Atheist Awarded $2M in Settlement After Being Refused Secular Rehab Treatment

a reply to: Sremmos80
It is founded on a belief in a power outside yourself.


11.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.

As I said in the other reply.

Many use the group as a higher power.

But many, such as the plaintiff in the OP, or people like yourself and many posters on ATS, just search for ways to be offended by religion.

AA couldn't be farther from being a religious organization.

But don't let that stand in the way of your being 'offended'.

I am out before I offend someone.......

originally posted by: Southern Guardian
And we hear non-stop about this so called persecution of christians on Fox news. Give me a break.

Drug rehab councillors can accept a door handle being the higher power to an abuser

Sounds like you are just Christian bashing here.

I wonder why?

Give me a break!!!

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: Lucid Lunacy

Our programs use
evidence-based tools, social model, peer-group oriented recovery, and introduction to 12 step programs (AA, NA, Alanon), alumni and family groups.

From the site.
If it is the 12 step program then it is AA.

It is definitely AA. New site shows a picture of the AA book.

There was a case recently (not sure if same one) that legally challenged AA as being religious based.

Pretty sure the final ruling was that AA is religious based.

a reply to: Bone75

What a crock of #.
Most people attending these things, and I know a few, just go along with it but don't believe any of your religious nonsense.
And they get clean, go on with there life as godless as ever.
By the way, saying godless like its an insult is like a black guy calling a white guy a cracker...ineffective at its intended purpose (I have a tattoo that says godless, kingless, and wellness...just saying).

originally posted by: Lucid Lunacy

He was subsequently thrown in jail for 100 days because he wouldn't attend the program [he requested a secular one]. More than 3 months in jail. I'm fine with this settlement.

I bet he is too!

$2,000,000 for 100 days in jail... umm...

SIGN ME UP!!!

a reply to: Raggedyman

What you are referring to Christian bashing is actually criticizing you pushing your nonsense on people in any way you can.

As to why?
Well, because your ridiculous presumptions need to be called out I guess, but mostly because its just plain fun to watch you spin your martyrdom into a frenzy if stupid...
Kind if like the robot on the original star trek that fried itself trying to understand its own contradicting programming.

a reply to: stosh64

Sounds like you are the only one offended, we just think it was right for this guy to say he didn't want a religious practice.
Not sure you know what offended means...

If you want to seriously act like a program that tells you that if you give your life up to God, 'as you see him', is not religious then seems like being willfully ignorant.

Also they don't really recommend you chose people or physical things, they say don't pick something that will fail on you and guess what the only thing that won't fail on you is?

a reply to: stosh64

This may be true, but it was founded by a very particular sect of fundamentalist Christians. It most certainly is a religious-slanted organization, and has been found so by several court cases.

But the high court, in a 5-to-2 ruling, said that state prison officials violated the constitutional rights of the inmate who brought the case, David Griffin, a former addict who complained that he found the Alcoholics Anonymous teachings objectionable because of agnostic or atheistic views he has held since the 1950's.

''A fair reading of the fundamental A.A. doctrinal writings discloses that their dominant theme is unequivocally religious,'' the court said. ''Adherence to the A.A. fellowship entails engagement in religious activity and religious proselytization.''

NY Times

"God as we understand him" is non-sectarian, not non-religious. And many AA members will claim they're not religious, but the important literature (Big Book) is steeped with a mandated belief in God -- any God.

People then will claim, "oh but it's spiritual not religious!" -- until the words "God" are taken out of the Big Book, 12 steps, and the 12 by 12 -- it's a religious organization.

originally posted by: Bone75
Well perhaps if the godless were better at rehabilitating drug addicts than Christians are, there would be more options for the judge to choose from?

The Godless do a pretty good job. SMART Recovery is not religious at all, and is a secular treatment program:

SMART Recovery® employs evidence-based tools for recovery. That is to say, in their meetings, they discuss tools to recovery that have been proven to work over the course of several clinical studies. The primary tool in SMART Recovery® is Rational Emotive Behavioral Therapy, REBT, for short. This tool basically assists someone in changing their belief system about alcohol and/or drugs and it’s fairly effective, boasting a recovery rate anywhere between 35% and 50% over a one-year period, depending on the study

....

Over the course of two years, the REBT group did significantly better abstaining than the 12-step (or AA) group (in fact, more than 10% higher). While there are questions about how the study was conducted, there is no question that this study showed a significantly higher relative value of recovery for REBT practitioners to AA practitioners, keeping in mind that they were required to attend. Other studies show Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, a very similar technique, to be up to 60% effective for abstinence in some studies, with an average recovery rate of 45% over the course of a year. Alcoholics Anonymous doesn’t come close to these rates of abstinence, hovering around the same rate as spontaneous remission (otherwise known as a ‘cold turkey’ approach) in most controlled studies or epidemiological surveys.

