Category: Case Studies

Case Study: Covid-19 Group Inventory To Help Assess Having In-Person Meetings

Posted on by The Webservant

Foreword to Second Edition pg xix

“Soon was beset by these very problems on every side and in every group. But out of this frightening and at first disrupting experience grew that AA’s had to hang together or die separately. We had to unify our fellowship or pass off the scene.”

Thinking of reopening to in person meetings? We suggest using the traditions as a tool to help your group decide whether you should or not. As well as looking at some risk factors associated with Covid-19.

Tradition 1: Our common welfare should come first, personal recovery depends upon CA unity.

What happens if someone comes in drunk or high and doesn’t abide by the social distancing of 6 ft apart or wear a mask? (this doesn’t have to be someone under the influence it could be anyone)

Would this affect the group harmony/unity?

Tradition 2: For our group purpose there is but one ultimate authority – A loving God as he may be expressed in our group conscience. Our leaders are but trusted servants; they do not govern.

Do I participate in debate with information and facts instead of fear?

Is my conscience carrying the best intentions for my group and our fellowship as a whole, or is it based on my own interests and ego?

By utilizing the knowledge and expertise of experts around the world to inform my group I am a responsible trusted servant of my group. Do I recognize that I have no expertise on this pandemic?

Tradition 3: The only requirement for CA membership is a desire to stop using cocaine and all other mind-altering substances.

If the room my group is in, is at capacity and I need to turn someone away, how does that affect membership? Who is responsible for saying who stays or not?

Tradition 4: Each group should be autonomous except in matters affecting other groups or C.A. as a whole.

Am I considering the implications that opening a meeting in person may have on other groups or the fellowship as a whole?

Do I understand that my decisions and actions today may have a lasting effect on our fellowship for years to come?

Am I teaching others how to use and access online meetings?

Tradition 5: Each group has but one primary purpose – to carry its message to the addict who still suffers.

Do I help my group in every way possible to fulfill its primary purpose during this pandemic?

Tradition 6: A C.A. group ought never endorse, finance, or lend the C.A. name to any related facility or outside enterprise, lest problems of money, property and prestige divert us from our primary purpose.

Am I trying to be prestigious by having an in person meeting before everyone else? Is my ego getting in the way of channeling Gods will into my decisions?

Should I try to lease my own building so I can have meetings?

Is having a meeting outside in a public place ok for anonymity? Would a newcomer feel comfortable to share?

Tradition 7: Every C.A. group ought to be fully self-supporting, declining outside contributions.

If my group meets in person with a limited amount of people will we still be able to pay the rent and any other expenses incurred with donations to the basket?

Tradition 8: Cocaine Anonymous should remain forever non-professional, but our service centers may employ special workers.

Is there going to be someone to sanitize all areas of the room that the group meets or would the group need to hire some outside help?

Tradition 9: C.A., as such, ought never be organized; but we may create service boards or committees directly responsible to those they serve.

Can I help our fellowship continue to grow during this pandemic with meeting online, and helping others that may struggle with technology?

Can I form a committee to gather and share knowledge during the pandemic that may be useful in helping our group make a decision to re-open our meeting?

Will our group be able to make sure we follow the laws and protocols our province and city? Do we need to form a committee to do this?

Tradition 10: Cocaine Anonymous has no opinion on outside issues; hence the C.A. name ought never be drawn into public controversy.

Do I recognize that I have no opinion on medicine or treatment of Covid-19, but still need to be able to make a decision on how/when to hold our meetings? (Online or in-person)

Is it possible that meeting in-person at this time could create controversy at the public level? What happens if there is an outbreak at a meeting and it is posted on the news? Would we be able to attract newcomers and maintain our tradition 5?

Can I participate in debate involving our group or fellowship without bringing my own personal fears into it?

Tradition 11: Our public relations policy is based on attraction rather than promotion; we need always maintain personal anonymity at the level of press, radio, television and films.

