This specialist article is intended for colleagues who, as part of their professional work in the field of psychosocial care, come into contact with so-called ‘cult children’ as part of their professional work in the field of psychosocial care. It is intended to help them better understand those affected, perhaps identify them at an earlier stage and provide targeted support. Right from the start – before the so-called ‘cult child’ has finally found their own words to describe life and the dynamics within the cult that once shaped them.

‘The tolerance enshrined in Article 4 of the German Basic Law is not boundless. Parents do not have the right to turn their child into an instrument and object of their religious beliefs, thereby severely curtailing the child’s opportunities for development. This also applies to cults which, by their very nature, impair the children’s personal development.” (J.v. Staudinger, 1996)

We have been hearing and reading about so-called sects and cults, new religious movements, esoteric groups, guru movements, psycho-cults, conspiracy theorists, ‘Reich citizens’, neo-Nazis, totalitarian value-based communities, radicalisation tendencies and so on for some time now. And this has become increasingly frequent in recent years. The fact that these communities and largely closed systems consist of individual people – of individuals – usually escapes public perception. And the fact that, over the decades, children have been and continue to be born into these communities was completely ignored for a long time. Who are these ‘children born into them’, these so-called ‘sect children’, who have been socialised within the rigid and totalitarian value system of their parents? And above all: what do these so-called ‘cult children’ need if they should one day decide to leave the small (supposedly good and safe, monocausal) world of their parents and kindred spirits and step into a vast (supposedly evil and unsafe, multicausal) world, in which there cannot and need not be an answer to every question?

This is an attempt to address the extremely complex issue of professional support for so-called ‘cult children’ or ‘second- or third-generation cult members’ ‘second/third generation (SGA)’’. By now, more than a third of my clients are former members born into such communities – courageous and brave, often young people who have left everything they once knew behind to start afresh. These are individuals who, from a very young age, had to learn that they always came second and received no protection from their parents. For their parents, the top priority was always their God, the guru, the ideology, the mission, numerous rules and a high degree of obedience.

What unites all those who have left is a long-standing experience of manipulation and psychological abuse at the hands of a master or their parents, and a sense of grief, sometimes anger, disappointment, helplessness and disorientation following their departure from what was once the centre of their lives within the cult. After leaving such a community of shared values, people search intensely for explanations for what has happened. They want – and need – to understand what actually took place within this group, why they themselves remained an active part of it for so long (despite recurring doubts), why they left, and finally, how their own life can and should now continue without their family, their brothers and sisters in spirit, and without the faith that once served as their spiritual home.

The welfare and rights of children must certainly not end where religious freedom begins. Nevertheless, it remains very difficult to determine where and from when a risk to the child’s welfare arises in so-called sects, cults and new religious communities. (see Appendix 1). In the recent past, reports on the ‘Children of Lonnerstadt’ and the ‘12 Tribes’.

Triggered by a WDR feature in October 2012 on the programme ‘Menschen hautnah’ about the “Lonnerstadt cult children”, a wave of outrage swept across the country. The programme clearly showed the extremely strict conditions under which these children were forced to live. Well over 2,000 people discussed the issue on various social media platforms at the time, organised vigils outside the children’s home and that of the guru, and submitted petitions to the relevant district administrator and the local youth welfare office. Several TV reports and numerous newspaper articles followed. A family psychology assessment was commissioned at the end of 2012 to determine whether the children’s welfare was indeed at risk. The outcome of this assessment ultimately led, in July 2013, to the children being taken into care by the youth welfare office and the parents’ custody rights being restricted. Since then, the children have been placed in a children’s home.1

As a result of this placement, the children were finally removed from the religious-esoteric sphere of influence of the guru and the ‘New Group of World Servers’. They were finally allowed to sleep in, no longer had to meditate early in the morning, and were no longer subjected to the daily rituals and numerous rules imposed by their parents and their guru. The parents, who remained devoted to the guru at the time, were allowed to visit their children regularly at the care home, and after some time the children were also permitted, at their own request, to spend weekends with their parents again. In the meantime, the children have also been returned to their family of origin. In August 2014, the guru and his partner were sentenced to three years’ imprisonment by the Nuremberg/Fürth Regional Court for the mistreatment of persons in their care. Both lodged an appeal, which was dismissed by the Federal Court of Justice in Karlsruhe in August 2015. Having served two-thirds of their sentences, both have now been released on parole since the summer of 2018.

