This issue raises the following questions: On what basis does the group or leader claim authority? Are other authorities recognized as equal and/or of similar importance? Can the group or leader’s authority be questioned? What is the process for such questioning? Can specific examples be given of such questions being raised? Is the group or leader’s authority somehow reinforced by a higher power? Is questioning the group or leader’s authority tantamount to questioning that higher power? What distinctions does the group or leader make regarding a separation of authority concerning such a higher power? Is any authority outside the group given equal weight and importance? What examples can be given to show a sense of equal or recognized authority outside the group?
6. “Scarcity,” Cialdini says, is when “we see that a less-available item is more desired and valued.”757 If cult members are told, Singer says, that without the group they will miss out on living life without stress; miss out on attaining cosmic awareness and bliss; miss out on changing the world; miss out on gaining the ability to travel back in time or whatever the group offers, that benefit is tailored to seem essential. The group may also exemplify this rule by claiming exclusivity; in other words, no other group exists that can offer the same or equal path of fulfillment.
This principle forms the basis for the following questions: Has the group or leader ever mentioned another path of fulfillment that is considered equal? If so, what is the precise name or identity of the group or leader that offers this alternative path? Does the leader or group denigrate anyone or anything outside the group that might offer an alternate approach or path to problem solving or fulfillment?
During this segment of discussion about coercive persuasion, undue influence techniques, and group behavior, it may be useful to review whatever published material or documentation exists about the group or leader. This might include official literature, website pages, message board posts, and video or audio presentations available online, including whatever examples exist that can be specifically credited to the group or leader and then used to demonstrate various discussion points.
Third Block of Discussion: What Is the Specific History of the Group or Leader?
At this point the specific history of the group or leader who has caused concern is closely examined. This may include information that has been gathered through research, a private investigation, or readily accessible documentation. In some situations those who are concerned have retained the services of a private investigator to develop a comprehensive file of information about a group or leader. Many prefer the more cost-effective alternative of gathering information themselves by accessing public records such as court documents, previously published news articles, and disclosure documents possibly filed with the relevant authorities. Easy access to the World Wide Web may provide information through various searched resources, which are readily available online.
Some groups or leaders may have a history that includes criminal prosecution and/or litigation—for example, the criminal tax-fraud conviction and subsequent incarceration of Rev. Sun Myung Moon.758 In some situations there may have been a group member or leader who was professionally disciplined. This might be reflected in public records of someone such as a licensed professional with a history of complaints, a disciplinary record, or a suspension. Former members of the group may have filed lawsuits, and there may also be evidence of family estrangement or abuse through divorce or child-custody filings.
Corporate records may also disclose the finances of the group or leader. Such disclosure may be required if the group has tax-exempt, nonprofit status or is incorporated. Filing requirements vary, but some documents may be on file. These documents might detail, to some extent, the group’s finances, general structure or delegation, and administration of authority. For example, a controversial group known as Eternal Flame disclosed in its corporate filings that about half of the more than $1 million collected in annual revenue from its supporters was spent on generous salaries and compensation. This included a $52,000-a-year housing allowance and use of a Cadillac and Land Rover for its three leaders.759
There may be evidence of alleged abuse, which one may see through publicly posted testimonies available at websites that are critical of the group or leader. This might include online video recordings former members made about the group or leader. For example, the personal accounts of past members of the Children of God detail childhood sexual abuse.760 There may be legal PDF documents posted or related public records. Abuse allegations corroborated by historical documentation, such as public records and press reports, typically gain greater credibility and importance than those allegations made without such supporting material.
Another facet of the group’s relative status and wealth might potentially be discerned through a review of real estate records. This may specifically reveal what property the group or leader owns and has progressively accumulated over a period of time. The value of those properties can also be deduced from recorded tax assessments and mortgage liens. For example, the homes Falun Gong founder Li Hongzhi purchased in New Jersey and New York represented a combined value approaching $1 million.761
All this background information can be used to construct a picture of the group or leader based on historical documentation. When reviewing this history, one should ask specifically relevant questions. What does the objective evidence indicate either negatively or positively about the group or leader? Does this evidence seem to expose a consistent pattern of behavior? Has the group or leader in some way been deceptive or intentionally misleading? Do the facts somehow contradict the popular or preferred image of the group or leader? Have events occurred that the group or leader might have deliberately slanted, falsely interpreted, or propagandized?
The discussion should also focus on how those present at the intervention view the gathered information. Those involved may add additional important firsthand impressions about what they see as noteworthy about the group or leader’s historical record.
