International Journal of Cultic Studies ■ Vol. 5, 2014 73
described in this book (pp. 274–77, 343–46).
Dr. Ophoven is America’s premier expert
witness for the defense of child abuse, testifying
at about seventy trials each year (p. 274).
Ophoven’s fee is $400 per hour, plus expenses,
which often include travel time (p. 276). The
questions I am forced to ask are “How can an
intelligent doctor specialize in defending parents
who needlessly allow their children to suffer and
die? Is this not also morally perverse? Has she
too been brainwashed?”
Then there are the politicians who facilitated
faith-healing child abuse. Richard Nixon
engineered passage of the state and federal
religious-shield laws that gave faith healing the
same essential legal status as medical treatment,
and that allowed Christian Science hospitals to
bill Medicare at the same rate as that of medical
hospitals (p. 35). Nixon’s mandates were
endorsed by Ted Kennedy, chairman of the US
House Subcommittee on Health, who needed the
money and votes of the Christian Science church
members in his home state of Massachusetts,
where Mrs. Eddy had founded and
headquartered the church (p. 36). George W.
Bush took Nixon’s “Southern Strategy to new
lows, pandering to religious fundamentalism
because it was politically expedient” (p. 194).
Again, I ask, “Are these politicians, and the
many other governors who were guilty of the
same kind of political expediency good people?
And have these public representatives also been
brainwashed?”
Finally, what about the broader Christian
church? Should they not be exercising some
form of discipline on churches that are obviously
doing what is terribly wrong and quite contrary
to orthodox Christian doctrine? Stauth, in his
conclusion, hints at this problem when
describing Rita Swan, who, in her crusade
against the crime of faith-healing abuse,
experienced much personal abuse herself “from
fundamentalists, lobbyists, legislators, decade
after decade, with barely a penny of help from a
vast American religious community that should
have revered her” (pp. 435–436). Is the broader
Christian church, too, morally perverse and
brainwashed?
The story overall is a very sad story. But
surprisingly, it ends on a positive note and offers
a message of hope. There is of course the final
victory, in October of 2011, in a series of court
cases in Clackamas County. This victory will
hopefully begin to change the trajectory of laws
in America in a direction that will end the
religious-shield laws that protect children from
parents who blindly believe in faith healing.
There are scenes of Rita Swan, and Patrick
Robbins, and the detectives and attorneys in
Clackamas County celebrating their modest
victories. But perhaps the most positive and
hope-inducing part of this story has to do with
individuals who were transformed. There is of
course Patrick and his sister Ella, who grew up
within the narrow and distorted influence of the
Follower’s church, yet somehow managed to
free themselves from this background, despite
the pressures to conform. Brainwashing doesn’t
always succeed! Then there is the miracle of
Patrick and his sister learning to forgive their
family and their church (see especially p. 317).
And finally there is the Followers’ church in
Clackamas County, where a growing number of
members begin to doubt the Church and study
the Bible for themselves (p. 371). Toward the
end of the book, Patrick and Ella put on a picnic
for their like-minded friends in the church, and
Patrick gives an inspiring reinterpretation of the
Christian story that includes grace and
compassion and freedom (pp. 385–387).
Healing and healthy religion is possible!2
This book deserves to be widely read. It
provides an in-depth look at a phenomenon that
should be of special interest to church leaders
and cult specialists. Researchers should be
forewarned that there are no footnotes. Indeed,
at times I could not help but ask whether the
author was indulging in too much editorial
license, especially when describing the feelings
and motivations of some of the key actors in this
drama. Stauth also has a tendency to
sensationalize. For example, he has this to say
2 Elsewhere I have argued for “committed openness” as
characterizing healthy religion. See for example my "Religious
Education and Committed Openness," in Inspiring Faith: Studies
in Religious Education, edited by Marius Felderhof, Penny
Thompson, and David Torevell. Hampshire, England: Ashgate
Publishing, 2007, pp. 35–46.
described in this book (pp. 274–77, 343–46).
