When I tried to unwind the group’s explanation of seemingly contradictory teachings for the purpose of closer examination, the wife became angry. Rather than engage in an analysis of the material posted at the group website, the wife insisted that we end our conversation and soon left the room. Now only the husband was there to persuade his wife to resume the dialogue. He couldn’t convince her to continue. The intervention ended in failure.
In my opinion this intervention effort primarily failed for two reasons. First, the family couldn’t pull together consistently and support the effort all the way through. Having the right people involved when undertaking an intervention is vitally important. If someone is ambivalent about the effort, he or she shouldn’t become involved. Instead, hopefully others can be found who can be more supportive and consistently provide a better basis for success.
In addition, despite my warnings, the husband decided not to disconnect Internet access at the house. He later explained this was because he was afraid his wife would be angry if she later found out he had done this. The husband’s failure to follow through on this important point, however, allowed his wife to download scripted answers from the group rather than to engage in independent critical thinking. The wife had promised not to contact the group during the intervention but rationalized that visiting the group website was somehow not the equivalent of directly contacting group members.
Breakdown
A family contacted me regarding concerns about their son, who had recently returned home after prolonged involvement with a certain highly demanding group. His behavior was now erratic, and the parents were concerned that their son had been brainwashed.
Substantial historical documentation was available about this particular group through news reports and court records. The organization had often been called a “cult.” I assembled a file and flew in to prepare the family for the intervention. When I met with them the day before the intervention, we discussed what could potentially go wrong and what our respective roles would be during the process.
On the day of the intervention, when I met the son for the first time, talking with him was difficult. Hours passed, but we were unable to maintain an ongoing exchange of ideas. He would talk—often, it seemed, to himself—then drift away into an apparent alternate world of his own, disconnected from his surroundings.
After almost a day of the parents and me trying to engage the young man, without success, I asked his mother and father to meet with me privately in another room. I explained that it was impossible for me to share information without a meaningful level of communication. I advised the parents to seek help from a doctor in their local area. The situation was outside my expertise, and I couldn’t help them.
Later doctors established that the young man had experienced a kind of mental breakdown, and he was hospitalized. His cultic involvement may have caused this in part, or there may have been an underlying condition his group involvement somehow exacerbated. In any event the problem wasn’t something an intervention could address; it instead required the immediate attention of a doctor.
Hopefully, these examples of failed interventions can help those who are concerned better understand the possible problems that may develop during an effort.
It has been said that whenever information is shared during an intervention, the effort can be seen as successful. When families retain a cult-intervention consultant, however, they usually expect much more defined results. That is why I have very specifically defined the net result of a successful intervention. That is, the person who is the focus of the intervention decides to leave the group or cultic situation by the conclusion of that effort.
It’s important to reiterate again that meaningful communication and access are the foundations for any intervention. Until those crucial elements or ingredients are developed or are evident, there is no need to retain a specialist or consultant for an assessment or to prepare for an intervention.
CHAPTER 23
MOVING ON
Generally most cult members eventually move on and leave the group. Sadly, this separation may take place after they have experienced years of deception, exploitation, and destructive consequences in their personal lives. Cult members frequently experience psychological, emotional, and at times physical or sexual abuse. The experience of each former cult member will vary according to his or her individual involvement in the group and its level of destructive behavior.
Members in many destructive cults are encouraged to become increasingly dependent through the use of coercive persuasion techniques. The net result of such cultic manipulation culminates in a form of undue influence. In this state of mind, the cult member is induced to accept erroneous perspectives, such as that individual autonomy or independent thinking is somehow an expression of arrogance, inflated ego, pride, or even “sinful.” The cult member is coerced to accept that others must make decisions and value judgments for him or her.
Even though most cult members live at home, work at a regular job, and don’t reside in a compound, they can nevertheless become isolated through their immersion in the group, which dominates most, if not all, of their otherwise free time. Due to this immersion, cult members become increasingly dependent on the group or leader. This is often because they have been largely cut off from the outside world.
In this state of relative isolation, they may develop unreasonable fears about leaving the group, seemingly irrational concerns about outsiders, and an apparent disconnection from reality. This may include the fear that the cult or leader might retaliate in some way if they left. This fear of retaliation by former cult members is most often exaggerated or misplaced, but it may take time for it to dissipate. It’s important to recognize that such unreasonable fears former cult members express are not unusual and are actually quite common.