Thefix.com

There is no reason for this man to not have had the option to attend SMART if it was available in his area. AA has a monopoly on block due to its age, its "social network" (everyone knows someone that's gone to AA), and the fact that its run at almost every church -- churches where judges, politicians, and public leaders attend. Let's face it, Christians have had a pretty strong grip on US politics for a long time, and anything that agrees with their doctrines is going to be advocated.

In the end, a person's recovery is up to them ... they're the one that has to want to change their behavior. If someone is "forced" to attend a program they don't agree with, they are already being setup to fail.

And just like many things in life, there isn't "one path" to recovery. The right path to recovery is the one that works. For some it's AA, and for some it's not. People aren't cookie-cutter automatons to be indoctrinated with some 60+ year old book. If they want to be, fine -- if not, they should be allowed to seek other options. Just the fact that the addict *wants* to seek treatment should be encouraged.

This isn't condoning forcing religion but anyone who has dealt with addicts knows if you don't have money the Christians will accept and treat you. Rehab is absurdly expensive thousands per day. It could be as simple as the religious program was cost effective.

I had a friend who eventually died from a motorcycle wreck sober who I had helped sober up. Literally the only people that would help him was a Catholic charity group associated with the Catholic hospital. Everyone else was willing to let him die if he couldn't cough up literally 10's of thousands for the treatment he needed.

I am sorry but if you are in jail and an addict who has committed a crime and needs treatment you don't deserve religious freedom at the expense of taxpayers. You get the cheapest program available that has a decent track record.

originally posted by: MystikMushroom

originally posted by: Bone75
Well perhaps if the godless were better at rehabilitating drug addicts than Christians are, there would be more options for the judge to choose from?

The Godless do a pretty good job. SMART Recovery is not religious at all, and is a secular treatment program:

SMART Recovery® employs evidence-based tools for recovery. That is to say, in their meetings, they discuss tools to recovery that have been proven to work over the course of several clinical studies. The primary tool in SMART Recovery® is Rational Emotive Behavioral Therapy, REBT, for short. This tool basically assists someone in changing their belief system about alcohol and/or drugs and it’s fairly effective, boasting a recovery rate anywhere between 35% and 50% over a one-year period, depending on the study

....

Over the course of two years, the REBT group did significantly better abstaining than the 12-step (or AA) group (in fact, more than 10% higher). While there are questions about how the study was conducted, there is no question that this study showed a significantly higher relative value of recovery for REBT practitioners to AA practitioners, keeping in mind that they were required to attend. Other studies show Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, a very similar technique, to be up to 60% effective for abstinence in some studies, with an average recovery rate of 45% over the course of a year. Alcoholics Anonymous doesn’t come close to these rates of abstinence, hovering around the same rate as spontaneous remission (otherwise known as a ‘cold turkey’ approach) in most controlled studies or epidemiological surveys.

Thefix.com

There is no reason for this man to not have had the option to attend SMART if it was available in his area. AA has a monopoly on block due to its age, its "social network" (everyone knows someone that's gone to AA), and the fact that its run at almost every church -- churches where judges, politicians, and public leaders attend. Let's face it, Christians have had a pretty strong grip on US politics for a long time, and anything that agrees with their doctrines is going to be advocated.

In the end, a person's recovery is up to them ... they're the one that has to want to change their behavior. If someone is "forced" to attend a program they don't agree with, they are already being setup to fail.

And just like many things in life, there isn't "one path" to recovery. The right path to recovery is the one that works. For some it's AA, and for some it's not. People aren't cookie-cutter automatons to be indoctrinated with some 60+ year old book. If they want to be, fine -- if not, they should be allowed to seek other options. Just the fact that the addict *wants* to seek treatment should be encouraged.

Definitely agree if that is all he needed. However meth, and inpatient incarceration programs are probably more complicated than AA or SMART.

I don't have the details of the story but if it included the detox period its more than just AA or SMART. It's also constant medical attention.

a reply to: luthier

And I'd like to see SMART incorporated into an inpatient system. In patient treatment usually gives the addict time to "dry out" or go through withdrawal in a safe environment -- supplemented with the same AA they'd be doing if they were just going to normal meetings.

Those big fancy detox centers have horrible success rates, and suspiciously last just as long as insurance companies have allotted..

In fact, those big treatment centers seem to suspiciously take very few surveys. Not surprising, as the very few they have taken don't reflect to favorably for long term success.

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
a reply to: luthier

And I'd like to see SMART incorporated into an inpatient system. In patient treatment usually gives the addict time to "dry out" or go through withdrawal in a safe environment -- supplemented with the same AA they'd be doing if they were just going to normal meetings.

Those big fancy detox centers have horrible success rates, and suspiciously last just as long as insurance companies have allotted..

In fact, those big treatment centers seem to suspiciously take very few surveys. Not surprising, as the very few they have taken don't reflect to favorably for long term success.

I agree. But its not just big fancy centers that cost so much money. It's the little ones too. The detox period is very dangerous and requires medical attention. It's much more than therapy. It's constant monitoring. The big fancy ones are tens of thousands a day. The normal one are a thousand a day. They need to control blood pressure, watch for strokes and heart attacks, medicate, and use psychiatrists to prevent suicide.