Am I ok with giving my full name and phone number in case of an outbreak?

If an outbreak should occur, and having to provide our names to public health, would this affect our personal anonymity as a cocaine anonymous group?

Tradition 12: Anonymity is the spiritual foundation of all our Traditions, ever reminding us to place principles before personalities.

How will our fellowship become more successful if “we did this” instead of “I did this”?

Can I be a small part of Gods grand plan?

What are the C.A. Archives going to look like when this pandemic is over? Did we stay harmonized or dismantle?

Robert’s Rules of Order Dramatization: Mock Motion Exercise

Posted on by The Webservant

NARRATOR

This presentation is designed to give C.A. Members a general understanding on how parliamentary procedure can be used at a Group, District, Area and World Conference level of services.

The World Service Conference uses Robert’s Rules of Order with some modifications.  You can find an abridged version of Robert’s Rules and their modifications in your World Service Manual (2022) on pages 85 through 92.

We have created a series of mock motions to illustrate parliamentary procedure.  This presentation won’t cover every aspect of parliamentary procedure that you may encounter, but should illustrate most of the more common ones.

Motions typically take place either in the “Old Business” or “New Business” section of the Agenda.  For the purposes of this play, we assume all the players can make motions.

MAKER of MOTION

I (Convention Hospitality Committee member) move that: “When Area’s business runs over into the lunch hour that it adopt an official pizza lunch, to be effective immediately.”

SECONDER

Second!

CHAIR

It has been moved and seconded that: “When Area’s business runs over into the lunch hour that it adopt an official pizza lunch, to be effective immediately.” Is there any discussion on this motion?

The participating members raise their hands to be recognized.

NARRATOR

In order for anything to be considered by the Service Committee it must first be entered in the form of a motion.  A Motion must be seconded before it can be debated and/or voted upon.  This particular Motion is called a Main Motion because there are no previous pending motions.  The Chairperson has called those members who have asked to be recognized by raising their hands.  Once recognized they may proceed to speak in the order in which they were recognized.

The motion that the maker presented is stated simply and directly without any of the arguments that they might use to support or argue for their motion.  The Chair will ask the maker of the Motion first if they wish to speak first.  If the maker does not speak then the first in line will start when given the go-ahead by the Chairperson.

CHAIR

Would the Committee like to speak to its motion?

Thank you, Mr. Chair.  I speak in favor of the motion.  The Committee has worked long and hard to create an environment that is business like but fun.  We have taken into consideration the opinions of many individuals that work in the various levels of C.A. Service and this is the result of that dialogue and the group conscience taken by the Hospitality Committee.  I urge you to vote in favor of this motion. 

A MEMBER INTERRUPTS:  Point of Order!

CHAIR

Please state your “point of order.”

POINT OF ORDER

Mr. Chair I believe this motion is out of order as we can’t make a decision that requires distribution of Area funds, without GSRs having time to bring this matter back to their Groups for discussion.

CHAIR

Thank you.  No, all of the requirements have been met by this motion. The Area Service Committee and attending GSR’s have been given responsibility to disburse monies on behalf of the groups that serve the Area as a whole. Furthermore, Concept Three, “the Right of Decision” also give GSRs the responsibility to make decisions as business arise at Area.

Thank you Mr. Chairman.

NARRATOR

When the motion’s maker spoke to this motion they stated their position in the very beginning in a clear and concise manner.  When the point of order was called out, the person making the “point of order” did not wait to be recognized, since points of order must be raised immediately prior to any other business.  That is exactly how a point of order must be raised.  Complex motions or those motions with substantial impact on C.A. ought be presented, seconded, and then tabled to be taken back to the Groups, Committees, etc. for thoughtful consideration.

CHAIR

Member is recognized and has the floor.

I have a Point of information.

CHAIR

Very well.  What is your question?

Yes Mr. Chairman, thank you.  Isn’t the Area Service Committee obligated to follow the selections of the Hospitality Committee when picking a vendor to purchase the pizza from?