Psychologist Margaret Singer said this cultic m mind-set was the cumulative result of what she called “the five Ds,” which includes deception, debilitation, dependency, dread, and desensitization.1175
In their book Snapping: America’s Epidemic of Sudden Personality Change, authors Flo Conway and Jim Siegelman recounted information they had gathered after disseminating one thousand questionnaires to former cult members throughout the United States and Canada. They received four hundred responses from people who had spent time in forty-eight different groups called “cults.”1176
A substantial percentage of former cult members reported back to Conway and Siegelman that they experienced “ongoing problems of confusion, disorientation and dissociation.”1177 The authors found that two-thirds of the respondents experienced substantial residual emotional difficulties. “One in six reported hallucinations or delusions for up to twelve years after leaving their groups.”1178 One former cultist said, “It hurts to think, it physically aches.”1179 According to their survey results, the substantial recovery from a cultic experience took “on an average sixteen months.”1180 Conway and Siegelman specifically noted that “the psychological trauma the new sects and therapies may inflict on their members is directly proportional to the amount of time people spend in mind-altering rituals and self-help practices.”1181
Conway and Siegelman also reported that “one in five of [their] survey respondents experienced some physical health problem.”1182 Dr. Cathleen Mann, a PhD in psychology, has been a licensed counselor for over eighteen years and has helped many former cult members. According to Mann the first priority for every exiting cult member is a medical checkup. She says, “Since most cults use a drastic change in diet, sleep deprivation, over activity, assaults to the body in other ways, it is highly likely that the former member has potential physical consequences.”1183
Other studies of former cult members seem to confirm a similar pattern of results regarding the negative effects cultic involvement produces. One such study included sixty-six former members of Rev. Moon‘s Unification Church and was published in the American Journal of Psychiatry. It found that 36 percent of the former members experienc
ed emotional problems after leaving and that 61 percent said church leaders had “negatively impacted” their lives.1184 1185
A study of the American Family Foundation (AFF), now known as the International Cultic Studies Association (ICSA), yielded a similar pattern of results. The AFF/ICSA study included 308 former members of 101 groups called “cults.”1186 About 67 percent experienced emotional disorders including depression, 76 percent were angry with their former leaders, and 83 percent had lower self-confidence. These results are quite comparable to those previously reported through the surveys Conway and Siegelman took.1187
Mann notes that “the scant research we have is anecdotal and consists of former members’ self-report.” She warns about unfounded assumptions. “I think the most troubling problem is twofold: (1) assuming everyone from a particular group is always traumatized at all or in the same way; and (2) presenting specialized counseling as the only solution.” Mann concludes, “This is problematic because it strikes at a person’s ability to make informed choices about counseling and because counseling does not work for everyone.”1188 It is important to keep in mind that destructive cults and leaders often present themselves as the single solution.
Those hoping to help former cult members must not impose their assumptions or solutions on them as the cult once did. Instead, information must be transparently shared about various alternatives and choices regarding recovery.
Singer said, “Most persons leaving cults are not severely mentally ill, but those occasional ones who are should, of course, be referred to a psychiatrist or psychologist knowledgeable about cults.”1189 A persistent myth concerning cult involvement is that it can be explained by some preexistent and underlying mental illness or condition. In fact, the overwhelming majority of cults reject those who are mentally or physically ill and are interested only in recruiting high-functioning, healthy, and therefore potentially useful people.
Singer observed, “Most cult veterans are neither grossly incompetent nor blatantly disturbed. But they report and their families confirmed cognitive inefficiencies and crucial changes that take time to pass. Ex-cultists often have trouble putting into precise words these inefficiencies, which they want to explain.” Singer characterizes this temporary cognitive disability as a combination of both the “blurring of mental acuity” along with “uncritical passivity.” 1190
When someone leaves a cultic situation, confronting him or her with criticism, a judgmental attitude, or blame is unwise. It is also incorrect to assault him or her with negative attacks concerning his or her former group or leader. Instead, be a good listener. Remember that a destructive cult cannot be all bad and that there may have been some positive aspects or associations linked to cultic involvement. Time in the group or under the undue influence of a leader may have produced some positive changes, developments, or realizations. It’s important for those who are concerned not to make sweeping generalizations and needlessly negative comments. Destructive cults prey on and exploit human frailties and emotions to fulfill their needs. Those hoping to help former cult members must recognize their fragility and be sensitive to their situation.
Don’t be critical of spirituality, idealism, or some form of awareness. The stated goals and ideals of the group may have been laudable despite the bad behavior. No one willingly joins a “cult” or volunteers to be abused and exploited. People are essentially tricked into cultic involvement.
Don’t try to convince or convert a former cult member regarding a certain set of beliefs. Respect individual expression and the personal process of discovery. Each former cult member must begin to make his or her own choices, free of coercive persuasion and undue influence.
As the surveys indicate, many cult members may take some time redeveloping their critical-thinking skills and beginning to think independently again. Likewise, their ability to tolerate ambiguity may slowly return. No one can reasonably expect an instant, overnight transformation after departing from a cultic situation.
