Short form: 'Alcoholics Anonymous has no opinion on
outside issues; hence the AA name ought never be drawn into public
controversy.'
Long form: 'No AA group or member should ever, in
such a way as to implicate AA, express any opinion on outside controversial
issues—particularly those of politics, alcohol reform, or sectarian religion.
The Alcoholics Anonymous groups oppose no one. Concerning such matters they can
express no views whatever.’
What is not an opinion? Fact,
principle, and experience.
Are opinions bad? No, because if they
were, Tradition X would read AA has no opinion on issues or no
AA member should express any opinion.
Give me an example of an 'inside
issue'! What works and does not work in the treatment of alcoholism.
Are there dangers of avoiding opinions
on inside issues? Yes: (a) excessive open-mindedness and the presentation
of all paths through AA as equally likely to bring about permanent, contented
sobriety (b) being so enigmatic and cautious with newcomers that they have
no clue what to do to stay sober.
What outside issues should be left at
the door?
(a) Membership and jargon of
other twelve-steps fellowships.
(b) Negative views of particular
religions (never say, ‘I’m a recovering Catholic’. You’re insulting newcomer
Catholics).
(c) Positive views of particular
religions (don’t advertise Jesus; don’t vaunt Buddhism).
(d) Religious practices (don’t
cross yourself; don’t introduce Buddhist meditation into your AA group).
(e) Any view on politics
whatsoever.
(f) Negative views of treatment
centres (do not say, ‘that idea is just treatment centre rubbish’; don’t
dismiss psychotherapy).
(g) Positive views of other
methods of recovering (don’t advertise treatment centres, psychotherapy, other
support groups, or particular writers on recovery, religion, or spirituality).
Why? Because it affects unity
(Tradition I) and primary purpose (Tradition V), and because newcomers in
particular will mistake your view for that of AA and may be put off AA.
Give an example of a breach! A member
of a twelve-step fellowship wrote to a website devoted to criticising AA in
general and certain groups in particular, and the website published his views
of that group and of one of its more prominent members. There was a furore.
That was the first breach of Tradition X. The second breach was the group’s very
public upset and personal hostility towards the other twelve-step fellowship
and individuals and groups within it.
What should they have done instead?
Everyone should have kept their big, fat mouths shut at the public level.
What if people are spreading
misinformation? Concept XII answers that: stay silent publicly but write to
them correcting the misinformation privately.
How does Tradition X apply within sponsorship?
Convey only what is in or consistent with the book Alcoholics Anonymous.
Are relationships and medication
outside issues? They are partly inside and partly outside. Both affect the
individual’s spiritual welfare, but both have aspects clearly outside the scope
of AA.
What is the sponsor’s role, then? Share
knowledge and experience and ask pertinent questions; do not tell anyone
what to do.
Are there exceptions? Absolutely: as
with any set of principles, sometimes they conflict with one another. If
someone is in danger of harming himself or others, there is a moral obligation
to share one’s opinion.
Does this not breach Tradition X? If there
is a risk of the opinion being mistaken for that of AA, take your AA hat off
and preface the opinion with: ‘I’m saying this to you not as your sponsor or as
an AA member but as a friend who is concerned about your welfare.’ If in doubt,
add, ‘this is just my opinion, and sometimes my opinions are 100% wrong.’
Is this the last word on Tradition X?
No.