ACAMORNING.ORG

Host Info
Contribute

Motion 25-10: The WSO Proposal to Change the Fellowship Name

Proposed by the Name Change Study, ACA WSO

January 15, 2026

Excerpt from the SMR Business meeting, January 2026:

  • Fellowship Group Voting determination:
  1. Review recent polling on the website: Motion 25-10: The WSO Proposal to Change the Fellowship Name [We reviewed the material posted on our website.]
  2. Show of hands to confirm or not confirm the online vote [There were 9 votes to confirm the results of the online voting. There was 2 vote against confirming the result of the online voting.]
  3. Minority opinion – up to 4 participants may speak – Why we would take an opposite position.

Comment: I’m an adult child – I don’t like change. I like the acronym ‘ACA.’ I do not like the terminology ‘dysfunction’, I think it may turn people off to the program. I didn’t know my family was dysfunctional until I was in the program for a long time.

Comment: I agree with what has been expressed. What’s more, it may be difficult now for people to find us searching for ACAD.

  1. Question: Would anyone in the majority want to change their vote? [No. No one indicated that they wanted to change their vote from ‘Yes’ to ‘No’.]
  2. If ‘Yes’, Question: Shall we have a re-vote?  (Does not apply)
  3. If ‘Yes’, Show of hands to determine a Group Conscience (Does not apply)
  1. Look at the Sample Voting Packet to determine who, when, how and if a written response will be added.

Comment: Who will be filling in the optional comments on the form?

Comment: The group can determine the wording of the response. Someone (possibly D) will take the lead to facilitate. We can incorporate the comments that were submitted on the proposal post on the website, as well as the minority opinion stated above.

January 11, 2026

This motion has been adopted, passing the threshold of 67%

This motion received 68% approval. There were 22 votes cast. There were 15 votes in favor of, and 7 votes against the motion.

The results will be brought to the January 15th Group Conscience Business meeting for a minority opinion and final resolution. The position of the group will be submitted in the Fellowship Group Voting process of the ACA World Service Organization.

December 5, 2025, posted

Issue: To change the functional name of the fellowship to Adult Children of Alcoholics and Dysfunctional Families (ACAD), the top choice by the fellowship from the name study surveys.

Define the “Functional Name”: The functional name and/or acronym is intended to be used on WSO websites, literature, WSO signage, communications, and merchandise (recovery tokens, medallions, bookmarks, etc.). The legal name, Adult Children of Alcoholics World Service Organization, is not to be changed and is to be used wherever the legal name is required.

Background:

Here are a few highlights:

  • For the first time ever, the World Service Organization is turning directly to the meeting groups, Intergroups and Regions for direction on a policy issue that effects ACA as a whole. Typically the Organization holds an Annual Business Conference to find guidance from the Delegates of each group in a very direct, quick, abbreviated process.
  • There is a lot of information on the Adult Children of Alcoholics & Dysfunctional Families World Service Organization website. A lot of information. It looks at the long history of the proposal’s development and includes recordings of Town Hall discussions, the corresponding slide show presentation, a video enactment on how to conduct a Group Conscience and more. It’s all here at this site – https://adultchildren.org/fellowship-group-voting/. (Be sure to scroll down.)
  • The Strengthening My Recovery meeting, WEB0120 (that’s us), has the opportunity to participate in this process.

To begin, we will adapt our usual Proposal Process to open this space for direct comments from our members. Please become familiar with the issue at the page linked above and offer a brief* comment below. At the start of the new year, we can create opportunities to discuss the issue in a breakout room after our daily meeting. At the business meeting on January 15th we can render a final decision incorporating any results of our own online voting procedures. We are asked to submit a Fellowship Group Voting ballot by January 31st.

Thank you for being part of this process.

Note: * Brief comment is mentioned because with a recent proposal members offered extensive comments which triggered a message that the comment field was ‘full’ and not accepting any more. Please be mindful. And know that in January there will be ample time to discuss the issue ‘in person’, in a Zoom kinda way.

13 thoughts on “Motion 25-10: The WSO Proposal to Change the Fellowship Name”

  1. Anonymous says:

    I support the name change. My parents and grandparents were not alcoholics, and yet there was so much dysfunction. If dysfunction wasn’t included in ACA, I wouldn’t be entitled to attend, and would continue being lost and alone.