CHAIR

Would the motion’s maker care to answer?

MOTION MAKER

Thank You, Mr. Chairman.  No, the Area Service Committee can select any contractor if it has a basis for making that decision and that this motion considers the Area Service Committee as part of the process in making those selections.

NARRATOR

You will notice that the Point of Information, is a question asked of or through the Chair by a member who has been recognized, not a new piece of information shouted out from the floor.  You must be recognized by the chair to ask your question.  If you shout “Point of Information” out from the floor, you will be taunted by the Chair.

Points of Information are taken in order as the individual is recognized during debate.  The Chair will either answer the question or call upon another to provide the answer.  Only one question may be asked.  However, since the point of information is not debate, asking a question does not stop the member for also being recognized for debate later on the same motion.  Persons wishing to debate twice on a motion must wait until no one else wishes to debate a first time.  Closing debate stops both debate and questions.

GSR WITH FRIENDLY AMENDMENT

I have a friendly amendment to offer:  I would like to make pepperoni the official topping of this Area.

NARRATOR

A friendly amendment is an amendment without a formal motion offered by a member when a small correction or change appears necessary. A friendly amendment must be accepted by unanimous consent of the voting members present, It does not matter if the maker of the motion accepts it or not. It must be accepted by the Area Service Committee as a whole. Once the chair has read a motion into the record, it belongs to the Area as a whole, not the original maker of the motion. NOTE: the member was clear about how they wanted the item to be changed and was prepared when he spoke.

CHAIR

“Are there any objections to the friendly amendment?” If none, it is accepted. If even one member raises a hand in objection, it fails.

UNITY CHAIR WITH FRIENDLY AMENDMENT:

Parliamentary Inquiry!!

CHAIR

Yes ?  What is your Parliamentary Inquiry?

Can I make a Motion to Amend at this time, since my friendly amendment was rejected?

CHAIR

Normally you could, but you’ve relinquished the floor, so you’ve had your turn.  But someone else in line could when it’s their turn.

ANOTHER FRIENDLY AMENDMENT

I move to amend the motion to insert “and pepperoni be the official topping”, after “The Area Committee adopt a monthly official pizza lunch.”

SECONDER

Second!

CHAIR

“Are there any objections to the friendly amendment?” If none, it is accepted. If even one member raises a hand in objection, it fails.

It has been moved and seconded to amend the motion on the floor to read as follows:  “When Area’s business runs over into the lunch hour that it adopt an official pizza lunch, and pepperoni be the official topping, to be effective immediately.” Is there any debate?

ANOTHER FRIENDLY AMENDMENT

I would like to offer a friendly amendment that “and pineapple” be added after pepperoni

CHAIR

Are there any objections from the floor to adding “and Pineapple” after pepperoni?

Seeing none the motion now reads “When Area’s business runs over into the lunch hour that it adopt an official pizza lunch and that pepperoni and pineapple be the official topping, to be effective immediately.”

MEMBER:

I speak in favor of this motion to amend.  I love pepperoni, it makes me happy to eat it, and it’s so good for you too! And we all know everyone loves pineapple, right? It is the best one.

CHAIR

Is there any further debate?

ADDITIONAL AMENDMENT

Mr. Chair, I would like to make a friendly amendment to also order hot wings as part of the pizza lunch.

CHAIR

Thank you, but I am going to rule that out of order as it would be an amendment to an amendment that has already been amended. As you may be aware, as per Robert’s Rules of Order, no motion may have more than two amendments to it. Any such motion regarding chicken wings would have to be a separate motion following the completion of the present motion on the floor.

CHAIR

Hearing no further debate please prepare yourselves to vote on the motion to amend the main motion to insert “and pepperoni and pineapple be the official topping”, after “The Area adopt a monthly official pizza.”

