International Journal of Cultic Studies ■ Vol. 8, 2017 51
members into the group.
132F
133 After an initial
welcoming period with the group, recruits find
themselves under long periods of thought
reform, isolation, and physical and mental
exhaustion. Thought reform is a manipulative
technique whereby the group controls every
element of the recruit’s environment, including
physical activity, diet, and sleep deprivation.
133F
134
Over time, thought reform creates a feeling of
dependency, powerlessness, and fear that cult
leaders use against the recruit to instill new
attitudes and behaviors. This environment
inhibits the recruit’s critical-thinking ability,
leaving him completely defenseless against his
new authoritarian group leader.
134F
135 Even
Molko’s success in graduate-level education was
no match for the Unification Church’s
manipulative tactics.
By the time the new recruit becomes a member,
the family of the new convert are rarely allowed
to maintain contact with their loved one because
the group maintains control over the person,
isolating him from the outside world.
135F
136
Additionally, cults implant an “us vs. them”
mentality (i.e., the group vs. the outside world,
including family) to exacerbate isolation from
outsiders.
136F
137 With such limited access to their
Dr. Arthur Wassmer’s definition is useful: “A cult is
an organization whose stated mission is religious,
political, philosophical or psychotherapeutic, with a
covert mission to accumulate wealth and/or power to
benefit its leadership.” See Susan Landa, Children
and Cults: A Practical Guide, 29 J. FAM. L. 591, 593
(1990/1991) (citing telephone interview with Dr.
Arthur Wassmer (Apr. 3, 1990)).
133 Richard Delgado, When Religious Exercise Is not
Free: Deprogramming and the Constitutional Status
of Coercively Induced Belief, 37 VAND. L. REV.
1071, 1072–73 (1984).
134 See Catherine Wong, St. Thomas on
Deprogramming: Is it Justifiable, 39 CATH. LAW. 81,
95 (1999) (citing Margaret Singer).
135 See Delgado, supra note 8, at 1074–75.
136 See Douglas H. Cook, Tort Liability for Cult
Deprogramming: Peterson v. Sorlien, 43 OHIO ST.
L.J. 465, 483–84 (1982) Landa, supra note 7, at 608.
137 Janja Lalich &Michael D. Langone,
Characteristics Associated with Cultic Groups, INT’L
CULTIC STUDIES ASS’N, http://www.csj.org/
loved one, a family must take affirmative action
to try to break the group’s control over their son.
Although there are variations on the actions
families employ, there are three traditional
models—seeking a conservatorship,
deprogramming the member, and employing exit
counseling.
Until the late 1970s, parents successfully sought
temporary conservatorships by showing courts
that their adult child had become incapacitated
by the group.
137F
138 Unfortunately for parents today,
doing this required courts to “deprive the
believer of his freedom of action and to subject
him to involuntary treatment,” a violation of the
First Amendment.
138F
139 Thus, without a showing
of actions that rendered the believer gravely
disabled as defined by state law, the justice
system cannot be involved.
139F
140 Without help
from the courts, parents are forced to employ the
more coercive model of deprogramming.
Deprogramming involves forcibly removing the
member from the group against his will,
detaining him in an isolated area, and
denigrating the group’s fundamental tenants by
using many of the same thought-reform
processes noted previously.
140F
141 The family’s goal
is to snap the member out of the cult mindset,
returning to him his ability to think critically,
infoserv_cult101/checklis.htm (last visited Apr. 14,
2016).
138 See generally Gretta Spendlove, Note, Legal
Issues in the Use of the Guardianship Procedures to
Remove Members of Cults, 18 ARIZ. L. REV. 1095
(1976) Note, Conservatorships and Religious Cults:
Diving a Theory of Free Exercise, 53 N.Y.U. L. REV.
1247 (1978).
139 Katz v. Superior Court, 141 Cal. Rptr. 234, 256
(Cal. Ct. App. 1977) (discussing United States v.
Ballard 322 U.S. 78 (1944)).
140 Id.
141 See Stephen Kent &Joseph Szimhart, Exit
Counseling and the Decline of Deprogramming, 1
CULTIC STUDIES REVIEW 246–47 (2002). An example
of a deprogramming appears in Molko, 762 P.2d at
51 when Molko is abducted by hired deprogrammers
after leaving his final session of the bar examination
and being taken to a motel for 3 days of
deprogramming. In that case, the deprogramming
was successful and Molko returned home to his
parents.
members into the group.
