Tradition 4: AA Group Autonomy and Responsibility
Group Freedom and Responsibility in the 12 Traditions of AA
By Buddy T
Updated March 20, 2019
Tradition 4 of the 12 traditions of Alcoholics Anonymous states that the freedom individual groups have carried, is with the condition/admonition to protect the fellowship as a whole. This means that meeting formats can vary from group to group, but it also cautions against straying too far from the usual program.
“Tradition 4: Each group should be autonomous except in matters affecting other groups or AA as a whole.”
Tradition 4 Grants AA Group Freedom With Responsibility to the Whole
Each 12-step group has complete freedom to decide for itself the program content of its meetings and the topics that will be discussed. The group can decide if the meeting will be open or closed and when and where the meeting will be held. Each group can decide to change its meeting format and has complete authority to spend its funds as needed.
The group can also decide how it wishes to begin and end its meetings. Some groups close with a prayer, while others have a moment of silence. In all of these matters, each group has total freedom. It is entirely up to the membership of that individual group.
But the second part of this tradition reminds each group that it has a responsibility also to the worldwide fellowship and other groups. By adhering to the traditions and principals of its program, each group can assure that it will not stray too far away from the program’s basic tenets.
Limits to Freedom Granted By the Fourth Tradition
The autonomy provided in Tradition 4 does not mean an individual group has the authority to re-word the steps or traditions or to create its own literature. Nor should groups introduce, discuss, or sell outside literature at their meeting places.
Many a meeting has gotten away from the look and feel of its primary purpose by using non-conference-approved literature, showing videos of popular self-help speakers, or allowing treatment professionals to speak at open meetings on the latest therapy techniques.
There is a saying that there is no right or wrong way to hold a meeting, but the group can cease carrying the message if it strays too far from its traditions and concepts. Other than that, groups have complete freedom to design their programs to the needs of their members, which can result in a wide variety of formats.
How Group Autonomy Creates Different Environments
One AA member described what it was like when encountering groups that did things differently. He says that when he first came into AA, he learned how it went in his little group, and as he went to other groups in neighboring towns, he would think, “They don’t do their meetings right,” simply because they weren’t the same as the first group he went to.
Today these little things that used to bother him make him realize that they’re what makes all these groups unique and different. He looks forward to the different meetings now because they’re unique in their own rights. As long as the guidelines of the program are followed and the basic message is there for everyone, the autonomy of each group is one more example of why Alcoholics Anonymous works.”
Dr. Olga Book REVIEW: By OLIVIER ZUNZ, Philanthropy in AMERICA, A HISTORY.
recent Book: Link: http://a.co/d/4CXW5lD
SCIENCE-BASED READING BLOG: https://drolgalazinandrei.wordpress.com/2019/03/27/see-this-instagram-video-by-drolgalazin/
PINTEREST: PROFMEX Dr. Olga Book Publish
https://www.acorns.com/invite/MLGYL6 Get your Acorn
EQUAL PAY FOR WOMEN CALIFORNIA, MAKE A DONATION: https://www.facebook.com/donate/301866947322266/?fundraiser_source=external_url
The Center for Information Analysis and Response and the Steering Committee shall terminate ten years after the date of the enactment of this Act.
The measure approved Wednesday is aimed at foreign information sources, not ones based in the United States.
The effort would expand the State Department’s Global Engagement Center, which focuses on combating propaganda and recruitment by the Islamic State and other violent extremist groups, and would draw support from the Defense Department, intelligence agencies, the U.S. Agency for International Development and the Broadcasting Board of Governors.
The measure also would create a grant program to help foster civil society and independent journalism in countries targeted with propaganda campaigns by Russia and other foreign powers, including China.
One independent researcher into Russian propaganda efforts, Clint Watts, said he worried that the Global Engagement Center is poorly suited to lead a broad U.S. government response that spans several departments. He complained that the resulting effort may be unfocused and overly bureaucratic.
“It’s the opposite of what we need,” said Watts, a former FBI agent and a fellow at the Foreign Policy Research Institute. “We need to be moving quickly, nimbly.”
The Senate Intelligence Committee, meanwhile, has approved language in the fiscal year 2017 intelligence authorization bill calling for new executive branch efforts to combat what it characterized as “active measures” by Russia to manipulate people and governments through front groups, covert broadcasting or “media manipulation.”
“There is definitely bipartisan concern about the Russian government engaging in covert influence activities of this nature,” Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said in a statement. “If you read section 501 of this year’s intelligence authorization bill, it directs the President to set up an interagency committee to ‘counter active measures by Russia to exert covert influence over peoples and governments.’ So that shows you that senators from both parties are clearly concerned about Russian covert influence efforts.”