(EVERYONE THAT HAS A VOTE WILL VOTE TO APPROVE THE AMENDMENT) 

CHAIR

All those in favor please raise your hands.  All opposed?  The ayes clearly have it. The motion on the floor now reads: “When Area’s business runs over into the lunch hour that it adopt an official pizza lunch, and pepperoni and pineapple be the official topping, to be effective immediately.”   Any further debate on the Main Motion, as amended?  

NARRATOR

If the debate continues whereby it seems there are no new points being made, a member who has the floor can “Call the Question” — a Motion to Close Debate and vote immediately on the Main Question requires a second, is not debatable and requires a 2/3rds majority to pass. The Motion to Limit Debate to, for example, 20 minutes, applies only to the Main Motion being considered and requires a 2/3rds majority. NOTE: With a call to question, there must be others in line to debate after the person making the call to question, or it is out of order.

There is no further debate.

CHAIR

Thank you .  Please prepare yourself to vote on the main motion: “When Area’s business runs over into the lunch hour that it adopt an official pizza lunch and pepperoni and pineapple be the official topping, to be effective immediately.” All those in favor please raise your hands.  (Everyone but Opposing members raises their hand)  All those opposed? (Opposing Members raise hands)  It appears that the ayes have a majority and the motion passes.

NARRATOR

Instead of relying upon a friendly amendment, the proposed changes to the main motion are in the form of a motion to amend.  This motion is debatable and is voted upon before considering the main motion.  The Chairperson must read the motion as amended if the amendment is passed.  In addition, the Chairperson must always read the motion, prior to taking a vote. 

Besides Points of Order, there are several other times where a member may call out from the Floor without being recognized.  One of these is a “Parliamentary Inquiry” where a member needs to know the proper procedure for an urgent matter.  Another is to “Appeal from a Decision of the Chair”; as such decisions must be appealed immediately.  Another is the “Motion to Reconsider”… 

CHAIR

Is there anything further that the Committee…

Member raises their hand is recognized by the chair.

OPPOSING GSR – I’d like to make 5th Concept Statement.

NARRATOR

A 5th Concept Statement must be made before the next item of business. NOTE: The chair may allow the 5th concept statement to be heard at any point during the same business meeting.

CHAIR

Asks the Member, Did you vote on the losing side? Member replies, “YES.”

Chair recognizes the member to make a 5th Concept Statement.

I speak against the motion as submitted.  While I believe that the Committee has worked very hard on this I am not sure that we have considered everything about this.

Member raises their hand is recognized by the chair.

MEMBER

I move to reconsider the previous motion.  I voted with the prevailing side.

SECONDER

Second!

CHAIR

A Motion to Reconsider has been made and seconded.  Is there debate on this motion? 

Members raise their hands and are recognized by the chair.

Member: I have had second thoughts about our voting on the motion without sufficient debate on whether to include it in the Manual or not.  I believe we are doing ourselves and the Fellowship a disservice if we do not consider all the possibilities from our action here today.

Member: I speak against the motion to Reconsider.  I believe that the issue was clear at the outset and the limited debate did not indicate lack of participation but a good understanding of the issue.  I don’t think that additional debate on the motion would resolve the minority’s problem with the motion or change the minds of any significant number of the majority. 

Member: I speak against the motion. My argument has already been made. Thank you. 

Narrator

Please notice how, having already heard the points he wanted to bring up, simply stated his position, and took a seat. This is a very effective way to make proper use of valuable conference floor time. Hearing repetitive debate is not the best way to get your point across.

CHAIR

There being no further debate, prepare yourselves to vote.  All in favor of the motion to reconsider the previous motion raise your hands.  All opposed?   (Everyone else with votes raise their hands).  The motion clearly fails.  Let’s move on to the balance of our Committee reports.

