Cultic Studies Review, Vol. 2, No. 2, 2003, Page 90
Clinical and Diagnostic Issues of Cultism: Group
Dependence Disorder
Miguel Perlado
Attention and Research on Social Addictions (AIS)
Vía Layetana 45, Esc. A, 1º 1ª Barcelona 08003 Spain
Email: miguel_perlado@hotmail.com
Abstract
This paper reviews some diagnostic proposals on the clinical complexity of
cults. The diagnostic criteria of group dependence disorder employed in the
therapeutic service of Attention and Research on Social Addictions (Attention
e Investigación de Socioadicciones -AIS) are introduced. A psychoanalytically
based psychopathological model derived from the research is also presented.
Keywords: sect, cult, diagnosis, follower, group dependency, psychological
manipulation, social addiction
The history of diagnosis goes back to Hippocratic medicine of the fifth and fourth century
B.C., when the need appeared to assign words to illnesses for treatment. At that time,
diagnosis had two meanings: on the one hand, diagnosis as a path of knowledge of the
difference (diagignôskein), and on the other, diagnosis as profound knowledge (diágnôsis).
These two meanings have carried through to current times, and thus we can find diagnosis
as a classification (medical-psychiatric diagnosis) and diagnosis as knowledge of what is
happening to the patient (psychological-psychoanalytical diagnosis) (Echevarría &Font,
1991).
The psychiatric-medical diagnosis is based on detecting, classifying, and differentiating a
disorder, with the establishment of specific syndromes. Alternatively, the psychological-
psychoanalytical diagnosis is progressively established as we enter into a relationship with
the patient (thus, for example, we can understand psychotherapy as a complete diagnostic
process).
Although establishing a diagnosis helps put order to thinking and information, as well as to
communicating and doing research, it can also fulfill certain counter-therapeutic functions:
erase the patient‘s anxiety toward the uncertainty that his or her suffering can generate and
produce in the therapist a sense of omnipotence and of control over the problem. These
functions may calm the patient and make the therapist feel much better, but they don‘t
necessarily solve the patient‘s problem.
Regarding the present subject, we are not concerned in justifying one or another type of
diagnosis as suitable—since both can be complementary—but rather in developing an
approach to the problem of diagnosis in cult commitments, and reviewing diverse proposals
along with the one employed by our group.
All of the proposals are oriented toward defining a specific disorder that a follower
committed to a ―cult group‖ might possibly present, which does not indicate that all
followers will automatically suffer this disorder.
Thought Reform and Dissociative States
From his recent literature review, Cubero (2001) shows us that psychiatry as a discipline
seems to be little interested in the psychopathological complexity of cults. Only a few
professionals have become interested in this field and have offered us different clinical
descriptions, though these have received little attention.
Clinical and Diagnostic Issues of Cultism: Group
Dependence Disorder
Miguel Perlado
Attention and Research on Social Addictions (AIS)
Vía Layetana 45, Esc. A, 1º 1ª Barcelona 08003 Spain
Email: miguel_perlado@hotmail.com
Abstract
This paper reviews some diagnostic proposals on the clinical complexity of
cults. The diagnostic criteria of group dependence disorder employed in the
therapeutic service of Attention and Research on Social Addictions (Attention
e Investigación de Socioadicciones -AIS) are introduced. A psychoanalytically
based psychopathological model derived from the research is also presented.
Keywords: sect, cult, diagnosis, follower, group dependency, psychological
manipulation, social addiction
The history of diagnosis goes back to Hippocratic medicine of the fifth and fourth century
B.C., when the need appeared to assign words to illnesses for treatment. At that time,
diagnosis had two meanings: on the one hand, diagnosis as a path of knowledge of the
difference (diagignôskein), and on the other, diagnosis as profound knowledge (diágnôsis).
These two meanings have carried through to current times, and thus we can find diagnosis
as a classification (medical-psychiatric diagnosis) and diagnosis as knowledge of what is
happening to the patient (psychological-psychoanalytical diagnosis) (Echevarría &Font,
1991).
The psychiatric-medical diagnosis is based on detecting, classifying, and differentiating a
disorder, with the establishment of specific syndromes. Alternatively, the psychological-
psychoanalytical diagnosis is progressively established as we enter into a relationship with
the patient (thus, for example, we can understand psychotherapy as a complete diagnostic
process).
Although establishing a diagnosis helps put order to thinking and information, as well as to
communicating and doing research, it can also fulfill certain counter-therapeutic functions:
erase the patient‘s anxiety toward the uncertainty that his or her suffering can generate and
produce in the therapist a sense of omnipotence and of control over the problem. These
functions may calm the patient and make the therapist feel much better, but they don‘t
necessarily solve the patient‘s problem.
Regarding the present subject, we are not concerned in justifying one or another type of
diagnosis as suitable—since both can be complementary—but rather in developing an
approach to the problem of diagnosis in cult commitments, and reviewing diverse proposals
along with the one employed by our group.
All of the proposals are oriented toward defining a specific disorder that a follower
committed to a ―cult group‖ might possibly present, which does not indicate that all
followers will automatically suffer this disorder.
Thought Reform and Dissociative States
From his recent literature review, Cubero (2001) shows us that psychiatry as a discipline
seems to be little interested in the psychopathological complexity of cults. Only a few
professionals have become interested in this field and have offered us different clinical
descriptions, though these have received little attention.