Thanks to the efforts of an investigative journalist who carried out undercover research within the ‘12 Tribes’ community, the allegations of child abuse were substantiated. The ‘RTL-Extra’ report from September 2013 led to around 40 children being taken into care and the withdrawal of parental responsibility. Even before this large-scale operation took place, foster families and children’s homes had been organised to take in these children.

I first met the founders of the German ‘12 Tribes’ community in 1979 in Winnenden, near Stuttgart. From Baden-Württemberg, they later moved – in search of a suitable place to live – to Sus in the south of France, the so-called ‘Tabitha’s Place’. In October 1986, I went undercover there for a few days (on behalf of affected and concerned parents) to find out more about the background to this Christian fundamentalist community. The children I met in Sus at that time are now the parents whose children were taken into care in 2013.

Experience of working with so-called ‘cult children’ born into such communities

Quotes from those who have left:

“…They lied to me so much. People out there aren’t bad at all…”

“…I’m completely surprised at how nice all the people in the outside world are. I didn’t expect that…”

“…I feel as though I’ve landed here from another planet….

“…I always feel like an alien here….

“…How do you make friends? How do you go about it?

“…What do I talk about when I’m invited out…?

“…How can I learn to argue…?

“…I’m ashamed of my past….

“…I want to finally be myself and feel that I’m worth something…

“…Someone told me they like me just the way I am. That really blew me away….

“…My boss praised me today. I found that very awkward. I suppose he was just trying to be nice….

“…Who and what can I even believe in anymore…?”

“…I always thought I was on my own and that nobody understood me. But now I know that lots of people have been through similar experiences. That helps me ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….”

Guilt and fear

To maintain the cult’s internal dynamics and ensure that day-to-day cult life runs smoothly, it is essential to keep the emotions of guilt and fear alive. A so-called ‘cult child’ constantly feels that they are not doing enough for the one and only truth – for example, not proselytising, believing, reading, praying, meditating or chanting enough – and thus finds themselves in a kind of debt of obligation, combined with a latent sense of guilt towards the relevant authority. The member is constantly striving to think and feel the ‘right’ things and, in accordance with the cult’s ideology, to act ‘correctly’ as well. Over time, a genuine fear of making ‘mistakes’ develops. The person is constantly striving – 24 hours a day – to be and become someone other than who they actually are and who they actually perceive themselves to be. This creates a tension and a conflict that is difficult to bear in the long run. As a result, however, the member remains easily influenced and manipulated by the authorities in their day-to-day life within the cult. For it is impossible ever to truly achieve the goal and promise of salvation defined by the leader.

Feelings of guilt are therefore the constant companions of a so-called ‘cult child’.

Fear of leaving

Nevertheless, the so-called ‘cult child’ feels chosen by a higher power (God, providence, karma, fate) and regarded as part of an elite destined for such a lofty goal as the salvation of our world. At least, this is what they have been told from an early age. This feeling or conviction is coupled with the systematic development of what is known as exit phobia. Time and again, they are made to believe that terrible events (illness, accidents, depression, death) would occur if a member were to leave the group.

Leaving such a community is always a dramatic process, accompanied by fear, uncertainty, self-reproach and despair. In this way, the underlying message is always present: ‘If you leave us, you are turning your back on God, you are damned and lost, and you will die a spiritual death’. For a so-called ‘cult child’ born into the group , leaving the group means not only turning their back on what was once their spiritual home and ideology, but also, as a result of this step, the person leaving usually loses their parents and their entire family of origin. At first, this is an unimaginably painful free fall that absolutely must be supported and cushioned. And in this initial phase following the departure and the simultaneous new beginning, the person who has left repeatedly finds themselves thinking: ‘What if they were right after all and I’ve made the wrong decision?’ (see Appendix 2).

US and THEM – In and Out

People who join a so-called sect or cult on the basis of their own experiences and life events have a clear advantage over those born into it – the so-called ‘sect children’ – because, should they leave, they can draw on many years of life lived outside the cult and, thanks to these lived experiences, are able to compare, weigh things up and change their perspective more easily. They truly know ‘THE CULT’ and the ‘outside world’ (the world surrounding the cult and defined by it as hostile). They therefore know that not everything told within the cult is actually true. In other words, they have gained cognitive points of comparison and experiences both within and after the cult, which can help them to understand better, to distance themselves internally and to weigh things up.

