Cults Inside Out: How People Get in and Can Get Out

by Rick Alan Ross

  The person conducting the intervention must be someone who can effectively maintain a certain level of neutrality and objectivity when presenting the gathered information. For example, if the group being discussed is religious in nature, the moderator leading the intervention shouldn’t take a specific religious position to promote a certain sectarian point of view. Proselytizing should never be part of the process. This same consideration would also apply to a group’s particular philosophy or political views. No preferred alternate philosophy or political view should be specifically advanced during the intervention. The focus should be on how the cultic group behaves, not on what it believes. The facilitator involved in the intervention should avoid potentially manipulative or often-deceptive persuasion techniques such as neuro-linguistics programming (NLP) or hypnosis.

  NLP is a strategic communication approach Richard Bandler and John Grinder created in California during the 1970s.720 This approach involves the carefully planned use of subtle suggestions conveyed by certain chosen vocabulary and behaviors, which are strategically employed to influence people. NLP practitioners typically employ this approach without informed consent. It is therefore both deceptive and unethical to use such a manipulative and deceptive persuasion process in a cult intervention, which is based on education, not on deceptive manipulation.

  Hypnosis is an altered state of consciousness one can use as a component of a manipulative persuasion process. Hypnosis takes place when a person in a hypnotic state of trance (the subject) is guided by another (the hypnotist) to respond to suggestions for changes in subjective experience or alterations in perception, sensation, emotion, thought, or behavior.”721 Some destructive cult leaders have used hypnosis and related techniques of trance induction to make their followers more suggestible and malleable.

  It is unethical to use hypnosis within the context of a cult intervention; hypnosis could potentially manipulate the subject through the power of suggestion. Hypnosis places one person in a position of power and authority as the hypnotist and the other through the process in a subordinate position of suggestibility. This situation can easily lead to undue influence.

  The goal of a cult intervention is to share information about deceptive and manipulative techniques of persuasion. This educational process is based on honest disclosure and dialogue. It is, therefore, wholly inappropriate and unethical to use deceptive techniques of communication and persuasion similar to those destructive cults use.

  One of the most common excuses destructive cults offer to apologize for the deception or manipulation they may use is that “the ends justify the means.” This apology is based on the idea that unethical behavior can be rationalized on the premise that it is justified if the ultimate goal of that behavior is good. But this is a “slippery slope” that has led many cults to essentially condone abuse. The use of deceptive persuasion techniques or psychological tricks shouldn’t compromise the ethical integrity of a cult intervention if the goal is for an honest outcome. Instead, the basis for an ethical and effective intervention is an emphasis on independent decision making through a process of education that employs critical thinking and personal reflection.

  If the chosen moderator or facilitator for the intervention is a mental health professional, there are certain additional professional boundary issues that would apply and must be considered. Typically a cult intervention isn’t counseling but rather an information-driven process of education. A licensed mental health professional has very specific legal and ethical requirements when he or she engages in counseling, such as reviewing and completing a specially required consent form before beginning counseling. The boundaries for a licensed counseling professional should be clearly understood and firmly established beforehand if a licensed mental health professional is to be involved.

  Due diligence in the selection of any professional should also include a detailed understanding of qualifications and expertise. How was that expertise obtained? Has the expertise of the person being considered been officially recognized? What is his or her specific area of focus linked to this expertise? And how can that particular focus and related background be helpful in the current situation?

  All the issues and considerations listed above should be reviewed and explicitly understood and agreed on before initiating a plan for an intervention with anyone.

  I advise you not to enter into any agreement with a professional unless it is a written agreement. A written agreement must disclose in detail all the fees and costs expected and explains exactly what professional services will be provided. No intervention professional can reasonably guarantee success, but it is reasonable to ask any professional for references regarding his or her relevant experience and past clients.

  CHAPTER 8

  COPING STRATEGIES

  Initial Response

  Developing practical coping strategies when dealing with a cult situation is important. Learning a pragmatic but principled approach is in the best interest of those concerned. This includes what to say and what not to say in conversation with someone suspected of cult involvement.

  A confrontational, critical, and argumentative approach can easily result in a breakdown of communication and estrangement. For this reason the first practical rule to learn is that words such as cult or brainwashing are not useful in conversation with someone involved in a destructive cult. It may seem obvious that the group is a cult to those on the outside looking in, but for insiders the term is likely to be perceived as derogatory or even hateful. Likewise, devoted members would probably perceive the word brainwashing to describe group influence in much the same way. Using these words would likely lead only to an argument and perhaps engender hostility. For this reason it’s best to avoid using these words.

