Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 1, 1991, Page 34
individual is totally isolated fosters regression and may impede the resident‟s ability to leave
the center. The underlying premise at the “cultic” residential treatment center is that
parents should be totally excluded from any participation in the treatment process. In this
context, parental objections toward any treatment decisions are deflected and dismissed.
As a result, the individual is denied contact with his or her biological family and the
residential treatment center becomes more than a “second-chance family” it becomes a
primary support system necessary to the individual‟s continuing survival.
Directors of residential treatment centers monitor the boundaries between the treatment
center and the external environment. Their activities alter the permeability of this boundary.
Ideally, directors should encourage the staff to obtain additional extramural training.
Inappropriate directors, however, may establish a climate in which the search for
extramural training is seen as a betrayal of the center‟s ethos. In this context, inappropriate
directors may create a collusive atmosphere between themselves and the staff, an
atmosphere in which they bond together against an ostensibly hostile outside world.
Directors may encourage staff members to change records (presumably to obtain funds
from recalcitrant sources or to “protect” residents). They may propagate the myth that only
they have sufficient ability and cunning to maneuver the staff and residents through the
impending shoals of financial or therapeutic disaster. These actions inevitably lead to the
director‟s self-aggrandizement and the formation of an increasingly isolated residential
treatment community with cultic overtones.
Mystical Manipulation
Cult groups may often claim to be imbued with a higher sense of purpose. They portray
themselves as members of an elite --the vanguard of a social or spiritual movement with a
mystical imperative, “the pursuit of which must supersede all considerations of decency or
of immediate human welfare” (Lifton, 1961, p. 422).
The goal of residential treatment is limited --the enhancement of personal autonomy. Yet,
both cults and residential treatment centers share a belief in the use of structure designed
to alter the human condition. They share a common discomfort with the dysfunctional
present and, by extension, a common vision of human perfectability. Hence, skillful
manipulators justify their rigid control over residents or followers and their cruel and/or
bizarre practices in the name of faith or of “therapeutic necessity.” Similarly, both residents
and followers are led to refocus their lives from a “pathological” past (or as some cults may
reframe it, a “satanic world”).
Isolation, sensory deprivation, and solitary confinement as forms of limit-setting, or the
reliance on self-revelation and public confession, are all rationalized as necessary sacrifices
along the road to Oz. These practices create a dramatic atmosphere that encourages
residents and staff to view the world in polarized terms. Polarization provides the incentive
for residents to forge increasingly symbiotic bonds between themselves and the director.
Indeed, in one case a group began to pray for the painful death of a recently departed
member. In such a polarized atmosphere, it is not surprising that other groups forestall
departures or stifle criticism by resorting to beatings and solitary confinement. (In Synanon,
for example, a rattlesnake was placed in a lawyer‟s mailbox to stifle his opposition.)
Demand for Purity
Cults portray a world divided into absolute good and absolute evil. Goodness is defined as
those ideas, feelings, and behavior consistent with the cult‟s totalist ideology (which may
reduce itself to the leader‟s whims of the moment). Anything done in the cult‟s name is
perceived as good and is therefore given moral validation. On the other hand, any thoughts
or actions that deviate from the group leader‟s wishes are viewed as inherently impure or
sinful. The individual who voices doubts about the group‟s ideology or actions is viewed as a
individual is totally isolated fosters regression and may impede the resident‟s ability to leave
the center. The underlying premise at the “cultic” residential treatment center is that
parents should be totally excluded from any participation in the treatment process. In this
context, parental objections toward any treatment decisions are deflected and dismissed.
As a result, the individual is denied contact with his or her biological family and the
residential treatment center becomes more than a “second-chance family” it becomes a
primary support system necessary to the individual‟s continuing survival.
Directors of residential treatment centers monitor the boundaries between the treatment
center and the external environment. Their activities alter the permeability of this boundary.
Ideally, directors should encourage the staff to obtain additional extramural training.
Inappropriate directors, however, may establish a climate in which the search for
extramural training is seen as a betrayal of the center‟s ethos. In this context, inappropriate
directors may create a collusive atmosphere between themselves and the staff, an
atmosphere in which they bond together against an ostensibly hostile outside world.
Directors may encourage staff members to change records (presumably to obtain funds
from recalcitrant sources or to “protect” residents). They may propagate the myth that only
they have sufficient ability and cunning to maneuver the staff and residents through the
impending shoals of financial or therapeutic disaster. These actions inevitably lead to the
director‟s self-aggrandizement and the formation of an increasingly isolated residential
treatment community with cultic overtones.
Mystical Manipulation
Cult groups may often claim to be imbued with a higher sense of purpose. They portray
themselves as members of an elite --the vanguard of a social or spiritual movement with a
mystical imperative, “the pursuit of which must supersede all considerations of decency or
of immediate human welfare” (Lifton, 1961, p. 422).
The goal of residential treatment is limited --the enhancement of personal autonomy. Yet,
both cults and residential treatment centers share a belief in the use of structure designed
to alter the human condition. They share a common discomfort with the dysfunctional
present and, by extension, a common vision of human perfectability. Hence, skillful
manipulators justify their rigid control over residents or followers and their cruel and/or
bizarre practices in the name of faith or of “therapeutic necessity.” Similarly, both residents
and followers are led to refocus their lives from a “pathological” past (or as some cults may
reframe it, a “satanic world”).
Isolation, sensory deprivation, and solitary confinement as forms of limit-setting, or the
reliance on self-revelation and public confession, are all rationalized as necessary sacrifices
along the road to Oz. These practices create a dramatic atmosphere that encourages
residents and staff to view the world in polarized terms. Polarization provides the incentive
for residents to forge increasingly symbiotic bonds between themselves and the director.
Indeed, in one case a group began to pray for the painful death of a recently departed
member. In such a polarized atmosphere, it is not surprising that other groups forestall
departures or stifle criticism by resorting to beatings and solitary confinement. (In Synanon,
for example, a rattlesnake was placed in a lawyer‟s mailbox to stifle his opposition.)
Demand for Purity
Cults portray a world divided into absolute good and absolute evil. Goodness is defined as
those ideas, feelings, and behavior consistent with the cult‟s totalist ideology (which may
reduce itself to the leader‟s whims of the moment). Anything done in the cult‟s name is
perceived as good and is therefore given moral validation. On the other hand, any thoughts
or actions that deviate from the group leader‟s wishes are viewed as inherently impure or
sinful. The individual who voices doubts about the group‟s ideology or actions is viewed as a