A person born into the cult – a so-called ‘cult child’ – simply lacks this ability and capacity to compare, because they were socialised exclusively within the cult context, that is, ‘inside’ a collective reality (where everything is good and right) and shaped by the consciousness of a single ‘WE’ (a sanctified collective, a chosen elite). This also results in an all-encompassing, all-explaining collective identity, but unfortunately less of a personally felt and experienced sense of self.

Family (and a secure attachment), religiosity and faith can certainly act as supportive and protective factors in a person’s resilience. But what, then, sustains the resilience of a ‘cult child’ who has left, when precisely these factors have been completely lost as a result of leaving the cult? Which supportive and protective factors are, or will become, viable and prove helpful?

There is hardly any of these religious or spiritual communities and their closed systems that allow their children to play with other (non-believing) peers, take part in club activities or even form friendships with those who hold different views – experiences in which children would acquire skills such as social competence. Socially competent behaviour is understood to include, for example, being able to say ‘no’, expressing dissent, openly showing emotions, apologising, giving compliments and also accepting compliments oneself, etc. (from Hinsch & Pfingsten (GSK), 1998).

Those who have been born into a cult and have since left must relearn many things – which seem self-evident to us – completely from scratch. For example, within the cult they have not learnt to deal with conflicts, are unable to argue, and often do not know how to make casual contact with other people or even form friendships. Initially, they have virtually nothing in common with these people in this world, which is now a new experience for them. They were not allowed to develop any hobbies or interests in areas such as art, sport, culture or literature. They are deeply afraid of making mistakes, shy away from taking risks, often feel out of place and are constantly preoccupied with doing everything ‘right’. But who tells them now – after leaving the cult – what is ‘right’ and what is ‘wrong’? Where is their ‘locus of control’? Where is their sense of self and their confidence in it?

Self-esteem and so-called ‘cult children’

In my observation, many of the causes of the particular problems faced by those born into such communities who have left – so-called ‘cult children’ – lie quite simply in their lack of, or near-absence of, self-worth.

From birth, their sense of self-worth stemmed exclusively from the collective, an ideology and the ‘WE’ of the group. Personal development towards a familiar sense of one’s own identity is extremely difficult to achieve within these closed belief systems. Many factors that help to establish and shape identity are simply not permitted in such groups, or are frowned upon, or defined as satanic/demonic and subject to negative sanctions.

A kind of ‘psychosocial moratorium’ (according to Erikson E. H., 1966), during which one is permitted to seek, try out and experiment between childhood and adult identity in order to perceive oneself and one’s limits in a wide variety of situations, to test one’s own actions and to develop one’s own identity, is only possible to a very limited extent in cults due to their selfimposed or enforced withdrawal from this world of ours and the collective identity that goes hand in hand with it.

As a rule, self-esteem is fostered when one attributes personal success to internal factors and failure to external ones, or allows for a mixture of both (locus of control, Rotter (1966)).

In cults, a healthy and stable development of self-esteem is hardly possible, because success is generally attributed to external factors and failure is consistently attributed to internal ones.

In other words, the exact opposite of conventional attribution takes place.

Here, personal success is usually explained as the grace or will of a god, e.g. Jehovah, a being, energetic providence, fate, etc. – in other words, external to oneself.

Anything else would be negatively sanctioned by the cult as pride, arrogance, selfishness, a lack of humility, etc., because the prevailing tendency in such communities is always: ‘The honour belongs to God/Energy/the Master/Jehovah, etc.’.

In the event of failure, however, the blame always lies with oneself. In other words, it is internal – within myself. This principle of attribution experienced within the cult also contributes significantly to so-called ‘cult children’ becoming immune to praise from outside (and inside). In my experience with this client group, a sort of personal firewall developed within the cult that consistently shields them from any potential praise. (After all, they learnt at an early age to immunise themselves against external criticism, for example).

Those who were born into the cult and have since left – so-called ‘cult children’ – hear and register potential praise (e.g. in the workplace) and immediately compress it into a sort of zip file. However, they are not (yet) able to unzip it in order to make it fruitful for themselves and their lives. Fruitful, supportive and protective in the sense of resilience.

The reason for this is undoubtedly the taboo learnt within the cult: the prohibition against perceiving oneself as something special, unique and valuable, and against ‘giving oneself credit’ when things go well and success is achieved. This inevitably leads to an important focus in working with so-called ‘cult children’, which will be discussed further below in Stage III (Three -stage model for so-called ‘cult children’) is discussed below.

