Talk:Exit counseling

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article seems to have a potential pro-cult, or at least anti-anti-cult slant. Samrolken 05:20, 26 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Sincerely, I don't see where's the slan...--euyyn 10:00, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)

It used to have an anti-anti cult slant. Andries 16:19, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)


Ed, I think it is unfair and inaccurate to write that exit counseling is voluntary depropgramming. Depropgramming is by definition involuntary. Andries 08:42, 16 Oct 2004 (UTC)

To my knowledge, CAN introduced the term in order to distance itself from crimes committed by the deprogrammers, improve the image of the occupation and to seek recognition similar to that of psychoanasys. I think that it would probably make sense to add a history of exit counselling. (ExitControl)

There is no danger in confusing something defined as "voluntary deprogramming" as involuntary, so I don't see why this article is non-neutral.--Tengen 02:04, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Tengen, true, I did not think of that, but deprogramming is illegal and has a negative connotation so I think it incorrect to say that exit-coundelling is voluntary deprogramming. I changed it accordingly. Andries 09:00, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
In Recovery from Cults (working on an entry for the book in the article) it states in chapter 8 Exit Counseling A Practical Overview:"Exit counseling is distinguished from deprogramming, which received much media coverage in the late 1970s and 1980s, in that the former is a voluntary process, whereas the latter is currently associated with a temporary restraint of the cultist." The contributors to that section are: David Clark, Carol Giambalvo, Noel Giambalvo,M.S., Kevin GGarvey, Michael Langone, Ph.D.* I dare say too that many that suffered the deprogramming process often seemed to need help in recovering from that trauma. Deprogramming is a violation in my opinion on ones civil liberties without due process and is a violent process. I am also looking into peer-exit counseling as that seems to be an over looked area too and one that in my opinion seems in line with standard peer counseling in general.PEACETalkAbout 16:29, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Merging Exit counseling and Deprogramming

The main article on exit counseling starts unfairly with a pro-cult biased slant. It ignores the very real phenomenon of mind control. It fails to acknowledge the incalculable pain and suffering inflicted by mind-controlling groups such as Boston Church of Christ and Jehovah's Witness, as well as many smaller groups. Unfortunately, the mainstream counseling community has failed to recognize the role of mind control in abusive-group situations. A key aim of exit counseling is to reveal the techniques of mind control. The group member can then decide whether he or she has experienced such techniques in their own group.

Sure, there is disagreement about what constitutes "mind control" -- just as there used to be disagreement about what constitutes "alcoholism." Today we look for genes that confer susceptibility to alcoholism; tomorrow, we'll look for mind control susceptibility. But until the mainstream psychologists and psychiatrists take up their responsibility, exit counseling will be the main hope for victims of a wide-ranging form of social pathology. (L)


I propose to have one article with both subjects covered in which the distictions between the two can be explored. A possible title "Deprogramming and exit counseling", with previous titles redirecting to the new article. --Zappaz 01:32, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I do not agree. Voluntarily talking somebody out of his religion is basically different from doing this unvoluntarily. Andries 06:49, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)
If we're running short of space we could merge Cult and New religious movement.  ;)
But seriously; a necessity for any merger is the elimination of duplication. And we can eliminate duplication even without doing the merger, so there is no impediment to improving the articles under their present names. Cheers, -Willmcw 07:53, Mar 24, 2005 (UTC)

Exit counseling is not two wrongs make a right. I think thinking something like that is hasty generalization or possably guilt by association. I might have the wrong fallacy, but I know it's a logical fallicy to think that because brainwashing people to think certain things is wrong, brainwashing is wrong. It's like thinking that because dragging an unconcious man into a fire is wrong, dragging him out is wrong.

I'd also like to point out that aulthough technically "exit counseling is voluntary deprogramming" doesn't make sense, it is commonly used, like in "a bull is a male cow". Perhaps it should be changed to "exit counseling is the same as deprogramming, exept voluntary." Daniel 7 July 2005 02:33 (UTC)

[edit] Totally disputed

Makes deprogramming seem natural. Skirts over renaming issue.