NARRATOR

To finish off our presentation,  used a procedure that can be confusing when first faced on the Conference floor. A motion to reconsider a previous motion may only be made by a member that voted with the prevailing side when the motion was first voted upon.  Both passed and failed motions may be reconsidered.  Any member may second, regardless of their previous vote.  Since the original motion was debatable the motion to Reconsider was also debatable.  Notice that both members debated the reasons for and against the motion to Reconsider, not the original motion.  A member arguing a motion not on the floor, such as the original motion here, would be ruled out of order.  If the motion to Reconsider had passed, the original motion would have returned to the floor, with debate and amendment again in order.  Anyone may discuss motions with the permission of the Chairperson but may only make motions if they have a vote during that session, except on behalf of their committee.

This concludes our dramatization.  We hope that you have a clearer understanding of how Robert’s Rules of Order will work at the Group, District, Area or World level of service.

“Property and Prestige”

Posted on by The Webservant

By Hal K., Houston TX

In the spirit of the Traditions and the direction of the Concepts of World Service, it appears that many of us, as trusted servants, may want to examine our adherence to the intent of our founders of being directly responsible to those they serve. In my travels over the past two years as a Trustee I have uncovered a discouraging, but not surprising, discovery of property and prestige issues amongst many of our trusted servants. Through our implied definitions of what our responsibilities are to this Fellowship and the implied direction of the Traditions and/or Concepts, I fear that many trusted servants have manipulated these definitions and directions into some sort of warped manifesto of discrete leadership intent.

I have discovered financial structures within structures of Areas and Districts that are disproportionate to our service design. Many (though not all) of our area and district structures are focused on either financing local ventures under the guise of the need to better serve CA as a whole (e.g. travel expense for officers and alternates, special projects, workshops, etc.)

I believe the Traditions dictate that our fellowship needs as little organization as possible except on matters that may affect the CA fellowship as a whole. I also believe that our primary purpose should never be superseded by our ambitious need to expand our service structure beyond the immediate needs of the membership. In light of the financial deficits now facing our Fellowship, should we be using our simple committees as a financial means to fulfill or finance personal recognition or promote needs outside the scope of these committees? I think not! I have discovered financial structures within structures of Areas and Districts that are disproportionate to our service design. Many (though not all) of our area and district structures are focused on either financing local ventures under the guise of the need to better serve CA as a whole (e.g. travel expense for officers and alternates, special projects, workshops, etc.) As an individual contributing to the Fellowship, whether through the Seventh Tradition or specific fundraising events such as conventions, dances, and the like, it is reasonable to expect that these contributions be utilized in the most prudent way at the local committee level or be filtered down from the group level directly to the World Service Office.

What ever happened to the “good old days” when to serve this fellowship was to not cause hardship to it? In my early days as a delegate (1986) to the World Service Conference, when our Areas were new, without large budgets, we could not afford to send a delegate, let alone two or three alternates, advisors, or observers. We would alternate who would go, share manuals and materials, share rooms pay our own airfare etc. We did this willingly, always believing that what we did was necessary and for the greater good of the CA Fellowship. For this reason, Areas, Districts and committees should not hold on to money, because this will eventually justify a self-serving need to spend it. This will result in not only an under-funded World Service Office but will eventually destroy our Fellowship as a whole.

Through the development of “down line” representation (i.e. sponsees) at the District or Area level, these elders maintain their influence, which may be so permanently established at the district or area level that newcomers often surrender. This stifles change and growth for these local fellowships and sometimes the First Tradition barely gets utilized except to support their position or argument to maintain control.

The Ninth Tradition suggest we not be organized and yet in many cases we often neglect to seek out advice from those that have gone before us, those that were often responsible for the creation of our local service structures. Old-timers are often called “bleeding deacons” and are often criticized and avoided instead of being sought and consulted for their invaluable experience. On the opposite end of the spectrum are our so-called “elder statesmen” who are often perceived to have power and/or influence. Through the development of “down line” representation (i.e. sponsees) at the District or Area level, these elders maintain their influence, which may be so permanently established at the district or area level that newcomers often surrender. This stifles change and growth for these local fellowships and sometimes the First Tradition barely gets utilized except to support their position or argument to maintain control.