Support for cult leavers

Over the course of my more than 35 years’ work with cult members, those leaving cults and -leavers and their families, I have succeeded in developing various cross-methodological and theme-centred models, seminars and psychotherapeutic methods that are tailored entirely to this specific clientele and the particular issues they face. I have learnt about and come to understand most of this – and for which I am very grateful – through my clients, and have developed it further on this basis.

Addressing the subject areas in a top-down approach, from Stage I to III, has proved effective for most cult members and those who have left. For those born into cults – so-called ‘cult children’, Stages I and II are extremely relevant in helping them to better articulate, understand and process their own cult experience. As a rule, they lack their own terminology, imagery and words to do this at the outset. However, processing can only take place if the unspeakable can be put into words and images, if feelings are allowed to be named, and if experiences within the cult thereby become comprehensible and manageable.3

Stage III, in the conventional sense, does not apply to them, however, because they were simply unable or not allowed to experience life outside the cult.

For this reason, over time I have modified Stage III of my three-stage model for so-called ‘cult children’ and adapted it to their specific needs.

It is particularly important for this group of clients to work together in a resource-oriented way to develop forward-looking approaches. The focus is on exploring (e.g. through role-play) and gaining an understanding Some helpful points to consider are:

• What enabled the so-called ‘cult child’ to leave the cult (and, as a direct
consequence, the family as well)?
• Which of their own resources were helpful or instrumental in this?
• Being allowed to feel self-worth and self-efficacy
• Learning the ability to see things from a different perspective
• Learning to understand the multiple causes involved
• Realistic perception of oneself and others
• Exercises that help build identity and shape personality
• Allowing oneself to be ‘I’
• Developing a distinct identity by embracing or allowing yourself to have ‘rough edges’
• Learning to say ‘no’
• Developing conflict management skills
• Allowing yourself to make your own mistakes
• Not seeing uncertainty as a threat, but as an opportunity
• Learning alternative ways of communicating within the family
• Dealing with fear and insecurity, guilt and sin in the context of cult
ideology
• Freedom and confidence to think for oneself
• Learning to take control of one’s own interpretation and understanding
• Understanding the attribution of success and failure
• Encouragement to pursue further education, vocational training and university studies of one’s own identity, being allowed to experiment and having to make ‘mistakes’, as well as addressing the question of where, how and with what this

A practical example

We all learn a great deal very quickly through observation, and often pictures really do speak louder than words. One of the many resources I use in my work with so-called ‘cult children’ is ‘ZOOM’, a picture book4 for children by Istvan Banyai (1995), in which a constantly shifting and astonishing change of perspective captivates the reader. With the help of this story, a change of perspective can be playfully encouraged among those leaving cults, and multi-causal thinking stimulated.

Quite a few of those who have left such groups initially felt deeply unsettled by this children’s book, ‘ZOOM’, and perceive the sequence of images as threatening and profoundly disharmonious. Could this be a possible consequence of living in a monocausal world, in which absolutely nothing was left to chance and there was an answer to every question? People who did not grow up in a totalitarian setting dictated by others – or who did not spend years of their lives in such an environment – but who were able to experience the diversity and multi-causality of life and the world, can enjoy this book and are happy to be enchanted by it.

Perhaps it really is the case, as the author of ‘ZOOM’ suggests, that ‘sometimes you see things more clearly and get closer to the heart of a matter when you take a step back’. After all, perhaps there can and should be many truths and realities?

Perhaps making a ‘mistake’ isn’t such a bad thing after all?

And perhaps a ‘right’ decision doesn’t always have to be made straight away? These are all questions, thoughts and considerations that leave most people born into so-called ‘cult families’ feeling deeply unsettled and threatened at the start of their journey out of the group. But perhaps sometimes all it takes is a little courage and curiosity about life and the world, and a supportive and trusting environment, to finally be able to make one’s own decisions with determination and without fear – and to learn to trust those decisions. (see Appendix 3).

WE and I?

Although many cults do indeed say, ‘Love your neighbour as yourself’, the second half of this saying was not really understood or internalised in this way by those born into cults, the so-called ‘cult children’. Many of those leaving the cult suffer from a form of ‘I’ disorder or ‘I’ weakness. Those born into the cult must embark on an arduous journey from the cult’s sole binding ‘WE’ (its collective reality and identity) towards their unique ‘I’, whilst at the same time engaging with many new ‘WE’s – some larger, some smaller, and often less binding – involving new people, new groups and opportunities in the most diverse situations in this, our world. In doing so, they learn to trust themselves and to trust that they will do things ‘right’. They begin to feel increasingly at ease and comfortable within the vague, the open, the colourful and the undefined, and to perceive all of this as less threatening and unsettling. This phase of life following departure is often initially associated with great fears and uncertainties. Everything feels unfamiliar at first.

