Quote

I would bet that most people in AA don't know who Frank Buchman was and would only be interested in the principles that AA borrowed from the Oxford movement.....

Colter

That is the typical response I hear from most people in AA and a very common tactic employed by its members not only to defend the ‘program’ but also to promote it; you choose to ignore anything negative and get your magnifying glasses out and pinpoint only the positive aspects of AA. This only adds to my concern that AA may indeed be a cult because it attempts to remove itself from the kind of scrutiny afforded any other institution, and most frighteningly one that claims to save the lives of its members. I might also add that the reason most people in AA are not interested in the truth is because if they ceased to protect themselves from it, would it not be the case that their ‘faith’ in the program, the very thing they AA insists is cornerstone of their lives, would crumble? I can see why no one in AA would dare look into Frank Buchman, the Oxford Group, and soul surgery (The five C’s of which the 12 Steps were evidently lifted from). Frank Buchman was clearly a fascist who also supported Hitler which is well documented. Anyone that says the following is clearly deluded -

"I thank Heaven for a man like Adolf Hitler"[[/i]url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_N._D._Buchman] Retrieved here[/url

But having been a member of AA for 9 years and used all the very same tactics Colter is using I can understand them. The most important thing an AA member can do is distract his/her audience when faced with any form of criticism by attempting to reduce the individual rather than acknowledging a point and attempting to defend it rationally. Colter gives us an example of this in the following comment -

Quote

What is disturbing is that people who, for whatever reason decide not to get help in AA ,are not content to just leave but launch out on a campaign complete with web sites and a following to slander AA in the most vicious way proving the very contention that AA makes, that being that alcoholics are generally selfish immature people.

If this proves the kind of fact you use to base your judgments on then you inadvertently prove another point of mine; AA decides its own facts. How does setting up a website prove that I am either selfish or immature? I am not saying I am neither of those things, all I ask is how setting up a website proves such a thing? That is like saying someone who wants to talk about the damage or side-effects of a drug prescribed to them is selfish and immature. I am not going to insult the members of this forum by dwelling on this point any longer.

I am in a rush but I want to deal with one other point before I go - Colter said:

Quote

There is nothing anywhere in AA literature which takes such an approach in the context that you presented it. I only know of instances where damaged relationships with others are the focus. Situations where a grudge may exist and one could benefit from fist seeing if they themselves had any part to play in the matter but certainly not rape.

Selfishness, self-centeredness! That, we think, is the root of our troubles. Driven by a hundred forms of fear, self-delusion, self-seeking, and self-pity, we step on the toes of our fellows and they retaliate. Sometimes they hurt us, seemingly without provocation, but we invariably find that at some time in the past we have made decisions based on self which later placed us in a position to be hurt. (William Wilson, Chapter 5, Alcoholics Anonymous.)

Wilson does not use words like sometimes, or occasionally, he says “invariably” - he is saying anytime and everytime we are hurt we have some part to play in it. Is this not just another tactic to induce guilt in the individual, which in turn instils a need in them to confess their sins there by reinforcing their dependence on the program, or the group? The War on Self as I call it; I am nothing but WE are everything attitude - very cult like to me.

Thank you all for your responses and Colter, I send this in the spirit of debate.


J a m e s G

Quote

The question of how to approach the man we hated will arise. It may be he has done us more harm than we have done him and, though we may have acquired a better attitude toward him, we are still not too keen about admitting our faults. Nevertheless, with a person we dislike, we take the bit in our teeth. It is harder to go to an enemy than to a friend, but we find it much more beneficial to us. We go to him in a helpful and forgiving spirit, confessing our former ill feeling and expressing our regret.
Under no condition do we criticize such a person or argue. Simply tell him that we will never get over drinking until we have done our utmost to straighten out the past. We are there to sweep off our side of the street, realizing that nothing worth while can be accomplished until we do so, never trying to tell him what he should do. His faults are not discussed. We stick to our own. If our manner is calm, frank, and open, we will be gratified with the result.

This is from a big book website right out of the big book. Its where it says you have to go to someone and tell them you're sorry because you used to be mad at them. So I was told I should go even to some guy who stole money from me and apologize to him for bring mad at him, but only when I was ready. Like I was going to do that! I would talk to God about it, and try to forgive the guy, but I was not going to tell some guy who ripped me off that I was sorry to him for being mad at him. That's nuts!

