• first of all, almost by definition, they recognize that they have some sort of significant problem with alcohol and/or other drugs, or with the results of their addiction (DUI, etc), which their current efforts are not dealing with satisfactorily. My impression here, possibly erroneous, is that the degree of addiction of the average new member of SMART Recovery is probably on average less than that of those who first come to AA; they have problems, but usually not the massive problems that some members of AA sometimes have (although we have a fair number of people sent by the courts);
  

• in spite of recognizing that they have a problem, some may object to labelling themselves as "alcoholics", admitting they have a "disease," and committing themselves to a life-long program of recovery;
  

• they may have a totally pragmatic and non-ideological bent: they have tried other programs (e.g., AA, MM, RR, psychotherapy) and found that they didn't work, so they are trying a different program. Some even try attending both AA and SMART Recovery, or psychotherapy and SMART Recovery, trying to get the best of each program;
  

• they may object to the "religiosity" of AA, rejecting what they consider a meaningless difference between religion and spirituality often promoted by AA. Some, but not most, SMART participants are agnostics or atheists. But almost all participants, whether believers or not, do not consider that a God or some other form of a "Higher Power" can be a significant force in resolving their drinking/drugging program;
  

• they may object to the cookie cutter, "one size fits all," approach of other programs, which also emphasize the unique correctness of their own approach. SMART Recovery emphasizes a methodology which allows each participant to choose his/her own path to recovery (or sadly, at another level, they may be looking for new rationalizations which would allow them to continue drinking/drugging), and recognizes as well as the validity of other recovery programs for some people--"different strokes for different folks";
  

• they may have an intellectual curiosity and analytical bent which leads them to dissect their own problems and independently try to find solutions, a process frequently discouraged in other programs. This is frequently more a reason for staying in SMART Recovery rather than a reason for initial attraction ("cross-talk", for example, is encouraged in SMART Recovery);
  

• they may be looking for some sort of "support group" for their problem which is compatible with some of the other factors listed (which in fact SMART Recovery provides, although we make a clear distinction between "support groups" and "self-help groups," believing we fall chiefly in the latter category);
  

• some also come to SMART Recovery with the (frequently unspoken) desire to cut down or "control" their drinking in the mistaken belief that SMART Recovery is not an abstinence program, since it presents itself as an alternative to AA (SMART Recovery is an abstinence program, of course, but still-drinking members are probably more gently treated than in AA);
  

• a very few have had a positive experience with either cognitive-behavioral therapy in general or Rational-Emotive Belief Therapy (REBT) in particular through their own psychiatrist or psychologist, or through reading the many publications of Albert Ellis, and, recognizing that they have a drinking/drugging problem, learned that SMART Recovery is the program that applies REBT to addiction.

This is Essay No. 5, issued July, 1998.

Previous Essays

May, 1998--Moyers on Addiction

March, 1998--Should People With Gambling or Overeating Disorders Be Welcome At SMART Meetings?

January, 1998--Differences Between SMART Recovery and AA

November, 1997--Fifty Ways to Recover