This process offers the cult member a unique opportunity to evaluate and critically examine the group and its history outside what may have been a largely controlled environment. Much of the information reviewed might otherwise be either unknown or somehow obscured by the group or leader to avoid or obfuscate its significance or importance. This cult member may also be exposed to various perspectives regarding the assembled information.
Fourth Block of Discussion: What Are the family’s Specific Concerns?
At this juncture family members and those concerned may express why they feel the intervention was necessary and important. They explain in detail, based on their firsthand observations, why involvement with the group seems to be problematic and potentially unsafe or even dangerous.
Evidence might include medical neglect, sexual abuse, child abuse and neglect, suspected psychological and emotional damage, criminal conduct, financial exploitation, diminished and increasingly strained communication, escalating isolation, and substandard living conditions. Each person participating in the intervention has an opportunity to present his or her personal point of view and general perspective. This may include both anecdotal examples as well as concerns motivated by gathered historical information. This is often the most volatile, difficult, and emotional phase of the intervention.
My role through this process is to keep the discussion focused but with an appropriate level of flexibility. This might include focusing attention on how the cultic group may have caused, contributed to, and/or exacerbated certain personal problems or situations. All those present express their concerns regarding such issues as personal safety, quality of life, family relations, and reasonable expectations for the future. Those present may feel a sense of special urgency due to particular recent events tied to cult involvement. For example, there might be an anticipated marital separation or divorce, critical child custody or visitation dispute, expected bankruptcy or business failure, closely related criminal prosecution, or a serious illness that is not being prope
rly treated.
This difficult part of the intervention and must be carefully moderated. Everyone present has been prepared by setting guidelines for this portion of the discussion during the previous preparation process. That is, no one should become punitive, angry, or needlessly emotional or confrontational. Instead, participants are encouraged to stay focused on the facts and connect their concerns to the well-documented details about the group or leader. Everyone is also encouraged to be both candid and precise about his or her concerns while also on balance expressing his or her continuing love and support. Every opportunity is afforded to allow the cult-involved individual a response to each concern. It is crucial for those concerned to participate meaningfully, and everything must be done to encourage that participation within the boundaries previously discussed during the preparation phase.
Conclusion
As the intervention ends, there should be a review of what has been learned, including the major points of exchange regarding certain concerns. Again this would focus first on the definition of a destructive cult and on how the group in question fits that profile. Second is how the group or leader used specifically identified coercive persuasion techniques to gain undue influence. Third is what we have learned about the particular history of the group or leader and how that demonstrates that further involvement poses a risk and is potentially unsafe, if not dangerous. Finally are the serious concerns that made family and old friends increasingly uncomfortable and ultimately led to the intervention.
At this juncture it isn’t necessary for the cult-involved person to make a definitive statement about future involvement with the group or leader. Rather what can be reasonably expected is a commitment to take a break from the group and to think things over more independently. This means thinking things through without any coaching or influence exerted by anyone connected to the group or leader. This process might also include seeking additional input from a professional counselor, lawyer, or consultant who has a particularly relevant and helpful expertise. The impetus behind this commitment should be to prioritize the needed time to further understand the reasons family and friends are so concerned about the group or leader.
There may be agreed-on specific appointments made with a medical doctor, lawyer, or helping professional. Changes may also be made in living arrangements, in regard to group involvement, such as moving out of group housing or out of a living situation with another group member to establish greater independence. Everything should be focused on increasing relative independence and decreasing dependence on the group or leader.
CHAPTER 11
BIBLE-BASED GROUP INTERVENTION
A young professional and married mother with small children became involved with an online religious group essentially based on the World Wide Web. For the purpose of this chapter, the group will be identified simply as the Call of God. This small, web-based group included only about twenty to thirty active members, who were recruited and communicated almost entirely through the Internet.
The leader of the group claims he receives revelation directly from God. These revelations are then relayed to the world in the form of “letters from God,” which are then archived and downloaded through a group website. Group members maintain cohesiveness through daily communication, but they stay in touch with each other by using online resources, such as Internet conferencing services, frequent e-mails, and text messages. Personal physical contact most often hasn’t occurred between the leader and most of his followers.
Those in the core of the Call of God—its most significant and sustaining supporters—are primarily located in North America and Australia. The leader lives in the United States. Contributions to the group are made online through the group website. People generally learn about the Call of God through the same site, and that is also the means of initial contact.
Web-Based “Cult” Groups
Groups called “cults” that use the World Wide Web for the recruitment and retention of members have become increasingly common. Two examples of other groups called “cults” that are essentially web based are Divine Truth, led by Alan John “A.J.” Miller in Australia; and the Fellowship of the Martyrs (FOTM), founded by Doug Perry in the United States.
