I absolutely disagree with
adding anything to the name Codependents Anonymous.
The suggested addendum sounds
like an advertising slogan, and I think it comes close to violating the 11th
There are as many definitions
of codependency as there are codependents, and as many definitions of recovery
as there are recovering codependents. To narrow that scope in any way will not
attract more people to CoDa, it will in fact turn off people who feel they
don’t fit that definition.
The only requirement for CoDa
membership is a desire to have healthy relationships. Please let’s not start
tinkering with success. It will inevitably lead to disunity as people debate
definitions and wording—violating the 1st Tradition—and possibly
even lead to groups splitting off and forming their own factions.
The decline in meeting
attendance could be due to the following factors:
Many people stop attending when they feel better (they usually end up
coming back months or years later).
Some meetings, though listed on the meeting schedules and on taped phone
messages, have actually stopped existing because no one wanted to chair them.
Some facilities become unavailable; e.g., a church basement flood knocked
out one New York City meeting for more than a month. In that time, members may
have found other meetings more convenient or more to their liking, or after
repeatedly showing up for a non-meeting, got fed up and joined another meeting.
Some people decide that other 12-step programs are a priority for them
For those of us who work full time jobs, and for those who have childcare
responsibilities, we can’t always get to as many meetings as we’d like
during the week, and there aren’t that many weekend meetings available.
There may be plenty of other
reasons why attendance may be down (holidays, vacations). I seriously doubt
it’s because of the name of the organization. Anyone
who wants to find out what “codependent” means has only to visit a
bookstore, get on the Internet, or call the phone numbers listed with
A Satisfied Customer!