Tradition 6

Short form

An A.A. group ought never endorse, finance or lend the A.A. name to any related facility or outside enterprise, lest problems of money, property and prestige divert us from our primary purpose.

Long form

Problems of money, property, and authority may easily divert us from our primary spiritual aim. We think, therefore, that any considerable property of genuine use to A.A. should be separately incorporated and managed, thus dividing the material from the spiritual. An A.A. group, as such, should never go into business. Secondary aids to A.A. such as clubs or hospitals which require much property or administration, ought to be incorporated and so set apart that, if necessary, they can be freely discarded by the groups. Hence such facilities ought not to use the A.A. name. Their management should be the sole responsibility of those people who financially support them. For clubs, A.A. managers are usually preferred. But hospitals, as well as other places of recuperation, ought to be well outside A.A.— and medically supervised. While an A.A. group may cooperate with anyone, such cooperation ought never to go so far as affiliation or endorsement, actual or implied. An A.A. group can bind itself to no one.

Excerpt from the Twelve Steps & Twelve Traditions

12-Traditions-Tradition-6.mp3

The moment we saw that we had an answer for alcoholism, it was reasonable (or so it seemed at the time) for us to feel that we might have the answer to a lot of other things. The A.A. groups, many thought, could go into business, might finance any enterprise whatever in the total field of alcoholism. In fact, we felt duty-bound to throw the whole weight of the A.A. name behind any meritorious cause.

Here are some of the things we dreamed. Hospitals didn't like alcoholics, so we thought we'd build a hospital chain of our own. People needed to be told what alcoholism was, so we'd educate the public, even rewrite school and medical textbooks. We'd gather up derelicts from skid rows, sort out those who could get well, and make it possible for the rest to earn their livelihood in a kind of quarantined confinement. Maybe these places would make large sums of money to carry on our other good works. We seriously thought of rewriting the laws of the land, and having it declared that alcoholics are sick people. No more would they be jailed; judges would parole them in our custody. We'd spill A.A. into the dark regions of dope addiction and criminality. We'd form groups of depressive and paranoid folks; the deeper the neurosis, the better we'd like it. It stood to reason that if alcoholism could be licked, so could any problem.

It occurred to us that we could take what we had into the factories and cause laborers and capitalists to love each other. Our uncompromising honesty might soon clean up politics. With one arm around the shoulder of religion and the other around the shoulder of medicine, we'd resolve their differences. Having learned to live so happily, we'd show everybody else how. Why, we thought, our Society of Alcoholics Anonymous might prove to be the spearhead of a new spiritual advance! We might transform the world.

Yes, we of A.A. did dream those dreams. How natural that was, since most alcoholics are bankrupt idealists. Nearly every one of us had wished to do great good, perform great deeds, and embody great ideals. We are all perfectionists who, failing perfection, have gone to the other extreme and settled for the bottle and the blackout. Providence, through A.A., had brought us within reach of our highest expectations. So why shouldn't we share our way of life with everyone?

Whereupon we tried A.A. hospitals— they all bogged down because you cannot put an A.A. group into business; too many busybody cooks spoil the broth. A.A. groups had their fling at education, and when they began to publicly whoop up the merits of this or that brand, people became confused. Did A.A. fix drunks or was it an educational project? Was A.A. spiritual or was it medical? Was it a reform movement? In consternation, we saw ourselves getting married to all kinds of enterprises, some good and some not so good. Watching alcoholics committed willy-nilly to prisons or asylums, we began to cry, “There oughtta be a law!” A.A.'s commenced to thump tables in legislative committee rooms and agitated for legal reform. That made good newspaper copy, but little else. We saw we'd soon be mired in politics. Even inside A.A. we found it imperative to remove the A.A. name from clubs and Twelfth Step houses.

These adventures implanted a deep-rooted conviction that in no circumstances could we endorse any related enterprise, no matter how good. We of Alcoholics Anonymous could not be all things to all men, nor should we try.

Years ago this principle of “no endorsement” was put to a vital test. Some of the great distilling companies proposed to go into the field of alcohol education. It would be a good thing, they believed, for the liquor trade to show a sense of public responsibility. They wanted to say that liquor should be enjoyed, not misused; hard drinkers ought to slow down, and problem drinkers— alcoholics— should not drink at all.

In one of their trade associations, the question arose of just how this campaign should be handled. Of course, they would use the resources of radio, press, and films to make their point. But what kind of person should head the job? They immediately thought of Alcoholics Anonymous. If they could find a good public relations man in our ranks, why wouldn't he be ideal? He'd certainly know the problem. His connection with A.A. would be valuable, because the Fellowship stood high in public favor and hadn't an enemy in the world.

Soon they'd spotted their man, an A.A. with the necessary experience. Straightway he appeared at New York's A.A. headquarters, asking, “Is there anything in our tradition that suggests I shouldn't take a job like this one? The kind of education seems good to me, and is not too controversial. Do you headquarters folks see any bugs in it?”

