Those affected by PAS may want to
look out for a revision after the
magic date when such written
evidence can be introduced in court.
The Cult of Parenthood: A
Qualitative Study of Parental
Alienation
Amy J. L. Baker, Ph.D.
Abstract
Forty adults who were alienated from
a parent as a child participated in
a qualitative research study about
their experience. A content analysis
was conducted on the transcripts and
a comparison was undertaken to
identify similarities between
alienating parents and cult leaders.
Results revealed that adults whose
parents alienated them from their
other parent described the
alienating parent much the way
former cult members describe cult
leaders. The alienating parents were
described as narcissistic and
requiring excessive devotion and
loyalty, especially at the expense
of the targeted parent. The
alienating parents also were found
to utilize many of the same
emotional manipulation and
persuasion techniques cult leaders
use to heighten dependency on them.
And, finally, the alienating parents
seemed to benefit from the
alienation much the way cult leaders
benefit from the cult: they have
excessive control, power, and
adulation. Likewise, the
participants reported many of the
same negative outcomes that former
cult members experience such as low
self-esteem, guilt, depression, and
lack of trust in themselves and
others. These findings can provide a
useful framework for conceptualizing
the experience of parental
alienation and should also be useful
for therapists who provide
counseling and treatment to adults
who experienced alienation as a
child.
Each year approximately one million
couples divorce. Many of these
divorces involve children. Research
has consistently shown that children
whose parents divorce suffer
emotionally and psychologically,
especially when the divorce is
contentious and the children are
exposed to ongoing conflict between
their parents (e.g., Amato, 1994;
Johnston, 1994, Wallerstein &
Blakeslee, 1996; Wallerstein &
Lewis, 2004). Amato (1994), building
on an earlier meta-analysis of 92
studies, concluded that children who
experienced divorce, compared to
samples of children in continuously
intact two-parent families, had
higher rates of negative outcomes
including conduct problems,
psychological maladjustment, and
poorer self-concepts. Using a
qualitative approach, Wallerstein
and Lewis (2004) also found
long-term negative consequences of
children’s experience of parental
divorce.
One subset of children of divorce
considered most at risk for negative
outcomes are those experiencing
ongoing post-divorce conflict (Garrity
& Baris, 1994, Turkat, 2002). The
children in these families are at
risk of being subjected to some form
of parental alienation in which one
parent turns the child against the
other parent through powerful
emotional manipulation techniques
designed to bind the child to them
at the exclusion of the other
–targeted -- parent (Darnall, 1998;
Gardner, 1998; Garrity & Baris,
1994; Warshak, 2001). These
alienating parents undermine the
independent thinking skills of their
children and cultivate an unhealthy
dependency designed to satisfy the
emotional needs of the adult rather
than the developmental needs of the
child (Warshak, 2001).
According to Gardner (1998) children
can experience three levels of the
parental alienation syndrome: mild,
moderate, and severe (although
Turkat, 2002 outlined conceptual
issues with this scale). Mild cases
are characterized by some parental
programming against the targeted
parent but visitation is not
seriously affected and the child
manages to have a reasonably healthy
relationship with both parents. In
cases of moderate parental
alienation there is significant
parental programming against the
targeted parent and considerable
struggle around visitation. The
child often has difficulty during
the transition but eventually
adjusts. The child who is severely
alienated is adamant about his or
her hatred of the targeted parent.
The child usually refuses any
contact and may threaten to run away
if forced to visit. The alienating
parent and the child have an
unhealthy alliance based on shared
distorted ideas about the targeted
parent. When this happens and the
child wholly adopts the views of the
alienating parent and severs all
ties with the targeted parent, the
child is living in something akin to
a cult, the cult of the alienating
parent.
According to West and Langone (1986)
a cult (1) is a hierarchical social
group in which there is a leader who
requires excessive devotion, (2) has
a leader who uses emotional
manipulation and persuasion
techniques to heighten dependency on
him or her, and (3) furthers the
aims of the leader at the expense of
its members as well as others.[1]
Utilizing this definition provides a
useful basis for comparing cults to
the characteristics of families in
which parental alienation occurs.
Of course, most families in western
cultures are hierarchical social
groups. Power is not evenly
distributed among the members of the
family. Parents have legal,
physical, moral, and psychological
control over their children. Even
parents who respect their children’s
individuality and aim to promote
competence and autonomy retain some
authority over their children. In
some families, however, parents
exploit their inherent authority in
order to alienate the child from the
other parent. The focus of the
current study was to determine
whether these alienating parents
resemble cult leaders; that is, do
they (1) require excessive devotion,
(2) use emotional manipulation
techniques to heighten dependency,
and (3) garner psychological
benefits at the expense of the well
being of the child. This analysis
was accomplished through the current
study of interviews with adult who –
when they were children – were
turned against one parent by the
other.
The Study
A qualitative retrospective study
was conducted in the Fall of 2004.
Guidelines for conducting
qualitative research developed by
Berg (1998) were utilized throughout
the study. Subjects were recruited
from word of mouth and from postings
on the internet. People who
responded were asked to briefly
describe their situation in order to
ensure that the alienation was at
least in part due to the behaviors
and attitudes of the other parent.
Appointments were made with people
who met this criterion. At the
beginning of each appointment it was
explained that the interview was
voluntary, for research purposes,
and could be stopped at any time. It
was also explained that although I
am a psychologist I am not a
clinician and would not be able to
provide counseling. Informed consent
was obtained and the audiotape was
turned on. Only one person declined
to participate after the study was
explained. The recruitment flyer
called for people who had been
turned against one parent as a child
due to the attitudes and behaviors
of the other parent. In this way,
only people who were aware that the
alienation was engineered by the
other parent were included in the
study. This allowed for an
examination of the process by which
the individual became aware that he
or she had been manipulated to
become alienated, which was one
important focus of the study.
The Sample
Forty-two adults participated in the
interview process (2 were
subsequently removed from data
analysis because of faulty tapes).
An additional two people agreed to
participate but did not follow-up.
Thus, data for 40 participants are
presented. Participants were between
19 and 67 years of age (M=40.4,
SD=11.4); 15 were male and 25 were
female. For three fourths (n=30) the
parents divorced during the
participant’s childhood and in all
but six cases the alienating parent
was the mother. Basic information
about the 40 participants is
provided in Table 1.
