Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 6, No. 1, 1989, Page 53
on its members. The potentially destructive impact of a cult on a child usually presents itself
in less dramatic settings and with less potential risk.
Divorce and Custody Issues
Religious differences of parents and the question of the child‟s religious identity have
become significant issues in divorce and custody proceedings even when both parents are
members of mainstream religious denominations. Thus, it is hardly surprising that religion
will be injected into custody proceedings particularly when the parents were initially married
within a cultic organization or the actual divorce was precipitated by a parent‟s cult
affiliation. The court‟s concern with “best interests” of the child can lead it to examine the
membership of a parent in an eccentric group as an aspect of whether or not the total
environment will be conducive to the child‟s growth and development (KandeL 1988).
These issues are presented in a particularly dramatic light in the case of Ophelia A:
Ophelia A. sought psychiatric consultation as part of her effort to regain
custody of her two children, Norman and Dierdre. Mrs. A. had joined a quasi-
Christian cult at the age of 17. The product of a “fundamentalististic”
Christian background, she had joined because she believed that the group
was a particularly committed evangelical organization. At age 18, she met
and married Tim, a member of the group. They rose to positions of leadership
within the cult. Two children were born. Gradually, Mrs. A. became
disenchanted with the group because of the sexual and financial
manipulations that characterized the relationship between the cult‟s hierarchy
and its members (the group encourages the female members to engage in
“flirty fishing” i.e., using prostitution as a form of recruitment). She was able
to persuade her husband to leave the group with her and their two children.
However, her husband was unable to find employment or function in the non-
cult world. Eventually, he rejoined the group. They separated. One day, while
Mrs. A. was working in the garden, her husband appeared and demanded the
children. Without waiting for an answer, he ran to the house and snatched
them away. Mrs. A. has not seen them in ten years. Through contacts with
former members of the cult, she believes that the children are now living with
their father in Asia.
The issues of this case are typical of those which arise when one parent is a member of a
cult group. Both parents regarded one another in completely polarized terms. Mr. A. related
to Mrs. A. as a defector/apostate/heretic. This justified his “rescuing” his children from
“Satan”. Moreover, he made no effort to work out any realistic arrangement for visitation
with her. In other cases, the non-cult parent will regard the cult member as a totally unfit
parent to maintain viable contact with the child, even when the parent who is a cult member
does attempt to abide by court regulations, e.g., returning the child on time and not using
the visitation for recruitment purposes.
Polarization creates a difficult role for the psychotherapist. It is extremely difficult for the
psychotherapist to work in an environment in which both parties are absolutely convinced of
their “truths”. Yet, it is important for the psychotherapist to help both parent and child to
see that while one of the parents espouses unusual ideas, this does not mean that they will
necessarily relate to the child in an irresponsible fashion.
These issues may be particularly confusing for children who in the aftermath of a divorce
are forced to deal with family separation and the additional discovery that a parent may be
“disturbed.” The -psychotherapist can play an important role in facilitating communication
between parents to work out appropriately respectful relations.
on its members. The potentially destructive impact of a cult on a child usually presents itself
in less dramatic settings and with less potential risk.
Divorce and Custody Issues
Religious differences of parents and the question of the child‟s religious identity have
become significant issues in divorce and custody proceedings even when both parents are
members of mainstream religious denominations. Thus, it is hardly surprising that religion
will be injected into custody proceedings particularly when the parents were initially married
within a cultic organization or the actual divorce was precipitated by a parent‟s cult
affiliation. The court‟s concern with “best interests” of the child can lead it to examine the
membership of a parent in an eccentric group as an aspect of whether or not the total
environment will be conducive to the child‟s growth and development (KandeL 1988).
These issues are presented in a particularly dramatic light in the case of Ophelia A:
Ophelia A. sought psychiatric consultation as part of her effort to regain
custody of her two children, Norman and Dierdre. Mrs. A. had joined a quasi-
Christian cult at the age of 17. The product of a “fundamentalististic”
Christian background, she had joined because she believed that the group
was a particularly committed evangelical organization. At age 18, she met
and married Tim, a member of the group. They rose to positions of leadership
within the cult. Two children were born. Gradually, Mrs. A. became
disenchanted with the group because of the sexual and financial
manipulations that characterized the relationship between the cult‟s hierarchy
and its members (the group encourages the female members to engage in
“flirty fishing” i.e., using prostitution as a form of recruitment). She was able
to persuade her husband to leave the group with her and their two children.
However, her husband was unable to find employment or function in the non-
cult world. Eventually, he rejoined the group. They separated. One day, while
Mrs. A. was working in the garden, her husband appeared and demanded the
children. Without waiting for an answer, he ran to the house and snatched
them away. Mrs. A. has not seen them in ten years. Through contacts with
former members of the cult, she believes that the children are now living with
their father in Asia.
The issues of this case are typical of those which arise when one parent is a member of a
cult group. Both parents regarded one another in completely polarized terms. Mr. A. related
to Mrs. A. as a defector/apostate/heretic. This justified his “rescuing” his children from
“Satan”. Moreover, he made no effort to work out any realistic arrangement for visitation
with her. In other cases, the non-cult parent will regard the cult member as a totally unfit
parent to maintain viable contact with the child, even when the parent who is a cult member
does attempt to abide by court regulations, e.g., returning the child on time and not using
the visitation for recruitment purposes.
Polarization creates a difficult role for the psychotherapist. It is extremely difficult for the
psychotherapist to work in an environment in which both parties are absolutely convinced of
their “truths”. Yet, it is important for the psychotherapist to help both parent and child to
see that while one of the parents espouses unusual ideas, this does not mean that they will
necessarily relate to the child in an irresponsible fashion.
These issues may be particularly confusing for children who in the aftermath of a divorce
are forced to deal with family separation and the additional discovery that a parent may be
“disturbed.” The -psychotherapist can play an important role in facilitating communication
between parents to work out appropriately respectful relations.
