Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 14, No. 1, 1997, page 32
whatever) becomes synonymous with obeying the leader. To go against the leader‟s
directive is to go against God himself. The mother becomes psychologically trapped: she
wants to be a good person, but the definition of goodness resides entirely in the cult‟s
domain. And any attempt to define goodness for herself ensures swift condemnation and an
attack on her “faith.” This double bind often results in an almost unbearable tension.
An internal struggle takes place within the mother when asked to do something that her
noncult persona identifies as wrong. Anne discussed the incident where the cult leader took
her money for a phony adoption: “I was very uncomfortable when I gave him the money --
I felt that he was insincere. But then, I also thought that he was a true proletarian and
anything he did was good for my development. He just wouldn‟t do anything unprincipled.
He was this great political leader --and everything around me was reinforcing that belief.”
Or Jill talking about her reaction when her leader took her baby away: “I thought, „I don‟t
want to do this, but I will if that‟s what‟s best, if that‟s God‟s will.‟ The leader took the place
of God, so I thought he‟d only do what was best. To me, I needed Chrissie, but he said
otherwise.”
The mother may also go against her noncult self out of fear of the leader‟s or the group‟s
response. Helen describes an incident: “Once when my twins were less than a year old and
they were holding onto the hem of my skirt --it was in front of a whole group of people --
Brother told me over and over to kick them away, and first I just wiggled, but he insisted
that I kick them away and so, finally, I did. Even though it violated my sense of Mother, of
Human Being, of the notion of loving the Lord.”
Again, Clara describes the pressure:
If I had paid attention to all those occasions when everything inside of me said,
“No, this isn‟t right,” I couldn‟t have stayed there. If I had ...said, “I will not go
along with this,” first of all, it would have taken a kind of strength I don‟t know I
had at the time because everyone in the room [would be saying] “Clara, you want
to have dinner with your son? You‟re so selfish ...” I would have had to be willing
to stand there and have everyone in the room say “No.” (Deikman, 1990, p. 20)
Even though the mother may resist, eventually she must give in or leave the group. In
some cases, giving in results in a feeling of relief. Clara recounts:
I remember at one point saying, “I‟ll do it,” and everything got quiet around me
and the noise in my head stopped and I thought, “God, maybe that is right....” And
inside me I thought the quiet or sense of rightness means I‟m doing the right
thing. (Deikman, 1990, pp. 22-23)
The conflict of struggling against the cult can be so intense that giving in feels like a
resolution. This feeling is analogous to that of a battered woman: “In these relationships the
painful feelings of confusion, anxiety, and guilt that the victimized woman is led to feel are
all relieved when she simply “„gives in‟ and does what she is told. If she agrees ...she is, at
least briefly, „loved‟ by him. If not, she continues to be degraded, devalued, and maligned”
(Boulette &Anderson, 1986, p. 27).
What is particularly damaging in this process of giving in is the sense of positive feedback
from within yourself. It‟s as though you come to believe in the “rightness” of the decision
because of the relief that comes from resolving the conflict and removing the intense
pressure. At this point you can truly no longer trust your own feelings because those
feelings have, in a sense, been captured and turned against you. You have walked through
the looking-glass and can no longer trust your own innate sensations.
The mothers described those times when they made critical decisions involving their
children: Mary told how she thought “it was for the best” that she not see her children for 5

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 14, No. 1, 1997, page 33
years, saying, “I thought they‟d be harassed by the FBI --the FBI had already visited other
members of my family.”
When Laurel agreed to give up her disabled child she said, “J. needed the best chance in life
...and so I could let her go.”
Janie told me, “I wanted my son to have a happier life. But this was The Truth. It must have
been something wrong with me if I wanted to leave. It was God‟s will for us to be there. It
should have been the best thing for him, but all there was around us was hopelessness.”
Or Helen, whose children suffered considerable physical abuse: “Brother said it was the Holy
Way. He took so many liberties with my children and told me to consider it an honor.”
Rosanne Henry, who gave up her child to her cult leader, shared her story in Captive
Hearts, Captive Minds (Tobias &Lalich, 1994): “After two months of hell I finally agreed to
the plan. I remember the very moment when I flipped the switch. “„There is nothing greater
that I could do for my child than give her to the divine mother,‟ I thought” (p. 235).
What comes across in these stories is how the mothers felt that they were doing the best
thing for their children. Perhaps in this way mothers strive to reconcile the internal conflict
that is at work. They do, clearly, still love their children deeply. In that sense the bond
between mother and child remains intact.
For some mothers, however, their children represented a barrier to their complete
dedication to the cult. Jill (who, before joining the cult, imagined that she would be a “fun
and empathetic” mother) was often resentful of her young children when they made noise
during endless meetings with no child care. She felt that they were preventing her from
“knowing God,” as well as casting a bad light on her as a poor mother and, therefore, a
sinner. For Jill, the conflict was the double bind of having to be a perfect mother (in the
cult‟s view), yet having to give the cult 100% and so not having time or resources to
properly parent her children. She now feels that this strain had a severe impact on her bond
with her oldest child.
Sometimes a mother‟s acceptance of the cult‟s influence may reflect her own ambivalent
feelings about certain issues. In these cases, perhaps the cult involvement helps “resolve” a
difficulty for the mother.
For Mary, joining the cult and not seeing her children for 5 years resolved the intense
conflicts she felt toward her children, who had chosen to live with their father because of
Mary‟s lesbianism. She had felt alienated from her children and unable to participate
positively in rearing them. In joining the cult, she both regained an inner sense of meaning
lost to her when her children moved away, and removed herself from her painful role as
noncustodial parent.
In Laurel‟s case, the “recommendation” to give up her disabled child spoke to two issues for
her. First, she didn‟t love the child‟s father: “I could have made a commitment to go with
them if I had loved him.” Second, “If I were to leave [with the baby and father], I thought I
would have to stay home with J. and make her therapy my full-time career, while „Dave‟
would be an accountant and earn our living. I saw that as self-sacrifice and I didn‟t see
myself as that type of person.”
It would be important to further pursue the question of how mothers respond to this
fundamental internal conflict: between their own sense of what is right and the cult‟s
control. My observations lead me to see three different ways this conflict plays out:
The mother may continue to consciously disagree with the cult practices, but will give in
externally to resolve the pressure being applied on her. She carries within her, however, a
continuing, nagging sense that what she is being asked to do is wrong, even while she may