About a dozen years ago, when Church leaders were pounding the pulpit about the evils of pornography in every General Conference, I went to my first Twelve Step meeting. The Church sponsored a support group for recovering porn addicts, and a separate support group for their family members. My XH, the porn addict, refused to attend, so I went by myself to the support group.
I don’t remember what I thought we would do – maybe they would give us tips on how to help our husbands quit using porn. But what actually happened is I learned all about codependency and how to overcome it. I wasn’t very familiar with codependency before these meetings.
We (the other women married to porn addicts) joked that the 12-step program was “Coming Unto Christ for Dummies” because it was so clear, and so different from anything we’d learned in Church. This program defined codependency, identified it as a problem, then showed us how to overcome it using the Atonement. Through Christ, we could be healed from the pain that fueled our codependency and learn to live healthier and happier lives. (I later discovered that certain types of therapy and secular support groups can achieve a similar result.)
The support group had its own Twelve Step manual, with the principles written specifically to address the codependency that developed in the wives of addicts. The manual I used has been revised and expanded and is available on healingthroughchrist.org.
Before I go any further, here’s the disclaimer: I’m not a mental health professional. I’ve been through some mental health problems, lived with people with mental health problems, and have done a lot of research. I’ve been to many different therapists and support groups. My comments are based on my observations and personal experience. Also, women can be porn addicts, drug addicts, or have other compulsive behaviors, and their spouse can develop codependency. For simplicity’s sake, and because it was my own lived experience, when I say he/husband, I’m referring to the addict, and she/wife refers to the codependent spouse.
Defining Codependency
Codependency is a problem that exists only in relation to someone else’s problem. The specific problem that we were dealing with was the compulsive behavior of our husbands’ porn use. Here’s my extremely simplified summary of the problem that porn addiction creates in a marriage: The porn addict uses porn to numb any negative feelings – boredom, fear of inadequacy, emotional pain, frustration. The addict is trying to muffle bad feelings, and get his emotional needs for love and belonging from porn. The addict’s spouse, meanwhile, is emotionally starving. The addict can’t offer her love and belonging. He cuts off emotional connection to her. In a healthy marriage, two people talk out the problems, support each other through difficulties, and enjoy being together. In a marriage afflicted with a porn addiction, the addict withdraws emotionally and avoids his spouse. This leaves his spouse desperately lonely and confused, and she’ll typically start to lash out in an effort to get her emotional needs met, or to at least get his attention.
The go-to book was “Codependent No More: How to Stop Controlling Others and Start Caring For Yourself,” by Melody Beattie (Hazelden 1992). The Church didn’t officially recommend it, but we passed copies around at the support group and learned to speak the language in it. Codependency is not a pleasant problem. Codependents are “hostile, controlling, manipulative, indirect, guilt producing, difficult to communicate with, and more.” Id. p.5. Codependents are also caretakers and martyrs, permanent victims and never appreciated. We hurt and we don’t know what to do about it other than spread the pain around to everyone around us.
Codependency looks different in different contexts, but there are a few commonalities. “A codependent person is one who has let another person’s behavior affect him or her, and who is obsessed with controlling that person’s behavior.” Id. at 36.
Here’s another definition: “Codependency is an emotional, psychological, and behavioral condition that develops as a result of an individual’s prolonged exposure to, and practice of, a set of oppressive rules — rules which prevent the open expression of feeling as well as the direct discussion of personal and interpersonal problems.” Co-Dependency, An Emerging Issue, by Robert Subby.
These two factors produce codependency: “One fairly common denominator was having a relationship, personally or professionally, with troubled, needy, or dependent people. But a second, more common denominator seemed to be the unwritten, silent rules that usually develop in the immediate family and set the pace for relationships. These rules prohibit discussion about problems; open expression of feelings; direct, honest communication; realistic expectations, such as being human, vulnerable, or imperfect …”
Basically, you’re in a relationship with a person with a problem, and you can’t talk openly and honestly about the problem and how it affects you. Codependency is an attempt to eliminate the problem without admitting that that’s what you’re doing. Once the problem is eliminated, thinks the codependent, then the relationship will be happy and the former addict can meet the codependent’s emotional needs. That’s the goal. It doesn’t work like that, but that’s the motivation for being codependent. We’re trying to rescue him, so he can then rescue us.
Codependent Styles
The support group manual explained the three main categories of behavior that codependents used. Most people will favor one category over the others, though all behaviors may be present.
- Persecuting Behaviors: Overpowering feelings of frustration, resentment and anger can lead to persecuting behaviors. These behaviors may include withholding love, threatening, nagging, using the silent treatment, name-calling, blaming, criticizing and judging.
- Suffering Behaviors: When we struggle with feelings of despair, our hopelessness can cause us to feel victimized and we may be overcome by suffering behaviors. Remaining a victim, creating drama, wallowing in guilt, and fixating on worry and fear are examples of suffering behaviors.
- Rescuing Behaviors: Codependent rescuing and care-taking involves doing people’s thinking for them, suffering people’s consequences for them and solving people’s problems for them. Rescuing behaviors enables bad behavior. We make excuses, minimize the problem, and make sure the addict doesn’t suffer the consequences of his actions. These are the martyrs.
These behaviors spill over into other relationships and situations and affect every aspect of the codependent person’s life. Plus, they make you and everyone around you miserable.
The First Step
Step One: AWARENESS: Come to admit that we are powerless over the addiction of another and recognize that our lives have become unmanageable.
That’s the first step in the Twelve Step manual for overcoming codependency. That’s a monumental concept to accept. Most of us had spent years putting our husband’s problems at the center of our lives. After all, we’ve heard since childhood that women are spiritual powerhouses, responsible for the tone of the home, and that men attribute all their success in life to their wives’ support. To go from those messages to being plainly told that there’s nothing we can do to make our husbands stop using porn was quite a leap.
Most of us were trying to replace the Savior — we would save our husbands from their porn addictions! Men do not want to be saved by their wives. Even if it worked, that’s a huge amount of pressure – an addict who relies on someone else to cure them is going to relapse. Admitting that we couldn’t change our husbands helped us get out of the Savior’s way. The men were in the room next door, working on their own relationship to the Savior. That wasn’t our responsibility.
The other concept in this step is that our lives were out of control. Codependents are control freaks, so admitting that we couldn’t deal with the mess we were making was also a big change. We were to work on our relationship with the Savior on our own account, not so we could save our husbands and teach our children. For many of us, this was the first time we’d actually paid attention to ourselves and our own needs in years.
There was a lot in the Twelve Steps that was basically about establishing healthy boundaries. Where does my responsibility for someone else’s well-being end? How do I separate what I can do from what I can’t do? How do I communicate my boundaries? Is it okay to say no? How do I talk calmly about upsetting topics? Can I be happy if someone I love is struggling? This program took us through all that.
Each meeting followed the same format. We had announcements and an opening prayer. Then one of the missionaries led us in reading a principle. We focused on one step per meeting. After we’d read the principle and discussed it, we had sharing time, complete with “Hi, my name is Janey and I’m a codependent.” And everyone chorused back, “Hi Janey.” I know that format gets mocked a lot, but it really was welcoming. Everyone smiled, and for many of us, those were the first real smiles in a really long time. No judgment; no pressure. It was the first Church meeting on the planet in which we could be totally honest.
The women who were there for the first time would cry. With shaky voices, they’d admit how scared and betrayed they felt.
Those of us who had been coming for months or years talked honestly about the hard times and shared stories about small improvements — ways in which we’d changed in a healthy way. Like dealing with a difficult teenager without yelling, or having a hard conversation with husband and staying calm throughout, or learning a new skill rather than nagging husband all the time. Participants also shared the struggle when we fell into old patterns, or a problem resolved itself only to reveal a bigger problem. Either way, it was honest.
I looked forward to those meetings all week. Codependency is a disease of silence, and the 90 minutes of talking, actually talking openly and honestly about difficult things, set me on a road to recovery.
Conclusion
The idea that I wasn’t responsible for the well-being and righteousness of the men in my life was mind-blowing. I’d been raised to be codependent. The Church praises women for rescuing and caretaking behaviors. Before these Twelve Step meetings, it never occurred to me that I could stop trying to help/change my husband. These Steps helped me process some unhealthy dynamics that I’d held onto since childhood. The Twelve Steps were brilliant and I thought that we should cover them all in Relief Society and tell women that they didn’t need to make themselves miserable by trying to be everything to everybody.
Then, the Church torpedoed the program and switched it out to a manual and focus that seemed designed to make us more codependent. But we don’t have to get into that right now.
- How familiar are you with the word “codependency” and its meaning?
- Do you feel responsible for other peoples’ actions? To the detriment of your own happiness and peace of mind?
- Do you think the Church encourages people to be codependent?
- The central cause of codependency is when you’re in a relationship with someone who won’t let you be honest, or respect your honesty when you work up the courage to tell the truth. Do you think someone could be codependent with the Church?
Wheat & Tares 
1. I am achingly familiar with the word “codependency”. I am usually the “avoidant one” and the “enabling one”.
2. I am responsible for other people’s actions (at least in the state I live in for my children). Dr. Russell Barkley (noted professional ADHD clinician) taught that ADHD parents needed to have a paradigm shift from a “Designer” (designing their kids) to a “Shepherd” (designing the environment the kids exist in) that I found to be profound and helpful. That has been a helpful reframing for my interactions with other people. I am learning to prioritize “the environment I set up for others” by what I pay attention to and what I value/invest in (in terms of physical, mental, and emotional resources).
3. I think that the Church organization sees itself as an institution to be depended on (while depending heavily on the members – especially the women to run it). The church explicitly teaches that women are to rely on men for priesthood administration of ordinances (this was a huge “supply issue” during COVID when there were a lot of women who wanted access to the Sacrament ordinance and did not have that access). The church assumes that the “family administration” through being “mothers and wives” is the equivalent to priesthood ordinances – even though that comparison is more like apples to bananas then apple to apple comparisons.
4. I think that Religious OCD is what happens when an individual is co-dependent with the church (or at least one of the mechanisms of causing it). The focus on the “specifics”, the dealing with “feelings of shame and inadequacy” through rituals, and the entire “the church is more truthful (full of truth) then I am” are symptoms of “co-dependency”.
I participated in and then led ARP support for a few years. It was the first “real” experience I had in a church setting for the reasons you mentioned. I could be completely vulnerable and honest with my group members, and I came to know Christ in a totally new way. I finally let go of trying to control my husband after 10-12 years. If church could be like that experience, I wouldn’t struggle with it nearly so much.
Can people be codependent with the church? Absolutely. 100%. My codependency with the church didn’t dawn on me until two years ago, well after my time with ARP and my own reading of codependent no more.
Here is the intro to Codependents Anonynous’ website, coda.org.
“ Somewhere along the line, we learned to doubt our perception, discount our feelings, and overlook our needs. We looked to others to tell us what to think, feel, and behave. Other people supplied us with information about who we were and should be. It became more important to be compliant or avoidant rather than to be authentic, and we adopted rigid beliefs about what “should be.” We believed that if we could just “get it right,” things would be okay. When we “got it wrong,” our sense of security and self-worth evaporated.
Somewhere along this road we learn about codependence. We hear it from a friend or a therapist. We see it mentioned in the news. Many of us wonder if codependence describes who we are.
Codependence is a disease that deteriorates the souls. It affects our personal lives; our families, children, friends, and relatives; our businesses and careers; our health; and our spiritual growth. It is debilitating and, if left untreated, causes us to become more destructive to ourselves and others. Many of us come to a point when we must look beyond ourselves for help.”
That describes me to a T. I have looked, irony of all ironies, to Christ for help in escaping my codependent relationship with the church as an institution. Although Elder Pearson would say they are one and the same, they are absolutely not.
My struggle right now is that the closer I have come to Christ and understanding his life and example and teachings, the farther away from the Church I am drawn because I see how it distorts and twists those teachings in an effort to control its members and keep them compliant. I am still working on if, and how, I can have a healthy and mature non-codependent relationship with this institution.
One of my family members has a lifetime chronic illness. I love this person deeply. Even when I had not heard the term, “person first”, it felt dismissive or unkind when someone (initially, a healthcare professional) referred to this person by their medical condition. Or uses the illness as an adjective describing the person. Examples, when someone talks about a neighbor who had “a Down syndrome baby”, or “the CF in A6”.
I have not been through the twelve-step program, so I don’t know if terminology used in this post is acceptable within it. But I felt gut-punched when I read the beginning paragraphs.
My parents raised me specifically to avoid codependency and to have good boundaries. My mother’s parents had a relationship where grandma suffered from mental illness (depression) and suffered greatly, and was a martyr and controlled my grandfather. My father is a psychologist and and my mother is a mental health counselor.
My mother would say “Don’t be a martyr. How will your sister know she hurt you if you don’t tell her?” She would say “Whose problem is that?” and she would mean it was my problem to solve & to ask someone to help me with. I was taught to communicate respectfully, kindly and without guilt or manipulation. My father modeled personal spiritual authority by asking to be released when he was in the bishopric. They taught me that each person makes their own choices & ultimately it isn’t on anyone else. I have a naturally confident, kind and verbal personality.
Their efforts really helped me.
I married a man who was addicted to pornography. I didn’t know it until we had been married for 13 years and had 3 children. To his credit, he was laid off and asking God to help him and God told him he wouldn’t help until he told me about his problem. He eventually subsumed this addiction into an addiction to World of Warcraft, and now many years later does neither.
I love the book ” He Did Deliver Me from Bondage” by Colleen G Harrison.
I participated with my husband in our ward’s tiny 12 step program for anyone with any problem. I thought it was a good effort.
When the codependency curriculum came out I was excited. I got a copy and started to read it. I felt very strongly that it didn’t apply to me and that it would be harmful for me to read the whole thing, which surprised me and I took as direction from the spirit. I felt like it placed responsibility on me that wasn’t there, and could feed into my husband’s pathology of blaming me. My mother agreed with this.
We went to counseling and the counselor supported me in my decision and so did my bishop. Eventually we got a new bishop who blamed me and wanted us to do the codependency program with 2 other couples. I felt very pushed into it. The couple in charge of this 12 step program approached me and found that I accepted that Imy husband might never stop his addiction and that it is his problem not mine. They persuaded the bishop to stop pushing me on it.
Does the church encourage codependency? Without doubt. They teach us to be silent and accept their authority without complaint (murdering) or communication. That is wrong and can only result in difficulties.
Spell check! Murmuring not murdering.
“He Did Deliver Me from Bondage” was the book used by LDS Social Services for their 12 step program before they developed the 12 step program through the wards.
I agree with person first language. My husband is a valued child of God. His problems with addiction are a secondary, temporary characteristic.
Thank you for this post, Janey. I feel like codependency is a concept I’m only beginning to understand. It’s a term that seems to have an obvious meaning, until one really does the hard work of understanding it, how it operates, and how to cope with or overcome it. And I simply haven’t done that work with the term. I appreciate your insights here.
Having read this post, I feel that yes, of course people can be codependent with a church. In terms of my relationship to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, it’s influence on my upbringing and lingering influence though I no longer practice it, I tend to think more in terms of the religion fueling scrupulosity. So it’s helpful to step back from that and consider things from the angle of codependency.
1. How familiar are you with the word “codependency” and its meaning? Very much familiar.
2. Do you feel responsible for other peoples’ emotions/actions? To the detriment of your own happiness and peace of mind? – God/church. I was taught that my less-than-perfect behaviors make God angry. I tried to achieve something I unconsciously assumed my entire membership: I could eliminate all improper and impure thoughts, feelings, and behaviors right now. I also tried to live my life to avoid angering the church leaders and church discipline. I tried to make my father, who was addicted to work and money, less stressed and happy with me. I helped run his businesses and put his stocks in my name at the age of 18 so my mother couldn’t go after them when they got divorced. Without being conscious of what I was doing, I’ve tried to make church leaders, God, my father, and girlfriends happy because I saw myself as being a rescuer and a helper. I’ve also had a terrible time feeling peace, joy, and self-love because I felt like once I conquered one problem, another one would appear. Imperfection, and emotions, never disappear.
3. Do you think the Church encourages people to be codependent? No doubt.
4. The central cause of codependency is when you’re in a relationship with someone who won’t let you be honest, or respect your honesty when you work up the courage to tell the truth. Do you think someone could be codependent with the Church? YES!!!!! First, before you can be honest, they have to want to hear and experience your unique personhood! The prophets and leaders have all truth so they tell you everything you need to know to be happy and have eternal life. It’s a complete franchise to Heaven. They are addicted to the church/religion and we are the codependent members trying to tell them how to change their views on LBGT, sexual purity, perfectionism, compulsory tithing, motivation by fear/threats of punishment. I knew I was deeply unhappy and frustrated for 30 years in that culture/system but I ignored the inner emptiness and longing for fulfillment to be accepted and feel safe, which was only a false security because the minute I had problems (sin), I was labeled, disfellowshipped, and put in the out-group. There was no attempt to listen to understand, help me heal underlying emotions, find my own voice (personhood), decide who I was, what I valued, who I wanted to be, what I wanted to accomplish – in short, to HEAL! The church values OBEDIENCE and compliance to its rituals as its highest vision. Those who don’t fit the culture are ignored or shunned, even though members will smile at them.
The leaders are at a huge crossroads with the Internet and all of the history/truth coming to light. People are questioning the very foundation of the church. Smith’s many accounts of his vision, priesthood NOT being ‘restored’ by Peter, James, John until 1834 when it was changed in the D&C (wasn’t even mentioned in the previous Book of Commandments), tithing, deception, wealth, etc. As people become angered, feel betrayed, and filled with anxiety, they are talking quite loudly and publicly! The church doesn’t want to hear any of it; they silence those who seek to become independent and transcend codependence. I see members doing it on many forums! They enable the leader-addicts and don’t want codependent members to talk about their problems, feelings, or needs for truth, openness, reconciling of conflicting doctrines, or threats for leaving the relationships (church). Smith constantly threatened the salvation of members if they left – a highly emotionally abusive, controlling behavior that claimed came from revelation (God). It’s just wrong! I’m no longer codependent so anyone on this forum can try to silence me but I’m passed all that. I only worship God, who is not a man and never was. When the church conflates Savior and church, it robs members of the ability to use the 12 steps because a damned apostate can’t go to God for church codependence. God doesn’t want anything to do with a non-Mormon! That is the ultimate act of control and spiritual abuse. For leaders to control God – to speak for him, to tell members His decision to damn them, and to leave them without a Savior because they have left the codependent breeding system.
1. How familiar are you with the word “codependency” and its meaning? Very much familiar.
2. Do you feel responsible for other peoples’ emotions/actions? To the detriment of your own happiness and peace of mind? – God/church. I was taught that my less-than-perfect behaviors make God angry. I tried to achieve something I unconsciously assumed my entire membership: I could eliminate all improper and impure thoughts, feelings, and behaviors right now. I also tried to live my life to avoid angering the church leaders and church discipline. I tried to make my father, who was addicted to work and money, less stressed and happy with me. I helped run his businesses and put his stocks in my name at the age of 18 so my mother couldn’t go after them when they got divorced. Without being conscious of what I was doing, I’ve tried to make church leaders, God, my father, and girlfriends happy because I saw myself as being a rescuer and a helper. I’ve also had a terrible time feeling peace, joy, and self-love because I felt like once I conquered one problem, another one would appear. Imperfection, and emotions, never disappear.
3. Do you think the Church encourages people to be codependent? No doubt.
4. The central cause of codependency is when you’re in a relationship with someone who won’t let you be honest, or respect your honesty when you work up the courage, to tell the truth. Do you think someone could be codependent with the Church? YES!!!!! First, before you can be honest, they have to want to hear and experience your unique personhood! The prophets and leaders have all truth so they tell you everything you need to know to be happy and have eternal life. It’s a complete franchise to Heaven. They are addicted to the church/religion and we are the codependent members trying to tell them how to change their views on LBGT, sexual purity, perfectionism, compulsory tithing, and motivation by fear/threats of punishment. I knew I was deeply unhappy and frustrated for 30 years in that culture/system but I ignored the inner emptiness and longing for fulfillment to be accepted and feel safe, which was only a false security because the minute I had problems (sin), I was labeled, disfellowshipped, and put in the out-group. There was no attempt to listen to understand, help me heal underlying emotions, find my own voice (personhood), decide who I was, what I valued, who I wanted to be, what I wanted to accomplish – in short, to HEAL! The church values OBEDIENCE and compliance to its rituals as its highest vision. Those who don’t fit the culture are ignored or shunned, even though members will smile at them.
The leaders are at a huge crossroads with the Internet and all of the history/truth coming to light. People are questioning the very foundation of the church. Smith’s many accounts of his vision, priesthood NOT being ‘restored’ by Peter, James, John until 1834 when it was changed in the D&C (wasn’t even mentioned in the previous Book of Commandments), tithing, deception, wealth, etc. As people become angered, feel betrayed, and filled with anxiety, they are talking quite loudly and publicly! The church doesn’t want to hear any of it; they silence those who seek to become independent and transcend codependence. I see members doing it on many forums! They enable the leader-addicts and don’t want codependent members to talk about their problems, feelings, or needs for truth, openness, reconciling of conflicting doctrines, or threats for leaving the relationships (church). Smith constantly threatened the salvation of members if they left – a highly emotionally abusive, controlling behavior that claimed came from revelation (God). It’s just wrong! I’m no longer codependent so anyone on this forum can try to silence me but I’m passed all that. I only worship God, who is not a man and never was. When the church conflates Savior and church, it robs members of the ability to use the 12 steps because a damned apostate can’t go to God for church codependence. God doesn’t want anything to do with a non-Mormon! That is the ultimate act of control and spiritual abuse. For leaders to control God – to speak for him, to tell members His decision to damn them, and to leave them without a Savior because they have left the codependent breeding system.
Amy – I hear you about being responsible for other peoples’ actions in the form of a child. I have a son with some issues, and I can’t leave it to him to deal with. The doctors expect me to handle a lot of his problems, and I’ve had to evaluate and re-evaluate to try and keep myself healthy in spite of the fact that I really am responsible for some of things that my son should be able to do on his own (like eat enough food to gain weight). It’s a tricky situation.
LH – thanks for adding that quote from coda.org. That is right on! Those words still resonate with me. My particular brand of perfectionism was rooted in codependency, and I felt utterly worthless when I did something less-than-perfect.
anonforthis – The “Codependent No More” book by Beattie acknowledges that codependency can arise in response to a chronic illness. I had a friend who realized she was developing codependency in response to her young son’s autism. Of course she couldn’t talk things out with her son, but fortunately the honesty can be spoken to another person. She sought out a therapist and then joined a support group, both of which helped her immensely. I can’t find the reference to chronic illness in the book right now, but I know that situation is discussed.
lws329 – that’s great your parents taught you such good relationship principles. I had the opposite experience; never talk about things that upset you, and expect people to read your mind. That’s how we handled my father’s behavioral issues. It left scars. And I loved “He Did Deliver Me From Bondage.” That went around our support groups too. It was SO helpful.
