Tradition III

Short form: The only requirement for AA membership is a desire to stop drinking

Long form: Our membership ought to include all who suffer from alcoholism. Hence we may refuse none who wish to recover. Nor ought AA membership ever depend upon money or conformity. Any two or three alcoholics gathered together for sobriety may call themselves an AA group, provided that, as a group, they have no other affiliation

Application in AA

The only requirement: two elements: (1) there is one requirement (2) there are no other requirements
AA membership. What does that mean?

Membership is abstract: no lists, no certificates, no procedure, etc.
In principle, exclusion from a group does not mean exclusion from AA
Exception: small towns where there is only one group
Principles for exceptional exclusion from a particular group:

Based on a grave threat to unity and/or primary purpose
Warnings given by the group not heeded
Exclusion by virtue of the group conscience only
Time-limited:

Less than one month is ineffective
More than six months is unnecessary

Establish a re-entry system for such time as the person wishes to rejoin
Offer other means of help outside the group meeting context

E.g. taking people through the steps
Holding an informal 'mens' meeting' (where the issue is unwanted attention to women)

How does someone become a member?

Who is eligible?

Those who suffer from alcoholism
Suffer from not because of
What is alcoholism?

Page 44
12 x 12, Step One

Self-diagnosis on another basis?

Some closed groups exclude non-alcoholics

'If you do not have a desire to stop drinking, please leave now.'
This is probably more for the other members to feel more comfortable that the Tradition is being observed
People are exceptionally unlikely to draw attention to themselves in that way by leaving at that point ...
... but anyone who falls into that category might not return

Some closed groups welcome anyone

E.g. someone has never drunk but identifies with certain aspects of the description of the alcoholic

E.g. the bedevilments

Open groups always welcome anyone (because no membership is required to attend)
Usually, questions start getting asked only when someone wants to do service & take part in the running of the group

Short form vs long form:

Desire to stop drinking vs wish to recover
These are different things!

A wish to recover presupposes one is ill
It is explicit that the illness in question is alcoholism

Narrow interpretation: both elements are required for membership
Broad interpretation: either is required for membership
February 1948 Grapevine article: this suggests minimisation of barriers

How is membership established?

You're an AA when you say you are
Some groups 'qualify' individuals and redirect those who 'fail' the entrance test to other fellowships
This is generally not done in London
This is sometimes done in places where the vast majority of people sent to AA or attending AA are not alcoholics

Specifically in small, primary purpose groups amidst a generalised sea of what are called AA meetings but which are essentially forums for self-expression on any topic

However: February 1948 Grapevine article: 'Every alcoholic in the world may become, and remain, a member of Alcoholics Anonymous so long as he says so.'

AA membership, money, and conformity

No overt exclusion of individuals on the basis of lack of money or lack of conformity
But no covert exclusion either:

Expensive restaurants/cafes afterwards (which some members can't afford to come to)
Dress codes
Religion or lack of it

It is rare for atheists to be deliberately made to feel uncomfortable

(Although some atheists become agitated if someone else in the room expresses ideas, views, or experiences concerning the Higher Power)

It is common for religion and religionists to be openly mocked and disparaged

It is also common for people to express the idea that one should not mention God or the Higher Power in AA

Excessively personalised sharing which excludes outsiders

Sycophancy towards the speaker
Lavish praise towards the speaker
Back-handed compliments or other barbed comments indicating a 'history' with the speaker
Unnecessary reference to the depth or duration of relationships with other specific people in the room

Coldness or indifference to the ugly, smelly, drunk, or weird
Cliquey behaviour: exclusivity before/after meeting + at fellowship

However, some people perceive others talking to each other as 'cliquey', when all they are observing is conversation or friendship
The line is crossed when

Newcomers / visitors / strangers are not actively welcomed
Efforts are not made to include such people when they join a gathering or conversation

Very successful groups will appear cliquey when they're not, simply because of the depth and duration of relationships between their members

Such have to deliberately work against this appearance by actively including newcomers / visitors / strangers in conversations and activities

The ideal is to be radically inclusive

Eliminate any barrier to entry
February 1948 Grapevine article:

Alcoholics are rebels, non-conformists, bankrupt idealists
Barriers could be fatal
Alcoholics can be unable / unwilling to conform
Alcoholics can be 'too weak and confused to jump hurdles'

We must therefore make every effort to overcome barriers that others cannot overcome by themselves
Inclusion cannot be forced
Once good efforts have been made, give people space
Sometimes excessive efforts at inclusion can actually put people off

Any two or three alcoholics ..