Table 1: Sample Description
ID |
Gender |
Age at Interview |
Age at Separation |
Custodial Parent |
Alienating
Parent |
1 |
Female |
40 |
3 |
Mother |
Mother |
2 |
Female |
47 |
NA |
Both |
Mother |
3 |
Female |
35 |
12 |
Mother |
Mother |
4 |
Female |
44 |
NA |
Both |
Mother |
5 |
Female |
30 |
13 |
Mother |
Mother |
6 |
Female |
30 |
Birth |
Mother |
Mother |
7 |
Male |
40 |
9 |
Mother |
Mother |
8 |
Female |
33 |
3 |
Mother |
Mother |
9 |
Male |
38 |
5 |
Mother |
Mother |
10 |
Female |
32 |
2 |
Father |
Father |
11 |
Male |
43 |
NA |
Both |
Mother |
12 |
Female |
50 |
NA |
Both |
Mother |
13 |
Female |
33 |
NA |
Both |
Mother |
14 |
Female |
36 |
2 |
Mother |
Mother |
15 |
Male |
67 |
NA |
Both |
Father |
16 |
Male |
43 |
5 |
Mother |
Mother |
17 |
Male |
28 |
11 |
Father |
Father |
18 |
Female |
26 |
2 |
Mother |
Mother |
19 |
Female |
51 |
NA |
Both |
Mother |
20 |
Male |
48 |
12 |
Mother |
Father |
21 |
Female |
44 |
12 |
Mother |
Mother |
22 |
Male |
39 |
NA |
Both |
Mother |
23 |
Female |
28 |
3 |
Mother |
Mother |
24 |
Male |
32 |
NA |
Both |
Mother |
25 |
Female |
43 |
12 |
Mother |
Mother |
26 |
Male |
57 |
2 |
Mother |
Mother |
27 |
Female |
19 |
8 |
Mother |
Mother |
28 |
Female |
32 |
NA |
Both |
Father |
29 |
Male |
63 |
NA |
Both |
Mother |
30 |
Male |
39 |
2 |
Mother |
Mother |
31 |
Female |
60 |
Birth |
Mother |
Mother |
32 |
Female |
50 |
11 |
Mother |
Mother |
33 |
Female |
21 |
2 |
Mother |
Mother |
34 |
Male |
39 |
4 |
Mother |
Mother |
35 |
Female |
19 |
1 |
Mother |
Mother |
36 |
Female |
41 |
3 |
Mother |
Father |
37 |
Male |
52 |
8 |
Mother |
Mother |
38 |
Male |
46 |
2 |
Mother |
Mother |
39 |
Female |
37 |
Birth |
Mother |
Mother |
40 |
Female |
50 |
5 |
Mother |
Mother |
The Interview Schedule
Interviews followed a
semi-structured protocol which
ensured that the same information
was obtained from all participants
while allowing each person to “tell
their story” in full. The interview
schedule was developed in order to
capture the 12 aspects of the
qualitative research interview as
outlined in Kvale (1996, p. 27).
That is, the interview aimed to
understand in a focused way
the subject’s every day life
world as it related to parental
alienation and the meaning of
the alienation for them, in a
qualitative rather than
quantitative form, with an emphasis
on description of specific
experiences. This information was
obtained through a sensitively
conducted interpersonal
exchange that because of the
deliberate naiveté of the
interviewer allowed the subject to
express ambiguous statements
and come to new and/or changed
understandings. The interview
was conducted in such a manner as to
produce a positive experience
for the participant.
The interview had five major
sections. The first section of the
interview obtained basic demographic
information including age, gender,
place of birth, and so forth.
Section two focused on memories of
the marriage, the participant’s
relationship to each parent up until
the time of the separation/divorce,
how the participant was told about
the separation, who moved out of the
house and a description of the
custody/visitation schedule through
the age of 18.[2]
The third section of the interview
focused on the alienation, beginning
with which parent was the alienating
parent and which was the targeted
parent. Participants were asked to
list all of the different strategies
used by the alienating parent and to
provide examples of each. The
participant was asked to describe
his/her relationship to the targeted
parent and how that changed over
time, as well as the participant’s
relationship to the alienating
parent during this period. This
section ended with a discussion of
how the targeted parent tried to
counter the alienation, whether the
participant knew about these
attempts at the time, and the
perceived motivation of the
alienating parent. In the fourth
section of the interview, the
participants were asked about when
his or her thinking eventually
changed about the targeted parent.
They were queried about when they
began to realize that their feelings
and thoughts about the targeted
parent were induced by the
alienating parent rather than based
wholly in reality. Whether or not
the alienating parent was ever
confronted, whether the targeted
parent was told about the
realization, and what, if anything,
could the targeted parent have done
to mitigate the alienation were
discussed. Any reunification with
the targeted parent was described in
full including who initiated it and
what happened. The final section of
the interview entailed a
conversation about the person’s life
at the present, including what kind
of relationship he or she had with
each parent and what the impact of
the alienation has been. At the end
of the interview a checklist was
reviewed in order to ensure
consistency of data across
participants.
Analysis
Audiotapes were transcribed
verbatim. Transcripts were then
submitted to a content analysis in
which each unique unit of thought
was separated from the transcript
and taped onto an index card.
Content analysis was guided by an
inductive grounded theory approach
(Berg, 1998; Straus, 1987) in which
the texts were read in order to
identify the major themes. Cards
were then coded according to its
essential idea (i.e., relationship
with targeted parent prior to the
alienation, strategies utilized by
the alienating parent, impact of the
alienation). In all there were 11
major categories including a
category on the strategies utilized
by the alienating parent. These
“strategy” cards were further coded
into sub-categories that produced
the major findings presented in the
current paper. This paper also draws
on the data collected pertaining to
their relationship with the
alienating parent. All quotes are
attributed to the participant number
so that the reader can determine the
age and gender of the speaker as
well as whether his or her parents
separated/divorced, age of that
event, and who the custodial parent
was.
The Findings
A Leader who Requires Excessive
Devotion
Cults are organized around a leader,
typically described as a charismatic
individual who maintains ultimate
power and authority over the group.
Within the cult the leader is
designated as worthy of devotion and
awe because of his or her superior
capacity to comprehend the true
nature of reality. Due to this
supposed unique and valuable
knowledge, leaders are presented as
able to understand members better
than they understand themselves. It
is held that through great personal
sacrifice, cult leaders are willing
to share this knowledge on behalf of
the members who require the wisdom
and the guidance of the leader in
order to function. In return,
members are expected to reserve
their love and devotion exclusively
for the leader, who has earned an
elevated place at the center of
their emotional lives. Cult leaders
have been compared to both
psychopaths (Tobias & Lalich, 1994)
and narcissists (Shaw, 2003) because
of their lack of humility in
presenting themselves as superior to
others and because of their
willingness to use their charm and
persuasion skills in order to
exploit and unduly influence others.
