Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 6, No. 1, 1989, Page 61
connections with individuals who have more information on a particular organization.
Articles on the group and the experiences of others in the group in question provide good
background information from which the family can assess the cultist‟s experience.
Action
A clinician with knowledge of cults can now help the family place the information it has
gathered in perspective and begin to consider how they might deal with the situation
(Singer, 1986). Obviously, each individual‟s experience in any group is unique, as is his or
her way of responding to pressures. Although the authors see a strong identification with
the leader in cultists, they also note that some pre-cult personality characteristics survive,
to a greater or lesser degree. (This depends on the degree of autonomy allowed as well as
on different aspects of the cultist‟s previous personality. However, even healthy young
adults are dramatically influenced by this experience.) The clinician who automatically
assumes that only cultic manipulation is operant in every case without assessing the family
constellation, the pre-cult personality, the possibility of psychopathology, and the degree to
which cult membership is ego-syntonic is as guilty of narrow, judgmental thinking as the
professional who sees only these factors operating.
Clinicians can also help the family differentiate between those factors that are significant in
determining if the group is a destructive one (e.g., former members‟ testimony that fears
of leaving the group were instilled in them) and those factors that are less significant (e.g.,
the fact that someone has labeled the group a “cult”).
Clinicians can also assess the dynamics of the family and the personalities of each family
member, as well as the cultist‟s relationship with each of them. There is no single
therapeutic approach in responding to families and cultists the therapist must devise a
strategy that respects the family‟s style and appreciates each cultist‟s unique situation.
Clinicians can be helpful during this stage by explaining the genesis of the changes that the
family members sense in the cultist and demystifying the experience for them. Families
cannot mobilize to take necessary action as long as they are confused, depressed, and self-
blaming. By explaining the phenomena of cult recruitment and membership, clinicians free
the family to take whatever action it deems appropriate.
Even when all the evidence points to the conclusion that the group the family member is
involved with is a destructive cult, some families or family members continue to rely heavily
on the defense mechanism of denial. There are many reasons families deny that someone
is at risk. As mentioned previously, some families are already traumatized by
circumstances that leave then drained them of the cognitive resources and energy
necessary to assess and judge the complex situation of cult membership. Indeed, their
trauma may be associated with the cult member‟s vulnerability to joining the cult.
In other families, denial may be a long-standing mechanism for dealing --or not dealing --
with stress. Sometimes families perceive taking a stand against a family member and his or
her behavior as too risky emotionally. This is particularly true of cultists who were always
seen as independent and mature, or even parentified by family members. It may be
difficult to believe that an idealistic young adult could get involved in something that was
not a good cause, particularly when he describes the group in such positive terms.
Furthermore, it is painful for families to face the possibility of danger, and often there is a
need to minimize the risk.
Former cultists who have left groups on their own, without family support, often report that
they are angry with their families for leaving them in a destructive situation for years
without intervening in any way. The clinician‟s role in this situation is to empathize with
their feelings, but also to help these individuals explore the possibility that the family may
have been ignorant of the destructive nature of their groups and to understand the
connections with individuals who have more information on a particular organization.
Articles on the group and the experiences of others in the group in question provide good
background information from which the family can assess the cultist‟s experience.
Action
A clinician with knowledge of cults can now help the family place the information it has
gathered in perspective and begin to consider how they might deal with the situation
(Singer, 1986). Obviously, each individual‟s experience in any group is unique, as is his or
her way of responding to pressures. Although the authors see a strong identification with
the leader in cultists, they also note that some pre-cult personality characteristics survive,
to a greater or lesser degree. (This depends on the degree of autonomy allowed as well as
on different aspects of the cultist‟s previous personality. However, even healthy young
adults are dramatically influenced by this experience.) The clinician who automatically
assumes that only cultic manipulation is operant in every case without assessing the family
constellation, the pre-cult personality, the possibility of psychopathology, and the degree to
which cult membership is ego-syntonic is as guilty of narrow, judgmental thinking as the
professional who sees only these factors operating.
Clinicians can also help the family differentiate between those factors that are significant in
determining if the group is a destructive one (e.g., former members‟ testimony that fears
of leaving the group were instilled in them) and those factors that are less significant (e.g.,
the fact that someone has labeled the group a “cult”).
Clinicians can also assess the dynamics of the family and the personalities of each family
member, as well as the cultist‟s relationship with each of them. There is no single
therapeutic approach in responding to families and cultists the therapist must devise a
strategy that respects the family‟s style and appreciates each cultist‟s unique situation.
Clinicians can be helpful during this stage by explaining the genesis of the changes that the
family members sense in the cultist and demystifying the experience for them. Families
cannot mobilize to take necessary action as long as they are confused, depressed, and self-
blaming. By explaining the phenomena of cult recruitment and membership, clinicians free
the family to take whatever action it deems appropriate.
Even when all the evidence points to the conclusion that the group the family member is
involved with is a destructive cult, some families or family members continue to rely heavily
on the defense mechanism of denial. There are many reasons families deny that someone
is at risk. As mentioned previously, some families are already traumatized by
circumstances that leave then drained them of the cognitive resources and energy
necessary to assess and judge the complex situation of cult membership. Indeed, their
trauma may be associated with the cult member‟s vulnerability to joining the cult.
In other families, denial may be a long-standing mechanism for dealing --or not dealing --
with stress. Sometimes families perceive taking a stand against a family member and his or
her behavior as too risky emotionally. This is particularly true of cultists who were always
seen as independent and mature, or even parentified by family members. It may be
difficult to believe that an idealistic young adult could get involved in something that was
not a good cause, particularly when he describes the group in such positive terms.
Furthermore, it is painful for families to face the possibility of danger, and often there is a
need to minimize the risk.
Former cultists who have left groups on their own, without family support, often report that
they are angry with their families for leaving them in a destructive situation for years
without intervening in any way. The clinician‟s role in this situation is to empathize with
their feelings, but also to help these individuals explore the possibility that the family may
have been ignorant of the destructive nature of their groups and to understand the