If I can follow the spirit of the Traditions and Concepts I will have a greater chance when serving this Fellowship of decreasing self and increasing unity; likewise if all trusted servants follow the true spirit of the Traditions and Concepts, they reduce the opportunity for property and prestige to divert them from their primary purpose.

C.A. Newsgram, Volume 15 No. 4 • CA World Service Office, 3740 Overland Ave., Suite C • Los Angeles, CA 90034 • Fourth Quarter 2001 p. 5

Case Study: An agnostic group rewrites the 12 Steps.

Posted on by The Webservant

An agnostic group, based on group conscience, rewrites Steps 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, and 11 of C.A. into their own version?

Step Two: Came to accept and to understand that we needed strengths beyond our awareness and resources to restore us to sanity. [Was: Came to believe that a Power greater than ourselves could restore us to sanity.]

Step Three: Made a decision to turn our will and our lives over to the care of the C.A. program. [Was: Made a decision to turn our will and our lives over to the care of God, as we understood Him.]

Step Five: Admitted to ourselves without reservation, and to another human being, the exact nature of our wrongs. [Was: Admitted to God, to ourselves, and to another human being the exact nature of our wrongs.]

Step Six: Were ready to accept help in letting go of all our defects of character. [Was: Were entirely ready to have God remove all these defects of character.]

Step Seven: Humbly sought to have our shortcomings removed. [Was: Humbly asked Him to remove our shortcomings.]

Step Eleven: Sought through mindful inquiry and meditation to improve our spiritual awareness, seeking only for knowledge of our rightful path in life and the power to carry that out. [Was: Sought through prayer and meditation to improve our conscious contact with God as we understood Him, praying only for knowledge of His will for us and the power to carry that out.]

Clarifying Questions and Answers:

Can this group still be identified as part of C.A.? Explain Why or Why Not?

Does this group’s action affect other groups? If Yes: Should the group be expelled —no longer endorsed by C.A. at the Area Level and removed from the C.A. meeting list? 

How might the Traditions be used to resolve this schism—both within the group and at the Area Level?

Case Study: A Group is using non-conference approved literature in their meeting.

Posted on by The Webservant

Suggested Readings:

Cocaine Anonymous World Service Manual 2020 Edition p. 14

Cocaine Anonymous groups, meetings and service committees should only use, display, distribute or sell the following literature and materials: the WSC Approved Literature set forth in the Appendix, the books “ALCOHOLICS ANONYMOUS,” “TWELVE STEPS AND TWELVE TRADITIONS,” and “The A.A. Service Manual, combined with the 12 Concepts For World Service,” and Cocaine Anonymous World Service, Region, Area, District and group/ meeting approved flyers, meeting directories and other materials displaying the C.A. logo as described above

CA Newsgram, Second Quarter 2007, Vol. 24 No. 2 “Conference Approved Literature” (World Service Board of Trustees)

“Clearly, if the reading/writing that the group/meeting/committee wants to use is not on the Conference-approved list contained in the (WSC) Manual’s Appendix, and there has been no advisory opinion to date authorizing its reference and use, the subject materials should not be used. The language cited, therefore, is the clear conscience of our entire Fellowship regardless of whether we, as a board, or any member of the Fellowship or group argues or decides whether the word “should” is suggestive, as some members of the Fellowship argue, or directive, as others might argue. The intent and spirit of including that paragraph (WSC Approved Literature) was and is to set a base level of appropriate materials and readings for all groups of C.A. throughout our world.”

CA NewsGram, Fourth Quarter 2009, Vol. 26 No.3 “A.A.’s “How It Works” and Cocaine Anonymous (World Service Board of Trustees)

Update as of December 5, 2009: It is the position of the World Service Board of Trustees that the C.A. version of How it Works is not considered C.A. approved literature. In the spirit of unity, our common welfare, and our observance of the Twelve Traditions, we suggest that your group have a business meeting to determine the well-informed group conscience as to what readings shall be used in your meeting formats.

