Contemporary Negative Assessments of Alcoholics Anonymous: A Response

This article is a response to unfounded assessments of the value and effectiveness of Alcoholic Anonymous (AA) as an agent of recovery from alcohol/other drug disorders. Three recent examples are identified: Dodes and Dodes (2014), Glaser (2015), and Mohammad (2016). To challenge these assessments, three publications offering scientific support for AA are presented: Emrick et al. (1993); Vaillant (2012); and Humphreys, Blodgett, and Wagner (2014). A detailed examination is then undertaken of how Dodes and Dodes arrive at the conclusion that AA’s long-term sobriety rate is between 5% and 8%. Our review of the studies cited by Dodes and Dodes reveals that long-term abstinence rates for actively involved members of AA and other 12-Step groups are impressively high.