Cultic Studies Review, Vol. 8, No. 2, 2009, Page 6
regarding the meaning of personal doubts may be exacerbated by the fact that often the
individual, immersed in an active process of personal change, might interpret personal
doubts as a simple stage in his or her own development. Moreover, the decision might be
perceived as permanent and irreversible, unlike the situation in traditional religious groups
(Bromley, 1991), with disaffiliation making it impossible to maintain effective ties with
emotionally significant persons who remain members of the group.
Among the reasons given for leaving a cult, Wright (1983) identified the following
―precipitating factors‖ in a sample of 45 subjects, distributed in groups of 15 from among
former members of the Unification Church, Hare Krishna, and the Children of God: a break
in the subject‘s isolation from the outside world the development of an intimate
relationship or an effective commitment that competes with that felt for the group
disillusionment derived from the failure of the group to fulfill its declared goals and the
perception of inconsistencies between the actions of the leader or leaders and the ideals
they supposedly represent. Chambers et al. (1994), in their study of 308 former members
of various groups, highlighted the importance of time spent outside the group suffering a
disillusioning experience with the leader becoming aware of being manipulated or
perceiving that one is the object of abuse or exploitation. Jacobs (1987) studied 40 former
members of various groups and identified two main sources of disenchantment whereby the
social bonds with the group itself break first, followed by deterioration in and rupture of
emotional ties with the charismatic leader. The author described four areas of disaffection
with the leader: principally forms of psychological abuse, such as verbal abuse degradation
and the perception of rejection or emotional disdain from the leader unmaterialized affect
and the perception of artificial feelings. The importance of the family has also been
recognized as a factor in the decision to leave the group (Goldberg &Goldberg, 1989
Langone 1990). Wright and Piper (1986) specifically studied this family influence of
―voluntary‖ disaffiliation from a cult and concluded that parental disapproval of a child‘s
involvement in a cult was the most important factor in accounting for the child‘s exit from
the cult.
The ways in which members leave a group can be classified as
Voluntary Exit, a term used by Wright (1984) to refer to those who leave a group
without any outside intervention.
Involuntary Exit, which includes those who have left the group after a
deprogramming process, which involves the kidnapping of the subjects by family or
friends so that the individuals can be subjected against their will to the
intervention. This group can also include those who left because they were expelled
or because the group was dissolved. Or
Counseled Exit, which refers to those who left because of the efforts of family,
friends, or professionals to bring about the subjects‘ disaffiliation.
The validity of negative reports provided by former members who perceived themselves to
be objects of abuse and manipulation while in the group has been called into question. Their
testimonies have been labeled ―atrocity tales‖ (Bromley, Shupe &Ventimiglia, 1983 Shupe
&Bromley, 1980), based on the understanding that these appraisals of their former cultic
experiences would be negatively biased by their method of exit—involuntary or counseled
exit (Lewis, 1986 Solomon, 1981), and/or the influence of any contacts maintained with
cult-awareness associations (CAAs) after they have left the group. It has even been claimed
that the tendency of former members to hold negative and stereotypical attitudes toward
their groups would correlate closely with the degree of exposure to the socializing influences
of the ―anti-cult movement‖ (Lewis, 1986 Solomon, 1981), and that this relationship
results in descriptions of supposed mental aberrations that occurred in the group. Even
more, claims have been made that the subjects who had left the group after any kind of
regarding the meaning of personal doubts may be exacerbated by the fact that often the
individual, immersed in an active process of personal change, might interpret personal
doubts as a simple stage in his or her own development. Moreover, the decision might be
perceived as permanent and irreversible, unlike the situation in traditional religious groups
(Bromley, 1991), with disaffiliation making it impossible to maintain effective ties with
emotionally significant persons who remain members of the group.
Among the reasons given for leaving a cult, Wright (1983) identified the following
―precipitating factors‖ in a sample of 45 subjects, distributed in groups of 15 from among
former members of the Unification Church, Hare Krishna, and the Children of God: a break
in the subject‘s isolation from the outside world the development of an intimate
relationship or an effective commitment that competes with that felt for the group
disillusionment derived from the failure of the group to fulfill its declared goals and the
perception of inconsistencies between the actions of the leader or leaders and the ideals
they supposedly represent. Chambers et al. (1994), in their study of 308 former members
of various groups, highlighted the importance of time spent outside the group suffering a
disillusioning experience with the leader becoming aware of being manipulated or
perceiving that one is the object of abuse or exploitation. Jacobs (1987) studied 40 former
members of various groups and identified two main sources of disenchantment whereby the
social bonds with the group itself break first, followed by deterioration in and rupture of
emotional ties with the charismatic leader. The author described four areas of disaffection
with the leader: principally forms of psychological abuse, such as verbal abuse degradation
and the perception of rejection or emotional disdain from the leader unmaterialized affect
and the perception of artificial feelings. The importance of the family has also been
recognized as a factor in the decision to leave the group (Goldberg &Goldberg, 1989
Langone 1990). Wright and Piper (1986) specifically studied this family influence of
―voluntary‖ disaffiliation from a cult and concluded that parental disapproval of a child‘s
involvement in a cult was the most important factor in accounting for the child‘s exit from
the cult.
The ways in which members leave a group can be classified as
Voluntary Exit, a term used by Wright (1984) to refer to those who leave a group
without any outside intervention.
Involuntary Exit, which includes those who have left the group after a
deprogramming process, which involves the kidnapping of the subjects by family or
friends so that the individuals can be subjected against their will to the
intervention. This group can also include those who left because they were expelled
or because the group was dissolved. Or
Counseled Exit, which refers to those who left because of the efforts of family,
friends, or professionals to bring about the subjects‘ disaffiliation.
The validity of negative reports provided by former members who perceived themselves to
be objects of abuse and manipulation while in the group has been called into question. Their
testimonies have been labeled ―atrocity tales‖ (Bromley, Shupe &Ventimiglia, 1983 Shupe
&Bromley, 1980), based on the understanding that these appraisals of their former cultic
experiences would be negatively biased by their method of exit—involuntary or counseled
exit (Lewis, 1986 Solomon, 1981), and/or the influence of any contacts maintained with
cult-awareness associations (CAAs) after they have left the group. It has even been claimed
that the tendency of former members to hold negative and stereotypical attitudes toward
their groups would correlate closely with the degree of exposure to the socializing influences
of the ―anti-cult movement‖ (Lewis, 1986 Solomon, 1981), and that this relationship
results in descriptions of supposed mental aberrations that occurred in the group. Even
more, claims have been made that the subjects who had left the group after any kind of