The Language of the Heart: Bill W’s Grapevine Writings. pp. 80-81

Bill Wilson on Tradition Four: “With these concepts in mind, let us look more closely at Tradition 4. The first sentence of Tradition 4 guarantees each A.A. group local autonomy. With respect to its own affairs, the group may make any decisions, adopt any attitudes that it likes. No over-all or intergroup authority should challenge this primary privilege. We feel this ought to be so, even though the group might sometimes act with complete indifference to our tradition. For example, an A.A. group could, if it wished, hire a paid preacher and support him out of the proceeds of a group night club. Though such an absurd procedure would be miles outside our tradition, the group’s “right to be wrong” would be held inviolate. We are sure that each group can be granted, and safely granted, these most extreme privileges. We know that our familiar process of trial and error would summarily eliminate both the preacher and the night club. Those severe growing pains which invariably follow any radical departure from A.A. tradition can be absolutely relied upon to bring an erring group back into line. An A.A. group need not be coerced by any human government over and above its own members. Their own experience, plus A.A. opinion in surrounding groups, plus God’s prompting in their group conscience would be sufficient. Much travail has already taught us this. Hence we may confidently say to each group, “You should be responsible to no other authority than your own conscience.”.

Clarifying Questions and Answers:

Is it OK for a group to use non-conference approved literature in meetings?

Does non-conference approved literature imply Conference disapproval? If yes? Would that imply that C.A. has an opinion on outside issues?

Does the group’s use of Non-Conference approved literature at their meetings affect C.A. as a whole? If Yes, How is our common welfare impacted by the use of these materials at C.A. meetings and events?

Is there a list of C.A. Approved Literature? A: Yes – click here.

Case Study: What can a Group do about a disruptive member?

Posted on by The Webservant

A member continuously disrupts group meetings with loud abusive and bullying behaviour towards fellow members and newcomers. Membership in the group continues to decline. New people coming to the meeting for the first time often do not return.

Suggested Readings:

AA, Twelve Steps and Twelve Traditions, P. 143-144

The elders led Ed aside. They said firmly, “You can’t talk like this around here. You’ll have to quit it or get out.” With great sarcasm Ed came back at them. “Now do tell! Is that so?” He reached over to a bookshelf and took up a sheaf of papers. On top of them lay the foreword to the book “Alco­holics Anonymous,” then under preparation. He read aloud, “The only requirement for A.A. membership is a desire to stop drinking.” Relentlessly, Ed went on, “When you guys wrote that sentence, did you mean it, or didn’t you?” Dismayed, the elders looked at one another, for they knew he had them cold. So Ed stayed.

The Twelve Traditions Illustrated

Our brother the noisy drunk affords the simplest illustration of this Tradition (One). If he insists on disrupting the meeting, we “invite” him to leave, and we bring him back when he’s in better shape to hear the message. we are putting the “common welfare” first. But it is his welfare, too; if he’s ever going to get sober, the group must go on functioning, ready for him.

Clarifying Questions and Answers:

Can a member be thrown out of a group for disrupted, abusive behaviour?

How might the group deal with a member whose conduct is threatening the common welfare of the group?

Case Study: Does Fundraising Conflict with Tradition Seven and Concept Seven?

Posted on by The Webservant

Discussion Points:

Fundraising conflicts with the expressed and adopted definition of the phrase “fully self-supporting” from Tradition Seven, which states, “all expenses are to be liquidated by individual contributions”. Our founders wished to be very clear. Fundraising activity interferes with our faith that a God of our understanding will direct and provide for our fellowship if we follow traditions. Practicing tradition is our path to a higher power and true unity.

Fundraising activities divert time, resources, intention and focus of individuals and groups from our primary purpose as stated in Tradition Five. Extraordinary time and energy are put into making events “successful” rather than purposeful.

