AA Conference Approved Literature

 The term “Conference-approved” relates to literature and audiovisual material that is published by AA World Services, Inc, and has been approved by Conference for this purpose.

“The term has no relation to material not published by GSO. It does not imply Conference disapproval of other material about AA. A great deal of literature helpful to alcoholics is published by others, and A.A. does not try to tell any individual member what he or she may or may not read.” (Service Material from the General Service Office)

A.A. also produces non-conference approved literature such as the ‘Grapevine’, which is published by A.A. Grapevine, Inc. Examples of Grapevine publications are the book ‘The Language of the Heart’, which consists of Bill W’s Grapevine writings, and also the A.A. ‘Preamble’ is a Grapevine, Inc publication.

The General Service Conference recognises the Grapevine as the international journal of Alcoholics Anonymous. The only reason it’s not Conference approved is because it’s published monthly and the Conference meets annually and therefore it is not practically possible.

My personal concern is with AA members stating that “only Conference-approved literature should be read out at meetings.” This is a misunderstanding of the term at best and outright dogmatism at worst. As stated above, group members are free to read from any literature they choose to and there is no ‘tradition’ or GSO guidance that states otherwise.

A.A. group members should also be aware that neither GSO or Intergroup, governs individual groups’ decisions. Ultimately the group conscience decides its own format and practices.

In my view it’s not healthy to unreasonable censor what members read out at meetings, as to do so is based upon fear and prevents group members’ right to freedom of expression. Diversity of opinion and views is a good thing, as we can learn from each other’s differences and experiences.

Also, A.A. should never be rigid in its outlook and be prepared to change and evolve when necessary as new understanding and insights become clear. The founder members of the fellowship were humble enough to realise that “we know only a little” and they learnt from experience as they went along and envisaged an evolving A.A.

Dogmatism within A.A. was being warned about nearly 30 years ago. At a talk given by the then General Service Manager, Bob Pearson, to the General Service Conference in 1986, he had this to say:

“If you were to ask me what is the greatest danger facing AA today, I would have to answer: the growing rigidity – the increasing demand for absolute answers to nit-picking questions; pressure for GSO to “enforce” our Traditions; screening alcoholics at closed meetings; prohibiting non-Conference-approved literature, i.e., “banning books;” laying more and more rules on groups and members.”

The fellowship of A.A. is based upon liberal and spiritual principles which suggest acceptance and tolerance of each other’s differences. The ‘primary purpose’ of the group as stated in Tradition 5, is one of carrying a message of recovery to the alcoholic who still suffers, and it’s this common goal that binds those differences together.

My experience of alcoholism and recovery from it are unique to me, as is my message to others, who may or may not identify. How I communicate it and any literature I use to help me in doing so, should be my choice. In addition, my understanding and experience of the 12 Steps is personal to me.


Tradition One, calls for Unity not uniformity, and states that…… “We believe there isn’t a fellowship on earth which lavishes more devoted care upon its individual members; surely there is none which more jealously guards the individual’s right to think, talk, and act as he wishes. No AA can compel another to do anything; nobody can be punished or expelled. Our Twelve Steps to recovery are suggestions; the Twelve Traditions which guarantee A.A.’s unity contain not a single “Don’t.” They repeatedly say “We ought….” but never “You must!”

To summarise the core principle of Tradition One, I would suggest that the individual’s right to freedom of expression should be cherished, as long as it is not harmful towards the welfare of the group as a whole.

Tradition Two, suggests that ultimately the group conscience decides its own format and practices. However, an informed group conscience should take into consideration all viewpoints, as well as application of the relevant ‘traditions’ and the principles they contain.  It is also worthwhile considering any previous guidance by Conference/GSO in relation to the issue, although the AA group is not obligated to follow it.

Tradition Three, States that….. “The only requirement for A.A. membership is a desire to stop drinking.” The Program of recovery is a suggestion only, members are free not to read the Big Book or practice the Twelve Steps if they so wish, and the program of A.A. should not be forced upon its members. Tradition Three aims to be fully inclusive of all members regardless of differences and warns against dogmatic rules born of fear and prejudice, which are barriers to recovery for all who want it.

A quote from Bill W.

 “In AA we are supposed to be bound together in the kinship of a universal suffering. Therefore the full liberty to practice any creed or principle or therapy should be a first consideration. Hence let us not pressure anyone with individual or even collective views. Let us instead accord to each other the respect that is due to every human being as he tries to make his way towards the light. Let us always try to be inclusive rather than exclusive. Let us remember that each alcoholic among us is a member of AA, so long as he or she so declares.”