Miller claims to be Jesus reincarnated and says his partner, a young woman named Mary Luck, is actually the reincarnation of the biblical Mary Magdalene, who witnessed the crucifixion of Jesus. Miller has developed a residential complex of properties near Kingaroy, west of Queensland‘s Sunshine Coast in Australia, where reportedly thirty to forty of his devotees relocated by 2011.762
Doug Perry leads FOTM from Liberty, Missouri, near Kansas City. About seventy members of FOTM live in shared apartments in the same neighborhood.763 Perry also seems to believe that God speaks through him to the world.
Both FOTM and Divine Truth heavily rely on the World Wide Web to recruit new members and raise money. Miller has downloads, and Perry has audiobooks. Both men also use YouTube.com to broadcast their teachings. Perry has accumulated a collection of more than nine hundred videos available online. Miller and Perry often make disparaging remarks about other organized religious groups, apparently implying that they alone possess the complete and uncorrupted truth.
The young mother I worked with had been a member of Call of God for two years before her husband and family contacted me. They became concerned when she announced she would no longer communicate with her parents or sibling due to the undue influence of her group. Her marriage was becoming increasingly strained, though she still lived at home with her husband. He wasn’t a member of the group and had repeatedly refused to become involved. The young woman’s parents retained me to do an intervention, a choice the woman’s husband strongly supported.
I received quite a bit of information from the family through an intake questionnaire and file they had prepared about the group. The father did considerable investigation through public records about the leader’s business concerns and assets. I also assembled a file largely based on the Call of God website, which included printouts of various material of interest archived there; I highlighted and noted much of this.
Preparation Meeting
When we met for the preparation meeting before the intervention, we compared our respective files and discussed family concerns in more detail. The preparation meeting included the young woman’s parents, her sibling, her sibling’s spouse, and her husband. As in all such preparation meetings, we discussed the parameters of our respective roles and what we could reasonably expect.
I emphasized how important it would be to stay focused on the group, its leader, and related behavior, rather than to be drawn into any sort of religious debate. It is important in interventions to stay focused, not allowing the discussion to drift into extraneous concerns that are not immediately relevant. The dialogue must remain tightly focused on the behavior of the group and leader and why there was concern. When people discuss a religious cult, certain beliefs or teachings may come up, but they should be discussed only as they specifically relate to the group’s behavior and its pattern of manipulation to gain undue influence.
During the preparation meeting we also talked about how important it would be to temporarily interrupt the group’s influence by shutting down all means of communication with them during the intervention. We would accomplish this by turning off and storing all cell phones and terminating all Internet connections. We rehearsed how this step would be taken and agreed that it must be accomplished by the end of the first day.
The young woman would be asked to promise that she wouldn’t communicate with the cultic group or anyone associated with the group until the intervention was over. This commitment would encompass the few days when the intervention would take place. I also asked the parents whether it would be possible for her to stay at their home during the intervention so there would be no distractions and so there would be confidence that all means of communication she might use remained shut down. Her husband agreed that this would be best.<
br />
Before the intervention began, I suggested that once we had the young woman’s agreement about outside communication, the mother would politely ask for her cell phone. It would then be locked up, assuring everyone that she couldn’t use it during the intervention to contact the cult group. These precautions would be taken to rule out any coaching or interference from the leader or group members, who might otherwise seek to sabotage the intervention effort.
The Beginning of the Intervention
On the following day the young woman arrived at her parents’ home for a special, planned visit. Her parents had pleaded with her that a meeting was necessary so they could better understand the reasoning behind her recently announced decision to cut them off. She expected to share her beliefs and explain to them more about the Call of God. During our preparation for the intervention, we had discussed how such a meeting would provide the necessary and important initial access for them to begin the intervention.
My presence at the meeting was a complete surprise. The young woman also didn’t expect her sibling and her sibling’s spouse to be there. But everyone had gathered together with her husband’s full knowledge and cooperation. The couple’s small children had been placed with a caregiver. As agreed, pending her arrival, all phones and Internet access in the family’s home were disconnected. She was polite but confused about the purpose of my presence and why others she hadn’t expected to see were also present.
Her parents quickly introduced me as a professional consultant they had invited to attend the meeting. They explained that much of what had happened regarding the Call of God was confusing to them, so they had sought outside assistance from an expert consultant. I apologized for the surprise meeting but explained that I had advised the family not to tell her about my inclusion or about others attending the meeting to ensure there would be no interference or coaching by anyone associated with the group. She accepted this apology.
Cults Inside Out: How People Get in and Can Get Out Page 28