Quote

Notice that the word "fear" is bracketed alongside the difficulties with Mr. Brown, Mrs. Jones, the employer, and the wife. This short word somehow touches about every aspect of our lives. It was an evil and corroding thread; the fabric of our existence was shot through with it. It set in motion trains of circumstances which brought us misfortune we felt we didn't deserve. But did not we, ourselves, set the ball rolling? Sometimes we think fear ought to be classed with stealing. It seems to cause more trouble.
We reviewed our fears thoroughly. We put them on paper, even though we had no resentment in connection with them.

I quess if that woman who got raped was mad about it her sponsor could of told her her fault was having fear. I would quit AA right then and there is they told me that. I was afraid of some things, and They told me that it was my defect if I was afraid, but I said that was crazy and quit going to AA.

Hi James G,
I can perceive your friendly and mature demeanor regarding debate of the AA program.
points of interest in response to your last post.

* There are legitimate criticisms of trends and ideals within AA, I openly do it in AA meetings. All spiritual movements take on an evolution of their own, some for the better and some for the worce. Movements may liberalize or dilute original principles. Power driving individuals may rise up with new "interpretations" of founding principles and do it in an authoritative way. Most "big shots" in AA either get drunk, get humbled or leave as they become frustrated evangelists.

Quote

Wilson does not use words like sometimes, or occasionally, he says “invariably” - he is saying anytime and every time we are hurt we have some part to play in it. Is this not just another tactic to induce guilt in the individual, which in turn instills a need in them to confess their sins there by reinforcing their dependence on the program, or the group? The War on Self as I call it; I am nothing but WE are everything attitude - very cult like to me.

Isn't this an example of the "magnifying glass"?

Induce Guilt? alcoholics already have guilt, and why? because we are guilty! We are so accustomed to being guilty that we might take on guilt that's not our own so we have to first address our own guilt and then begin to construct healthy psychological boundaries.

If someone treats me wrong and I get angry about it that's a natural and predictable human/animal response. If 12 years latter I'm still angry and sitting in a bar drunk ......well, that's my problem.

In my own life I've identified that I am passive aggressive, that is to say that I get angry inside but don't express that anger when I'm being mistreated but rather suppress it. I have a habit of avoiding confrontation out of fear. This kind of behavior contributes to a low self concept as a persistent theme and subsequently a desire to escape those feelings through pleasurable alternative realities.

I have found it necessary and even healthy to openly express my anger and confront people when necessary. In my opinion I needed to grow through those formative steps that I avoided as an adolescent. I seem to remember a certain airline clerk in Porto Rico on whom I practiced my new found power after being bumped due to over booking. :twisted:

Alcoholics tend to blame others for all their problems and have a difficult time seeing their own part (if in fact they have a part in a dispute). That's why psychologist say that we are people who have not grown up because of our life long [i:b9cdc876a1]mental habit [/i:b9cdc876a1] of avoiding ego deflation or personality shaping experiences by confronting and [i:b9cdc876a1]realizing[/i:b9cdc876a1] our imperfections or limitations.

I feel fairly confident in saying that the holding grudges is not healthy for any human being.

Quote

Selfishness, self-centeredness! That, we think, is the root of our troubles. Driven by a hundred forms of fear, self-delusion, self-seeking, and self-pity, we step on the toes of our fellows and they retaliate. Sometimes they hurt us, seemingly without provocation, but we invariably find that at some time in the past we have made decisions based on self which later placed us in a position to be hurt.[/[/quote]

As an aside the original draft of the what we call "the first 164"pages of the big book was twice as long. Several people who were asked to review the writings edited it down because there was to much "you must" kind of language. Alcoholics are particularly averse to being told what to do.[/color:b9cdc876a1]

For purposes of comparison to Judaio Christian Ideals I will demonstrate how Jesus puts it:


27"But I tell you who hear me: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, 28bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you. 29If someone strikes you on one cheek, turn to him the other also. If someone takes your cloak, do not stop him from taking your tunic. 30Give to everyone who asks you, and if anyone takes what belongs to you, do not demand it back. 31Do to others as you would have them do to you.
32"If you love those who love you, what credit is that to you? Even 'sinners' love those who love them. 33And if you do good to those who are good to you, what credit is that to you? Even 'sinners' do that. 34And if you lend to those from whom you expect repayment, what credit is that to you? Even 'sinners' lend to 'sinners,' expecting to be repaid in full. 35But love your enemies, do good to them, and lend to them without expecting to get anything back. Then your reward will be great, and you will be sons of the Most High, because he is kind to the ungrateful and wicked. 36Be merciful, just as your Father is merciful.


