Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 6, No. 2, 1989, Page 26
Studies of Voluntary Defectors and Research Critical of Deprogramming as an
Effective Intervention
Several researchers take strong issue with claims of deprogramming effectiveness, and they
dispute the existence of a relationship between cull involvement, “mind control” and “post-
cult syndromes” (and, by logical extension, deprogramming). Shupe and Bromley (1980)
and Solomon (1981) have noted that most cult “atrocity tales” have come from former
cultists who have undergone deprogramming. Kilbourne (1983) and Lewis (1986) have
suggested that post-cult reports of mind control and cult-induced psychological damage can
be attributed to socialization during the deprogramming process, as opposed to accurate
reports of experiences during cult membership.
Wright (1984) has criticized Conway and Siegelman (1982) and Skonovd (1981) for
presenting data on former cultists without distinguishing between the responses of
voluntary defectors and deprogramming. He presented data on 45 voluntary defectors from
cults, obtained from in-depth interviews Subjects were obtained through use of the
“snowballing” technique (respondents were solicited through use of posters and newspaper
ads in several Northeast universities). They represented three well-known cults: Unification
Church, ISKCON and Children of God/Family of Love. Wright admitted that the snowballing
sampling technique had several disadvantages chief among them the inability to estimate
sampling error.
When asked to assess their post-cult attitudes and reactions, Wright‟s (1984' subjects chose
between “Indifferent,” “Angry,” “Duped/brainwashed” and “Wiser for the experience.”
Wright found that most (67%) felt “Wiser for the experience” with only 9% and 7% feeling
“Duped/brainwashed” or “Angry,” respectively. Nondeprogrammed subjects generally left
their cults for one o: four reasons: (a) there was a breakdown in the member‟s isolation
from the outside world (b) the member became involved in a dyadic relationship in
violation of the communal context (c) perceived lack of success in achieving the cults
stated goal of world transformation and (d) inconsistencies between the ideals of the cult
and its actions.
Narrative responses suggested that defectors “often indicated a sustained affection or
appreciation for certain aspects of group involvement particularly with regard to the
development and maintenance of close interpersonal relationships within the movement
(Wright, 1984, p. 178) Wright noted the qualitative differences between subjects who might
have responded identically to some of his questions:
For a few, however, this same mode of response (“wiser for the experience” was a way of
saying that they had been able to salvage some positive thing out of something essentially
seen as negative. Without question, the, perceived their choice, in retrospect, as a mistake.
Yet, they could see some redeeming value in their involvement with the movement.
However, even allowing for the variation of responses within the category “wiser for the
experience,” what is readily demonstrated in these data is the almost complete absence of
brainwashing accusations. (Wright, 1984, p 178)
Wright (1984, pp. 178-179) stated that “accounts by voluntary defectors are generally
characterized by greater tolerance and flexibility in arriving at an understanding of one's
previous involvements” which he contrasted with the presumably “less tolerant attitudes of
their deprogrammed counterparts. In interpreting his data Wright concluded that “91% of
the sample felt their participation was entirely voluntary and specifically avoided the
language an, rhetoric of brainwashing.” In his conclusion, Wright compared the stages c
voluntary cult defection to those often experienced by divorcing couples.
Beckford (1985) also attempted to describe voluntary defectors (disengagers), from a cult
(the Unification Church) and distinguish them from deprogramees. His research drew from

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 6, No. 2, 1989, Page 27
two kinds of sources. First, he conducted extensive interviews with 26 ex-members, 13 of
their close relatives, 35 parents of active U.C. members, 26 anticult activists, and an
unspecified number of journalists and “official policy makers.” Second, he analyzed written
and personal documents drawn from anticult publications ex-member autobiographies,
journalistic accounts, legal transcripts and research studies. Beckford's sample (both human
subjects and written materials) was drawn primarily from Great Britain, with additional
subject and information coming from the Federal Republic of Germany, France Japan, and
the U.S.A. Despite the geographic difference from U.S.-based research, Beckford found
surprising similarities in demographics between hi non-American subjects and their
American counterparts.
Like Wright, Beckford found less antagonism and greater ambivalence among voluntary
defectors, although he hesitated to give these subjects positively biased labels such as
“more tolerant” or “less rigid.” Like Levine (1984) Beckford also found the rate of
disengagement among Moonists to be fairly high, with approximately 75% of recruits in
Great Britain leaving the U.S. within one year of joining he labeled this “the “revolving
door” syndrome” (Beckford, 1985, p. 151).
In contrast to most models of religious defection, Beckford found that U.C ex-members did
not leave because of cognitive conflicts (e.g., changes in belief systems). Instead, they
tended to leave because of material (e.g. uncomfortable living conditions, poor diet,
exhaustion constant demand to fund-raise), social (e.g., emotional cruelty, rigid leadership,
resentment of the discrepancies between the lifestyles of leaders and the rank-and-file),
and psychological (e.g., fear, guilt, constant belittling and demands to subjugate concerns.
Although most of the defectors reported long-term conflicts and doubts (which were usually
actively suppressed), the decision finally to leave was generally made on the spur of the
moment, following a chance conversation, the experience of an unaccustomed freedom, a
bout of homesickness, etc. A few of Beckford‟s informants were expelled for being “too
lazy,” insubordinate, or disruptive. Beckford's report of U.C. response to defectors matched
my own experience: “One was either a member in good standing or a defector ...the vast
majority [of defectors] sank immediately into oblivion from the movements point of view”
(Beckford, 1985, p. 159).
Beckford reported a variety of psychological stress symptoms among hi defector subjects,
including confusion, shame, guilt, frustration, boredom and extreme listlessness that often
lasted six months or longer. Immediately following their leave-taking “it was not uncommon
for them to sleep for more than twelve hours for several consecutive nights” (Beckford,
1985, pp. 162-163). These factors, among others, led Beckford to conclude that U.C.
defectors differed significantly from leave-takers from traditional, but nevertheless
demanding religious orders (e.g., nuns, priests and ranks):
The fact that ex-nuns, ex-priests and ex-Moonies all share the experience of
abandoning “high commitment roles” should not be allowed to conceal the
sharp differences between their respective experiences in other, possibly
more important, respects. (Beckford, 1985, p. 168)
Most of Beckford's (1985) nondeprogrammed subjects also described “floating” symptoms.
He concluded that “nearly all informants were troubled after leaving the U.C. by recurrent
nightmares and [other] psychic phenomena that included “hallucinations ...and out-of-
body experiences” (p. 164). Spiritual or paranormal experiences that had initially caused an
emotional “high” had, toward the end of their U.C. membership and lingering after
defection, become unpleasant and frightening. These defectors felt “burned out:”
An intriguing feature of the psychic experiences reported by ex- Moonies after
disengagement is that so many of them related to frightening or threatening
themes ...The persistence of unpleasant and frightening experiences with the