    1. Anonymous says:

      This is strange, the opening of this video discusses substantial unanimity vs simple majority. Am I mistaken?

      The conversation went like this….
      Motion made
      (I make a Motion to use substantial unanimity)
      seconded
      discussion
      (a couple stated they wanted to keep it as simple majority)
      then a vote — the person running the meeting said we are voting as to whether we use substantial unanimity vs simple majority….
      –How many want substantial unanimity…. then counted
      –How many want simple majority… then counted.
      –How many abstained…
      Then they asked for a minority offering… neither person who disagreed wanted add minority opinion.

      However, the Motion was regarding substantial unanimity. Wouldn’t the vote be a count for how many were in favor of the motion? Then if it did not pass, it would fall back on the Voting already in place.

      This confuses things…

      1. Anonymous says:

        You are correct.

        First,
        Group Conscience 12 step is a decision-making process, where the group seeks collective will (conscience of the whole) rather than a simple majority (or the loudest voices). If not using a formal decision-making process, it goes something like this,
        1) issue presented clearly
        2) open discussion (everyone gets to speak)
        3) quiet reflections (sometimes a moment of silence)
        4) Vote (often by a show of hands)
        5. Acceptance of the outcome as a group’s conscience — even if not everyone agrees

        REGULAR VOTING
        It does not mean unanimity
        It does not mean pressure to agree
        Dissenting voices are valued because they help reveal blind spots.

        FORMAL VOTING
        Parliamentary steps (like in the video)
        1. A motion was made (someone clearly state a proposal: “I move that we … (in this instance she asked for unanimity))
        2. The Motion was seconded (this doesn’t mean agreement. It only means: “This is worth discussing.”
        3. Discussion followed (this is the heart of group conscience)
        – members share perspective
        – pros and cons are aired
        – minority views are important here
        – no one should be cut off or rushed

        What comes next (usually)
        4. Call the question (when discussion feels complete)…. “Are we ready to vote” (anyone can ask for more discussion if they feel unheard)
        5. Vote
        – show of hands/ voice/ ballot
        – the outcome is accepted as the group conscience
        6. Move forward together (even those who disagreed support the decision once it is made.

        The question posed above (if I am reading it accurately) is about the video showing how to do a group conscience was actually done in error.

        It was not done accurately. It is a “procedural mismatch” between the Motion and the Vote

        What should happen…
        Once a Motion is made and seconded, the group can “only vote on that exact motion,” unless of these happens first:
        – the motion is “amended” (and the amendment is seconded and discussed), or the motion is “withdrawn,” or a “substitute is formally made” and seconded.

        Until then, the chair can not redefine the choice.

        You described above
        1. motion made
        2. two people disagree
        3. the chair reframes the decision as a “Vote for A or B (or abstain)
        4. But A/B was not the wording of the original Motion.

        That is NOT PROCEDURALLY CORRECT.
        A motion is a specific proposal, “A or B” creates a false choice unless:
        – A = the original motion
        – B = a formally stated, seconded alternative

        Without that step, the vote does not reflect the Motion on the floor.

        What the Chair should have done instead
        Option 1 – Amend the Motion… I move to amend the motion to… (second, discuss, vote on amendment, then vote on the amended motion)
        Option 2 – Substitute motion… I move that (second, discuss, vote on substitute vs original)
        Option 3 – Vote up or down… All in favor of the motion as stated?.. All opposed??.. Any abstentions.

        Why this matters (especially in group conscience settings: process integrity matters as much as outcome; reframing a vote can invalidate minority voices, it can unintentionally (or intentionally) steer results.

        Having said all of this, I hope we, as a group, do not follow that video due to its inaccuracies on how to do a group conscience meeting.

        Additionally, the polling and then voting, does not allow full Group Conscience, unless there is a discussion and options for questions and discussion (as above), not as a procedural event, but as in good faith and following Tradition for exchange of interrelation ideas. Meaning, the procedures as I read them is to do a poll (online voting) for so much time, then feedback… yet where is the feedback discussion, and where does it allow for conversation. It appears the Town Hall is an after event for minority opinion. Yet I am not sure. It feels like something is missing.

