Why shouldn't you be held responsible for the two people Audrey killed?

Stanton:

Neither AA nor anyone else who is competent uses the term "blackout" to EXPLAIN such behavior as that exhibited by Kishline. As you ought to know, the term mainly refers to an absence of memory for one's behavior and events experienced while intoxicated.

Without doubt the major factor in the problem of addiction and alcoholism is denial. It could be compared with the force of gravity pulling a runaway train down a steep grade to certain destruction, and people like you are back there giving it a push, perhaps, as much as for any other reasons, for ego and money. My question is this: How do you manage to live with yourself, knowing as you must, how you and those like you have enabled denial in tens of thousands of both nascent and fully developed alcoholics. How often do you think of the greater suffering that has been and will be endured by children of alcoholics because of your self-serving message of "hope" that for most, is false.

Certainly some people who exhibit problem drinking may learn to manage it, but who are you to try to convince people that with allegedly expert guidance such as yours/MM's, THEY are qualified to decide which group they are in.

Kishline killed those people, not because AA failed, but because she failed to be honest with herself. I have always considered pop psychologists like you and Wayne Dyer an embarrassment to the field of psychology, but your behavior goes beyond that to raise questions of criminal negligence. I think it would be quite appropriate if relatives/friends of Kishline's victims sued you and sued the organization of which I understand you to be a board member — Moderation Management — out of existence.

Mike Carr

Dear Mike:

Members of the listserv Addict_l have been having a great time with your statement that only incompetent people (and not real AA spokespeople) attribute Audrey Kishline's behavior to blackout. Certainly, some people on this list who claim to be AA members and supporters do think that blackout was related to her behavior. Frankly, I am holding off discussing blackout further until the list resolves exactly what it is. The primary difference in opinion seems to be between those who believe blackout is simply a failure of memory, and others who feel it reflects an inability to process ongoing experience though the superego or judgement systems in the brain.

I thought I could offer more solid feedback in some of the other areas you discuss in your forceful e-mail to me. When you say that, "I think it would be quite appropriate if relatives/friends of Kishline's victims sued you and sued the organization of which I understand you to be a board member — Moderation Management — out of existence." I am not an MM board member (but was once a member of a now defunct advisory board). But do you believe the AA board can be sued for the conduct of its members? I don't think you can sue the MM Board without the other. For example, I was an expert in a case where a very active AA member got drunk and drove over the median strip and killed a woman. (I was testifying that he was responsible for his actions while his argument was that he was in alcoholic blackout and couldn't be held responsible.) Would the dead woman's children be able to sue George Vaillant and, if I were a friend of hers, could I join in the suit also, in your view?

Yours best, Stanton

© 2000 Stanton Peele. All rights reserved.
Last update: