Prison officials are promoting faith-based, 12-Step programs for inmates -- and pushing religious belief and dependence. But one Atheist "Refusnik" wants a secular alternative...

New Hampshire prison inmate has become the latest nonbeliever "refusnik" to challenge participation in a religion-based alcohol treatment program as a condition of parole and sentence reduction. Bill Yates, a former heroin addict now serving time in the New Hampshire State Prison, wants the secular Rational Recovery program available for inmates, and has refused to participate in an Alcoholic Anonymous 12-step program administered by a group called Summit House. He charges that prison officials will not reduce his sentence until he submits to the "spiritual" recovery program, and will probably be turned down next October when his case is brought up before the parole board.

    Yates told the Concord (N.H.) Monitor newspaper this past week, that "Alcoholics Anonymous is religious, and the prison cannot hold anybody back from freedom because they failed to attend an unequivocally religious process." He also criticized the AA view that all addictions involve a life- long recovery process, and says that he has simply "quit" his addiction cycle.

¶

The justices noted that "God" is mentioned in five of the twelve steps which are included in the Alcoholics Anonymous recovery program, and that AA meetings were "heavily laced with at least general religious content..."

¶

    That's the view of Rational Recovery; the group's co-founder, Lois Trimpey, told the Monitor that, "The worst way to quit something you love is to do it one day at a time. You have to take the high dive and get it over with."

    Regardless of which view is correct, though, secularists charge that the state -- and the prisons -- have no business promoting religious belief as a condition for parole or other consideration. But prison officials claim that the AA program is not religious, but "spiritual." That doesn't stop Steve Kenney, director of substance abuse services for the New Hampshire Department of Corrections from criticizing a program which doesn't acknowledge the ultimate power of a deity. "The people who created Rational Recovery, as far as I can see, have problems with God," he said. "They can't separate out God from spirituality. They don't like the idea of being powerless. If you're an alcoholic, the fact remains, you are powerless."

    The courts have taken a different view, however, and inmates across the country are lodging cases -- and winning -- against 12-step programs that refer to higher powers, god and spirituality. In June, 1996, for instance, the New York State Supreme Court upheld the case of David Griffin, an atheist, who said that government was promoting religion by requiring participation in Alcoholics Anonymous as a condition for parole. In a 5-2 decision, the justices found that Alcoholics Anonymous "engages in religious activity and religious proselytization," and that prison officials violated Griffin's constitutional rights by trying to coerce him to participate.

   "A fair reading of the fundamental AA doctrinal writings," said the majority, discloses that their dominant theme is unequivocally religious... Adherence to the AA fellowship entails engagement in religious activity and religious proselytization."

    The Justices noted that "God" is mentioned in five of the twelve steps which are included in the Alcoholics Anonymous recovery program, and that AA meetings were "heavily laced with at least general religious content." Judge Howard A. Levine, writing for the majority, said that the decision was not meant to end AA programs for inmates who voluntarily participated but was designed to uphold the rights who had their civil liberties violated by prison officials.

    Mr. Yates, 38, says that he has had an on-and-off relationship with drugs, but due to choice, not "powerlessness" before an addiction. He says that Rational Recovery worked for him, and cites the prevalence of drugs behind prison walls as an example of how he can so "no" to the substances. He applauds the RR program since it doesn't require endless "support group" sessions.

    But nationwide, prisons are not enthusiastic about the Rational Recovery approach. According to the Monitor, no prison system in the U.S. has instituted an RR program, although religion and "spirituality" based programs such as Alcoholics Anonymous abound.

    Lois Trimpey of Rational Recovery told AANEWS today that her organization has received information requests from "thousands of inmates" who are seeking information on the program, and an alternative to the religion-based "brainwashing" of Alcoholics Anonymous. She estimates that inmates are currently operating over two-dozen self-help programs throughout the nation's prison system which are based, in part, on the Rational Recovery teachings.

    Trimpey also says that the AA program is far from a success. "Based on their own figures, it's estimated that out of every 100 persons who start off in an Alcoholics Anonymous 12-Step program, 50 are gone by the end of the first month, and 75 by the third month. Five out of 100 complete the full program."

    "Alcoholics Anonymous is a counterfeit religion," said Trimpey. "It's corrupted the medical establishment, psychology and the penal system with its claim that alcoholism is a 'disease' before which we are 'powerless.'"

    She noted that in the case of Mr. Yates, in order to fulfill the requirement of State Prison officials, he would have be in the AA program for up to a year. But that program -- administered by a group called Summit House -- has a 24-36 month long waiting period. "Bill Yates would have to be in prison for another three or four years before he could get out, even though he has a clean record and has been an exemplary inmate."

    On November 10, 1997, the Tennessee Supreme Court ruled that the Alcoholics Anonymous 12-Step programs "indisputably raise the question of establishment of religion." In EVANS v. THE BOARD OF PAROLES, state justices noted the coercive elements involved in the AA program, and reversed a lower court ruling which required inmates to participate in the 12-Step regiment.

    Another case occurred in June, 1997. The Federal District Court of Southern New York reinstated the earlier decision, WARNER vs. ORANGE CO. DEPT. OF PROBATION, and said that the plaintiff's rights were violated by forcing an Alcoholics Anonymous program on him. Judge Gerald Goettel described AA as "deeply religious," and singled out the County's stubborn refusal to acknowledge the religious elements in the 12-Step program. "I am at a loss to understand this," said the judge.

    WARNER involved the 1994 conviction of a New York man who had been convicted of a drunk driving offense, and was sentence to an Alcoholics Anonymous program as an "alternative" to a prison sentence. The court ruled that his First Amendment rights had been violated since the State was "coercing the plaintiff to participate in religious exercises, an act which tends toward the establishment of a state religious faith."

    Penal authorities and politicians seem to approve of the wider use of religious ideology at "treating" and "reforming" inmates; but critics charge that these 12-Step programs, with their emphasis on acknowledging deities and believing in one's "powerlessness," are a form of control and even brainwashing. And important constitutional questions are involved; should government be establishing a religious litmus test for inmates as a condition of parole?

    There is also a question of funding. In the New Hampshire case, the Summit House program is reportedly funded with public Medicare monies. There is the prospect of wider abuse, though, as prison gates swing open to "faith based" ministries, like Chuck Colson's Prison Fellowship Ministry. In Texas, the Colson group now has control of the Jester Unit of the state prison system, where it is operating a religion-based rehabilitation program for select inmates. While the initial costs of the program could run as high as $1.5 million and are being "donated" by Colson's outreach, there are rumblings that following the trial run at Jester, costs may be shifted to the state. The State of Texas already covers some peripheral expenses, such as the housing, foods and security for the 100 to 200 inmates participating.

    Colson and other religionists say that their Bible-based rehab programs are "restorative justice," not a violation of the First Amendment.

[text only]