The adult children who participated
in the interviews described the
alienating parent in similar terms.
In particular, they perceived the
alienating parent as needing to be
the center of attention at all times
and insisting on being the center of
the child’s emotional life. “She was
the center and everything revolved
around her.” (31) Another
participant said, “Mainly I think
she always wants to be your
everything. She wants to be your
center of attention. And so she
liked the fact that by making me
hate him all I had was her.” (27) In
fact, many of the interview subjects
described their parents as
narcissistic, either using that
label or using precise descriptors
that called that term to mind.
In cults, it is not enough to feel
devotion to the leader; members are
expected to demonstrate their
devotion on a regular basis.
Expressions of devotion include
putting the needs of the leader
first, never questioning the
authority of the leader, confessing
imperfections, allowing the leader
to make all important decisions, and
making public declarations of faith
and love. These actions reassure the
leader that the member is fully
indoctrinated and further solidify
the member’s commitment to the cult
(Lifton, 1989). In many cases the
expressions of devotion are public,
with the aim of turning a public
declaration of devotion into an
inner desire to be loyal to the
leader. By requiring such public
assertions of faith and trust in the
leader, cult leaders are exploiting
the natural tendency in people to
want their beliefs to be consistent
with their actions (e.g. Festinger,
1957). In this way saying becomes
believing.[3]
This process also occurred in the
families of alienation. The
participants reported feeling
pressured to show their devotion to
the alienating parent. Many
described their relationship with
the alienating parent as one in
which their parent’s needs were felt
as more real and urgent to them than
their own. They recalled staying
home from social activities to tend
to their parent, to keep them
company, to take care of younger
siblings, or to perform household
duties. “I did what I could do to
make her life easier because her
life was so hard because of my
father. That was my mantra, mom’s
life is hard. I have to try to help
her. (40)” They chose friends,
hobbies, and eventually careers and
spouses to please their parent.
Others reported that they grew up
believing that it was their job to
satisfy the needs of their parent,
exemplified in the statement, “I was
there to help her. It would make me
want to try harder to please her. I
learned how to be amusing at a very
young age. “ (27) In general, they
experienced themselves as extensions
of their parent, their primary
function in life being to take care
of, please, admire, reassure, and be
devoted to them.
A particularly important expression
of devotion was an allegiance to and
preference for the alienating parent
over the targeted parent. Some of
the participants recalled being
asked to spy on the targeted parent
and keep secrets from him or her.
Many participants said that they had
made negative reports to the
alienating parent about the targeted
parent such as saying that they did
not have a good time during visits,
exaggerating small infractions or
hurts, and making false claims of
harm. Joining the alienating parent
in the belittling of the targeted
parent was another means of showing
devotion. A few participants
recalled mocking the targeted
parent, and one told of being
encouraged to spit, hit, and
sexually humiliate his mother at the
behest of his father. Devotion also
took the form of making accusations
against the targeted parent for real
and fabricated allegations,
including stealing the child’s
personal items and shirking
financial obligations such as child
support payments.
As with cults, loyalty and devotion
in alienating families was extracted
either through sweet seduction or
through wrathful commands (and
usually an alternating sequence of
both). An example of the former was
provided by a woman who described
her mother and stepfather as being
“nicer than nice,” doing everything
for her until she eventually
believed, “that they were the only
ones we could rely on, that we had
to be with them. (1)” In her family,
demonstrations of loyalty took the
form of hiding from her father when
he came to visit and being rude to
people in the neighborhood that her
mother and stepfather singled out as
being worthy of contempt. Another
woman recalled her mother saying,
“Don’t you want to stay here with me
and your sister? Your sister
understands that to go over there is
to go with people who don’t like me.
I am your mother don’t you want to
like me? (33)” Through a combination
of rhetorical skill and guilt
inducement this mother compelled her
daughter to reject her father.
At the other end of the spectrum of
strategies for extracting loyalty
was a young man who grew up with a
raging drunken father. He explained
that, “There was a constant ritual
everyday. He would come in my room
in the middle of the night and make
me profess my faith to him and if I
didn’t and if I didn’t stay away
from everybody else that he was
going to kill himself. He would do
this and I would have nobody.” (17)
And one woman reported that her
father wanted her to profess her
exclusive love for him, and would
beat her until she did so. Many
participants reported having to
constantly reassure their alienating
parents that they loved them best of
all, and that they did not in fact
have positive feelings for the
targeted parent. “She’d start crying
and say we didn’t love her and
that’s just how she is.” (36)
The ultimate sign of devotion and
loyalty to a cult leader entails
renouncing all other sources of
influence. Just as cult leaders
require an exclusive place in the
hearts and minds of the members,
these alienating parents seemed to
want to have sole claim on their
children. Allegiance to the other
parent was not allowed in these
families and the participants
understood that there was to be an
exclusive and all encompassing
relationship with only one parent.
They were made to feel that any
contact with the targeted parent was
a betrayal of the worst kind. One
man said of his mother, “If I talked
about my dad it was like sticking a
knife in her back.” (9) Another said
he felt like a traitor when he came
back from a visit. Ultimately, many
of the participants were encouraged
if not coerced to renounce their
relationship with the targeted
parent. Loving both parents would
have been unthinkable, just as
belonging to two cults at the same
time is not possible. And in this
way, many of the participants felt
that they had to make a choice
between their parents. Naturally,
they chose the parent whom they
believed really loved them and was
able to take care of them, the one
who had been telling them all along
that the other parent was unsafe,
worthy of contempt, and did not even
love them in return (see section
beginning on page 14 below). In
time, most of the participants were
turned against the targeted parent
completely, withdrawing their love
and natural affection for them. More
than one made a comment such as, “I
remember thinking he should go ahead
and die. I wish he’d just go get in
a car accident. I wish he’d die. I
didn’t want him to come home.” (22)
Another said, “I did believe her
that he was a terrible rotten person
who beat my mother and thank god she
divorced him.” (16) The intensity of
these and other similar statements
reflect the utter lack of
ambivalence, (one parent is all good
while the other is all bad), which
is a hallmark of parental alienation
syndrome (Gardner, 1998).
