March 1st, 2025
TOM M. – Hello again, Danette. Thanks for doing this—it’s great to see you again. This is our third tape, and I appreciate you just letting me come up with questions out of nowhere and looking for a response. I was recently looking over the old trustee minutes and reports and noticed that there was an effort by the board to work on public relations—or public information—as a separate entity. Not as the public information at WSC, but as the trustees. So how did you go about that whole process of deciding how to do it, where to do it, and who’s to do it?
DANETTE – Well, you know, as you asked that, I realized I don’t have a specific memory. I’m kind of guessing here as to why the trustees formed a committee of their members to do this external… what was it called? The External Committee on Public Relations? Whatever it was called, it was separate or different from the World Service Conference. I can’t recall at this point.
TOM M. – Was there already a WSC Public Relations or Public Information committee?
DANETTE – Yes there was definitely a WSC P.I. Committee. So, I mean, I know we, as trustees, didn’t just decide, “Oh, we’re just going to start doing this.” I’m imagining—and this may not make sense—but I’m imagining that the WSC PI Committee (it was Public Information at the time, and sometimes we used the term “Public Relations”) may have been focused more on the United States or North America. And perhaps they weren’t confident about taking on this worldwide attempt at spreading the positive image for NA. I’m just guessing at that—that feels right. But it should be recorded somewhere in WSC minutes if that’s the case. You know, something like, Hey, we want the trustees to look at this more carefully or use their spiritual experience and insight on how to address this without compromising our traditions. So that’s my take. I’m not positive why or how the Board of Trustees decided to form a committee for public information.
TOM M. – Okay.
DANETTE – It appears to me from reading some of the minutes you sent me—and from what I do remember—is that we were being very careful. It felt like we were just putting a toe in, trying to determine: What is out there? What do we want to get out there? How many organizations are doing this on an international level? Do we want to become associated with them? If so, how far do we want to go with that association? Yes, exactly. There was a lot of caution—not really trepidation, but moving forward cautiously.
TOM M. – There were a couple of things you pointed out that could be interpreted as contradictory.
DANETTE – I think what was going on was: as we found out more about these other organizations— how they were portraying addiction, how they were talking about 12-step recovery—we made decisions to slow our roll. Like, “Okay, wait a minute. Yeah, we want to get this stuff out there, but we want to be very cautious about how we do it.” So, that’s my response to the contradictions. I suppose I was looking at that from one angle of “let’s do more but let’s have less contact.”
TOM M. – That leads to something I wanted to ask you about regarding Joe Gossett—his comments about the efforts to promote NA worldwide, and how that may not have been a good approach. Shortly after that, he was gone.
DANETTE – As I mentioned, I don’t remember a lot about Joe Gossett’s tenure. I read the one letter you provided—his comments seemed more about NA World Services trying to control literature development and distribution. To me, that’s very different from doing public information or public relations on an international level. And I agree with him on that part. I think it was a very poor decision for NA World Services to put so much effort—lawsuits included—into stopping worldwide fellowships from doing their own literature, to a certain extent. Of course, it’s been vital that the NA message is carried as it was intended from the beginning (with any WSC approved changes of course).
TOM M. – Like the efforts in Brazil… was it called “Toxic Anonymous” or something?
DANETTE – Vaguely. Now that you mention it, yeah. They merged, or some people went down there and got them to switch to Narcotics Anonymous. Then they had some kind of agreement with the office to produce literature—maybe they paid a fee? I don’t know. Jumping off from that, it’s really important to balance cultural and language differences when carrying the NA message. Trying to enforce an ethnocentric perspective through literature likely did more harm than good.
TOM M. – Yeah, having a relatable message would be the goal in any literature effort. And speaking of growth, I read that Iran is currently the fastest-growing or largest NA population worldwide. That growth happened during sanctions. So, none of that could be attributed to the office—just the members there in Iran. Have you heard about that?
