Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 9, No. 2, 1992, Page 4
making them compliant servants, depriving them of independent judgment, separating them
from family and friends, and exploiting them financially and otherwise. These practices
challenge respect for individual autonomy which is a fundamental value in Western culture
and, as such, is a touchstone of ethical codes in all professions.
The first analysis of a group termed a “psychotherapy cult” was provided by Bainbridge
(1978). In Satan’s Power: A Deviant Psychotherapy Cult, he chronicled the evolution of a
group that began by providing low-cost mental health services and evolved over 12 years into
a fringe religious movement. Temerlin and Temerlin (1982, 1986) provided the first critical
analysis of the practices of several groups. Their synthesis of characteristic practices and
ethos was based on their clinical work with former members of five different groups that they
described as psychotherapy cults. Hochman (1984) outlined the theory, practices, and
casualties of a group in California that he referred to as a “therapy cult.” Ayella (1985) wrote
a doctoral dissertation analyzing the practices of the same group and comparing them to
other groups that she identified as psychotherapy cults.
The essential characteristics of these groups were described variously. Appel wrote that
“therapeutic cults frame the salvation they offer in psychological terms, as personal liberation
or cure” (1983, p. 19). The Temerlins summarized their analyses in the following way:
These cults were an iatrogenic perversion of therapy because the character problems
their patients brought to therapy were not worked through, but were replaced in
consciousness by a “true believing” acceptance of their therapists‟ theories, selfless
devotion to their therapists‟ welfare, unrecognized depression, and paranoid attitudes
toward nonbelieving professionals. (Temerlin &Temerlin, 1982, p. 132)
Based on the descriptions available, the central features of the groups whose practices are
under scrutiny here can be defined in at least a minimal way. They include (a) the use of
psychotherapy language and concepts to offer help (b) a predominant emphasis on working
in a group (c) the appearance and claim of competent professional leadership (d) the
elevation of a leader to charismatic status and idealization by members (e) self-sacrifice by
members on behalf of the leader and group (f) the development of a strong group identity
that separates them from other associations, groups, and professionals and (g) the develop-
ment of strong pressures for conformity and submission to the norms and practices of the
group.
Method
Existing studies of groups described by their observers as psychotherapy cults vary from
ethnographic analyses to journalistic accounts. Their lack of a common framework of analysis
limits comparisons and generalizations. For this study, we used eight categories of conduct in
mental health practice that are cited in ethical codes or derive from them (American
Psychological Association, 1989 Association for Specialists in Group Work, 1983 Corey,
Corey, &Callahan, 1988 Keith-Spiegel &Koocher, 1985). These categories include
confidentiality, dual relationships, informed consent, professional competency, dependency
and autonomy, financial practices, professional development, and separation/termination. In
each of these categories accepted standards of behavior are first compared with deviations
frequently cited in the literature on individual and group therapy then, practices reported in
the literature on groups described as psychotherapy cults are identified and briefly discussed.
Evidence about the conduct of these groups in each area under scrutiny was drawn from
information available in both popular and professional publications on three extinct groups
that have been labeled as psychotherapy cults. They are Synanon, Center for Feeling
Therapy, and Compulsions Analysis. In addition, written material on another group currently
operating has been analyzed. The post-hoc, second-hand analyses of five groups provided by
Temerlin and Temerlin (1982, 1986) were used. Further evidence was drawn from

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 9, No. 2, 1992, Page 5
observations and interviews conducted by the first author with members of another group
(Boland, 1989). The evidence and comparisons across categories of behavior are then
succinctly described. A summary of the information is presented in Table 1 at the end of the
article.
Analyses by Category
Confidentiality
Maintaining confidentiality of client disclosures and safeguarding the privacy of clients are
fundamental standards of conduct across helping professions (APA, 1989 ASGW, 1983
National Association of Social Workers, 1990). Both are backed by social sanctions and legal
protections. In group therapies, special problems of defining and maintaining confidentiality
arise (Kottler, 1982 Lakin, 1986 Roberts, 1982). Common violations include disclosures of
confidential information to outsiders by therapists and group members, discussions of
confidential information among group members outside the group, unauthorized disclosures
of client information to other social service workers and professionals, and “leaks” of
confidential information from individual therapy sessions to group therapy sessions.
Related but distinct issues arise regarding the extent of personal disclosure encouraged or
demanded in individual and group therapy. In group therapy the risks of embarrassment,
rejection, and vulnerability to severe pressures are much greater though they can also exist in
individual psychotherapy. An excessive emphasis on openness can increase this vulnerability.
Therapists, especially those working with groups, are expected to maintain a balance between
encouraging client self-disclosure and providing protection against pressures or tendencies to
engage in too much revelation of personal secrets (Lakin, 1986).
The evidence available indicates that groups labeled as psychotherapy cults violate these
guidelines routinely and pervasively. Observers report that leaders and group members
routinely discuss personal information gathered in both group and individual therapy sessions
with each other and with noninvolved persons (Boland, 1989). These disclosures are reported
to often include information about the leader‟s personal life as well as that of members
(Ofshe, 1976 Temerlin &Temerlin, 1982). This freedom has been described by Ayella (1985)
as attractive, but it has also been described as a source of surveillance (Conason &
McGarrahan, 1986) and the basis for threats of blackmail against an alienated member
(Black, 1975).
Group dynamics are utilized to ensure that the private is made public (Ayella, 1985). The
leader and other group members expect total “openness” or access into all parts of clients‟
lives, and sometimes those of leaders as well (Boland, 1989 Ofshe, 1976 Temerlin &
Temerlin, 1986). This openness then leads to efforts to exert wide areas of control over the
attitudes and behavior of members. Behavior that is not compliant is often viewed as
resistance or a sign of character flaws (Ayella, 1985 Ofshe, 1976 Temerlin &Temerlin,
1982). These behaviors are then targets of “therapy,” with the goal being that the member
would surrender the identified deviance and adhere to group norms (Ofshe, 1976).
Dual Relationships
Ethical codes in mental health professions urge that business, professional, social, or sexual
relationships with clients be avoided (APA, 1989 ASGW, 1983). Clients are to be protected
from having other aspects of their lives affected by the private knowledge gained by a
therapist or therapy group. Therapists are to avoid such conditions so that they do not
develop personal interests that would compromise their commitment to their clients‟
therapeutic welfare.
More complications arise in avoiding harmful dual relationships among group therapy clients