132F
133 After an initial
welcoming period with the group, recruits find
themselves under long periods of thought
reform, isolation, and physical and mental
exhaustion. Thought reform is a manipulative
technique whereby the group controls every
element of the recruit’s environment, including
physical activity, diet, and sleep deprivation.
133F
134
Over time, thought reform creates a feeling of
dependency, powerlessness, and fear that cult
leaders use against the recruit to instill new
attitudes and behaviors. This environment
inhibits the recruit’s critical-thinking ability,
leaving him completely defenseless against his
new authoritarian group leader.
134F
135 Even
Molko’s success in graduate-level education was
no match for the Unification Church’s
manipulative tactics.
By the time the new recruit becomes a member,
the family of the new convert are rarely allowed
to maintain contact with their loved one because
the group maintains control over the person,
isolating him from the outside world.
135F
136
Additionally, cults implant an “us vs. them”
mentality (i.e., the group vs. the outside world,
including family) to exacerbate isolation from
outsiders.
136F
137 With such limited access to their
Dr. Arthur Wassmer’s definition is useful: “A cult is
an organization whose stated mission is religious,
political, philosophical or psychotherapeutic, with a
covert mission to accumulate wealth and/or power to
benefit its leadership.” See Susan Landa, Children
and Cults: A Practical Guide, 29 J. FAM. L. 591, 593
(1990/1991) (citing telephone interview with Dr.
Arthur Wassmer (Apr. 3, 1990)).
133 Richard Delgado, When Religious Exercise Is not
Free: Deprogramming and the Constitutional Status
of Coercively Induced Belief, 37 VAND. L. REV.
1071, 1072–73 (1984).
134 See Catherine Wong, St. Thomas on
Deprogramming: Is it Justifiable, 39 CATH. LAW. 81,
95 (1999) (citing Margaret Singer).
135 See Delgado, supra note 8, at 1074–75.
136 See Douglas H. Cook, Tort Liability for Cult
Deprogramming: Peterson v. Sorlien, 43 OHIO ST.
L.J. 465, 483–84 (1982) Landa, supra note 7, at 608.
137 Janja Lalich &Michael D. Langone,
Characteristics Associated with Cultic Groups, INT’L
CULTIC STUDIES ASS’N, http://www.csj.org/
loved one, a family must take affirmative action
to try to break the group’s control over their son.
Although there are variations on the actions
families employ, there are three traditional
models—seeking a conservatorship,
deprogramming the member, and employing exit
counseling.
Until the late 1970s, parents successfully sought
temporary conservatorships by showing courts
that their adult child had become incapacitated
by the group.
137F
138 Unfortunately for parents today,
doing this required courts to “deprive the
believer of his freedom of action and to subject
him to involuntary treatment,” a violation of the
First Amendment.
138F
139 Thus, without a showing
of actions that rendered the believer gravely
disabled as defined by state law, the justice
system cannot be involved.
139F
140 Without help
from the courts, parents are forced to employ the
more coercive model of deprogramming.
Deprogramming involves forcibly removing the
member from the group against his will,
detaining him in an isolated area, and
denigrating the group’s fundamental tenants by
using many of the same thought-reform
processes noted previously.
140F
141 The family’s goal
is to snap the member out of the cult mindset,
returning to him his ability to think critically,
infoserv_cult101/checklis.htm (last visited Apr. 14,
2016).
138 See generally Gretta Spendlove, Note, Legal
Issues in the Use of the Guardianship Procedures to
Remove Members of Cults, 18 ARIZ. L. REV. 1095
(1976) Note, Conservatorships and Religious Cults:
Diving a Theory of Free Exercise, 53 N.Y.U. L. REV.
1247 (1978).
139 Katz v. Superior Court, 141 Cal. Rptr. 234, 256
(Cal. Ct. App. 1977) (discussing United States v.
Ballard 322 U.S. 78 (1944)).
140 Id.
141 See Stephen Kent &Joseph Szimhart, Exit
Counseling and the Decline of Deprogramming, 1
CULTIC STUDIES REVIEW 246–47 (2002). An example
of a deprogramming appears in Molko, 762 P.2d at
51 when Molko is abducted by hired deprogrammers
after leaving his final session of the bar examination
and being taken to a motel for 3 days of
deprogramming. In that case, the deprogramming
was successful and Molko returned home to his
parents.
