Jordon/Flickr (cc by-nc-nd)
A posted sign announcing an Alcoholics Anonymous meeting.
Certainly one of the main tenets of A.A. is its first-name-only policy. When it was created in small-town Ohio in the 1930s, alcoholism was a shame-filled label. Problem drinkers, it was reasoned, were more likely to seek help if they could do so discreetly. Now some influential A.A. members -- among the "quitterati" -- are coming out and pushing for openness. They argue that while anonymity protects, it also hides – creating prejudice and confusion. So is the privacy harmful or essential? Should A.A. remove anonymity from its set of traditions? Do you think alcoholism still carries a stigma? How could such a change impact members and people looking for help?
Susan Cheever, a regular columnist at The Fix, is the author of many books including the memoirs Home Before Dark and Note Found in a Bottle and the biography My Name is Bill: Bill Wilson: His Life and the Creation of Alcoholics Anonymous