The three is irrelevant, as the condition is met with two
... gathered together ...: this represents the creation of a spiritual entity

Although a single meeting would meet the requirement, the self-designation as a group is relevant only where regularity of meeting is intended
Regularity and structure require the commitment of individual members
It is not the physical space that makes the group but the creation of the spiritual entity
This spiritual entity persists even when the group is not physically (or virtually) together

For sobriety: this is the purpose of the group
If something else is sought, it must pertain to sobriety (e.g. the Twelve Steps, the Twelve Traditions, the Twelve Concepts for World Service, etc.)
It is OK for individual meetings to have secondary purposes within the scope of the Group
If there is a secondary purpose:

E.g.

'To discuss issues of later sobriety'
'To discuss sex and sexual identity in sobriety'

... this cannot be the only purpose, or the group cannot call itself an AA group

'provided they have no other affiliation'

What is affiliation? OED:

'Connection with an organisation or other body; esp. connection with a larger or more established group or organisation, often as a branch or subsidiary part'
'A relationship or link maintained for any of various reasons, such as accordance with the other party's political or religious views, facilitation of trade, etc.; esp. one maintained by a particular person with a political or religious body (not necessarily entailing an official membership of that body)'
The two aspects of affiliation

Ideology: professing a faith or political persuasion
Structure: formal linkage to or incorporation within another organisation

So: affiliation is not entailed by cooperation / collaboration, provided that this cooperation / collaboration is not structural (formal) in nature

Examples:

The group cannot be 'part' of another organisation or indeed establish other organisations
The group cannot be formally affiliated within a network
Although attendance at network meetings as a visitor is OK

An AA group could send a public information (PI) officer to a local meeting about alcoholism in the community
This meeting could even be a regular meeting
Provided that the PI officer is merely a visitor, attendee, and contributor to discussion, this is fine
If the PI officer were obliged in any way (e.g. to undertake work, to pay a subscription, etc.), this would constitute affiliation

Cooperation, e.g. with venues or facilities, must be at arm's length

The group's existence and viability is not dependent on the venue
The group is financially self-supporting and is not subsidised

Paying 'charity' or 'community' rent is OK: the rent does not need to be at a commercial level
It does need to be on the same level that the venue would charge other community organisations

... or the perception is that the group has to give something back for what it is receiving

The group has no obligations towards the venue (other than compliance with the terms of hire)
The group is not subject to supervision or regulation

Although observation is fine, e.g. by a doctor or parish priest

How this works with meetings held in institutions (e.g. prisons)

The group's meetings form a 'bubble' within the organisation
The attendees understand that, by attending the meeting, they're entering a 'bubble' operated by an external entity (i.e. AA)

The intention behind the non-affiliation:

This is contained within the February 1948 Grapevine essay:

'One can think of no AA member who would like, for example, to see the formation of "dry" AA groups, "wet" AA groups, Republican AA groups, communist AA groups. Few, if any, would wish our groups to be designated by religious denominations. We cannot lend the AA name, even directly, to other activities, however worthy. We think that AA should offer its experience to the whole world for whatever use can be made of it. But not its name. Nothing could be more certain."

So affiliation can prevail even if the movement affiliated to has no knowledge of the affiliation

Special-interest groups

This is a matter on which reasonable people of good will disagree
Pro:

There are homophobic or misogynistic groups
People have suffered particularly at the hands of men or straight people
The presence of the other sex can stifle candour
Tradition III is about removing barriers
Special-interest groups can:

Provide a 'safe space'

Whether actual (e.g. freedom from the unwanted attentions of men or freedom from homophobic conduct)
Or perceived (sometimes individuals perceive threat because fear or suspicion has been generalised to an entire group)

Eliminate distractions
Eliminate the barrier of 'perceived difference'
Take away the excuse that 'no one understands'

Con (as with everything written here, these are my personal views right now):

They can create division in AA through establishing a tighter identity than 'alcoholic'
They draw minorities out of other groups, which then skew even further towards older, white, straight men
Because of this impact on the demographic distribution across different groups, AA as a whole is affected
They breach the overall spirit of inclusiveness
The label 'non-restrictive'

This is used to mark the group as complying with Tradition III, as anyone can attend
However, men's and women's groups tend to turn people away if they don't comply with the additional membership requirement
LGBT etc. meetings do not turn people away and often have openly straight members
Young people's AA:

Sometimes, such groups are simply 'non-restrictive'
Sometimes, definitions of 'young' are used to get round the restrictive focus
'Young' can be defined as 'having room to grow' / 'being young at heart'
This ostensibly establishes formal compliance with Tradition III as anyone should be able to comply
However, these look like additional requirements for attendance: you have to be alcoholic and fall within this definition
If everyone falls within the definition, the definition is meaningless
If not everyone falls within the definition, the group is excluding certain categories of alcoholic

(Everyone should be able to identify with 'having room to grow' ...
... but is someone who is 'old at heart' not welcome?)

