I feel conflicted in giving this a rating as the good stuff is at 4-5, but the stuff that bothered me - which was unfortunately a lot - was around 1-2 . I'm going to give it a 3 at this point, as I do think there are some really good insights that I felt were beneficial. But there are also a lot of holes and incredible overemphasis on alcoholism and 12 Step program dogma, which I happen to feel strongly contain elements that are damaging and limiting in their approach and perspective. I cannot ethically support that view. It was also very presumptuously Christian. I feel annoyed and disrespected in light of these perspectives being so heavily 'pushed' - from the cover I had no idea that this was so primary to the entire contents of the book.
I have been aware of the term 'Codependent' for a long time, but it only recently popped up on my personal radar as something to look into and understand better. Within days of my starting to take an interest in the topic this book was referenced in another I was then reading (Traumata, by Meera Atkinson). A few weeks later I was looking at audiobooks in the local library and spotted this title, so immediately chose it.
I think the baseline message was articulated very well, in terms of what the core dynamics of codependency are - essentially, caring too much about, and being too influenced by, what other people think, want, etc. There was some really useful discussion about this, as well as plenty of individuals' stories which aided, to some degree, in describing some real-life scenarios that 'codependents' find themselves living and reliving.
I say 'to some degree' as all of the stories had alcoholism set as the main issue that codependency relates to. All the codependents in the book were involved with alcoholics. Some had been alcoholics themselves. Over-eating and obesity was mentioned a lot, too, and other substance abuse issues were also given light mention. I found it incredibly frustrating to have to continue to listen to the bombardment of 12 Steps views. I just found that lens to be far too myopic to do the actual topic of 'codependency' due justice. I contemplated not finishing the book, but stuck with it for the genuinely good good bits. I have personal lived experience of 12 Steps as well as really good recovery experience through approaching healing in other ways much more beneficial to me. I've read about other approaches to substance abuse recovery that deal more with what underlies it rather than making it the focus. My thoughts and feelings on 12 Steps are informed by a good mix of direct experience and relevant research. I could say A LOT more on this topic, but this is not the time or place for it. My point is just that I am not critical of 12 Steps on the basis of something flimsy, so by extension, I consider my concerns about this book to be valid and substantial.
I want to be very clear, though - I am NOT telling other people to abandon or avoid 12 Steps work if that is what they choose to engage for themselves. Nor am I discounting the experiences of those who feel they benefit from it - recovery and benefit are valuable however they come to any individual. My concern is the presumptuous presentation style of this book's contents, which seems to imply that healing codependence issues (or alcoholism, etc) is dependent on adherence to the 12 Steps - as if codependency is inextricably linked with 12 Steps view of illness and addiction, which is potentially damaging nonsense, in my view.
Also extremely irksome was the very commonly American style of presumptuous Christian proselytising (that said, I do think this American habit/ tendency is declining over recent years as respect for the differing views of others has grown, so perhaps, in this case, it is also a mark of an earlier era as the book was written in the '80s). I have been more involved with Buddhist practice and philosophy in my life, though I only really got into that when I found a Teacher who was as equally interested and engaged as I was with recognising what all Faith systems share. I was already in love with Hildegard von Bingen, and rather fond of St Claire and St Francis (I spent some time visiting a rural nunnery built alongside a monastery dedicated to these two). I have long loved mystical and contemplative Christian work. I have loved reading Matthew Fox and Thomas Merton, among others. Some of my role models are priests and nuns whose Christianity informs their social care work. I have my own relationship with God. And my God is NOT the God Melody Beattie frequently describes. And the issue here is not that I care about Melody Beattie's God specifically, but that a relationship with God - including not having such a relationship - is deeply personal and that I feel her manner of speaking about HER God is incredibly presumptuous (I've used that word a lot in this review, haven't I) and therefore disrespectful and inappropriate.
I do not agree that any healing is dependent on having a belief in any God, Higher Power or set steps. In my humble, imperfect, but conscientiously observed opinion, it is dependent on a deeply honest, deeply caring uncovering of both our personal layers of trauma and our inherent intelligence and wisdom. As far as I'm concerned, if anyone tries to tell you you need God, 12 Steps and Higher Power to heal, then I suggest running the other way because they are likely attempting some form of evangelical conversion - a form of violence completely antithetical to healing.
Beattie, at one point, claims she is not promoting the 12 Steps approach and defends her promotion (coz I say she
is
promoting it) by saying something like -'it is just my opinion'. These sorts of comments ring dishonest and avoidant to me. I think I would have more acceptance of this position if it was made explicitly clear on the cover of the book that it is coming from a 12 Step angle. Perhaps the subheading could include something like '... As informed by the 12 Steps.", as well as making it clear just how much alcoholism and substance use underpins the framing of codependency through the entire book. Be clear and upfront about the nature of the content so people are honestly informed about what they are getting into. I also think Beattie's manner of talking about her God and Christian beliefs ought to be openly qualified and articulated as HERS - it's ok for her to hold those beliefs, but own them honestly in a way that acknowledges that MANY others DO NOT share them. It is possible to communicate both of these at the same time - many people manage it easily and respectfully.
I did read a 1 star review by a woman dealing with codependency issues arising out of a traumatic, abusive childhood who said the book was very inadequate in speaking to her type of experience. I largely felt the same way. This was the first book on codependency I've read, and while there really were some genuine gems of insight peppered throughout I really hope there are other good books on the topic available which take in a much more broad, unbiased, rigorous approach to its examination.