And further….

“In no circumstances should we feel that Alcoholics Anonymous is the know-all and do-all of alcoholism.”

(Bill said, referring to the work of other organisations engaged in research, alcohol education and rehabilitation.)

The above quotes by Bill W are taken from his speech to the General Service Conference held in New York City in April, 1965.

About the Author, Steven K.

Steve K has been a member of AA for 24 years and lives in Cheshire, which is in the N. West region of England. He would describe himself as a humanist/agnostic. His home group is the Macclesfield Saturday morning AA group and he regularly chairs the meeting. He has a background in advice and counselling work, mainly in the areas of mental health and social welfare law. Steve enjoys swimming and going to the gym regularly at the local Leisure Centre and hill walking in the Cheshire countryside.

He’s recently started a recovery blog, 12stepphilosophy, and has self-published an eBook entitled “The 12 Step Philosophy of Alcoholics Anonymous: An Interpretation by Steve K.” The Third edition is available as both an eBook and a paperback at Lulu.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Gordon D Arnold
Gordon D Arnold
1 year ago

Unfortunately, we have a problem in our local groups. One individual who attends meetings also works in a treatment center. He uses his sharing time to quote outside literature from the field of addictions treatment and psychology, presenting this information in lecture form as if he is an expert in the field. He is not an expert and possesses no completed formal education in the field. Often, his technical presentations contain technical errors-he is disseminating inaccurate technical info on addictions treatment. How do you keep this behavior out of the meetings without banning references to non-conference approved literature? 

Last edited 1 year ago by Gordon D Arnold
David Hager
David Hager
1 year ago

Applause! I see creeping dogmatism in my own group. This helps.


Benn B
Benn B
5 years ago

I just wanted to speak up and say I am loving the conversation here! Thanks everyone for your thought-provoking comments. The whole debate from those who think only “Conference Approved” literature should be read at meetings seems to come from the point of “AA got it right the first time around and anything that deviates isn’t welcome.” In my opinion this truly keeps AA stuck in the Dark Ages and doesn’t do a very good job of serving those who may still suffer which is our primary purpose on oh so many levels. One of my personal feelings about sharing… Read more »

John S
5 years ago
Reply to  Benn B

Thank you Benn. I’m amazed at how much I am still evolving. All I have ever known in AA is venerating and quoting from the books, using the books for our topics, etc. I carried that practice over to agnostic AA, though I’m using different books. I’m coming around to thinking that maybe a group doesn’t really need a book. Individuals may want to read books and perhaps share what they learn from them at meetings, but why do we all need to use the same book and talk about said book? I was at a meeting in New York… Read more »

Ed W.
5 years ago

At my agnostic/no-prayer home group, we read this paragraph in the script at every meeting:   “In keeping with the tradition of A.A. unity, this meeting neither displays nor distributes any altered versions  of Conference-approved literature. This includes A.A.’s Twelve Steps and Twelve Traditions. Regardless, anyone who qualifies or shares here is free to read from or discuss any form of  literature or other expression, as it relates to his or her own recovery.”    This is to inform any of our “more orthodox” fellows with that, as a group we do not hang up, hand out, or organize round-robin… Read more »

bob k
bob k
5 years ago

When I was relatively new, there was a big foofaraw at a business meeting about the fact that the group was selling a few books that were NOT conference-approved. This whole episode had a palpable flavor of the various “book-burning” episodes which represent less-than-proud moments in world history. In my area of the AA world, most group peddle only conference-approved literature. One of the unfortunate consequences is that the average AA member here has never SEEN, let alone read, books such as NOT-GOD by the late Ernest Kurtz. That’s a shame. Regarding what is read at meetings, I have to… Read more »

John hickey
John hickey
9 months ago
Reply to  bob k

Hey Bob, You bring up a good point. Your opposition to the Bible being read/studied is probably shared by many. I probably wouldn’t mind hearing it read so much as I’ve never read it. But when I say that I would surely not want it read at an AA meeting. I like the Ernest Kurtz book but I imagine some wouldn’t. At my group I would oppose the reading of an non AA book in a business meeting after business meeting. If we started reading both at meetings many would probably be turned off. That’s probably why most meetings stick… Read more »