However, the aim is self-evidently to have meetings skewed towards those who are biologically young
If the group does not skew young, its identity and label are redundant
If the group does skew young, then selection / exclusion is taking place

Risk of identity formation / branding

E.g. YPAA conventions sometimes have special rites and customs

Contrast to LGBT / women's meetings: in most places it's hard to argue for a protective purpose
Young people's meetings are usually in places where there are plenty of young people in meetings generally

The solution is not to alter the definition of the exclusionary characteristic so as to appear to include everyone ...
... but simply to say that everyone is equally welcome

The restrictive membership results in a skewing of focus and blind spots

The focus is often taken off sobriety and the Twelve Steps and placed on the 'additional requirement for membership'
Although special interest groups are open to all (in principle) and in particular to anyone who has the special interest ...
... they tend to be very self-selecting
E.g. LGBT meetings attract only a fraction of LGBT AA members
E.g. women's meetings attract only a fraction of female AA members
There can be a sense of distance from the mainstream or universal
This can be accompanied by hostility or suspicion towards the mainstream or universal
Reintegration with society as a whole can be slowed
(I'm speaking from my own experience as a member of LGBT groups for many years)

However: in AA we don't police
Any attempt to resolve this discussion finally tends to kill unity
It's OK for people to have very different views
There are statistically very few such groups
Many people report significant benefits accruing from membership of such groups
Many people report that they could not have gotten or stayed sober without them
Anecdotally, Bill W was in support of the first gay group because it represented a necessary length that had to be gone to
The only conclusion I can come to:

If they help you, attend them
If they don't help you, don't attend them

Musts

The February 1948 Grapevine essay: 'In Alcoholics Anonymous there are no musts.'
However, to recover, there are
We're not obliging anyone to recover
The Steps are like a vending machine in AA
No one must use the vending machine
But if you do use it, you must pop your penny in at the top, or you won't get your fizzy pop out at the bottom

Application in life

AA has no requirement for membership: I must have no requirements other than sobriety

In other words: having a desire to stay sober (and by extension to do all that is required to that end) should be my only desire
If I want to be successful, happy, comfortable, or in possession of a job, a home, a family, I might drink if these are not attained or retained
My primary purpose is that of AA: stay sober and help other alcoholics to achieve sobriety
To achieve that end, I must have a relationship with God
The relationship with God is my immediate, conscious purpose: everything else flows from there

I must have no demands or requirements of other people
Boundaries

I aim to do God's will
This requires a vision of God's will
If the project involves other people at all ...
... the vision will include absolute requirements or preferences in terms of how those people behave

If I'm going to go on holiday with you, I need your agreement before booking the tickets
If I'm going to function at work, I need to sleep the night before, and I may need to ask you to listen to music on headphones late at night

For the project to succeed, I may need to set boundaries

'Start doing X'
'Stop doing Y'
'Do Z differently'
I present this as a request or a preference
This does not mean that there will be no consequences for non-compliance
But it does mean that you are free to choose whether or not to comply
... although freedom does not extend to avoiding consequences!
(A person is free to jump out of a window ...
... but that freedom does not entail exemption from the laws of gravity)

I remain 100% detached from your conduct
Although I may request that a boundary be set
I may monitor whether or not that boundary is observed
And I may enforce consequences if that boundary is not observed
But I have no 'emotional' requirement or demand of that other person
Generally, aim:

To work around other people maximally
Use boundaries as a last resort

Requirements in sponsorship

What are the requirements?
A desire to stop drinking + a wish to recover
This is demonstrated by action
Without action, the expressed desire + wish has no substance
The purpose of sponsorship must be these, not

A special relationship with the sponsor
Friendship

Any other role

(Friendship does sometimes arise ...
... but it must play second fiddle.
And the sponsor must be prepared to set it aside or discard it at any time.)

The relationship must proceed in good faith and with respect

Just as a group cannot survive without unity, sponsorship cannot survive without unity
Sponsorship need not be warm but it must be (reasonably) cordial
This does not mean agreeing on everything
But it does mean disagreeing without being disagreeable
No persistent indulgence of the four Rs on the part of the sponsee

React (instead: respond)
Resist (instead: consider)
Reject (instead: try it out)
Reproach (instead: appreciate)

No persistent indulgence of the four Hs on the part of the sponsor

Harsh (instead: be temperate)
Harping (instead: be brief)
Horrid (instead: be kind)
Hectoring (instead: be detached: if they don't want what you offer, that's OK!)

Requirements in relationships

A desire to make it work. What does 'work' mean?

Effective
Efficient
Harmonious

Evidence that this is not present:

Gross or persistent hostility
Undermining the common good

First 164

Search This Blog

Tradition III