DANETTE – Yes, I’ve heard the same. Every time I hear it, I go, “Huh.” And I trust that “huh” now. But explain what you mean about the sanctions—how do you think they impacted the literature development?
TOM M. – The U.S. and Europe are prohibited from exporting anything to Iran or accepting money from them. Travel, too, was limited. So, I don’t think the office had anything to do with Iran’s growth. Maybe a couple of members got in and helped a few others, but I don’t understand how it took off. Interesting. So maybe they smuggle the money out and get it to Europe? I read in one report about the London office—Jamie Scott Hopkins was running it—and they had some royalty-style agreement with WSO for literature production. Maybe something similar is going on in Iran?
DANETTE – I’m pretty sure that I remember correctly about some members who were able to travel to Iran and carry the message personally. Don’t know about any literature being carried in. Where are NA’s world offices currently?
TOM M. – I think: Belgium (Brussels), Canada, and Southern California. That’s all I know of. There was a time they had one in Russia, but I think there was so much corruption—some literature got stolen.
DANETTE – Was there ever an office in Iran?
TOM M. – Not officially, as far as I know. There may be a fellowship office, but not a published World Services Office. I thought there was one in a very unexpected place, but maybe not. I was at a thing in Tulsa where a guy from China said they were having a meeting in Beijing. Anthony, the WSO executive director, was there to negotiate production of the fourth or fifth edition of the Basic Text. That guy ended up becoming the RSR or RD for China.
DANETTE – Yeah, that’s how it happened back in the day. The WSO would send someone, and they’d identify a local member who’d end up representing the region at the WSC.
TOM M. – Back then, you probably had to use your own frequent flyer miles to attend!
DANETTE – Right. But did you really represent anyone? Vivian—who just passed—was one of those people. She was (I think originally from Sweden or lived there a long time) and was currently living in London but representing Sweden. For some time, nobody in Sweden knew she was at the WSC representing them. Exactly. It was a different time, for sure.
TOM M. – Was the EDM (European Delegates Meeting) going on when you were a trustee?
DANETTE – I think so. That might’ve been a result of one of the resolutions. It may have started right after—would’ve been nice to have it as a reference for ourselves in the Resolution Group.
TOM M. – It’s still going on. And I think the World Board (basically the board of directors for the WSO) attends every EDM.
DANETTE – All of them?
TOM M. – No, not all. But another thing—they travel to the United Nations annually, conveniently around Christmas in New York.
DANETTE – Why?
TOM M. – Good question. They never give real reports about why they go. You might see a little snippet in a report, but no actual breakdown of what happened or why they went.
DANETTE – I can’t come up with any reason that would’ve been helpful for the fellowship.
TOM M. – Maybe in countries like Iran, where addiction is treated with harsh penalties—maybe informing them there’s a way out is helpful. But once they know about NA, they know. Do they need continuous selling? The UN has subcommittees—maybe they present to Health or Science divisions? I gave a Basic Text to my uncle in the Philippines in the ’80s. He told me addiction there is different—people huff paint or gas, and they die quickly. It’s not about affluence or recreation like it sometimes is here. It’s an escape from the slums. The messaging has to be adapted.
DANETTE – Okay, so circling back to the External Committee of the Board of Trustees… Are there more minutes? I’d love to know how long that committee lasted. Apparently, I chaired it for a while, but I don’t remember that. Yeah, it was kind of a loose deal. I’d be interested too. Maybe Jack Bernstein would remember. Do we have any notes on where the UN got added to the list of outreach targets? It seems like a big stretch. I could follow some logic—show up once or every few years and send materials—but ongoing visits? I’d like to know more about how that committee evolved—or got absorbed.
TOM M. – I call the current World Board the “WSO Board of Directors” because that’s basically what they are. They run the office.
DANETTE – Exactly.