  If someone believed to be in a cult becomes confrontational about his or her beliefs and demands a response regarding his or her validity, responding directly is usually unwise. Instead it’s better to deflect, defer, or delay any direct response. For example, someone might respond by simply saying, “I am certainly willing to look at some of the literature, books, or materials from your perspective.” Or, “Let’s not have this discussion right now. I would like to have this discussion later when there is more time.” Appearing serious and genuinely interested in learning more about the group is important.

  We should note that any explanation of group beliefs and practices, as a relatively new member may explain, may not reflect the actual nature of the group, its complete teachings, or its actual intent. Destructive cults often selectively withhold information from new initiates until they reach higher levels in the group.

  The point at this juncture is that early on most people don’t have detailed information about the group or leader, and it’s best to wait until whatever information can be obtained has been reviewed. Also, a deep discussion about the group might be the premise used for an intervention effort, which would need to be planned first in some detail. This is why it is more practical to initially defer and delay until information can be effectively gathered and options carefully considered. It is very important in this context to keep communication open and access viable. A confrontational conversation could easily escalate into an argument, which could result in diminished communication. This would then effectively narrow whatever options might be considered.

  If a cult member becomes agitated and is increasingly insistent on receiving a more direct answer regarding his or her group and its beliefs, a measured response again might be, “I would rather not discuss this now, but I am willing to sit down and discuss this with you in more depth at another time.” It may be difficult, but remaining calm and appearing positive is critical. But don’t feign agreement with the group or its beliefs, which is being dishonest. Simply avoiding negative statements isn’t lying and therefore is more appropriate. Remember that one of the criticisms of destructive cults is that they are deceptive. If and when the probable deception of the cult in question becomes an issue or focus of concern, it is best that
those present at the intervention don’t themselves have a history of making deliberately deceptive statements about the group or leader.

  Likely, a cult member will cut off, or greatly reduce, communication if he or she is upset because of critical comments. Also, if the group or leader learns about such criticism, he or she may exert influence to end communication with critical family or friends. This is why it is important to carefully avoid appearing excessively negative or critical. For example, concerns about personal finances, health, diet, work, or education can be expressed in a reasonable tone without becoming shrill or punitive. For example, honestly raising questions when and if they are necessary regarding expenses, compensation, doctor’s visits, or some other practical concern should be done courteously and without rancor.

  Never allow such questions to escalate into an argument by pronouncing negative conclusions and leveling accusations. Instead, reasonably raise issues, such as fairness or safety, through questions without offering answers in a calm and subdued manner. Such questions may not be answered succinctly or satisfactorily, but arguing about the answers isn’t best. Raising the questions is probably the best that can be done, and this may stimulate critical thinking. But defer any deeper discussion, which could potentially cause an argument and might be part of a planned intervention effort at some later date.

  Regardless of what decision is made regarding how best to respond to a cultic situation, it is important to keep the lines of communication open and maintain meaningful access. Communication and access afford family and friends the continuing opportunity to reinforce love and friendship. They also allow those who are concerned the ability to collect additional relevant information and gain a better understanding of the group or leader. Cutting off communication due to a disagreement or unhappiness about cult involvement is never wise. This act could effectively surrender all influence to the group or leader. Continued communication provides the cult member with an outside frame of reference and alternate feedback, which can become the basis for critical thinking and reflection. This can ultimately broaden the basis of the cult members’ intellectual and emotional life and affect their perspective.

  In any contact with a cult member, remaining visibly calm is critical.

  Everyone involved should be unified in this approach. Discuss coping strategies with other family members and others who are concerned to be sure everyone is acting appropriately in unison. Any strategy or planned response is best approached when everyone concerned is acting together in concert and is fully informed. Seeking a second opinion from someone outside the situation who can be more objective may be helpful. Ideally this should be someone who is specifically knowledgeable about destructive cults. If no such person is readily available in the local area, a professional who has experience dealing with or researching destructive cults should be sought out for advice. Such professionals exist in the fields of psychology, sociology, counseling, and academia. But before consulting such professionals directly, it’s best to understand their specific work experience and read their published opinions regarding the issue of destructive cults. This due diligence should determine whether their experience and understanding of the issue are helpful and relevant to the circumstances.

  One way to determine whether a helping professional might potentially be a good fit is to ask specific questions about his or her experience in dealing with the recruitment and retention techniques destructive cults use. If responses to these questions seem defensive or vague, likely he or she doesn’t have much, if any, actual experience in the area. If a professional sees a cult problem as a “religious” or “family problem,” that is a red flag. The issue isn’t what the group believes but how it behaves, and there is no conclusive research to support the contention that cult involvement is a family-based problem. Few helping professionals have any specific experience dealing with destructive cults. But if a professional admits to such limitation and seems open and willing to learn, see this response as encouraging evidence that he or she might be helpful .