Thus, in these families, the normal
love and respect that children
naturally feel for a parent appeared
to be insufficient to satisfy the
narcissistic demands of the
alienating parent. What they seemed
to want from their children was a
level of adulation and exclusivity
typically reserved for cult leaders.
They seemed to garner that level of
devotion in much the same way that
cult leaders do: through a range of
emotional manipulation and
persuasion techniques. The
strategies employed by the
alienating parents – as described by
their adult children -- are
described below.
Use of Emotional Manipulation and
Persuasion Techniques to Heighten
Dependency on the Leader
The second characteristic of cults
is that leaders manipulate the
thoughts and feelings of its members
in order to promote a sense of
dependency on them (e.g., Hassan,
1988; Lifton, 1989; Singer, 1996).
This too was borne out in the
interviews of adults who as children
were alienated from a parent due to
the actions and behaviors of the
other parent. There were five
primary mechanisms for manipulating
the thoughts and feelings of the
children: (1) relentless bad
mouthing of the character of the
other parent in order to reduce
their importance and value (2)
creating the impression that the
targeted parent was dangerous and
planned to hurt the child in order
to instill fear in and rejection of
that parent (3) deceiving children
about the targeted parent’s feelings
for them in order to create hurt,
resentment, and psychological
distance (4) withdrawing love if the
child indicated affection or
positive regard for the targeted
parent in order to heighten the need
to please the alienating parent and
(5) erasing the other parent from
the life and mind of the child
through minimizing actual and
symbolic contact. Each of these is
discussed in turn.
Relentless Badmouthing of the
Character of the Other Parent to
Reduce Their Importance and Value
When participants were asked about
what the alienating parent did to
try to turn them against the other
parent, the first and most
frequently mentioned strategy was
badmouthing. It may have featured so
prominently in their minds because
it was an overt and not particularly
subtle behavior and because it was
so pervasive. Most participants
remarked on the constant litany of
negative comments made about the
targeted parent to the child and to
others in front of the child. Many
of the comments were general
statements about the lack of worth
of the person as a whole such as
being a piss poor dad, a whore and a
slut, not the man you think he is, a
good for nothing drunk probably in
jail right now. Common
complaints were that the person was
a cheat, an alcoholic, and someone
who did not care about his or her
family. One woman recalled her
step-mother complaining about how
lazy her mother was because she used
instant oatmeal in the mornings. The
alienating parent seemed to operate
under the assumption that if an
individual is told something enough
times it becomes true in their
minds, and that did seem to be the
case. When asked if they believed
the badmouthing, they responded, “Oh
absolutely! At no time did I ever
think my mom wasn’t telling the
truth.” (38), “All of it. She was my
mother. She was God.” (34), “All of
it! I believed her for a really long
time.” (35), “I became really angry
at my father. I believed her.” (29)
The barrage of negative statements
was noteworthy for its apparent
one-sidedness (nothing good was
recalled being said about the other
parent to balance out the
complaints) and its lack of
appropriateness. Even if true these
things should probably not be said
to a child (although there might be
certain circumstances in which
explaining negative aspects of the
other parent could be beneficial,
Warshak, 2001). Participants
recalled that their alienating
parents explained concepts and/or
used words such as abortion,
womanizer, rape, alcoholic well
before the children knew or needed
to knew what these concepts meant.
Badmouthing of the other parent
seemed to serve the same function as
bad mouthing the “outside world” for
cults: promotion of dependency
(Kent, 2004; Lifton, 1989; Shaw,
2003). Badmouthing creates in cult
members a belief that the leader is
the only person who truly cares and
can be trusted; everyone else is
contemptible and/or dangerous. The
alienating parents -- through
badmouthing – seemed to convey to
their children that they were the
only parent who loved and cared for
them, who could be trusted. Many of
the participants recalled their
parents explicitly inducing
dependency with comments such as, “I
did everything for you and he did
nothing.” (40) “Basically everything
good that happened was because of
her.” (29) One participant explained
that after a long litany of
complaints were spewed about the
targeted parent the alienating
parent would then comfort the child
by telling her, “I shouldn’t be too
upset because I had her.” (39)
Another participant explained that,
“He told me he was the only one who
cared about me, the only one who
wanted me, that no one else cared
about me over and over and over
again.” (17) Another participant
said of her mother, “In my mind she
was everything. She was all I had.”
(27) The constant badmouthing
created in the child the belief that
the targeted parent was not worthy
of love and respect, much the way
cult leaders aim to diminish all
other authority figures in the eyes
of members.
Creating the Impression that the
Targeted Parent was Dangerous and
Planned to Hurt the Child in order
to Instill Fear and Rejection of the
Parent
Sometimes the badmouthing took on a
decidedly darker tone and the child
was led to believe that the targeted
parent was capable of inflicting
great harm to them. Participants
were told that the targeted parent
had beaten them, wanted to abort
them, planned on throwing them in
the river, were reckless with them
when they were babies, didn’t have
their best interest at heart, and
were intent on kidnapping them. One
participant remembered the first
time she saw her father and
stepmother in five years, “Up to the
point they drove up into the
driveway my mom was sitting there
telling me, ‘You better watch it
because they are going to take you
and they are never going to bring
you back. They are going to kidnap
you. That lady is from Ohio. Do you
know anybody in Ohio? Do you know
how to get back home?’” (23) In all,
the participants were made to feel
unsafe at the thought of contact
with the targeted parent. “I
remember her always telling me how
mean and angry he was. If I needed
help with homework she would say,
‘Don’t ask your daddy, he will yell
at you.’ I was scared of him. It was
like a landmine.” As a boy he
avoided being in the same room with
his father and lived in constant
fear of being beaten by him, despite
the fact that this had never
actually occurred. “I felt like he
was hitting me all the time in my
head. It was a constant barrage of
how incompetent and how dangerous my
father was.” (22)
Badmouthing in order to instill fear
of the targeted parent seemed to
serve at least two purposes. Because
the interviews were conducted with
the adult children and not the
parents themselves, the motivations
of the alienating parents cannot
really be known. However, based on
the participants’ descriptions of
their experiences with the
alienating parent, the following
analysis is offered. First,
badmouthing seemed to make the child
want to avoid the targeted parent
and thus furthered the alienating
parent’s goal of severing that
relationship. In addition, it seemed
to heighten the child’s need for a
protector, a role the alienating
parent was probably only too willing
to play. In this way the bond
between the alienating parent and
the child was further strengthened
and reinforced. As attachment
theorists have found (Bowlby 1969,
Ainsworth, Blehar, Waters, & Wall,
1978), when a child senses fear
(real or imagined) his or her desire
to be near and comforted by the
attachment figure/caretaker is
activated. This is a biologically
determined protective mechanism
designed to ensure the safety of the
vulnerable within any species.
