Our column was an in-depth case study of a recovery center that is unaffiliated with the clubhouse movement. No data were collected from any form of clubhouse. In fact, we did not discuss Fountain House, and no inferences were made regarding clubhouses. In fact, the word “clubhouse” is used only twice in our column of more than 2,500 words. First, in the introduction we state that “clubhouses … often focus on providing a place of refuge and slow adjustment to living with a psychiatric disability.” We did not conjure up this statement. Our assertion was supported by a reference to a description of the Fountain House program published in this journal in 1999 (1), when Fountain House received an award from the American Psychiatric Association. The article states that clubhouses provide “services to ease the community adjustment of people with serious mental illness.” Dudek and Aquila themselves state in their letter that clubhouses “are not just places of respite,” implicitly acknowledging that provision of respite and refuge is an important component of clubhouse services. Thus we do not see how our original statement could be labeled as inaccurate, let alone denigrating or misclassifying.