Jake C. – my codependency with Church created scrupulosity, and then I blamed myself and drowned in self-loathing when I did something wrong. The Church’s teachings about ‘vending machine obedience’ sure didn’t help. The Church insists it doesn’t teach obedience that way, but it actually does.
docjohn51 – besides the other excellent points you make, I was glad you brought up members who are codependent in trying to change the Church’s views on LGBTQ issues and fear-based obedience. Part of the reason I left is that I knew I couldn’t stay without trying to change the Church. I know I fall into those patterns; I know I would get stressed by trying to bring about change in an organization that doesn’t want to change.
Great discussion, all, thanks for commenting.
Some important things to ponder here Janey. Thank you
Janey
For certain it is important to be mentally healthy. To have healthy relationships. To be free to have one’s own well-founded beliefs and ideas, separate from what an institution and its adherents teach and believe.
I have experienced poor reactions as my beliefs transitioned to no longer fit within lds church doctrine. I have taken a firm stance, and needed to defend my beliefs. I have been able to maintain my sense of self. At the same time, I don’t want to take anything away from what others find meaning and comfort in. In my situation we can coexist, but I know in others this isn’t wise or possible.
Regarding substances, I believe the emerging verbiage is “substance use disorder”. There is likely a similar term when the misused “substance” is pornography. There are some people I dislike and avoid. I try to still think of them in a person first way.
I am very familiar with co-dependency. I participated in a group that used Colleen Harris’ book, “He Did deliver Me from Bondage.”, read Melody Beatties’ book several times, studied family systems, etc. It was an exciting time of learning and growth for me. My husband and I served for two years as leaders for the Church’s Addiction Recovery Program. We gave it our best efforts, but honestly, it did not work well. There were just too many problems with it, which is why I am interested in your comment that the church torpedoed the program and caused more codependency than less. I would really appreciate a post on that as a check for me to see if my perceptions are correct. I feel that, like everything the church touches, it only provides a surface level approach run by lay people who don’t really understand what is at stake. I would not recommend the church’s ARP to anyone who seriously needs help. Looking forward to more discussion about this. Thanks for the post.
I didn’t realize the ARP had been shut down. I was hoping it would mature into something better.
Here are the problems I saw with it. They set it up with a facilitator couple that are selected basically because they are good members of the church with no apparent addiction problems. This means they are without the experience and skills to empathize and support addicts. They sit in a one up one down situation even when they try to be supportive.
Really, a little overeating is not the same situation as narcotics addiction. It’s pretty tough to offer support in the same group to both pornography addicts and their wives. The 12 step program works because of long time addicts who have been successful with sobriety supporting offering support to those who are thinking of trying sobriety.
Our ragtag tiny group of people with a variety of problems, with the never addicted couple leading was better than nothing, but not by much.
The church culture of pretending to be perfect and never airing your dirty laundry makes this situation so much worse. There’s no support where people don’t know you for your real self.
I also saw problems with the church addiction program. Long story about how I got kind of in inside scoop, but there was a guy in one of my wards that was a uppity up at LDS FS, and several times, I was able to discuss the history of these groups. Then, I put that together with comments I had heard over the years from social work clients, and formed my opinion of where the church “went wrong” on its approach to addiction.
The groups started as LDS break offs from AA, who wanted to share a specific LDS religious interpretation in AA. As these groups became more common, the church decided they were a big help as compared to regular AA because they stayed in ab LDS world view. So, LDS FS decided to sponsor them. Then, rather than just providing a room to meet, and let AA work, the church started controlling, changing, and ruining the whole concept.
First problem, the facilitator couple, as lws329 mentioned, are selected from the ward or stake specifically because they have no addiction problem. That violates the basic reason that AA worked. In AA, everyone has the problem, so no one is better than another and no one feels superior. And they have been there so they get it. While LDS selected leaders maybe well meaning, they just don’t have the life experience to help someone who is addicted to either a substance or behavior. They can be loving and supportive, but they still don’t get it. This lack of understanding lowers the trust level between members and leaders.
They broadened from alcohol addiction to everything. There is a big difference between being addicted to alcohol, compared to narcotics, compared to gambling, compared to porn. Even just staying with one substance, there is a huge difference between being the child of an alcoholic, the spouse of an alcoholic, or the person using alcohol. You can’t put them all in the same group and not have a repeat of the family dynamics. You put the codependent wife in with somebody else’s addicted husband and they repeat the behavior they are in the habit of doing. Now, you have a sick group instead of one where people will learn new behaviors. You reinforce the bad behaviors, instead of teaching new ones. Even a trained facilitator couldn’t head off that habitual behavior, and untrained lay volunteers wouldn’t even realize the problem.
