N.A. or not N.A?: that is the question. For or against 12-step recovery?

[Dickon]

It has amazed me how many people on here looking to quit opiates and other drugs have never even heard of Narcotics Anonymous (N.A.). I'm, therefore, curious to conduct a straw poll as what people on here think about it.

My two cents are that although I do not plan on becoming an N.A. member this time round, the only reason that this is even a remote possibility is the vast number of invaluable lessons I learnt about getting and staying clean in N.A. meetings. I think it's simply the best place for a lost soul in the agony of active addiction to first seek help. It's a really fantastic thing, it's free and (almost) universally available.

I know one objection is the use of the word God in the 12-steps themselves, but this is a completely specious objection. The phrase is "God, as you understand him (or God: the him might be on the out for sexism reasons)". An atheist could understand God as "A fictional concept created by man". That's consistent with the 12-steps, or how about God as "the totality of matter and forces in the universe, combined with the laws that govern motion", or maybe "God is a word that stands for what you make of it", etc. Don't let a lapsed monotheistic past colour your views!

So I embrace the non-hypocritical but somewhat odd position that I'd recommend it to anyone with no experience of staying or getting clean, but find it a little too strong on answers for my taste.

Dickon added 2 Minutes and 32 Seconds later...

P.S. I don't think I need to do this but just in case there is some very very oblique self-incrimination I add that this doublemerged post in entirity is to be viewed as fiction ...for entertainment purposes only.....

Reputation Comments on this post:

	thanks for sharing your thought provoking ideas and questions
	Good question
	nice way to bring it up