But that’s only the first time.

True to the motto: ‘Not yet – not yet’, it is in the ‘yet’ that the opportunity, the adventure and the journey ahead lie.

And: the journey is well worth it!

Last but not least

In his song ‘N’Oubliez Jamais’ (1997), the British rock and blues singer Joe Cocker beautifully expressed the ‘need for disobedience and dissent’ by singing:

‘…N’Oubliez Jamais
I Heard My Father Say Every
Generation Has Its Way
A Need To Disobey.
N’Oubliez Jamais
It’s in your destiny
A need to disagree …”.

These or similar phrases or songs were probably not something so-called ‘cult children’ heard from their parents. Because obedience came first. But in order to be true to oneself – or to become so – one sometimes has to learn to be ‘disobedient’, to set boundaries and also to ‘disagree’. I wish all so-called ‘cult children’ a safe journey, and especially the ‘children of Lonnerstadt’ and those of the ‘12 Tribes’.

Bibliography:

Banyai Istvan (1995): Zoom, Patmos Verlag Sauerländer

Bluhm, Helmar (2003): Cults and Psychogroups, in: Newsletter 5, Bavarian State Youth Welfare Office, Munich

Cregan, Jim (1997): N’Oubliez Jamais, Joe Cocker, EMI – Electrola

DGPPN, Position Paper (12/2016). Religiosity and Spirituality in Psychiatry and Psychotherapy

Egg, Marit (2005): Despite Faith: Reports on Growing Up in Isolated Religious Communities, Redd Barna, Oslo

Erikson, Erik H. (1966): Identity and the Life Cycle, Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am Main

Flammer, August (1988). Theories of Development, Huber, Stuttgart

Hempelmann, Reinhard (ed.) (2013). Between Conformity and Emancipation, EZW Texts 225

Hinsch, Rüdiger & Pfingsten, Ulrich (1998). Group Training in Social Skills (GSK), Psychologie Verlags Union, Weinheim

Kindler, Heinz & Lillig, Susanna et al. (eds.) (2006). Handbook on Child Welfare Risks, German Youth Institute, Munich

Lalich, Janja (2016). Preliminary Research Findings on Children in Cults, California State University, Chico

Langone, Michael D. (ed.) (1993): Recovery From Cults, W. W. Norton, New York, London

Rohmann, Dieter (2000): A description of psychotherapeutic work with cult members and those who have left them based on a three-stage model, in: Report Psychologie 5–6, 356–359

Rohmann, Dieter (2000): Everyone Has Their Own Cult, in: Psychologie Heute, 8/2000

Rohmann, Dieter (2002): Of Giants and Dwarfs, in: Wege zum Menschen 2, 105–113

Rohmann, Dieter (2017): Psychological Counselling Services and Experiences, in: EZW Materialdienst, 2/2017, 45–53

Rohmann, Dieter (2018): ‘Return’, in: Interventionen. Journal of Responsibility Education, Issue 12, 4–20

Rotter, Julian B. (1966): Generalised Expectancies for Internal versus External Control of Reinforcement. Psychological Monographs 80 (1)

Spürk, Dieter (2006): How should the affiliation of parents/guardians with so-called ‘sects’ and ‘psychological groups’ in relation to child welfare risks? In: Handbook on Child Welfare Risks under Section 1666 of the German Civil Code (BGB) and General Social Services (ASD), German Youth Institute, Munich

Staudinger v. J. (1996): Commentary on the Civil Code, Sellier – de Gruyter, Berlin

Thaler Singer, Margaret & Lalich, Janja. (1997): Cults. How People Lose and Regain Their Freedom, Auer, Heidelberg

Trautner, Hanns M. (1991). Textbook of Developmental Psychology (2), Hogrefe, Göttingen

Utsch, Michael (March 2014). The cult has stolen our child. In: Leidfaden. Specialist magazine on Crisis, Suffering and Grief, (32–37)

Utsch, Michael (2018). Psychotherapy and Spirituality: Dealing Professionally with Existential Conflicts and Questions of Transcendence, Springer, Heidelberg

Weiner, Bernard (1988). Psychology of Motivation, Psychologie Verlags Union, Munich

Wiseman, Richard (2008). Psychology – Research into Humour, in: Brain and Mind (4)