This article is an electronic version of an article originally published in Cultic Studies Journal, 1985, Volume 2, Number 1, pages 17-30. Please keep in mind that the pagination of this electronic reprint differs from that of the bound volume. This fact could affect how you enter bibliographic information in papers that you may write.

Some New Religions Are Dangerous

Arthur A. Dole, Ph.D., A.B.P.P.
University of Pennsylvania
Steve K. D. Eichel, Ph.D.
RETIRN

Abstract

Some researchers allege that new religions and psychotherapy are functionally equivalent. Yet many new religions differ from psychotherapy in respect to dangerousness. A survey of expert cult watchers suggests that documented abuses, not a rival religion or competing psychotherapy, determine whether a new religion is described as dangerous. In addition, the trend in psychotherapy is toward increased concern for ethical and accountable behavior. Finally, the resistance of new religions to impartial and well designed studies differs sharply from the free inquiry that characterizes psychotherapy outcome and process research. Without adequate research, we are forced to rely on the personal testimonies of former new religionists, many of whom report adverse effects.

Full text available through ICSA E-Library.