Way beyond the scope of AA and SMART. Unfortunately the catholics and other Christians are usually the only ones willing to do this for free as the nurses and drs are nuns and priests etc donating time.

a reply to: Southern Guardian

This is screwed up but is part of the way the world works today as long as Secularists are allowed to impose there ideal's over the traditional religious people upon whose traditions the society they are members of was built.
Here is a point, a Secularist (Read Atheist) is more likely like anyone to recieve better and more caring treatment in a christian hospital than in an atheist (oh he is suffering let's put him down) animal clinic.
And Humanists are just Atheist trying to tie a pink bow and a few flowers on the box and say it makes it nicer.


Atheists - Euthenasia, Eugenic's, Breeding programs, Genetic Engineered foetus, Organ harvesting from patients whom are written off but in many cases could have been saved.

What is more scary is the number of medical professionals whom are now atheists, do you really want to put your life in there hands - "oh that's a nice heart you have I know someone whom would like it very much and they have a better brain so I see them as a more valuable ANIMAL".

And worse Politicians.

a reply to: Bone75

originally posted by: Bone75
Well perhaps if the godless were better at rehabilitating drug addicts than Christians are, there would be more options for the judge to choose from?

Perhaps? Or perhaps not? You have no statistics or actual facts to point to. But you know this is besides the point of the OP. Nobody should be forced into a religious based program by the government. Plain and simple. It's really not hard to understand.

originally posted by: LABTECH767
a reply to: Southern Guardian

This is screwed up but is part of the way the world works today as long as Secularists are allowed to impose there ideal's over the traditional religious people upon whose traditions the society they are members of was built.
Here is a point, a Secularist (Read Atheist) is more likely like anyone to recieve better and more caring treatment in a christian hospital than in an atheist (oh he is suffering let's put him down) animal clinic.
And Humanists are just Atheist trying to tie a pink bow and a few flowers on the box and say it makes it nicer.


Atheists - Euthenasia, Eugenic's, Breeding programs, Genetic Engineered foetus, Organ harvesting from patients whom are written off but in many cases could have been saved.

What is more scary is the number of medical professionals whom are now atheists, do you really want to put your life in there hands - "oh that's a nice heart you have I know someone whom would like it very much and they have a better brain so I see them as a more valuable ANIMAL".

And worse Politicians.

Personally I would put my hands in the most qualified person regardless of their personal beliefs.

But yeah Christians are not evil by nature. The floods here in SC showed how many religious people through churches came together to help the community. Shelters portable toilets it was amazing really. I have never seen such community work and organization in my life.

I didn't see any Atheist groups bit their could have been and their were certainly atheist individuals doing there part. I am an agnostic kind of Diest and did my part but the churches were honestly quite amazing.

That doesn't mean I am bielever but I also can respect the grace within.

originally posted by: Southern Guardian
a reply to: Bone75

originally posted by: Bone75
Well perhaps if the godless were better at rehabilitating drug addicts than Christians are, there would be more options for the judge to choose from?

Perhaps? Or perhaps not? You have no statistics or actual facts to point to. But you know this is besides the point of the OP. Nobody should be forced into a religious based program by the government. Plain and simple. It's really not hard to understand.

So are you willing to pay out of your pocket or organize drs and nurses to work for free? Sometimes when you f up you just have to take what you can get. If there was another program at a similar cost thn you have a point but I doubt it from my own expireince helping a friend sober up in a crisis situation.

a reply to: LABTECH767

Well in America anyway..
That's not an issue in Canada as we have the dreaded socialised medicine..
Can't tell you how much it sucks not having to shell out $100000 or more for treatment or be left to die...
Damn socialist heathens...
Sarcasm off.

Not to mention the harm reduction programs we have in place to help addicts clean up, and are about to expand nationwide...the ones our previous government wanted to close...(psst, most of their members were fundamental Christians, but hey, keep preaching baby).

originally posted by: luthier
So are you willing to pay out of your pocket or organize drs and nurses to work for free?

Why should I? Because I don't want to force people to attend religious programs I need to pay a special fee according to you? Because I respect the constitution and peoples constitutional rights?

Where do you get off?

And I believe the State should cover the costs of these rehab programs. don't mind my taxes going to them. I do take issue with forcing people to attend specific religious ones.

Sometimes when you f up you just have to take what you can get.

So really, if you commit a crime, this means that government has the right to force you into a religious program? Yes or no? Does this or does this not violate the constitution?

originally posted by: VictorBloodworth
a reply to: LABTECH767

Well in America anyway..
That's not an issue in Canada as we have the dreaded socialised medicine..
Can't tell you how much it sucks not having to shell out $100000 or more for treatment or be left to die...
Damn socialist heathens...
Sarcasm off.

Yep. I was in a waiting room while they let my friend go into seizures since he had a record of abuse. (He was also half Cherokee). It was disgusting. I had to put him in the car and drive to the Catholic hospital down the road. I am not religious but I was very grateful and so was he.