deal with the withdrawal and pain, and work on the stuff that brought me to all that shit in the first place. It was easy to make the choice to keep drugging but it was hard as hell to make the choice to stop. In either case, my will was involved. The power came from me. It had to. No one else could save me but me and the only way that was going to happen is if I chose to stop the behavior. I know that the way I'm saying this sounds like I'm implying that it's easy but that's so far off. Way fucking off. There are fewer things more difficult than making the choice to stop abusing substances and going through the pain that comes with that. Is there a point of no return with addiction? Hell, yeah. I've seen it. But ultimately, the person at that stage of addiction got there in good part by the choices they made along the way.
• Actually, after seeing that last comment, I'll withdraw my last comment and offer an apology hikikomori for both having failed to read all your comments and having harangued you when you obviously do have direct insight about this blight called addiction.
• :) <------ For peacay.
• *HUGS* for everyone (^_^)
• *enjoys hugs*
• In my experience, an addiction is not entirely physical in every case, in fact in some cases the worst aspect of an addiction is in the behavioural side of it. And this exact discussion is why I didn't like the test; the subject is so complicated and every addict quite different in many ways that it becomes a minefield trying to generalise. Alnedra's sleep metaphor is very good. Except that one needs sleep, one usually doesn't need the object of an addiction. My wife always says that addictions are things we use to buffer ourselves; although I don't entirely agree with her, she says that, for instance, over-eaters do so for entirely emotional reasons - to comfort themselves in some moment of pain or emotional distress - even though they are not aware of this motivation. And after the eating binge comes the self-hate or remorse, which itself becomes an addiction. In any case I argue that none of this is conscious. The alcoholic doesn't know why he's drinking. The gambler doesn't know why he needs to gamble, just that he feels fantastic while he's doing it. Afterwards comes the shame and self-recrimination, then denial, then the cycle starts again. Sure, there are *moments* of clarity, but they don't remain. As soon as a downer happens again, or you get an emotional bruise which triggers something buried from childhood (it's all from childhood), you go back to seeking solace in whatever it happens to be. Addicts are locked in uncomprehending behavioural patterns in which will itself has no part to play. They might make excuses for the behaviour, but this is just masking the real reasons for them. Now, with things like smack or tobacco, of course there is a very strong physical need to continue the addictive behaviour, but in my experience the original decision is based on an emotional requirement to escape. Each of us is different however, and I've rarely met anyone in recovery who agrees about the factors behind the illness. I always try to say 'well, this is how it was for me, but for you...' and let them suggest what ever it might be for them. It's bad to try and place a template on everyone, which is one reason why I think 12-step doesn't work. It's fucking awful though, and a scourge. I mean, look at George Bush. He's a cripple to his addictions, even if he doesn't drink or drug anymore, he's replaced it with power addiction and ego-drug. That guy is a walking uncured addict. And I would relate it directly to his earliest childhood.
• I wonder if one can be addicted to web discussion boards...
• But isn't surrendering your will an act of will? A choice? I mean, whether you surrender it to the substance or behavior or surrender it to a "higher power" you're still making a choice even if you're unaware of what motivates it, right? John Locke used the same argument to condone slavery. Paraphrased: "You can't surrender your freedom unless you have, so therefore anyone without it made the decision to be a slave."
• unless you have it
• I wonder if one can be addicted to web discussion boards... Oooh, yes. *nod nod*
• ...an addiction is not entirely physical in every case...one usually doesn't need the object of an addiction... Using the term "addiction" outside a physical aspect really devalues it. People who need a chemical to avoid a painful death become equivalated to someone who really likes chocolate, or won't give up eating meat. Physical addictions are so vastly different from mental addictions that using the same word to describe things so different has blurred and harmed common awareness and understanding. The two things are totally different; they're really just homonyms, and shouldn't be used interchangibly. A person with no eyes and a person with shut eyelids could both be described as blind, but doing so is a diservice to both.
• Rubbish. Addiction is rooted in behaviour, in emotion. Otherwise you wouldn't stick a needle in yourself in the first place. Curing someone's chemical addiction rarely cures their behavioural problems.
• I think the urge that draws people back to so-called "physical" addictions (alcohol, drugs, etc) is no different than the urge that draws people to give in to their "mental" addictions (gambling, porn, an abusive relationship, etc). It's an emotional failing and can only be treated successfully by finding and resolving the emotional cause.
• Aren't there brain chemicals involved here? Wasn't it something to do with dopamine? And that there's a higher incidence of addiction among thrill-seeking personalities?
• Alnedra, nice metaphor comparing falling asleep and caving in to an addiction. The other way i've heard it described is this: "Addiction is when you can no longer tell the difference between the pleasure and the pain".
• Who here likes fake meat||? I had a beef dream last night but now I'm going to the chinese supermarket. Whoo whoo! FAKE MEAT TRAIN! LOL.
• I think I shall avoid commenting on this further. Too close to the bone.
• Yeah ... that last comment nearly sent me on a fake meat binge.
• "Addiction is when you can no longer tell the difference between the pleasure and the pain". Did you steal that quote off of the jacket of my soon-to-be published memoir, The Autobiography of Sex?
• *reconsiders having tofu wienies for supper*
• Sorry to be so late with the apology, but I was not taking a swipe at you, Skrik. It's these open-ended surveys in general I seem to have a problem with, and some of these breathless sites feed into the sometimes crippling introspection. For me it dates back from high school and Seventeen magazine. ("Did you see him in the hallway? If yes, you are definitely crushing!" "Are you vaguely dissatisfied with your appearance? If yes, you either have or will develop an eating disorder!"
• Oh, and thanks for the armchair analyzing about my issues, but I can't afford your fees right now. Thanks anyway.
• Peacay, I assure you that my experience is not just anecdotal and that I have seen this first hand. The AA chapter here is riddled with losers who use the service as a way of "power-tripping", as mentioned above. People in recovery do not make good councillors for others looking for help, what I have witnessed first hand is little short of barbarism. I am hoping to take legal steps over this in the future to bring the offenders to account. The AA chapter here is connected to the Salvation Army and Christian values are subtly foisted onto the unsuspecting alcoholics in a way which I find absolutely "non-christian". By the way, I notice your name and recognise the PK as a colloquialism from my past in Southern Africa. Are you from there?
• Have you contacted a national AA office, zqwerty? (I'm not certain such a thing exists, but I'm assuming there's some "higher authority", no pun intended.) Because the things happening in that chapter run contrary to how AA is supposed to be run. Whomever's operating that chapter should be removed. Personally, I'm not a supporter of AA's methods, but I know it works for some people, if done properly.
• "Ain`t nobodys bidness but mine own"