Alienating parents exploited this
innate mechanism in order to
artificially induce their child’s
desire to be near them.
Creating fear in order to activate
dependency needs is a strategy that
has also been used in cults. False
scenarios of doomsday and threat
from external forces have been
fabricated in order to heighten
members’ dependency on the leader.
Jonestown, Branch Davidians, and
Heaven’s Gate are just a few
examples of cults that have
propagated a sense of imminent
danger and, therefore, a belief that
the end was near (either from
natural or social forces) in order
to further a dependency on the
leader. Muster (2004) reports that
in the International Society for
Krishna Consciousness the leaders
announced that a nuclear war was
impending, which resulted in a
reorganization of the members into a
crisis mode of dependency and fear.
In this sense cult leaders behave
like insensitive parents who instill
fear and dependency rather than
encourage independence and
competence.
Deceiving the Child about the
Targeted Parent’s Feelings in Order
to Create Hurt, Resentment, and
Psychological Distance
Many of the participants were told
that the targeted parent did not
love them or want them. “She said he
didn’t love nobody but himself. He
didn’t care about us.” (36) Another
participant said, “That’s another
thing my mother told me was that my
dad didn’t want anything to do with
us boys. He just walked away from
us.” (34) One woman said “She told
me that my father wasn’t my friend
at all, that he had contempt for ‘a
lout like you.’” (12) Another was
told, “I was not important to him.
His other kids came first. I was
last on his list.” (39) In many
cases the alienating parent actually
engineered situations to make it
appear as if the targeted parent did
not care and then used that very
situation to convince the child that
the parent did not love them. For
example, one mother threw away
letters the father was sending and
then asked her daughter to explain
how her father could love her if he
did not even bother to write. Other
parents refused to accept phone
calls, moved away without providing
contact information, and told the
targeted parent that the child did
not want to see them. Because the
alienating parents eliminated
communication with the targeted
parent and controlled all
information, the participants had no
means with which to question the
veracity of what they were being
told. Eventually, they capitulated
under the weight of the “evidence”
and concluded that the targeted
parent did not love them after all,
further fueling their hurt and
resentment. In addition, once they
accepted this as “fact,” the
alienating parent became even more
important to them as their sole
source of parental love, support,
and care. In cults the use of
black/white and us/them thinking
promotes the belief that anyone
outside the cult is necessarily
wrong and/or does not really love or
care for them (Tobias & Lalich,
1994).
Withdrawing Love if the Child
Indicates Affection or Positive
Regard for the Targeted Parent
A classic cult technique is to
create a sense of psychological
imbalance and anxiety in members so
that they are preoccupied with
winning back the praise and
acceptance of the leader. Sometimes
this is accomplished through the
unpredictable use of rewards and
punishments (Goldberg & Goldberg,
1988). One particularly potent form
of punishment is for leaders to
withdraw their love and acceptance
of a member in order to create a
sense of insecurity. Panic ensues as
the member scrambles to get back in
the leader’s good graces. Almost
everything else becomes secondary to
regaining approval and equilibrium
and considerable effort is expended
figuring out how to avoid expulsion
from the leader’s realm of
acceptance.
Many of the study participants
described this same experience. They
recalled experiencing withdrawal of
love by the alienating parent if
they indicated any positive regard
for the targeted parent. They
learned to pretend they had a poor
visit with the targeted parent in
order to avoid rejection upon return
home. “She was always in a bit of a
mood or temper when we came back.”
(5) Many spoke of getting the cold
shoulder, of being emotionally cut
off from their parent. “She’d shut
me out. It would be just silence.”
(31) There was an emotional price to
pay if they had contact with the
targeted parent. “She would make
life rotten for us.” (2) “She
couldn’t stand to see me actually
get on with my father. She’d make
her disapproval evident if I so much
as spoke to him in a civilized way.
This disapproval was in the form of
throwing sour looks my way, and then
turning her back and ignoring me.”
(12) Another participant said,
“She’d treat me like the enemy.”
(37) Some mothers accused their
children of not loving them if they
went to visit the other parent, some
threatened to abandon their
children, and one woman recalled her
mother pointedly serving her an
inferior portion of food upon
returning from a visit. When asked
what it was like to come home from a
visit to his father, one participant
responded, “Oh it was very cold. She
would give me the cold shoulder.”
(10) Several said their alienating
parent would not speak to them for
several hours or the rest of the
evening following returning from a
visit. Because of the child’s
profound dependency on the
alienating parent, participants
found it very hard to tolerate their
disapproval and subsequent
withdrawal of love. “I was scared to
disagree with my mother. Any
disagreement on my part would cause
her to either turn her venom against
me or threaten that ‘things would
never be the same again after an
argument like that’, which left me
heartbroken and devastated.” (12)
When imagining what it would feel
like to experience the disapproval
of the alienating parents, others
spoke of feeling “lost,”
“terrified,” and “all alone.” Many
said that when the alienating parent
withdrew their love, they became
preoccupied with winning that parent
back. “It was scary. It made me want
to try harder.” (40) Thus, fear of
withdrawal of love was a powerful
threat that was used by the
alienating parents to control their
children and reduce their affection
towards and relationship with the
targeted parent.
Erasing the Other Parent
Cults tend to be exclusive social
environments in which members are
surrounded by like-minded people.
Lifton (1989) described the
totalistic nature of cults as milieu
control. The likelihood of contact
with alternate viewpoints and
perspectives is almost nonexistent.
The leader controls the reality of
the members by controlling the flow
of information in and out of the
cult. There is little opportunity
for countervailing opinions and
points of view to be expressed to
members. There is only one shared
reality, which must be accepted in
order to be a member of the cult.
All other ideas are excluded.
Newspapers are not read, television
is not viewed, contact with
outsiders who might question or
introduce members to other ways of
thinking and believing is strictly
forbidden (e.g., Muster, 2004).
The alienating parents of the study
participants were described as
operating the family in much the
same way, particularly as it related
to the targeted parent. Participants
were forbidden to have contact with
anyone who might speak well of the
targeted parent, especially extended
family members. Most importantly,
contact with the targeted parent was
minimized or eliminated all
together. In this way, the child did
not have any independent experiences
of the targeted parent and the
parent him/herself had no
opportunity to explain his/her side
or counter the campaign of lies. Few
of the participants had pictures of
the targeted parent, and none were
allowed to talk about him or her.