TOM M. – Are they serving the members or the office? Probably the office. Do you think they absorbed the External Affairs committee? Well, they got to write their own guidelines after they were voted in in ’98. They said, “Who better to write the guidelines than us?” So, they wrote them. Not sure if the conference approved them—I didn’t really review them. I have a whole bunch of Board of Trustee documents that I’m organizing. Happy to share those with you.
DANETTE – What was the date on those? ’92?
TOM M. – Yeah, and I think the committee started around 1990—maybe just before you got elected. The trustee subcommittee structure wasn’t utilized until the late ’80s. And then there were these other “internal” and “external” committees that didn’t match up with WSC committees. This external PR committee was active in ’92, and when did the boards combine? ’98?
DANETTE – Then from ’94 (when I resigned) to ’98, that turned into the “inventory Years.? is that correct
TOM M. – I thought you resigned after the inventory?
DANETTE – Right.
TOM M. – But those years were inventory, resolution, and implementation.
DANETTE – Anyone who looks at that inventory would probably come to the same conclusion: it was meaningless. The whole thing was just a waste of resources.
TOM M. – But we were only able to do it because we had the money — and the willingness to spend it on that instead of actual service. And by service, I mean funding events like quarterlies, workshops, things that actually support the fellowship. The conference voted to halt all services for that inventory.
DANETTE – I remember that. It was around that time my viewpoint shifted completely — the office no longer seemed to be serving the Fellowship. That viewpoint probably greatly influenced my later feelings about the single Board
TOM M. – They were more concerned with ensuring their own continued existence… or even proliferation. So, tell me what you remember about the money situation — between the office, the conference, and the trustees?
DANETTE – That’s what I’m still trying to figure out. As I’ve mentioned, I’ve tried — we’ve tried — to find documentation that shows how the funding originated, how it changed, and how it ended up becoming solely World Service Office money. It would make sense, structurally — but the outcome was bad.
TOM M. – Once the boards collapsed into one, there was no separation of powers.
DANETTE – For the office to have that kind of power… I don’t know. I’d want to know more. And I don’t know where or how that shift occurred.
TOM M. – Do you recall if the Concepts say anything specific about money?
DANETTE – I never paid much attention to the Concepts. They go: leadership, authority, group conscience, responsibility… ah, here we go — Concept Eleven: NA funds are to be used to further our primary purpose and must be managed responsibly. That’s the only one about funds.
TOM M. – But those Concepts were written for World Services — to guide what they do. So maybe they used that one to justify flying someone to New York every year to attend the UN meeting (and get their Christmas shopping in!).
Laughter
DANETTE – Do you know if the first trip to the UN was before or after the boards merged? I don’t remember any trustees going to the UN — maybe some office people. But it had to be after the boards merged. Yeah. And that’s when I knew — in my gut — that the decision to collapse the boards was reprehensible. From that point forward, I wasn’t surprised by any inefficient or self-serving decisions.
TOM M. – When Bob Stone was in charge — say, if someone from the office wanted to fly to a regional assembly — would that go through Bob?
DANETTE – There was a slower transition. When Jimmy was gone, Bob Stone kind of took over the role of decision maker. He may have included someone in shipping. Then Bob Stewart came on and handled all H\&I inquiries. Over time, someone was hired to be the fellowship services director — it evolved. So, when someone contacted the office — like Quebec did — saying they’d translated the Basic Text into French, Bob would react? Yes. That’s a great example. When Quebec contacted us — saying they’d translated the text with professionals — Bob almost immediately told me to pack my bags and go up there. It was December, i think, in, what i thought, was a massive snowstorm. I met amazing people. They were so open and believed NA World Services had their best interests at heart. I can’t remember all the conversations, but I was there for a week. One of the guys there, Marcel, made this plaque for me — it’s me walking in the snowstorm.
TOM M. – You still have it?
DANETTE – Yeah, it’s hanging on my wall. It says: Once upon a time a little girl named DANETTE walking in the snow around Quebec sure had a great time. We love you — from Berthol, Jeanette, Marcel, Sergei, Jack, Bruno, and all the members.