The other problem was having a group sponsored by the stake. Imagine the “confidentiality” when the stake president’s wife shows up. Yup, gossip all over the stake because people already have a relationship, so the group is not really anonymous.
One of the other things that makes AA work is having individual sponsors. The church groups didn’t do this, so it left people alone when outside of group. No one to call when they needed real life support.
I participated in two separate groups because I moved cities during the time that I attended. In both groups, men who struggled with porn addiction met separately from the wives. All family members were welcome in the support group, but 99.5% of us were wives. In my first city, the missionaries separated by gender as well. There were three senior couples. The three women led the wives’ support group, and the their husbands led the support group for our husbands who were struggling with porn addiction. There were separate groups for people struggling with substance abuse. The only people in our meetings were people struggling with porn use.
We were encouraged to choose a mentor. That was left up to us; mentors were not assigned. I didn’t choose to have a mentor, but I later served as a mentor for four other women. Those were rewarding experiences.
Confidentiality was huge. We were cautioned about confidentiality every week. One of the missionaries told me that, as part of their training, they were instructed to not even say hello if they saw one of us at the store (or wherever) to avoid someone asking, “so how do you know each other?” I never had my confidentiality violated by someone at meetings. They were not affiliated with stakes or wards, and no stake or ward leaders ever came to meetings.
When I first joined, the manual that I talked about in the post directly addressed codependency. It was written by a senior sister missionary, in collaboration with several other women who were in the support group. There was lots of feedback, and the authors actively solicited stories from us which were then included in newer drafts of the manual. The manual also frankly addressed the fact that not everyone quits porn. It also touched briefly on the unique challenges when the husband is both abusive and a porn addict. When I started coming to meetings, it felt a lot like AA. Besides the encouragement to find a mentor, we also did the “Hi my name is Janey and I’m a codependent” during sharing, we read the serenity prayer every week, and talked about outside books like “Codependent No More” and “He Did Deliver Me From Bondage.”
While I was still in the first city, the Church started directing us to drop certain AA types of behavior. We weren’t supposed to introduce ourselves with the AA greeting anymore. We were told not to recommend outside books. Not even “He Did Deliver Me From Bondage!”
Then some drama started about the manual we were using. We’d been told that our group was a pilot program, using this particular manual to see how it went, and then the manual might possibly be adopted Churchwide. I only heard tangentially about issues with the manual. The Church wanted some changes, so they made some changes. Then there was news that the manual would be scrapped entirely, and we were encouraged to write to the man at the Church Office Building who was over the Addiction Recovery Program. I wrote. Others did too.
Something happened (I never found out what), and we were told not to use the codependency manual anymore. We started using the same manual that our husbands were using. It was less helpful, but we all had enough experience to work with it, and coach along the newcomers. We used the addiction manual for over a year.
During that time, I moved to a different city. The group in that city also had separate meetings for men and women. The missionaries stayed in couples, though. We had an elder and sister running our meeting. I didn’t like that as much.
The Church introduced a new manual, specifically for the wives. We were all very excited. When we actually got the manual, it was a huge disappointment to those of us who had been in the program for years, using the Twelve Steps for our mental health issues. The Church leaders wanted to make Twelve Step meetings more like Church meetings, and they sure succeeded. Instead of the honesty and self-examination of the Twelve Steps, it was more like Sunday School lessons, in which we were told to think of Jesus when we took the sacrament, and other Sunday School answers. That’s what I meant when I said the Church “torpedoed the program.” I’ll do a whole post on it, and compare the texts in a little more detail.
The Church’s manual did not acknowledge that sometimes he doesn’t quit porn. It didn’t say anything about abuse.
I think I was in a uniquely wonderful situation in my first city. I came into the program with a great manual, and clicked immediately with a group of friends who stayed with me for years of recovery. Our group was good. We encouraged each other and kept in touch throughout the week. I’ve heard that some AA groups cause problems rather than solve them, and no doubt there was a wide variety of experiences among Church groups. I got a good one when I needed it, and I’ll always be relieved and grateful for it.
Janey, my information on the program comes from other people, and I have no personal experience with it. So, take it for what it is worth. The complaints on things like confidentiality came from clients I was seeing in my professional capacity, so they were battered wives, rape victims, or child sexual abuse victims, as well as associated with the church addiction program. Some were abusing alcohol or drugs themselves and some were the codependent wives. All were women, as most of my clients were women and I cannot remember any male ever discussing the church groups. Most were in Utah, some in Texas. My saying state or ward sponsored may have been what a client incorrectly thought.
