Background
Here's the (probably uncomfortable) background reading:
Sponsorship presents significant challenges for potential sponsors. The potential sponsee, first of all, is usually very troubled. Secondly, they are alcoholic (or whatever-ic, depending on your fellowship). That means, in most cases, they have (as we all do) the standard array of selfishness, self-centredness, self-delusion, self-pity, blame, etc. Thirdly, they usually come from troubled backgrounds, where family dynamics were ... less than ideal.
When I was new, I was the prototypical victim, in a world of persecutors, in search of a rescuer. If the rescuer did not rescue as I saw fit, I construed the rescuer as a persecutor, then persecuted the rescuer. Needing a new rescuer, I would recruit someone to help reinforce the narrative that the last rescuer was really a persecutor.
The spiritual path is one of moving from being concerned with my welfare (the result) and other people's conduct (the cause) to being concerned with my conduct (the cause) and other people's welfare (the result).
ALWAYS CHECK WITH A POTENTIAL SPONSEE WHETHER THIS IS WHAT THEY WANT.
It's also a path of moving from this entanglement ...
I'm not responsible for me (Snow White + sloven*)
I'm responsible for you (bulldozer + caretaker)
You're not responsible for you (doormat + apologist)
You're responsible for me (damsel in distress + blame-thrower)
*The sloven does not take care of themselves appropriately
... to this model:
I'm responsible for my attitudes, beliefs, thinking, behaviour, and inner life
You're responsible for your attitudes, beliefs, thinking, behaviour, and inner life
ALWAYS CHECK WITH A POTENTIAL SPONSEE WHETHER THIS IS WHAT THEY WANT, TOO.
Why?
Because a lot of people are trapped in the Karpman Drama Triangle, but are not done. If they're not done, you can't help them: you'll end up sucked in and forced into one of the roles. Here's an example:
Person A: Rescue me! Help me!
Person B: Try this (offers programme suggestion).
Person A: That's mean. You're not supporting me. This is too much. You're controlling me.
Person B: Maybe you might prefer to be sponsored by someone else.
Person A: You're abandoning me!
You can't win.
Now, it's VERY important to remember that: people can't help the pattern they're programmed with. I couldn't help the pattern I was programmed with. That's how programming works. I had one system, and this was it. I literally had no other option available. Getting well was possible, but I had to be willing to surrender. What is surrender? Dropping my own weapons and defences and awaiting orders. I was in recovery a VERY long time before I was seriously willing to address this behaviour on my part.
So, the person is innocent and not very well. They're not bad. They're not doing it on purpose. They're trapped in the programming. They and we can be helped with this, but the person in question has to want to be helped, not just with their alcoholism, but with their other patterns, too. If the other patterns are not dealt with, all of the relationships in AA become venues to reactivate, resuscitate, and revivify those old patterns. Basically raising the dead within the bodies of the new people in one's life. The old, toxic relationships are recreated and reenacted with new players.
But here's the kicker: if a person has grown up in the Karpman Drama Triangle, they've LEARNED THE OTHER ROLES TOO, in other words, although victim was the main role I played, I had been understudying rescuer and persecutor for years by carefully assimilating how others played those roles. I was ready to rock up and play those roles myself, as it were starting from the other points of the triangle.
So it's important to recognise that, if I get sucked into a Karpman situation with someone, I am TOTALLY RESPONSIBLE for my own reactivation. It's not their fault I've been reactivated: I'm responsible for spotting when it's happening.
How do I know? My body tenses up. It's super simple to spot, actually. A friend of mine says I twitch physically when I'm activated. So I have to remain vigilant and willing to take appropriate reaction in response to an 'invitation' or if I realise I've got sucked in.
So much for the theory. What's the answer?
The procedure
So, here's what can work. If someone wants to work with you, get them familiar with the AA programme: literature, tapes, meetings, fellowship.
Then present the questions elaborated upon above:
Do you want to be move from being concerned with others' conduct and your welfare to being concerned with your conduct and others' welfare?
Do you want to drop the responsibility entanglements and shift to being 100% responsible for yourself, leaving others to being 100% responsible for themselves?
If someone is willing to make this journey, it's usually possible to avoid the Karpman Drama Triangle trap.
If not, back away slowly and kindly, because, even if you start out as the benign rescuer, that won't be where it ends.