New England Region of Narcotics Anonymous Basic Website

Service System Workshop Dec. 17, 2010
Central Massachusetts Area (Worcester)

Jaime V. and I (Andrew L.) facilitated the workshop using tools from the na.org website, SSW CD we received from the Orlando workshop and also used movies from the WSC XXX disc I received at the Conference in April.
We had 15 participants at the beginning with about 25 total as people came in and out throughout the event. GSR’s and the central mass RCM were present along with interested members. Our training at the Orlando workshop proved to be very valuable at the event. Thank you.
We passed out the Background info sheet and members took turns reading paragraphs. We had a moment of silence and a prayer to open.
Then started the workshop.
We broke up the room into three groups and covered questions 1, 2, and 3 from the proposal input worksheet.

GSU
Question 1
Picture applying these models in your community. How would these models help you maintain what is positive in our current system concerning group support or improve support to your groups?
-*Favorite* Will help group concerns to be better addressed by the GSU. It will provide more time and focus on groups, the members and their needs.

-will help more people feel comfortable with being active on a service level that may not be as involved or intimidating as current ASC can currently be.

-more groups and group members will interact for local group concerns and will ultimately improve local NA unity

-GSU will get a larger representation of group conscience to the LSU level

Question 2
What, if any, challenges might these proposals create in effective local service delivery?

Linear- The LSU is smaller so where does the manpower come from?
-Group voice gets diluted at LSU level
-*Favorite*-Model could slow business if groups aren’t actually represented

Two-track- slows down the flow of business
-needs to be a link between GSU and LSU (non-voting?)

LSU
Question 3
Picture applying these models in your community. How would these models help you maintain what is positive in our current system concerning local services or improve effective local service delivery?

-two GSR’s and one interested member likes the way “area” currently operates
-being grateful for our ability to share one common concept with a diversity to come up with a solution

Intermediate-
Question 8
Considering the size, density, or other characteristics of your community, how could using an intermediate body be useful?
-rural groups get better representation
-can see value in large geographical or densely populated areas
-more fellowshipping/involvement
-adhoc with the option to be longstanding
-reduce travel times

Question 9
What, if any, challenges might using an intermediate body create?
-is this method putting too much strain on one representative?
-what about lack of manpower?
-what is the purpose of an intermediate body?
-possibility of avoiding group input/direction

State/National

Positives
-being more conscious of concepts
-more care in selecting members with better leadership qualities to fill service positions
-having one person to talk to state officials instead of them guessing which area/region to talk to
-single point of accountability

Challenges-
-How would zones be determined?
-Diluting of voice (meaning our current voices while seeking the lone addicts yet to hear the message in other parts of the world)
-being told where we are to report to as groups

more challenges reported on and submitted by a group (things said while brainstorming)
-this whole thing is bad
-it leads to one person having too much power
-things beyond region are evil
-anything to do with world is bad
-feels like to much/further separation, local/groups conscience will be lost and worlds conscience will be used or sought
-with world growth service comes less local opinion + growth + education

Good – one for zonal seating if it incorporates existing structure

Other comments and concerns that happened during open discussions include
-get rid of WSC
Jaime and I mentioned that it is in policy as a fellowship to hold a WSC
-the tail is wagging the dog
-will we have to do this in another 10 years if we grow rapidly between now and then?
Jaime and I mentioned zonal seating option and having a reduction in seating option if other parts of the world need seating. That would keep the count at a certain level while providing fairness throughout.
-we don’t exist in a vacuum
-can we be flexible enough?
-are we violating the 6th Tradition?
-we are fulfilling the 5th Tradition by carrying the message
-seems like we are quieting local voices to hear lone voices from afar