Dr. Ophoven is America’s premier expert
witness for the defense of child abuse, testifying
at about seventy trials each year (p. 274).
Ophoven’s fee is $400 per hour, plus expenses,
which often include travel time (p. 276). The
questions I am forced to ask are “How can an
intelligent doctor specialize in defending parents
who needlessly allow their children to suffer and
die? Is this not also morally perverse? Has she
too been brainwashed?”
Then there are the politicians who facilitated
faith-healing child abuse. Richard Nixon
engineered passage of the state and federal
religious-shield laws that gave faith healing the
same essential legal status as medical treatment,
and that allowed Christian Science hospitals to
bill Medicare at the same rate as that of medical
hospitals (p. 35). Nixon’s mandates were
endorsed by Ted Kennedy, chairman of the US
House Subcommittee on Health, who needed the
money and votes of the Christian Science church
members in his home state of Massachusetts,
where Mrs. Eddy had founded and
headquartered the church (p. 36). George W.
Bush took Nixon’s “Southern Strategy to new
lows, pandering to religious fundamentalism
because it was politically expedient” (p. 194).
Again, I ask, “Are these politicians, and the
many other governors who were guilty of the
same kind of political expediency good people?
And have these public representatives also been
brainwashed?”
Finally, what about the broader Christian
church? Should they not be exercising some
form of discipline on churches that are obviously
doing what is terribly wrong and quite contrary
to orthodox Christian doctrine? Stauth, in his
conclusion, hints at this problem when
describing Rita Swan, who, in her crusade
against the crime of faith-healing abuse,
experienced much personal abuse herself “from
fundamentalists, lobbyists, legislators, decade
after decade, with barely a penny of help from a
vast American religious community that should
have revered her” (pp. 435–436). Is the broader
Christian church, too, morally perverse and
brainwashed?
The story overall is a very sad story. But
surprisingly, it ends on a positive note and offers
a message of hope. There is of course the final
victory, in October of 2011, in a series of court
cases in Clackamas County. This victory will
hopefully begin to change the trajectory of laws
in America in a direction that will end the
religious-shield laws that protect children from
parents who blindly believe in faith healing.
There are scenes of Rita Swan, and Patrick
Robbins, and the detectives and attorneys in
Clackamas County celebrating their modest
victories. But perhaps the most positive and
hope-inducing part of this story has to do with
individuals who were transformed. There is of
course Patrick and his sister Ella, who grew up
within the narrow and distorted influence of the
Follower’s church, yet somehow managed to
free themselves from this background, despite
the pressures to conform. Brainwashing doesn’t
always succeed! Then there is the miracle of
Patrick and his sister learning to forgive their
family and their church (see especially p. 317).
And finally there is the Followers’ church in
Clackamas County, where a growing number of
members begin to doubt the Church and study
the Bible for themselves (p. 371). Toward the
end of the book, Patrick and Ella put on a picnic
for their like-minded friends in the church, and
Patrick gives an inspiring reinterpretation of the
Christian story that includes grace and
compassion and freedom (pp. 385–387).
Healing and healthy religion is possible!2
This book deserves to be widely read. It
provides an in-depth look at a phenomenon that
should be of special interest to church leaders
and cult specialists. Researchers should be
forewarned that there are no footnotes. Indeed,
at times I could not help but ask whether the
author was indulging in too much editorial
license, especially when describing the feelings
and motivations of some of the key actors in this
drama. Stauth also has a tendency to
sensationalize. For example, he has this to say
2 Elsewhere I have argued for “committed openness” as
characterizing healthy religion. See for example my "Religious
Education and Committed Openness," in Inspiring Faith: Studies
in Religious Education, edited by Marius Felderhof, Penny
Thompson, and David Torevell. Hampshire, England: Ashgate
Publishing, 2007, pp. 35–46.