When fundraising generates monies, controversy results concerning “money, property or prestige”. The traditions are unequivocal about the danger to unity of these subjects. Prudent reserves may become inflated and committees dependent upon fundraising events are pressured to raise more funds for bigger and better events. This further leads us away from the spiritual focus of our fellowship and our primary purpose as stated in Tradition Five.

Fundraising activities in meetings changes the atmosphere in meetings so necessary to our primary purpose of carrying the message to the newcomer. Intimidating, enthusiastic or manipulative sales behaviours are not supportive of our relationship to the newcomer. Inaccurate impressions of our program and purpose are made to newcomers and non-addict visitors. Some members of our fellowship will only attend some meetings if they can promote fundraising events, a significant diversion from our primary purpose.

Fundraising diminishes individual member’s and group’s abilities to effect change or voice discontent with any committee by the practice of with holding funds from the “basket” or donations from the group. Committees are often substantially financed by fundraising allowing them to ignore any diminished funding from the “basket”. This principle created by our tradition’s founders is inherent in the 7th Tradition and is a right granted to individual members.

Fundraising promotes governance rather than service, which is a clear contradiction expressed in the Tradition Two. Committees may decide on activities supported by fundraising which may have no relation to the collective group conscience. Majority democratic votes are used by committees often to rationalize this behaviour. Democratic votes, while useful are not to be confused with, nor are they the equivalent of, the spiritual concept of the conscience of the fellowship. Governance of this sort can also justified by the notion that what we are doing is “good” or “necessary”—euphemisms for “the ends justify the means.” Governance is organizational self will and blocks the effect of “a loving God as he may express himself in or group conscience”, central to the 2nd Tradition.

Fundraising permits the receipt of outside contributions to the funding of our fellowship, precisely prohibited by our 7th Tradition. There is no way to establish membership at the time of sale of goods or services and some activities such as raffles, lotteries, auctions of donated merchandise and resale of outside event tickets skirt legalities and does associate our fellowship with outside enterprises.

Fundraising encourages our membership to miss the underlying spiritual experiences inherent in the phrase “fully self-supporting”. Simplicity, faith, generosity and responsibility are for many, necessary experiences required to have changed lives, becoming fully contributing members to our fellowship and to society as a whole.

Various fundraising activities encourage our membership to continue the self-centered behaviour of “giving only if there is something in it for me”. This does not contain the underlying spiritual principles of generosity, faith, selflessness and “giving freely of what we have found,” inherent in the principle of self- support of Tradition Seven.

Social events once designed to promote recovery, fellowship and a sense of belonging, all worthy contributions of fellowship to the goal of unity, have changed from activities designed to celebrate the freedom of recovery to events with the primary purpose of fundraising. This often excludes members from fellowship activities who see fundraising activity contrary to many of the traditions.

For obvious practical requirements and to ensure fullest participation in fellowship events, entire fellowship support is required. This support is simply measured by the willingness of individual member contributions to fund a particular service. No financial support for a particular event or service is one indication of the expression of our collective group conscience. Funding from the fellowship donations helps to avoid the creation of committee events that a particular local area may not be large enough to support or indeed even desire. Funding of events by fundraising thought to be ” good” are not a substitute for informed group conscience, the spiritual essence of Tradition Two and our collective path to a higher power.

Fundraising activities conducted in the group setting change our group to a “business” activity rather than a “spiritual entity”. Our founders of the traditions cautioned in the creation of Tradition Five that business and spirituality should not be mixed, that discussions of money should be kept to a minimum, that we embrace the notion of corporate poverty and that we be ever vigilante in matters of money. Beware. They are seldom as emphatic as when discussing the subject of money and the 12 step fellowship.

Discussion Questions

Is your Group’s Fundraising efforts taking your fellowship in a different direction?

Does your Area’s fundraising efforts circumvent the ‘power of the purse?’

If your group withholds contributions from your Area in an effort to exercise its “power of the purse,” should your Group’s GSR communicate that decision with the Area Delegate?