Yeah, I stayed far away from LDS F S and any church sponsored “mental health” because the church has some sick dependency, codependency, and boundary issues, and i didn’t like, “confidentiality except from your bishop.” I didn’t feel good about telling clients that the church gets things dead backwards wrong. So, my attitude was just a bad fit.
I appreciate everyone’s comments about the Addiction Recovery Program. You have validated a lot of my concerns. A Stake President of mine stated in a meeting that we were losing members to the AA program and other affiliated churches. (I don’t remember the context of the meeting.)This was before the Church developed it’s own program. I have wondered if the church leaders really didn’t want to be involved in addiction recovery, but felt like they needed to control the narrative, hence the manual..The church came on the scene much later than most churches with AA type programs.
Based on my experience as a group leader (now called missionaries) here are some of the issues I had as has been mentioned in other comments.
– lay leaders with no experience with addiction treatment. We read from a script and the only training we received was basically how to conduct the meeting.
– a one size fits all approach, from pornography, substance abuse, bulimia etc to someone who was addicted to scrapbooking. Difficult to create a support system.
– no one was required to name their addiction, although some did during the discussion part of the meeting. Being able to name one’s problem openly is a huge step in the recovery process in my opinion.
– members of our stake who were also friends admitted they could probably benefit from the program, but felt they couldn’t attend due to their position in the church. They would purchase the manual sometimes.
– friends of my children who came, seeing us as leaders, came once and never came back. Confidentiality always a big concern.
– No SPONSORS. The success of the AA program is due to the support of the members and their commitment to help one another.
– Bishops requiring individuals to attend for twelve weeks and requiring a signature from us that they met the requirement. A huge misconception of the program.
– difficult to find good facilitators. Two of our facilitators were recovered alcoholics, but in getting to know them, they were addicted to opioids. They also recovered through attendance at AA meetings, not a church program, and found the experience different from what they knew, and as former less actives, they didn’t relate to the church manual.
– The manual leaned heavily on the Book of Mormon. Definitely meant to indoctrinate. I understand the philosophy of AA was very open to people having their own beliefs – to worship a higher power as they saw fit.
That seems to sum up most of it. In the Church everything is correlated, even its Addiction Recovery Program. So sad!
The 12-step groups are getting this language from early AA members of the Oxford Group (NB: not the “Oxford Movement,” which is a totally different thing), a network of liberal Protestant prayer / mutual confession parachurch groups. The AA founders tried to be ecumenical by the standards of the time (“Higher Power” comes from New Thought), but didn’t realize how much of their revivalist worldview they were smuggling in. Hence the creation of rival groups like Rational Recovery (AA for atheists).
I was so busy with real life that I didn’t read this post & comments until now, and that’s probably a good thing.
My experience with AA style codependency meetings (Al-anon?)is limited, though I did receive a coin or two. It was a secular AA org, prescribed by a therapist, with separate meetings for abusers of whatever. The curriculum was based on Beattie’s books and workbooks. Attendees came from a variety of victim situations, most from experiencing abuse in childhood, from a bad marriage or relationship, or their own substance abuse. There was much there that was therapeutic for me. I often have said that (for me at least) Relief Society was weekly codependency training, and a regular meeting to unlearn the bad programming made sense. But I always felt a hesitancy that clouded my enthusiasm for those meetings, and I’ve never quite unpacked the why of that.
But I’m still learning, and lately I’ve observed, in some professional quarters, the dismissal of the term ‘codependent’ as victim-blaming. For example, it can be used a a way to make it appear that an abuse victim contributed to their victimization with codependent behaviors, and it eases the guilt of the abuser to focus some guilt on the victim. The very term ‘co-dependent’ historically meant that the partner of the abuser played a part in how their own abuse happened. There are those in therapy professions who reject this entirely. I think they have a point.
lws329, your comment inspired me to speak up, and validate your discomfort with the codependency curriculum, especially one from a church POV written by a lay-person. Of course it’s not going to be honest about critical realities that are too sensitive, like the shoddy treatment of women in general, or the ways men are groomed into compliant service. I’m impressed that you rejected putting yourself through an experience you didn’t need and could cause damage, and I see it as a product of having had sensible mental health training from your parents. That’s the goal of all recovery programs, or should be, and you already have much of that in practice.
I appreciate your OP, Janey, and comments that address the journey towards a healthy mental outlook from a place of — codependency, or whatever label serves. I’m no longer comfortable with those terms to describe a person badly disconnected from themself, but I don’t know what shorthand would make a serviceable substitute. And I’m plenty occupied figuring out who I am to solve that problem.
Wow, it’s almost as if the Church’s approach to addiction and recovery is lacking and ineffective. Who would have thought? Have they made any improvements in the past 12 years or are they still relying on outdated methods?