66 International Journal of Cultic Studies ■ Vol. 8, 2017
• They feel a loss of the sense of safety.
• They have been (one or a combination of)
psychologically, physically, spiritually, or
sexually abused by people in positions of
power.
• They might have lost trust in people, in God,
and in themselves they may have a
predisposition to be influenced by authority
figures.
• They are highly reactive to a wide range of
triggers they may have developed a phobic
avoidance of triggers.
• They might readily dissociate.
• They can float between their pre-, in-cult,
and postcult personality.
• They are likely to be hypervigilant they
probably feel disempowered.
• They frequently demonstrate a lack of
critical thinking, possibly having
incorporated deliberately installed phobias
and superstitions, and are unable to make
simple decisions (the prefrontal cortex
“muscle” has atrophied).
• They are frequently operating in the limbic
state, with the limbic “muscle” being
constantly overstimulated, which can
become an habitual way of operating.
• They can display motor symptoms that
include numbness, paralysis, and ataxia.
Distinctions for Therapy
Based on the above analysis, I review important
distinctions between therapeutic approaches for
generic PTSD and postcult Complex PTSD in
the following subsections.
Hypnosis and Meditative Practices
The therapeutic use of hypnosis and meditative
practices runs a high risk of triggering and
retraumatizing former cult members because of
their extensive negative experiences with
hypnosis and meditation during their time in the
cult (Whitsett, 2006, p. 358 Kunsman, 2014, p.
3). Rosen (2014, p. 22) has warned that,
although mindful meditation is a popular
practice in the treatment of trauma, caution is
advisable when one is considering these
practices for former cult members.
Diagnosing
The process of diagnosing, as in a medical
model, is to be discouraged because it might
result in the former cult member experiencing
further feelings of disempowerment (White,
2004, p. 70). Citing Najavitas (2002) and Rosen
(2013), Rosen (2014, p. 23) recommended that
the client and the therapist together create and
use nonpathologizing language.
Therapist-Client Relationship
Similarly, decision making by the therapist on
the behalf of former members can contribute to
the former members’ sense of disempowerment.
Dubrow-Marshall (2015) relates the
circumstances of former members having been
in cultic groups and experiencing the initial
“love bombing” in conjunction with feigned
intimacy, wherein other members pretended to
share similarities with the new members, to
exert influence over them. As a consequence,
these former members can find the counselling
relationship “cold and uncaring.” And because of
their previous experiences of a highly structured,
rule-driven environment within the cult, former
members have an expectation and may “pressure
therapists to be directive” (p. 16). Similarly, the
therapist acting as an authority figure can be
distinctly counterproductive: This approach can
provoke a trigger, potentially disempower the
person seeking therapy, or reproduce the
destructive cult leader-follower relationship
(Herman, 1997, pp. 134–139). Rosen (2014) has
recommended an authoritative and
collaborative, rather than an authoritarian,
approach (p. 23, my italics).
In the same sense, failure to take into
consideration the power imbalance between the
therapist and the former cult member runs the
risk of retraumatizing the former cult member
because he is placing himself in a vulnerable
position and has previously been abused by
power figures while he was vulnerable within in
the cult (Herman, 1997, pp. 134–139).
• They feel a loss of the sense of safety.
• They have been (one or a combination of)
psychologically, physically, spiritually, or
sexually abused by people in positions of
power.
• They might have lost trust in people, in God,
and in themselves they may have a
predisposition to be influenced by authority
figures.
• They are highly reactive to a wide range of
triggers they may have developed a phobic
avoidance of triggers.
• They might readily dissociate.
• They can float between their pre-, in-cult,
and postcult personality.
• They are likely to be hypervigilant they
probably feel disempowered.
• They frequently demonstrate a lack of
critical thinking, possibly having
incorporated deliberately installed phobias
and superstitions, and are unable to make
simple decisions (the prefrontal cortex
“muscle” has atrophied).
• They are frequently operating in the limbic
state, with the limbic “muscle” being
constantly overstimulated, which can
become an habitual way of operating.
• They can display motor symptoms that
include numbness, paralysis, and ataxia.
Distinctions for Therapy
Based on the above analysis, I review important
distinctions between therapeutic approaches for
generic PTSD and postcult Complex PTSD in
the following subsections.
Hypnosis and Meditative Practices
The therapeutic use of hypnosis and meditative
practices runs a high risk of triggering and
retraumatizing former cult members because of
their extensive negative experiences with
hypnosis and meditation during their time in the
cult (Whitsett, 2006, p. 358 Kunsman, 2014, p.
3). Rosen (2014, p. 22) has warned that,
although mindful meditation is a popular
practice in the treatment of trauma, caution is
advisable when one is considering these
practices for former cult members.
Diagnosing
The process of diagnosing, as in a medical
model, is to be discouraged because it might
result in the former cult member experiencing
further feelings of disempowerment (White,
2004, p. 70). Citing Najavitas (2002) and Rosen
(2013), Rosen (2014, p. 23) recommended that
the client and the therapist together create and
use nonpathologizing language.
Therapist-Client Relationship
Similarly, decision making by the therapist on
the behalf of former members can contribute to
the former members’ sense of disempowerment.
Dubrow-Marshall (2015) relates the
circumstances of former members having been
in cultic groups and experiencing the initial
“love bombing” in conjunction with feigned
intimacy, wherein other members pretended to
share similarities with the new members, to
exert influence over them. As a consequence,
these former members can find the counselling
relationship “cold and uncaring.” And because of
their previous experiences of a highly structured,
rule-driven environment within the cult, former
members have an expectation and may “pressure
therapists to be directive” (p. 16). Similarly, the
therapist acting as an authority figure can be
distinctly counterproductive: This approach can
provoke a trigger, potentially disempower the
person seeking therapy, or reproduce the
destructive cult leader-follower relationship
(Herman, 1997, pp. 134–139). Rosen (2014) has
recommended an authoritative and
collaborative, rather than an authoritarian,
approach (p. 23, my italics).
In the same sense, failure to take into
consideration the power imbalance between the
therapist and the former cult member runs the
risk of retraumatizing the former cult member
because he is placing himself in a vulnerable
position and has previously been abused by
power figures while he was vulnerable within in
the cult (Herman, 1997, pp. 134–139).
