Cathleen A. Mann, Ph.D., LPC, NCAC II, CAC III
D/b/a Purplepeak Counseling and Consulting Group
1880 S. Pierce Street, Unit 7
Lakewood, CO 80232
Phone/VM: (303) 934-2828
Fax: (303) 934-2892 -----------------------------------------------------------
I have known Mr. Hassan for 10 years. He is the publisher of two
fine books on cults and high demand groups that are geared toward
families understanding and dealing with the phenomena of cultic
involvement and recovery. Mr. Hassan has an excellent reputation
in the mental health community. He has presented as an invited speaker
with others on cultic issues at the national APA (American Psychological
Association) conventions twice in the past 5 years. I have worked
with Mr. Hassan on voluntary interventions, and have had the opportunity
to observe his work firsthand. Additionally, I have worked with
Mr. Hassan’s Freedom of Mind Resource Center, Inc. as a volunteer.
I feel that I am at a unique vantage point to comment on Mr. Hassan’s
work, both as a colleague and as a professional who works with cultic
issues in the legal arena. I have been certified in court as an
expert in the areas of cults/high demand groups, undue influence
(or mind control), and effects of cultic involvement on adults,
family, and children.
It is patently false that Mr. Hassan is “collectively”
diagnosing persons based on their cult involvement. The issue of
“mind control” is a complicated one. It is important
to remember that “mind control” has many other names,
but the psychological literature recognizes it as undue influence,
groupthink, and thought reform, among others. Mind control is a
syndrome, much like child abuse is a syndrome. Mind control is not
a medical or mental health diagnosis, and Mr. Hassan is not using
it that way. The use of the term “mind control” is a
reference to a system of behaviors utilized by high demand groups
or individuals to elicit conformity, obedience, and submission to
group or individual will. The issue of undue influence and “mind
control” is heavily supported by the psychological literature,
including works by Zimbardo, Langone, Cialdini, Kent, Zablocki,
and others.
The effects of “mind control” can be negative. Mr.
Hassan uses his expertise to assist individuals and families with
recognizing the effects of cult involvement. Professionals who work
with cult survivors recognize that there is many times a lack of
informed consent in high demand group involvement. Individuals are
recruited and retained without full knowledge of what they are involved
with, the short and long term consequences of involvement, and how
deception may play a part in compliance and conformity. What Mr.
Hassan does is to provide education and counseling to encourage
critical thinking as one type of therapeutic intervention. Also,
Mr. Hassan encourages connection with families, which is often the
first liability when someone is indoctrinated into a cultic system.
This is conducted in a noncoercive fashion, where individuals are
informed of the process and are free to disengage at any time.
Mind control or undue influence may not be a legal defense, but
it has been used many times in a court of law as mitigation for
sentencing. The most recent example is the US v. Malvo
court case, where an expert on mind control and undue influence
was allowed to testify on the effects this syndrome had on Malvo’s
overall functioning. This expert testimony was allowed despite protests
from the Government. Testimony in court is not prohibited or limited
because of the controversy surrounding a topic, but is admitted
on a case-by-case basis. Other examples of the allowance of courtroom
testimony around cults and mind control include US v. Larry
Layton and Church Universal and Triumphant v. Mull, and others.
In the latter case, the court allowed the expert testimony of more
than one expert on mind control, and the group (Church Universal
and Triumphant) was found to have used deceit and deception to obtain
money from a member.
All competent mental health professionals recognize the importance
of the DSM-IV in the diagnosis of mental disorders. However, the
DSM-IV does not provide, nor does it endorse, any particular treatment
approach or strategy. The DSM-IV is merely a listing of symptoms.
Mr. Hassan is not treating mind control; he is treating the aftereffects
of mind control: dissociative, anxiety, and depressive disorders
(all listed as bona fide mental health conditions within the DSM-IV).
Also, the DSM-IV does not speak to the issue of causality, e.g.
because someone has the symptoms of a disorder, we cannot necessarily
exclude any cause. It is the job of the mental health professional
to try to determine causality and render treatment.
It is false that mind control has no credibility in the scientific
community. What is true is that mind control as a mechanism in cults
or high demand groups is controversial within the scientific
community, but it is not the only syndrome that is so. In the scientific
field of psychology for example, there is no unitary theory of anything!
There are many theories, but little consensus. It is a strawman
argument to say that mind control is controversial, when almost
everything else is also controversial and changes with new data
and information. The way psychology and psychiatry view things has
changed dramatically within the past 10, 20, and 30 years. It is
important to view mind control in its context within the subspeciality
of social psychology. No one would deny that something very wrong
occurred at Jonestown in 1978, or with the Branch Davidians or Heaven’s
Gate. It is accepted in the scientific community that a form of
applied social psychological techniques utilizing group, individual,
and intrapersonal factors contributed to the demise of individuals
within these groups.
It is important not to confuse the issues. What is a generally
accepted therapeutic intervention differs from an accepted legal
defense that may differ from controversial theorizing. It is vital
that informed people not confuse treatment with diagnosis or behavior
with causation or legal processes with therapeutic modalities.
Freedomofmind.com fully supports religious
freedom and the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
The fact that a person’s name or group appears on our website
does not necessarily mean they are a destructive mind control cult.
They appear because we have received inquiries and have established
a file on the group.
The Freedom of Mind Resource Center Inc. was established by cult expert Steve Hassan.
