Clinton, Michael2019-09-252019-09-252010-08-302007-041916-2405http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12424/175461Dr Charland has the following worries. He thinks that the philosophical doctrine of representationalism is a red herring that deflects attention from what he takes to be the “real” problem - the coercive nature of referrals to 12-step programs. Unlike me, he finds nothing objectionable in the spiritual context of 12-step programs. Furthermore, he believes that it is always alright to be given what you have decided you should have. Moreover, he pleads complexity in notions of God as a defence against my objection to the requirement that 12-step program members be entirely ready to have God remove all their defects of character. I hope that I have not misstated or misinterpreted Dr Charland’s objections. If I have, I apologize to him without reservation. That said, I am pleased to address Dr Charland’s objections in the hope that my response will encourage further debate about the ethics of 12-step programs.engWith permission of the license/copyright holderhealth ethicsmedical ethicsaddictionMethods of ethicsBioethicsPhilosophical ethicsMedical ethicsHealth ethicsArticle