  4. Anonymous says:

    My understanding is that this SMR Group will meet to discuss and allow input for the name change prior to the SMR Group vote, group conscience decision, as it is a very important vote. This was confirmed at our last business meeting. Additionally, our next business meeting is January 15, 2025.

    Two options for greater group participation:
    Mark your calendar: Sunday, January 4 and Saturday, January 10, 2025

  5. Anonymous says:

    My understanding is that this SMR Group will have two town hall meetings to discuss and allow input for the name change prior to the SMR Group vote, group conscience decision, as it is a very important vote. This was confirmed at our last business meeting. Additionally, our next business meeting is January 15, 2025.

    Two options for greater group participation:
    Mark your calendar: Sunday, January 4 and Saturday, January 10, 2025

  7. ej says:

    “Why I Support the WSO Name Change Proposal”

    I support the WSO Proposal to change the functional name to ACAD (Adult Children of Alcoholics and Dysfunctional Families).

    My support is rooted in the following Traditions and Concepts:

    Tradition 5 (Primary Purpose): The ACAD name removes a critical barrier, allowing the fellowship to better carry its message and reach all adult children who suffer from family dysfunction.

    Tradition 3 (Membership): The new name aligns the fellowship’s public identity with the reality of our membership requirement (“alcoholic or otherwise dysfunctional family”).

    Concept 2 (Group Conscience): The WSO is honoring the groups’ ultimate authority by facilitating a direct and thorough vote, ensuring the decision rests with the fellowship.

    Tradition 1 (Unity): This clarity and increased accessibility strengthen the common welfare and overall unity of ACA.

    Lastly, I support this change as an act of practicing Steps, Traditions, and Concepts to maximize the healing potential and fulfill healing purpose.

    1. Anonymous says:

      I have concerns about the financial piece. Did you read the website? I’m curious about your thoughts. It seems like putting the cart before the horse. There is no real budget regarding if this passes, as far as I can see. While I believe it makes sense to do the name change, I believe more consistent, thorough, accurate, with a bit more detail regarding the financial piece must be done. The last Town Hall did not accurately respond to such questions. I would love the link or the exact information regarding this.

      There is a very generic couple paragraphs (that was updated as a result of the last TownHall). So, there is a big kudos to the working ACA team who were open to updating and helping ACA Groups understand.

      It is sort of like saying, let’s make a decision to go to Europe right now. It should cost us about $5,000 (for plane, hotel and some sightseeing). Yet nobody has even looked up the flights, where we are going to stay or exactly what we will be doing when we get there.

      And why are they selling (taking preorders) for 25-year reunion big red books, if this may be updated eventually anyway? Food for thought.

      If anyone can give exact location and budget for the name change, as in accounting budget vs an estimate and round about costs, please let us know. Thank you.

  8. Brian eM says:

    I am very much in favor of the name change. So many people don’t even come to the meetings or delay coming to meeting and exploring the literature because of the name and emphasis on having alcoholic parents. ACA is so much more than that and explores much more comprehensive topics like effects of trauma and healing aspects beyound a spiritual spiritual practices like non-dominant handwriting, mirror work, affirmations and more.
    I know that the intent of the proposal was brought by people whose recovery was delayed for the very reason of the name. Emphasising dysfunction in the name also seems to help with the primary purpose of carrying the message to others affected by growing up in an alcoholic or otherwise disfunctional family.

  9. Jim R says:

    Also…
    Recordings of the October Town Hall discussions can be found on the webpage linked above. Scroll toward the bottom.

  10. Anonymous says:

    Note:

    There are two more town halls from ACA, if you want more info regarding this matter.

    ALL of these special town halls will be held on Saturdays. Mark your calendars now!
    October 4, 2025, December 6, 2025 and January 17, 2026 at
    11 AM – 12:30 PM ET
    or 9 PM – 10:30 PM ET
    ZOOM MEETING ID: 96175175199 PASSCODE: 080125
    Note: The above ID and Passcode have been corrected from the misinformation noted in the flyer.

Comments are closed.