Depicts deprogrammer Rick Ross as following a code of ethics? He's the guy who talked the FBI and ATF into double-crossing the Branch Davidians and attacking Waco with a tank and incendiary grenades.!

The content of the information involves usually the family concerns which were the reason for the exit counseling, the nature of mind control, doctrinal, ideological and organizational issues of the respective group, including especially information which is usually not available to followers like an analysis of internal group documents.

Using the word "information" in this context implies that its true information" - same with "analysis".

And "nature of mind control" means the unsupported theory that cults use mind control - repudiated by the APA as "not scientific".

We should not be slam-dunking the deprogrammers (renamed innocuousoly exit counselors) perhaps, but we certainly should not be white-washing them either. Uncle Ed 04:14, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

Steve Hassan wrote in his book "Breaking the bonds" that in the case of exit counseling you have to be careful, because otherwise the cultist will simply walk away. In other words, this indicates that Hassan's method of exit counselling is 100% voluntary. Andries 07:11, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Exit Counselling vs. Deprogramming

I have done quite a bit of research on cult interventions, and had the privledge to be accepted to present a research paper at a CESNUR conference last year (http://www.cesnur.org/2005/pa_brown.htm). Deprogramming is divided into voluntary and involuntary. Voluntary Deprogramming was renamed Exit Counseling. During some research I can across a paper that referred to an unpublished AFF letter where the suggestion was made to change the name from Voluntary Deprogramming to Exit Counseling. I will try to find that paper again and pass it on to everyone it on to everyone

Hi,

I would disagree with this MERGING for the following reasons:

  • 1. Exit Counselling can be done by peers and be most beneficial.
  • 2. Exit Counselling is to assist the individual in sorting themselves out....main point is they are willing participants.
  • 3. Exit Counselling can be harmed by MERGING with DEPROGRAMMING. By making individuals more likely to fear participation.
  • 4. Exit Counselling can be a positive thing, at an individuals own pace and they are not dragged kicking and screaming into what the "Programmer" sees as a reality.
  • 5. Exit Counselling can build a positive relationship with the therapist, the former members etc., where Deprogramming doesn't.
  • 6. Exit Counselling by and large is facilitated by open/willing participation by the individual and their support system.
  • 7. Exit Counselling is some thing available to the individual, even if they drop out. In fact there is a growing need in this area mainly due to financial constraints of former members. Most can not pay for therapy.

IF anything most post cult/New Religious Movement/Sects have complaints that they couldn't access Exit Counselling and form forums, groups to assist each other in a peer Exit counselling fashion.

Please keep them separate. PEACE TalkAbout 21:49, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

I agree with keeping them separate. The aspect of voluntary vs. forced is a key element. Likewise, the premise of deprogramming is that the "cult" has taken away the recruit's free will, which also relates to the aspect of voluntary vs. forced.
Mind control and Brainwashing start with the premise that the victim's ability to make choices has been compromised by the bad guys (U.S. cult leadersor Communist Chinese). Deprogramming assumes that the recruit is a victim of mind control or brainwashing. The possibility that he was a sincere religious seeker who voluntarily and knowingly joined a New religious movement is not considered.
Exit counseling may or may not begin with the 'victim' premise, but Voluntary Exit Counseling at least respects the wishes of the client.
Much ink has been spilled to obscure the distinction between the voluntary vs. forced aspect of deprogramming. Sometimes forcing the recruit out of the cult is justified on the grounds that he "lost his free will" there and the deprogrammers are "giving it back". However, this is just their POV. It is not an objective fact.
We should retain all information on the scientific dispute between supporters and opponents of the Mind control theory. --Uncle Ed 13:35, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

I think they should be kept separate. (XOR)

I agree, the two articles describe different topics and should be kept seperate. Exit counselling is clearly different than deprogramming.--Fahrenheit451 06:28, 6 November 2006 (UTC)