PART 5 - The Response of GSO and WSO
I was quite upset after the group conscience meeting which banned me from attending further meetings of the group. The reason why I had been banned was that basically the members were angry at what happened at the convention, which after all had been a closed meeting. I thought that what happened in a closed meeting was supposed to stay there but I realise now that in Al-Anon there is a lot of gossip and what you share in a meeting will be used against you by other people.
I also read the Al-Anon booklet "Twelve Steps and Traditions", which contains the suggestion that Al-Anon groups can ban members, and noted that this was only to be used as a last resort and only after every other means of dealing with the problem had been used. It is only to be used when someone is persistently disruptive at meetings (I had not been), and a group conscience should be called first to make the member aware of The Traditions (this had not been done) and to provide them with an opportunity to change (this had not been done) and to make them aware that if they did not change they would be asked to leave (this had not been done). Instead I was banned straight away. The Traditions had been broken. It is worth noting, and this is important for the victims of alcoholism, that the Executive Director of WSO stated that no Traditions had been broken. He approved of the actions of that group (but more on that later...)
I was reluctant to attend any other Al-Anon groups as I suspected that, given the contempt for The Traditions that group had shown, others would do likewise.
I contacted GSO and spoke with a member of staff there. I explained to her that the group had called a group conscience meeting and voted to exclude me. She told me that every group was autonomous. After further discussion she asked me to send in a letter describing the nature of my complaint. I sent the letter and awaited a response.
I received a response some time later advising me that she would discuss the matter with other representatives and would get back to me.
I waited patiently.
I contacted GSO about a month later and was advised a letter would be sent in due course.
I received the letter. It advised me that every group was autonomous and to try to attend another Al-Anon group. I contacted GSO expressing my disappointment at the response (I expected them to do something about the group breaking The Traditions). However, the upshot was that they were not going to intervene but would, ahem, detach from the situation. After further discussion, I asked for the address of WSO and wrote to them.
I waited patiently.
I received a response from the Associate Director International of WSO. The brief letter stated that "it was permissible for a group to follow the decision of the group conscience". In other words, if a group holds a group conscience meeting and votes to break The Traditions, the attitude of WSO is "that is OK - go ahead and tramp all over The Traditions, we could not care less. We will, ahem, detach from the situation."
The group conscience meeting had been held on 1 September 1999. By the time I had contacted GSO, had written the letter to GSO, phoned GSO, received the letter from GSO, phoned GSO, had written the letter to WSO, and received the letter from WSO over three months had passed. During this time I did not attend any other Al-Anon groups as I suspected that they would not adhere to The Traditions, particularly Tradition Three.
I was disappointed by the neglectful attitude of WSO but decided to let it go and attend another Al-Anon group.
On 18 November 1999, I attended another Al-Anon group but had not expected to be physically assaulted...