Any mention of the targeted parent
was felt to be taboo, something to
be avoided at all costs in order to
keep the peace in the family. “My
mother would get so mad she’d almost
start shaking if the subject of my
father came up.” (18) One woman was
shoved down the stairs when she
mentioned her father; and a young
man recalled, “Every time I mention
my dad all hell breaks loose. It was
almost as if I knew if I mentioned
that I wanted to go see my dad I
would be brow beaten into
submission.” (9) Another study
participant recalled that when she
said she wanted to see her father
her mother jumped up from the dinner
table and went into her room crying.
A few moments later her stepfather
informed her that she would be
thrown out of the house if she
mentioned her father again. One
woman recalled not being allowed to
bring home gifts received during
visits with her mother because, “It
wasn’t fair to the other kids. I
wasn’t allowed to talk about it.”
(10) In all these ways, the presence
of the targeted parent was minimized
and their place in the hearts and
minds of the children was
diminished.
Through these five strategies, the
alienating parents elevated
themselves into an esteemed place in
their children’s eyes and cultivated
in their children a profound
dependency on their approval and
acceptance. The third characteristic
of cults – the ways in which this
dependency benefits the leader and
harms the members – is explored
next.
Cults Further the Aims of the Leader
at the Expense of the Needs of its
Members as Well as Others
The third feature of cults is that
they operate for the benefit of the
leader and at the expense of its
members. While they claim to exist
for the benefit of the members --
who are in need of the wisdom and
guidance of the leader -- the
reality is just the opposite: The
leader benefits from the experience
much more than the members. The
benefits of cults to their leaders
are both financial and
psychological. Leaders of cults have
unlimited access to the money and
assets accumulated, and often spend
disproportionately on themselves,
justifying such expenses as the
minimum compensation for all their
sacrifice and hard work on behalf of
the members (Singer, 1996). The
psychological rewards of cult
leadership are also plentiful.
Leaders become all-powerful,
all-knowing, worshipped individuals
who can exercise control and
authority at their whim.
Similarly, the alienating parents
seemed to benefit from the lofty
place they held in their children’s
lives and from the elimination of
the targeted parent. First, they
appeared to have benefited by not
having to share parenting time, by
avoiding the complications of
coordinating schedules, and by not
having to deal with the cooperation
and compromise entailed in sharing a
child with someone they no longer
lived with or loved. As Johnston
(1994) has noted, concerns about the
other parent’s ability to care for
the children is pervasive in high
conflict divorces. For the most part
the alienating parents described in
this study had the opportunity to
raise their child as they pleased
without the interference of another
parent. Because many remarried, they
did not suffer the financial and
emotional difficulties of
single-parenthood (e.g., Teachman &
Paasch, 1994). Second, they seemed
to benefit by exacting revenge on a
person whom they believed harmed
and/or rejected them. By having the
child reject the other parent, the
alienating parent likely had the
satisfaction of the last laugh, so
to speak. They had the opportunity
to reject the parent in a way that
was designed to maximally inflict
pain and suffering. And, finally,
they seemed to benefit from the
narcissistic satisfaction of being
the most important person in their
child’s life. Through the strategies
described above, these parents
extended the natural idealization of
their children well into the later
teens and for some on into
adulthood. By cultivating dependency
on them, these parents delayed or
avoided all together the natural
separation and de-idealization of
their children. Thus, they warded
off the natural feelings of loss and
sadness that typically accompany the
process of children individuating
and living their own lives.
As the benefits to the cult leaders
are many, so too are the costs to
cult members. Much has been written
about the loss of identity, the loss
of time with family, and the loss of
dreams that result from extended
participation in cults (Langone,
1993; McKibben, Lynn, & Malinoski,
2002; Singer, 1996; Tobias & Lalich,
1994). The costs of cult
participation are many, both
psychological and financial. Many
cults require hefty membership fees
while others encourage if not
require members to turn over all
their assets and belongings to the
leader or produce economic
dependency on the cult. In addition
to the financial costs associated
with cult membership, former members
describe the emotional harm done to
them as the worst part of the
experience (Singer, 1996). The
emotional costs include (1)
diminished self-esteem from
excessive dependence (2) guilt from
having hurt friends and family, (3)
depression and sadness over time
lost with friends and family, and
(4) difficulties trusting self and
other (Tobias & Lalich, 1994). The
participants in the study
experienced each of these negative
emotional outcomes as a result of
being alienated from one parent due
to the actions and behaviors of the
other.[4]
Low Self-Esteem
Former cult members report low
self-esteem and shame from having
been duped and manipulated by the
leader. They feel foolish for having
believed the lies and half-truths
and for not questioning what was
told to them. They also suffer from
low self-esteem due to the
cultivation of excessive dependence
on the leader. They were led to
believe that they could not function
outside the authoritarian confines
of the cult, and that they were
incapable of knowing what is in
their own best interest.
Adults whose parents alienated them
from the other parent also reported
problems with self-esteem. Some
expressed the belief that they
should have questioned more what
they were being told about the
targeted parent, while others
recognized that as a child they
really had no reason to doubt what
their parents were telling them. “Of
course I believed my mother. She was
god.” (34) This was not the primary
source of their reduced self-esteem.
For them, it came from the
internalization of the hatred of the
targeted parent. When the alienating
parent denigrated the targeted
parent to the child, the child
assumed that he too was bad and
worthy of contempt because that
person was at least in part inside
him (genetically and from an early
relationship). This sentiment was
exemplified in the following
statement, “Any parts that I did
feel were like my father made me
feel bad about myself because she
berated him so. If I was like him
how could that be good?” (39) Thus,
the alienating parent’s rejection of
the targeted parent was experienced
as a rejection of that part of the
child that was like the targeted
parent. In psychoanalytic terms, the
“bad object” was internalized (e.g.,
Greenberg & Mitchell, 1983).
Self-esteem problems in former cult
members also results from leaders
fostering a belief that parents,
friends, and family did not really
love and care for them. Only the
cult leader loves the person the way
they deserve to be loved. This
experience was also seen in adults
whose parents alienated them from
their other parent. Many recalled
being told that the targeted parent
did not really love or want them.
