Frivolous lawsuit against AAWS dismissed

I have discussed in three previous blog entries Karla Brada's tragic death and the frivolous lawsuit Karla's family brought against AA World Services (AAWS). Anyone who was not a fanatic anti-stepper could see that the lawsuit has no merit -- how can AAWS be responsible for a relationship that did not even start in an AA meeting, much less a domestic violence incident that happened in a private residence? 

The courts agreed: The lawsuit against AAWS has been dismissed (mirror). While the murderer is still a party to the lawsuit, the judge decided that AA could not possibly be held responsible for something that had nothing to do with AA.

My prayers are with the Brada family that they can find peace and happiness. Hopefully, by having AAWS dismissed as a defendant, they can move on beyond what has been a misplaced resentment.

Did Karla have a sponsor?

Dr. Peele, in the comments to the his inaccurate hit piece published earlier this week claims that Karla (who I have now detailed in two previous blog entries) in fact had a sponsor.

His exact comment was as follows:

Gabrielle responds: "I happen to have notes in my possession that state Joanne Frye [sic -- it's spelled "Fry"] was Karla's sponsor -- in her own handwriting."

Now, it's very interesting that Dr. Peele uses Gabrielle Glaser as a source claiming that Mrs. Fry was Karla's sponsor. Because, when I read Gabrielle's own words, my conclusion was that Karla never had a sponsor. And, indeed, that piece written by Gabrielle never states that Karla had a sponsor.  To wit:

As a relative newcomer to AA, Suzanne said, Karla had not yet chosen a sponsor [...] Joanne Fry, Patrick’s wife and the woman she had asked to be her AA sponsor

Carefully observe that Gabrielle does not say that Fry became Karla's sponsor, but tries to imply that she might have been.

Now compare this to Joanne Fry's own account:

We were not, ever have been, nor intended to be or become sponsors for Earle or Brada; we simply knew them.

We have two different stories being told here. I choose to believe Joanne Fry never became Karla's sponsor because Glaser's own account of Karla Brada's death never directly claims Fry was Brada's sponsor, and because Joanne Fry out and out denies ever being her sponsor.

Karla Brada Mendez's tragic death

As someone who has been been in the rooms of Alcoholics Anonymous for decades, one of the most tragic things I have seen time and time again is the number of preventable deaths that occur. These deaths are preventable because, if the deceased people had followed the suggestions given to them and became clean and sober, they would not have had to die.

One recent example which has recently made the anti-AA blogosphere is one Karla Brada Mendez whose death has been detailed elsewhere. This death is especially tragic because, if Karla had made other decisions (such as, for example, following the suggestions most meetings give newcomers), she would still be alive today.

To wit:

• Most people in the fellowship suggest that men stick with men, and women stick with women. Many sponsors suggest that newcomers do not get in romantics relationships (classically, the suggestion is "no relationship in the first year"). Karla, instead, got in a relationship with another newcomer (one Eric Allen Earle).
• Most people in the fellowship suggest that newcomers get a sponsor. Karla chose not to do that.
• One common saying in the rooms is that "winners stick with the winners". Karla, for whatever reason, did not choose to associate with women with long-term sobriety. 
• There is not one oldtimer in the fellowships I have been to who would suggest that a newcomer drink or use drugs again. Karla starting drinking and using again with her boyfriend.
• When Karla's boyfriend was arrested for domestic violence, instead of going to a shelter and/or getting a restraining order against him, Karla instead chose to pay some $8,000 to bail him out.
• Finally, in another drunken fight between Karla and her boyfriend, she is killed from injuries consistent with a violent struggle.

The bottom line is this: In the rooms of AA, newcomers are given suggestions. Karla, for whatever reason, chose not to follow those suggestions. If she had, she would be alive today.

These events happened nearly three years ago. Karla's family felt the need to blame AA for their daughter's death -- despite the fact that she would be alive today if she had followed directions given to her in the meetings.

Don't get me wrong: I grieve very deeply for Karla's tragic death, just as I grieve for the countless other people who have gone through the rooms and died drunk. But I just can not see how AA is responsible for her death, since she was undoubtedly repeatedly given suggestions which would have saved her life.  But she chose, for whatever reason, to not follow those suggestions.

The suit was filed around September of 2012, but there is no information publicly available about how the lawsuit proceeded, whether it was dismissed, settled out of court, a settlement was reached, or the litigation is ongoing. Indeed, none of the articles about this lawsuit even have a docket number. Too bad; I am curious how the lawsuit went.