therapist can choose a model or combination of
models that suits both therapist and client.
There is a burgeoning of processing methods in
the trauma field. I recommend cautious use of
exposure therapies and eye movement
desensitization reprocessing (EMDR) with
former members, particularly second-generation
members who may have both developmental and
adult trauma. An experienced trauma therapist
should employ these approaches only if the
client has achieved relative stability, and if the
therapist is adept at working with dissociation
and pacing interventions. Exposure therapy and
EMDR include bold and steady exposure.
EMDR has a lower dropout rate than exposure
therapy (Power et al., 2002), perhaps because it
includes supportive bilateral stimulation—
tapping, eye movements, or music. However,
during EMDR therapy, associative networks get
stimulated quickly, and it is easy for a former
member to suddenly remember something
frightening during processing. With these and
other modalities, there is always the risk that the
emotions and body sensations associated with
facing something squarely without a break or
without enough distance can be too much. The
client may become flooded with sympathetic
arousal and reexperience all the implicit feelings
of terror, helplessness, or humiliation of the
original traumatic moment. Trauma researchers
and therapists call this retraumatizing.
Accelerated Experiential Dynamic
Psychotherapy (AEDP) the somatic therapies—
SE Sensorimotor Psychotherapy, SPI and
Internal Family Systems (IFS) have built-in
stabilizing elements that help the client stay
emotionally regulated and present during trauma
processing. If a therapist has training in EMDR
or exposure therapies only and is not yet savvy
about dissociation and pacing, it is better to stick
with stabilization, slow exploration, and
“working through.” Although the trauma-based
therapies are efficient and powerful, reaching
both verbally and somatically stored trauma, it is
also important to remember that talk therapy
works. Much of what works in therapy is
understanding, respect, and the therapeutic
alliance (Norcross &Lambert, 2011).
When second-generation former members are
processing trauma, themes and incidents from
childhood will likely stir the most potent body
sensations and emotional charges. For first-
generation former members, the opposite is most
often true—the experiences with the leader and
other group members were likely more abusive
than any they had as children. Thus, processing
the worst experiences rather than the earliest can
bring great relief to first-generation members. It
is also very important not to assume that the
negative cognitions of adult members were
learned in their families of origin. They are
often the result of brainwashing: well-ingrained
group beliefs that at the time seemed benign but
were used to blame, punish, and control
members (Lalich, 2004 Lalich &Tobias, 2006).
The process of working through the issues and
negative cognitions from the cult experience will
also stimulate and enable clients to work through
early childhood trauma with resonant themes.
Although they are highly effective and gaining
in popularity, some of the aforementioned
models have been developed only over the past
twenty years or so. Consequently, they may
seem strange to any psychotherapy patient and
should be presented as “something to try” and be
well described before the therapist uses them.
Because some processing models have
procedural elements, it is important to ensure
that the relational, talking aspects of the therapy
stay a strong part of the sessions. Otherwise,
clients can feel alone, abandoned, or that
something is being done to them, rather than
with them. This result could prove to be a
trigger for trauma born in the cult.
Integration and Healing
Recent discoveries in affective neuroscience and
interpersonal neurobiology have influenced how
we reconceptualize mental health.
Neuroscientists and trauma therapists talk about
flexibility, resonance, coherence, integration,
and mindfulness (Siegel, 2010). It is my
perspective that this is a positive shift in the
trauma field away from a metapsychology of
sickness and health, and toward a strength-based
model of plasticity, nervous-system regulation,
and relatedness.
In keeping with this model, we as humans are all
striving to freely experience when to use our
boundaries to say yes or no, to come close or go
International Journal of Cultic Studies ■ Vol. 5, 2014 25
models that suits both therapist and client.
There is a burgeoning of processing methods in
the trauma field. I recommend cautious use of
exposure therapies and eye movement
desensitization reprocessing (EMDR) with
former members, particularly second-generation
members who may have both developmental and
adult trauma. An experienced trauma therapist
should employ these approaches only if the
client has achieved relative stability, and if the
therapist is adept at working with dissociation
and pacing interventions. Exposure therapy and
EMDR include bold and steady exposure.
EMDR has a lower dropout rate than exposure
therapy (Power et al., 2002), perhaps because it
includes supportive bilateral stimulation—
tapping, eye movements, or music. However,
during EMDR therapy, associative networks get
stimulated quickly, and it is easy for a former
member to suddenly remember something
frightening during processing. With these and
other modalities, there is always the risk that the
emotions and body sensations associated with
facing something squarely without a break or
without enough distance can be too much. The
client may become flooded with sympathetic
arousal and reexperience all the implicit feelings
of terror, helplessness, or humiliation of the
original traumatic moment. Trauma researchers
and therapists call this retraumatizing.
Accelerated Experiential Dynamic
Psychotherapy (AEDP) the somatic therapies—
SE Sensorimotor Psychotherapy, SPI and
Internal Family Systems (IFS) have built-in
stabilizing elements that help the client stay
emotionally regulated and present during trauma
processing. If a therapist has training in EMDR
or exposure therapies only and is not yet savvy
about dissociation and pacing, it is better to stick
with stabilization, slow exploration, and
“working through.” Although the trauma-based
therapies are efficient and powerful, reaching
both verbally and somatically stored trauma, it is
also important to remember that talk therapy
works. Much of what works in therapy is
understanding, respect, and the therapeutic
alliance (Norcross &Lambert, 2011).
When second-generation former members are
processing trauma, themes and incidents from
childhood will likely stir the most potent body
sensations and emotional charges. For first-
generation former members, the opposite is most
often true—the experiences with the leader and
other group members were likely more abusive
than any they had as children. Thus, processing
the worst experiences rather than the earliest can
bring great relief to first-generation members. It
is also very important not to assume that the
negative cognitions of adult members were
learned in their families of origin. They are
often the result of brainwashing: well-ingrained
group beliefs that at the time seemed benign but
were used to blame, punish, and control
members (Lalich, 2004 Lalich &Tobias, 2006).
The process of working through the issues and
negative cognitions from the cult experience will
also stimulate and enable clients to work through
early childhood trauma with resonant themes.
Although they are highly effective and gaining
in popularity, some of the aforementioned
models have been developed only over the past
twenty years or so. Consequently, they may
seem strange to any psychotherapy patient and
should be presented as “something to try” and be
well described before the therapist uses them.
Because some processing models have
procedural elements, it is important to ensure
that the relational, talking aspects of the therapy
stay a strong part of the sessions. Otherwise,
clients can feel alone, abandoned, or that
something is being done to them, rather than
with them. This result could prove to be a
trigger for trauma born in the cult.
Integration and Healing
Recent discoveries in affective neuroscience and
interpersonal neurobiology have influenced how
we reconceptualize mental health.
Neuroscientists and trauma therapists talk about
flexibility, resonance, coherence, integration,
and mindfulness (Siegel, 2010). It is my
perspective that this is a positive shift in the
trauma field away from a metapsychology of
sickness and health, and toward a strength-based
model of plasticity, nervous-system regulation,
and relatedness.
In keeping with this model, we as humans are all
striving to freely experience when to use our
boundaries to say yes or no, to come close or go
International Journal of Cultic Studies ■ Vol. 5, 2014 25