At first glance, it did look like a good thing. Then doubt crept in. The association wanted to use our member's full name in all its advertising; he was to be described both as its director of publicity and as a member of Alcoholics Anonymous. Of course, there couldn't be the slightest objection if such an association hired an A.A. member solely because of his public relations ability and his knowledge of alcoholism. But that wasn't the whole story, for in this case not only was an A.A. member to break his anonymity at a public level, he was to link the name Alcoholics Anonymous to this particular educational project in the minds of millions. It would be bound to appear that A.A. was now backing education— liquor trade association style.

The minute we saw this compromising fact for what it was, we asked the prospective publicity director how he felt about it. “Great guns!” he said. “Of course I can't take the job. The ink wouldn't be dry on the first ad before an awful shriek would go up from the dry camp. They'd be out with lanterns looking for an honest A.A. to plump for their brand of education. A.A. would land exactly in the middle of the wet-dry controversy. Half the people in this country would think we'd signed up with the drys, the other half would think we'd joined the wets. What a mess!”

“Nevertheless,” we pointed out, “you still have a legal right to take this job.”

“I know that,” he said. “But this is no time for legalities. Alcoholics Anonymous saved my life, and it comes first. I certainly won't be the guy to land A.A. in big-time trouble, and this would really do it!”

Concerning endorsements, our friend had said it all. We saw as never before that we could not lend the A.A. name to any cause other than our own.

Excerpt from The Twelve Traditions Illustrated

Please click the link below to open the pamphlet The Twelve Traditions Illustrated and read Tradition Six or read the image below.

The "related facility" may be an outside group combatting alcoholism–or an enterprise that AA's want to start. It was the latter that most often confronted the young Fellowship. Outside agencies were pretty scarce in those days, and some members though AA should cover the whole alcoholism field. Led by a "super-promoter" (as the "Twelve and Twelve" describes him), one group built an all-purpose centre, including a section for drying-out treatment. Picture any group tackling such a project! Arguments over cost, architecture, staff, fees, medication, and rules might even make the local paper. (And pity the poor newcomer straying into the group–"We'll get around to you in a minute.")

Though that ambitious centre failed, some individual members have since founded successful clubhouses, rest farms, halfway houses, etc. The enterprises are run by these AA's and patronised by other members or prospective members. But money and property are involved. Therefore, it has proved wise to keep the operation of the facility completely separate from that of any AA group, and to keep "AA" or terms like "Twelfth Step" out of the name.

Toward outside agencies dealing with alcoholism, the AA policy is "cooperation but not affiliation." A group cooperates, for example, by welcomming referrals from clinics or by sponsoring AA groups in institutions. But in one area, money for a rehab was solicited at an AA meeting–implying affiliation. In another, AA was listed among beneficiaries of a United Fund drive...

Tradition Six Discussion Questions

Thoughts on Tradition Six

So what does it mean to appear to affiliate? In my time in service, I have seen this tradition frequently quoted and applied to extreme lengths. And perhaps sometimes this is right. But there are certainly occasions where the term 'implied affiliation' has been taken to mean that AA cannot even work with other agencies or engage the services it needs (such a telephone company). I feel that this extreme interpretation is unnecessary and unhelpful in fulfilling our primary purpose.

If we look at the long form of the tradition, we can see that Bill really intended this tradition to be a warning to groups who might consider undertaking projects that fall outside of our primary purpose of carrying the message. AA clubs are clearly exempt from this restriction, but starting a recovery centre or a charitable local project would certainly be a large distraction. But despite Bill's examples in the long form, the principle of endorsement is an important one to follow in all areas.

Let's say that a group decides to support a local homeless project. Group members are recruited to walk the streets at night offering help to those in need. On occasion they may find a potential member who they welcome to their meetings. The group grows and on the surface everything looks great. The charity being supported then begins to seek new funding and so begins a marketing campaign. In this campaign they proudly cite their association with AA. To outsiders it now appears that AA has moved into working with the homeless. Perhaps even worse, it also appears that AA is also seeking funds for this work. Before long the group appears to the outside that it is now a homeless charity. There is also the risk of the group's meetings being taken up with frequent discussions about this project thereby eating into meeting time that ought to be used to help alcoholics. The group and AA as a whole is also then at the mercy of an outside organisation who can publish their views on any matter that they wish.

A more recent example I experienced was from concerns from a member that an Intergroup advert for AA in a local paper meant that we were affiliating with that newspaper. Here, I believe, is where an important line of cleavage ought to be drawn. Nationally, AA groups and service bodies use a wide range of services. These include newspaper adverts and editorial, telephone companies, IT services, bookings at church and community halls and insurance, etcetera. If we were to read this tradition to mean that the use of a service implies affiliation, AA would be seriously handicapped in carrying the message of recovery.

It's important to note too that this tradition applies to groups, not to individuals. AA members are free to affiliate with whatever cause, politics or organisation they wish, but these affiliations are not appropriate at group level.

This tradition aims to preserve the integrity of AA and prevent us from becoming sidetracked from our primary purpose.