Over and over it was explained that
the targeted parent left them, did
not care about them, did not really
love them. This too resulted in
diminished self-esteem because the
child assumed that if the targeted
parent did not love them, they must
be unworthy of love. When parental
love is lacking the child will
naturally assume himself rather than
the parent to be the cause,
resulting in an unrealistically
negative self-image. It is much too
frightening to think that the parent
is at fault (e.g., Golomb, 1992;
Peck, 1983). Thus, the study
participants believed themselves to
be unlovable because they were told
that their parent did not love them.
Guilt
Former cult members often feel
guilty about the harm their cult
involvement has caused to their
loved ones. Once they realize that
they have squandered their money and
assets and that they have treated
badly those who really love them,
they feel ashamed that they were
capable of behaving so callously
towards people who did not deserve
it. Former cult members recall the
times that they were rude or
belittling or rejecting of their
friends and family and feel
embarrassed at their own behavior.
Participants in the study also
experienced guilt at having betrayed
the targeted parent. One man who was
made to verbally abuse his father on
the telephone worried about what
impact that had on his father, “I
don’t know if he believed we really
felt that way or not because we were
saying these things to him. I am
hoping in my heart that he knew but
it must have hurt like hell anyway.”
(7) He described his own feeling at
the time as being like “slicing his
wrists.” Another woman said she was
a “horrible horrible person” (19)
for joining her mother against her
father.
Depression
Depression is a common experience
for former cult members. They feel
saddened about the time they lost
with their friends and family on the
outside and for the fact that they
gave up their personal life dreams,
aspirations and goals. Depression
was also prevalent in the adults
interviewed for this study. Like
former cult members, they too felt
badly about the time they lost. “I
missed many years with my father.
Many wonderful years I could have
had with him.” (31) explained one
participant. One man who did not
find his father until much later in
life said he fully expected to meet
him for the first time standing over
his grave.” (38) The participants
expressed the belief that their
depression was also due to feeling
rejected by the targeted parent, in
addition to the time they lost with
them. An older woman whose mother
died when she was just
two-months-old provided a
particularly poignant example of
this. At the time of the mother’s
death, her father was having
difficulty caring for five children
while holding down a full-time job
that required him to be away from
the home on alternating weeks. For
this reason, he agreed to let his
sister raise the baby. This aunt,
whom the participant called mommy,
subsequently alienated her from her
father. She prevented visitation,
denigrated him to her, and let it be
known that any preference for the
father would be disloyal, hurtful,
and not tolerated. Thus, the
participant only saw her father a
few times a year despite the fact
that he lived less than an hour
away. Not only did she lose her
mother from an early death but she
lost her father as well. Because the
loss of her father was unnecessary,
she was particularly bitter. “You
lose your mother and you lose your
father and you’re alone. I always
felt alone.” (31) Another man
explained his experience with
depression, “I feel like I have a
hole in my soul. And it is not
something you can physically point
to and say here it is but you know
it is there.” (38)
The impact of the loss of the
targeted parent was exacerbated by
the fact they were not allowed to
openly mourn this loss. In general
the participants were discouraged
from talking about and/or expressing
interest in their relationship with
the targeted parent. Their loss was
not acknowledged and they received
no emotional support in dealing with
it. In fact, quite the opposite
message was conveyed, that it was a
positive event for the targeted
parent to be out of their lives,
essentially a “good riddance to bad
rubbish” message. Inability to mourn
a loss or significant life change is
believed to be associated with
subsequent depression (Bowlby, 1980;
Kubler-Ross, 1997) and this was
certainly borne out in the lives of
the participants.
Lack of Trust
Lack of trust in themselves and
others is a recurrent theme in
interviews with former cult members.
They know that they were manipulated
once and worry that it can happen
again. They realize that what they
believed about the cult and the
leader was actually not the case,
and therefore, do not trust
themselves to be good judges of
other’s motives and character. This
theme was also common among the
study participants. They did not
trust their own perceptions of
people because from a young age they
were told by one parent that the
other parent (whom most had positive
memories of) was bad, dangerous, or
in some other way worthy of fear or
contempt. Once they realized that
they had been manipulated and that
what they been led to believe their
whole lives about the targeted
parent was not the truth (or at
least not the whole truth) they
became even more unsure of what to
believe and whom to trust.
“Everything I believed is not so
true.” (5) In addition, some women
who were alienated from their
fathers reported not being able to
trust that men would be able to love
them. They assumed that if their
father (their first male love) did
not love them enough to stay
involved in their lives no man would
find them worthy of love and
commitment. One woman continually
created conflict in her romantic
relationships; she tested them to
see how much they could take before
they eventually rejected her. When
they did finally leave, she
concluded that of course that would
happen, all men eventually leave her
as her father did.
Conclusion
The 40 adults who participated in
this study described their parents
in much the same terms that cult
leaders are described. These parents
required excessive devotion and
utilized a range of strategies in
order to cultivate their children’s
dependence on them. The perceived
impact of the alienation as
described by the participants
matched many of the outcomes
associated with cult involvement.
These findings should provide a
useful framework for adults who were
alienated from a parent as a child
and for clinicians working with this
population.
Limitations of Study
Several methodological limitations
need to be noted. First, a
retrospective design was utilized
which did not allow for a
determination of causality. That is,
although the participants described
the outcomes of the alienation from
their perspective, it cannot be
known whether in fact such
associations exist. In particular,
many of the outcomes described (low
self esteem, lack of trust) may be
due to the divorce per se rather
than the alienation more
specifically. Without a comparison
group of adult children of divorce
who did not experience parental
alienation, it is not possible to
determine the alienation-specific
outcomes. However, to the extent
that the study aims to describe the
participants’ felt experience, the
findings can be considered valid.
Another limitation is that the
participants varied in their age at
the time of the interview. Thus,
some had not had a chance yet to
experience all of the possible
negative outcomes described above.
For example, a nineteen year-old
participant had less time to
experience depression or guilt than
say a 60-year-old participant. In
that respect, the findings may
under-represent the negative
outcomes of parental alienation.
Additionally, it is quite likely
that there are many adults who were
alienated from a parent and were not
aware of the fact that they had been
manipulated by their parent. There
is no way to ascertain the outcomes
for these adults. Thus, part of the
outcomes described above may be due
to the awareness of the experience
rather than to the experience
itself. And, finally, the
motivations and experiences of the
alienating parent were not directly
assessed. The only source of data
was the perceptions, beliefs, and
memories of the adult children. For
example, it is possible that the
alienating parents suffered as well
and that there may have been some
justification for the negative
statements made about the targeted
parent.