Placing pressure on former cult members to speed up the process is also unwise. As Conway and Siegelman noted, the longer a person has been in a destructive cult, the longer it may take him or her to sort things out and regain his or her past cognitive abilities. This may also depend on the severity of the group or leader. Some groups called “cults” are more destructive than others. Conway and Siegelman found that this was true depending upon the degree of personal involvement and the level of destructive behavior and control within a particular group.
Because there are so few support groups devoted to the issue of cult involvement, simply reading books on the subject of cults and thought reform may be easier. It is also possible to gather historical information about cults and their coercive persuasion techniques through the World Wide Web. Understanding the common elements of deception, coercive persuasion, and undue influence inherently present in destructive cults may help to sort through postcult issues and serve to assuage unreasonable fears, ease stress, and reduce anxiety.
The family and friends of a former cult member may also require help understanding cultic influence to better cope with someone who has recently ended such a situation. Again, this can be accomplished through a similarly focused educational process, which includes reading helpful books about cults and relevant research. Much like a former cult member who is coming to terms with the broader context of his or her involvement by learning about how cults affect others, family and friends can also benefit by broadening their knowledge base in regard to this subject.
Not placing blame on the family is also important. Mann states, “We do know that there is no connection in the research between family dysfunction, prior mental illness, or ‘looking for answers’ and cult involvement.” She points out, “Blaming historical and familial processes takes the onus of responsibility from the deception of cult recruiters, and places it on the cult member.”1191
Some people who leave cults become activists, hoping to help others. They may do so by sharing their cult experience with others in the hope that such knowledge will help others avoid destructive cults. Or former cult members may try to help those left behind in the group to leave as they have done. This may produce positive results and perhaps provide a sense of empowerment or closure in regard to their own past cult involvement.
But it is practical and important to take care of personal priorities first. Former cult members are not obligated to become activists, and most do not. Most simply move on. If someone has left behind family members in a particular group, it may be more important to preserve whatever goodwill and communication is possible rather than to engage in activism against the group.
Australian Jan Groenveld, a former member of controversial religious groups, began her cult education work in 1979. She said, “After 15 years wandering through the world of the cults, including time in both Mormonism and Jehovah’s Witnesses, I finally realized that I was being controlled rather than controlling my own life. I found myself alone with no access to information that would help me recover.”1192
In an effort to “make it easier for others,” Groenveld launched a website in 1990 to share information through the Internet. Her website, Cult Awareness and Information Centre (CAIC), explains, “The Internet is the only medium where both cult members and nonmembers are on a level playing field.”1193
Groenveld, like many others who have left cultic situations, suffered through what was sometimes a painful transition back to mainstream life. She explained some of the pitfalls of this process in an article widely posted on the World Wide Web titled “It Hurts.”1194
Jonestown survivor Deborah Layton explains, “It’s an abusive relationship. Often by the time you figure that out it’s too late, because you can’t see how to extricate yourself without hurting yourself or your family. You are like a caged animal.”1195 Groenveld laments the loss. “Leaving a cult is like experiencing the death of a close relative or a broken relationship…like having been betrayed by someone with whom you were in love. You
feel you were simply used.” Groenveld describes her subsequent “grieving process.” She explains, “Most people understand that a person must grieve after a death, [but] they find it difficult to understand the same applies in this situation.” This grieving process includes the recognition of painful feelings, which are the direct result of the deception and harm done by a cultic experience.
Nori Muster, a longtime devotee of the International Society of Krishna Consciousness (ISKCON) who later left the movement, noted deception in the recruitment process. “I don’t know that they actually join ISKCON, They come to the temple, but that’s something different.”1196 Muster was once ISKCON’s public relations secretary and editor of its newspaper. After she left, Muster wrote a book about the abuses in ISKCON titled Betrayal of The Spirit.1197 These abuses caused many members to leave.1198 Groenveld said that the sense of betrayal many former cult members feel cuts deep. “It hurts to discover you were deceived [by]…people you trusted implicitly, whom you were taught not to question.” And it hurts “when you learn that those you were taught were your ‘enemies’ were telling the truth after all.”
Jayanti Tamm was born into a group called a “cult” led by Guru Sri Chinmoy. She writes, “Cults are designed to keep a clear separation between those inside and outside. The more faithful a follower, the more reliant the person is on the group. It becomes everything—family, friends, church, home, work, dwelling, community. Extracting oneself from that after decades is difficult, and sometimes impossible. It is both terrifying and isolating.”1199 Like Muster, Tam later wrote a book about her experience titled Cartwheels in Sari.1200 Groenveld relates how difficult it can be to “start all over again” and that there may be profound sadness if substantial time has been lost. “Your self-confidence and self-worth are almost non-existent,” she said.1201
Cults Inside Out: How People Get in and Can Get Out Page 44