TOM M. – Wow.
DANETTE – It was in December — I don’t know the year — but it was the ’80s. I think around ’87 or ’88.
TOM M. – And you were under orders from Bob?
DANETTE – Yes. He was accountable to the Board of Directors, but they weren’t involved in the day-to day. He had a lot of influence. He was brilliant — his ability to lay out plans was seductive. I was instructed to tell the Quebec members, Don’t do anything more. We’re happy you did this, but now send a representative to the office to work with us. So Berthol came to the office. He was in awe. I think Ginny Swanson may have helped him — she handled literature and translations at that time, maybe?
TOM M. – So that was your first experience of thinking, “maybe this isn’t the best way to handle translations”?
DANETTE – Yes. At the time, I didn’t see it, but looking back, that was probably my first clue. And I wasn’t involved with Berthol’s visit to the office, but it was all part of a slow progression. Bob had accountability, but no one really saw what was happening. And by the time it got out of hand, it was too late. Even when they didn’t renew his contract — the culture had already changed. That culture was: Bob would go to them and lay out a plan, not the other way around.
TOM M. – So instead of people requesting to go to Canada or the UN, Bob sent people?
DANETTE – Exactly. That culture was created by Bob and passed on to George, Anthony, and eventually others.
TOM M. – And Joe Gossett came in, thought, What the hell is this? and was gone in just over a year.
DANETTE – Yeah.
TOM M. – He was probably required to sign an NDA or something — we’ve never heard from him again.
DANETTE – Then came the co-directorship, which I like as a corporate structure. But the mentality was already set: We run things here. You don’t tell us what to do.
TOM M. – I was at a thing in Wichita, and I said: We used to be a fellowship that had an office. Now we’re an office that has a fellowship. I don’t know if that resonated or confused people, but that’s how I felt.
DANETTE – You were clear. But most people don’t have that level of knowledge — or interest in world service history. As one of Al’s friends says, “Common sense is common anymore – there is only “uncommon sense” . Most people don’t know enough to even know what to ask. One last thing — there really is no WSO anymore. Chuck Gates, who is (dated info) a co-secretary at two of my regular meetings (one virtual, one local), used to make announcements as treasurer saying: This group sends 50% of donations to our Gold Coast Area and 50% to the WSO. Every time I’d hear that, I’d think — there’s no more WSO! Now that the Friday meeting is virtual and worldwide, there are very few people attending from the Gold Coast area anymore. They recently had a new group conscience and decided there’s not going to be any 7th tradition for that meeting, which I understand from a worldwide viewpoint. They announce that members who want to donate to NA can send money to WSO or their own areas.
TOM M. – Yeah. Everything is upside down.
DANETTE – But we’re just a microcosm of society, right?
TOM M. – Exactly. Well, we’ve hit the hour — and then some. We got off on some other stuff, but there are still several other things I want to talk about. Can we do another one, maybe next week?
DANETTE – Yes, we can. I already made a sponsee appointment for Saturday, so let’s do Sunday again. Same time?
TOM M. – That’s fine. Sounds good.
DANETTE – Thank you again for everything you do. This is always fun and entertaining.
TOM M. – Don’t forget to hang your plaque back up!
DANETTE – Oh — my plaque!
TOM M. – You know what, you should read the front of it into the tape, because you showed it to me. Read it to me.
DANETTE – Okay, the front of it says:
“You are a creature of the universe. Learn its lessons. Live by its laws. Enjoy its triggers.” Gift from Canada.
On the back, it says “Quebec Souvenir N A, then “Once Upon A Time. a little girl named DANETTE, walking in the snow around Quebec. Sure had a great time. We love you from: Berthol, Ginetter, Marcel, Serge, Jacques, Bruno and all them members. “ the initials M.g are also on the back.
TOM M. – That’s awesome.