Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 6, No. 1, 1989, Page 56
men was sufficient. However, other groups such as ISKCON (Hare Krishna) emphasize the
importance of women‟s assuming “traditional sex roles” and “may appear to stand as no
more than sexism” (Rochford, 1985). Thus, female members may be given very limited
educational opportunities. Yet, other groups may impose requirements such as having
children spend significant parts of the school day in meditation. The non-cult parent may be
legitimately concerned that his/her child is being directed towards a world view which is
incompatible with the child‟s participation in mainstream society (and ultimately diminishing
the opportunity for forming reasonable relationships with either the non-cult parent or other
non-cult adults). The role of the psychotherapist in this regard is not clearly defined. The
psychotherapist does have a responsibility to help the parents evolve a reasonable
relationship around the issue of education, if this is possible. But if he is seen in a forensic
capacity after the non-cult parent has explored efforts at compromise, the psychotherapist
has the responsibility of bringing to the attention of the court that a cult parents‟ depriving
the child of a mainstream education, may well not be in the child‟s best interest.
Mistreatment of Children
Cults may have eccentric and extremely harsh attitudes towards child discipline. The recent
Ecclesia case in which the cult leader‟s child was beaten to death illustrates that harsh and
brutal treatment of children may occur under the guise of quasi-Biblical sanction (“Spare the
rod and -spoil the child”) (Child‟s beating death, 1988). Unfortunately, this case is not
unique (Markowitz &Halperin, 1988). The psychotherapist may face a very difficult task in
deciding whether or not tales of child abuse represent a realistic concern.
Why do loving and caring cultic parents sometimes inflict bizarre and drastic discipline on
their children? Some cult groups regard children born within the group as symbolic of the
group‟s aspirations towards a spiritual perfectionism or as an effort towards the creation of
an “uebermensch” (cf., the efforts at the creation of a “Homo Sovieticus” Halberstadt &
Mandel, 1989. Hence, any deviance by the child from group norms or goals is seen in
particularly harsh terms. Additionally, parents may project onto their children ideas and
desires which are unacceptable to them as cult members. Thus, the normative play of
children is subject to criticism and they may be subject to harsh and unrelenting
punishment as the parents attempt to exorcize their own unacceptable fantasies from the
child (Markowitz &Halperin, 1988).
Mistreatment of children within a cult may include brutal discipline as well as neglect. The
group leader may actively discourage parents from involvement with their children because
it detracts from their own spiritual exercises. Rajneesh stated that parents should pursue
their own karma. Or, parents may be absent for long periods on cult-related business,
leaving children in the care of communal babysitters. Such positions because they are
directed towards the member‟s need rather than towards directly advancing the cult‟s
activities, are often given low status within the cult group, and the children are the
recipients of the caretakers‟ dissatisfaction with their own status.
The cult leader may decide that the group‟s goals can be realized only if the children are
reared in a communal setting in which the biological parents are essentially excluded from
playing a significant role in the child rearing process. In this context, the psychotherapist‟s
role may often be a forensic one in which he or she must work with the non-cult parent (or
even grandparent) to see that the child receives appropriate nurturing. The presence of the
psychotherapist as an active participant in the legal process may parenthetically provide
enough support to the parents to prevent them from pursuing extralegal approaches.
Throughout the course of any legal proceeding, the psychotherapist should caution parents
against taking matters into their own hands. The psychotherapist can provide a valuable
note of reality by helping the anxious parent appreciate the potential legal consequences of
such maneuvers. Even in -forensic activities, the psychotherapist‟s participation can provide
men was sufficient. However, other groups such as ISKCON (Hare Krishna) emphasize the
importance of women‟s assuming “traditional sex roles” and “may appear to stand as no
more than sexism” (Rochford, 1985). Thus, female members may be given very limited
educational opportunities. Yet, other groups may impose requirements such as having
children spend significant parts of the school day in meditation. The non-cult parent may be
legitimately concerned that his/her child is being directed towards a world view which is
incompatible with the child‟s participation in mainstream society (and ultimately diminishing
the opportunity for forming reasonable relationships with either the non-cult parent or other
non-cult adults). The role of the psychotherapist in this regard is not clearly defined. The
psychotherapist does have a responsibility to help the parents evolve a reasonable
relationship around the issue of education, if this is possible. But if he is seen in a forensic
capacity after the non-cult parent has explored efforts at compromise, the psychotherapist
has the responsibility of bringing to the attention of the court that a cult parents‟ depriving
the child of a mainstream education, may well not be in the child‟s best interest.
Mistreatment of Children
Cults may have eccentric and extremely harsh attitudes towards child discipline. The recent
Ecclesia case in which the cult leader‟s child was beaten to death illustrates that harsh and
brutal treatment of children may occur under the guise of quasi-Biblical sanction (“Spare the
rod and -spoil the child”) (Child‟s beating death, 1988). Unfortunately, this case is not
unique (Markowitz &Halperin, 1988). The psychotherapist may face a very difficult task in
deciding whether or not tales of child abuse represent a realistic concern.
Why do loving and caring cultic parents sometimes inflict bizarre and drastic discipline on
their children? Some cult groups regard children born within the group as symbolic of the
group‟s aspirations towards a spiritual perfectionism or as an effort towards the creation of
an “uebermensch” (cf., the efforts at the creation of a “Homo Sovieticus” Halberstadt &
Mandel, 1989. Hence, any deviance by the child from group norms or goals is seen in
particularly harsh terms. Additionally, parents may project onto their children ideas and
desires which are unacceptable to them as cult members. Thus, the normative play of
children is subject to criticism and they may be subject to harsh and unrelenting
punishment as the parents attempt to exorcize their own unacceptable fantasies from the
child (Markowitz &Halperin, 1988).
Mistreatment of children within a cult may include brutal discipline as well as neglect. The
group leader may actively discourage parents from involvement with their children because
it detracts from their own spiritual exercises. Rajneesh stated that parents should pursue
their own karma. Or, parents may be absent for long periods on cult-related business,
leaving children in the care of communal babysitters. Such positions because they are
directed towards the member‟s need rather than towards directly advancing the cult‟s
activities, are often given low status within the cult group, and the children are the
recipients of the caretakers‟ dissatisfaction with their own status.
The cult leader may decide that the group‟s goals can be realized only if the children are
reared in a communal setting in which the biological parents are essentially excluded from
playing a significant role in the child rearing process. In this context, the psychotherapist‟s
role may often be a forensic one in which he or she must work with the non-cult parent (or
even grandparent) to see that the child receives appropriate nurturing. The presence of the
psychotherapist as an active participant in the legal process may parenthetically provide
enough support to the parents to prevent them from pursuing extralegal approaches.
Throughout the course of any legal proceeding, the psychotherapist should caution parents
against taking matters into their own hands. The psychotherapist can provide a valuable
note of reality by helping the anxious parent appreciate the potential legal consequences of
such maneuvers. Even in -forensic activities, the psychotherapist‟s participation can provide