Future Research and Practical
Implications
Despite the limitations noted above,
the findings presented in this paper
represent the first glimpse at the
felt experience of adults who
experienced parental alienation as
children. To that extent they can be
used to develop hypotheses that can
be tested in future research. In
particular, three directions for
future research suggest themselves.
First, a longitudinal study of
divorced families would be very
helpful for determining the
proportion in which alienation
occurs. To date, there are no
empirically-based estimates of this
phenomenon. Gauging the magnitude of
the problem could attract more
researchers to the field as well as
lead to increased funding
opportunities. Second, a large-scale
quantitative study of adults who
were alienated as children could be
undertaken to extend the outcome
findings reported here. Standardized
measures of depression, drug use,
self-esteem and other outcomes could
be administered in order to
determine the rates of these
experiences in the sample. A third
direction for future research would
be a study of the adults (both
targeted and alienated) in order to
understand the phenomenon from their
perspective. For example, it is
likely that targeted parents are
aware of a broader range of
strategies used against them than
the children.
In the meantime, these findings may
be useful to clinicians working with
adults who experienced parental
alienation as a child. The
participants in this study seemed to
believe that what they experienced
was so unusual and idiosyncratic as
to defy classification or
categorization. It is possible that
utilizing the heuristic of cults may
provide them with a framework for
understanding their experience and
their response to it. A body of
knowledge has been developed about
cult leaders and the strategies they
use which may help the adult
children of parental alienation feel
connected to a larger group and may
provide them with a way to think
about their parents and themselves
that facilitates recovery and
growth. Parents who are currently
losing a child to an alienating
parent may also find this framework
useful for understanding the changes
they see in their children. For
these reasons the current findings
should be used to spur future
research and could inform practice
as deemed useful by clinicians
currently working with those
affected by parental alienation.
References
Ainsworth, M., Blehar, M.C., Waters,
E., Wall, S. (1978). Patterns of
attachment: A study of the strange
situation. Hillsdale, NJ:
Erlbaum.
Amato, P.R. (1994). Life-span
adjustment to their parents’
divorce. The Future of Children,
4, 143-165.
Baker, A.J.L. (in press). The
long-term effects of parental
alienation on adult children: A
qualitative research study.
American Journal of Family Therapy.
Berg, B.L. (1998). Qualitative
research methods for the social
sciences. Boston: Allyn and
Bacon.
Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment.
New York: Basic Books.
Bowlby, J. (1980). Loss. New
York: Basic Books.
Darnall, D. (1998). Divorce
casualties: Protecting your children
from parental alienation.
Dallas: Taylor Publishing.
Festinger, L. (1957). Theory of
cognitive dissonance. Stanford,
CA: Stanford University Press.
Gardner, R. (1998). The parental
alienation syndrome: A guide for
mental health and legal
professionals. Cresskill, NJ:
Creative Therapeutics.
Garrity, C.B., & Baris, M.A. (1994).
Caught in the middle: Protecting
the children from high conflict
divorce. New York: Lexington
Books.
Goldberg, L., & Goldberg, W. (1988).
Psychotherapy with ex-cultists: Four
case studies and commentary.
Cultic Studies Journal, 5,
193-210.
Golomb, E. (1992). Trapped in the
mirror: Adult children of
narcissists in their struggle for
self. NY: William Morrow.
Greenberg, J.R., & Mitchell, S.A.
(1983). Object relations in
psychoanalytic theory.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
Press.
Hassan, S. (1988). Combating cult
mind control. Rochester, VT:
Park Street Press.
Johnston, J. (1994). High conflict
divorce. The Future of Children,
4, 165-182.
Kent, S.A. (2004). Generational
revolt by the adult children of
first-generation members of the
children of God/family. Cultic
Studies Review, 3 (1).
Kubler-Ross, E. (1997). On death
and dying. New York: Scribner.
Kvale, S. (1996). InterViews: An
introduction to qualitative research
interviewing. Thousand Oaks:
Sage Publications.
Langone, M. (1993). Recovery from
cults. NY: W.W. Norton.
Langone, M. (2004). The definitional
ambiguity of the “cult” and AFF’s
mission.
http://www.cultinfobooks.com/infoserve_aff/aff_termdefambiguity.htm.
Lifton, R.J. (1989). Thought
reform and the psychology of
totalism. Chapel Hill: NC:
University of North Carolina Press.
McKibben, J.A., Lynn, S.J., &
Malinoski, P. (2002). Are cultic
environments psychologically
harmful? Cultic Studies Review, 1,
(3).
Muster, N.J. (2004). Authoritarian
culture and child abuse in ISKCON.
Cultic Studies Review.
Ofshe, R. (1992). Coercive
persuasion and attitude change. In
E. Borgatta (Ed.), Encyclopedia
of Sociology, Volume 1. NY:
Macmillan Publishing Group.
Peck, M.S. (1983). The people of
the lie. New York: Simon and
Schuster.
Shaw, D. (2003). Traumatic abuse in
cults: A psychoanalytic perspective.
Cultic Studies Review, 2,
101-129.
Singer, M. (1996). Cults in our
Midst. NY: Jossey-Bass.
Straus, A.L. (1987). Qualitative
analysis for social scientists.
New York: Cambridge University
Press.
Teachman, J.D., & Paasch, K.M.
(1994). Financial impact of divorce
on children and their families.
The Future or Children, 4, 44-62.
Tobias, M.L. & Lalich, J. (1994).
Captive minds, captive hearts.
Alameda, CA: Hunter House Inc.
Publishers.
Turkat, I. (2002). Parental
alienation syndrome: A review of
critical issues. Journal of the
American Academy of Matrimonial
Lawyers, 13, 131-176.
Warshak, R. (2001) Divorce
Poison. New York: Regan Books.
Wallerstein, J. & Blakeslee, S.
(1996). Second chances: men,
women, and children a decade after
divorce. New York: Mariner
Books.
Wallerstein, J. & Lewis, J. (2004).
The unexpected legacy of divorce:
The 25- year landmark Study.
Psychoanalytic Psychology, 21,
353-370.
West, L. J., & Langone, M. D.
(1986). Cultism: A conference for
scholars and policy makers.
Cultic Studies Journal, 3,
117-134.
Teaneck NJ 07666
amyjlbaker@aol.com
Submitted to Cultic Studies Review
December 23, 2004
Revised February 22, 2005
|