More thoughts on Anonymity

Anonymity is a funny thing. On the surface it seems like and old fashioned, unnecessary thing; a throwback to a time when there was a stigma on alcoholism (of course now thanks to People magazine and other entertainment-based media outlets, being an alcoholic is not only accepted but encouraged!). But seriously folks...

I personally think anonymity is the most well-known and yet the most consistently misunderstood Tradition we have. Partially because of the climate of secrecy that has been built up in AA as a result of people not understanding it in its full context.

"Steve spoke at the meeting last night."
"Which Steve?"
"Big Book Steve."
"Oh..."

Sure anonymity protects the newcomers when they come in, allowing them to feel safe that their identity as an alcoholic and will be kept confidential. And, as Brian noted, it protects AA as a whole from a possible black eye when someone has a very public relapse in the media and pictures of them passed out cold behind the wheel get plastered across the internet. But anonymity goes much deeper...



How many people's last names do you know in your home group? Dr. Bob himself pointed out that we are not a secret society. We were never meant to be secret from each other. He once said in a public talk that if he were to only introduced himself as Bob S., we would have made it difficult for people who needed his help to contact him, and would have therefore broken the Tradition of Anonymity by being so anonymous that another AA member could not get a hold of him when they needed to.

The Tradition tell us exactly at what level to maintain anonymity: Press, Radio and Film (and electronic media). By not giving our full names, first and last, to another AA member we break this Tradition just as much as the member who gives his full name as an AA member in the media. One person has broken the Tradition above the level of press, radio and film; the other has broken it below that level - Yet the Tradition clearly states we should only maintain anonymity only at the level of press, radio and film, and at no other level.

As a matter of fact the pamphlet Understanding Anonymity (pgs. 10 & 11) states that: "Experience suggests that AA members use last names within the Fellowship, especially for election of group officers and other service jobs." Yes, it actually suggests AA members use their last names within the Fellowship!

I would argue that you would find the exact opposite being intended and taught at most AA meeting these days. The use of last names within the Fellowship is very much the exception, not the rule. I would also argue that by discouraging members to use their last names with each other it adds to the feelings of isolation many members feel, new and old. It also makes the navigation of recovery that much more difficult for newcomers by discouraging them from learning how to develop a needed intimacy with another human being, an essential part of recovery and becoming a whole person again.

Yes, each member should be allowed to choose how much personal information they give out, that's not what I am saying. But it should be clear that it is their personal choice to do so, and not because they aren't allowed to because that's not something you do in AA.

I believe that understanding our Tradition of Anonymity is so core to personal recovery and the future health of AA that I make sure to discuss it with the men I sponsor and my friends in the program. We may have loads of literature, but ideals like Anonymity as passed down person to person by word of mouth and like everything else in AA, by our actions.