  Continued Communication

  Most cult groups will allow continued communication with family and old friends to some extent if they do not feel threatened—that is, if family and friends have seemingly remained neutral, not overtly critical and therefore not perceived as potential problems. Only the most extreme cults demand total isolation and cessation of all communication with those outside the group.

  Continued communication is essential for two practical reasons. First, it demonstrates commitment, which ensures that the cult member knows someone outside the group still cares about him or her and that old relationships remain intact regardless of cult involvement. Second, through continued communication the cult member has a viable link to the outside world, and conversely those outside the group will be better able to understand what is going on inside. This access can become a crucial factor if and when the cult member begins to have doubts or fears about the group or is considering leaving. In this sense continuing communication allows outsiders to penetrate the cultic milieu and the group’s control over the flow of information. This communication can also reinforce individual ideas and feelings.

  We should understand that any conversation or information shared with a cult member may be recounted to other members of the group or its leaders. It is therefore important to be sensitive about what is said, keeping in mind that leaders in the group could later potentially scrutinize and somehow manipulate whatever is shared. Destructive cults often use such tactics to isolate members from those outside the group, including family and old friends, and to engender increasing dependency.

  Every opportunity to communicate with a cult member is a chance to emotionally connect. This is why staying positive is so important. Find subjects of mutual interest in an effort to maintain or build on the existing relationship and rapport. Be affectionate, friendly, and reasonable. Look for areas of potential agreement.

  Never be confrontational, combative, or argumentative. Never denounce the group’s leader(s), beliefs, or practices. This doesn’t mean, however, that anyone should be deliberately misleading, give false information, or act obviously out of character. It simply means to filter out negativity and criticism that might distress or upset the cult member. Again, never use the word cult or terms like brainwashed or mind control. If an uncomfortable situation arises, someone might say, “I would really rather not discuss that right now. Let’s talk about something else. I don’t want to argue.” Or, “I am happy to have this time with you. I want this to be pleasant visit.”

  The more frequently a cult member is contacted, the better. This connection might include phone calls, letters, or personal visits. Concerned family members and friends might, to some extent, coordinate communication efforts, encouraging regular calls and visits from a number of people. But this should be done with the positive cooperation of the cult member. In other words reasonably respect the person’s space and schedule. Visits or mail should include sharing photographs of family, friends, favorite pets, and places of interest. An occasional gift of some favorite food is a meaningful gesture. All this may stimulate fond memories of happy times.

  Keeping cult members informed about contact information, such as changes of address and phone numbers, is crucial. Cult members should be kept up to date about family news and situations. This might include information about someone who is sick or hospitalized as well as births, deaths, weddings, graduations, engagements, and so forth. And they should always be sent invitations or announcements of such events. If there is a family emergency, they should be called. If the cult member doesn’t have a phone or cell phone, some means of communication might be provided and paid for to ensure continued contact and access.

  Never forget a cult member’s birthday, special anniversary, or significant holiday. Send thoughtful gifts, cards, text messages, e-mail and special commemorative keepsakes but don’t send money. All these considerations serve as important reminders not only of family and old friends b
ut also of pleasant memories.

  If at all possible, maintain health insurance coverage for a cult member through a family policy or provider. And if it seems meaningful, provide a car, without titling it in the cult member’s name, along with the necessary required insurance. This gesture may serve as a means for maintaining contact and possibly visiting outside of the group.

  Only the most extreme destructive cults, those living in group housing, censor incoming mail. But it may prove useful to keep a record of any communication through letters, cards, and sent gifts.

  Considering the Cultic Mind-set

  People who are in cults often develop what appears to be an alternate personality or mind-set, which is the result of group influence. The cult member may mimic certain behavior consistent with the qualities or attributes the group or leaders value. However, this isn’t proof that a genuinely unique or different personality exists. It is rather a reflection of the undue influence of the group, which produces its preferred mind-set.

  Often a particular leader may serve as a model or prototype of the ideal person. Members of a group may try to emulate the leader’s perceived positive characteristics. This emulation might include certain verbiage, idiosyncratic expressions, and mannerisms. The cult member may behave oddly; this behavior might be confusing and perhaps unpleasant. But by recognizing that this affectation is the result of a group process rather than an independent individual choice, those who are concerned can put this behavior in its proper context. Understanding this can help the family and old friends of a cult member to be more tolerant and inform their responses.

  Keeping in mind that the cult member’s innate individual personality has only become obscured can enable family and friends to more easily avoid angry responses, unproductive emotional outbursts, and confrontations. For example, a cult member may be hypercritical, offer harsh judgments, or act negative or seemingly petty. Cult members in some groups may also seem insensitive or emotionally disconnected. These traits should most often be understood as the result of undue influence and not as an independent decision to deliberately hurt family and old friends.