This all has to do with a spiritual attitude of our soul towards others, it's about changing our insides. "The reward" [i:b9cdc876a1]is now[/i:b9cdc876a1], in peace of mind as we learn to love even our enemies.

True forgiveness for ourselves is [i:b9cdc876a1]experienced[/i:b9cdc876a1] as we forgive those who trespass against us.

Colter

AA is not a "cult" by any objective criteria as outlined by experts in field of cultic stuidies.

See [www.culteducation.com]

We have been over this many times on various threads repeatedly.

Barabara was banned for repeating essentially the same posts over and over again and ranting.

The emails received from Barabara after that banning were revealing and bizarre to say the least.

She was and is an Internet "troll," someone who posts on boards with their own agenda and attempts to twist boards into endless debates and arguments.

This board is not for that purpose, but rather to share information and exchange comments for educational purposes.

In the FAQ of this site the following definition of a cult is used – I would like to tell you how I think AA, NA and treatment centres fall into these brackets:

Psychiatrist Robert Jay Lifton, who wrote the definitive book about thought reform (often called "brainwashing") also wrote a paper about cult formation. Lifton defined a cult as having the following three characteristics:
1. A charismatic leader, who increasingly becomes an object of worship as the general principles that may have originally sustained the group lose power.

Despite the fact that both of AA’s co-founders are now dead they are still held in an infallible light, and the words they uttered and wrote are treated like gospel. The first 164 pages of the Big Book of Alcoholics Anonymous have never been edited and I doubt they ever will. Bill Wilson and Dr Bob had their faults, both in their conduct and their ideology but to acknowledge these in any meeting or approved literature is frowned upon. Anyone wishing to challenge the program is swiftly silenced in meetings, and any negative experience expressed openly in the rooms is seen as dissent by other members. The mere fact that the program is regarded as faultless and thus not subject to improvement, is an assault on the possible growth we might achieve as a society by taking on board new theories and evidence about addiction. The slogan “If it ain’ broke, don’t fix it” adds to the kind of stagnation AA promotes. If something ain’t broke, that does not mean it can’t be improved – otherwise we’d all still be watching television in black and white! If one rejects AA and its principles AA is at pains to offer any form of alternative treatment simply because it believes it is the only way in which to recover. The Big Book, written by Bill Wilson, is often thumped and worshiped like a bible; there is even a slogan designed to silence anyone who wants to doubt a principle – “it’s in the Big Book.”

I would also add that although AA has no recognised leaders, within meetings old-timers set the rules with subtle mechanisms. At the same time a sponsor becomes a revered leader to many AAs. It is very hard to maintain a relationship with a sponsor whose advice you do not consistently take on board. In Step Three where members are told to hand their will and their lives over to the care of God, what they are really being asked to do is hand their will and their lives over to AA and its program of ‘recovery’ written by its charismatic co-founder, Bill Wilson. They get away with this by reassuring us no one is going to tell us what to believe in, but they will tell us how to interpret the will of whatever we choose to make our Higher Power. It would be better if they just told us what to believe in and be open about what the process of conversion really involves.

2. A process [is in use] call[ed] coercive persuasion or thought reform.

Slogans, which are effectively tools against individual thought, are used so often in AA it is bordering on embarrassing. Ones like “Take the cotton wool out of your ears and stick it in your mouth” or “K.I.S.S – Keep it Simple, Stupid,” spring to mind. AA can’t make anyone do anything, but it sure as hell can use subtle tactics to make an individual feel very uncomfortable. The 3rd Tradition which states, “The only requirement for membership is a desire to stop drinking,” is misleading to say the least. Any questioning of the program is met with accusations of denial, and suggestions that one is a ‘dry drunk.’ If we went to AA to get sober, with a desire to stop drinking, it seems a little odd that AA has not only redefined the alcoholic, but also sobriety now. Surely that would also point to the fact that this is not a self-help group to help the problem drinker solve their problem, but rather one of thought reform. If not drinking is not enough, hence the ‘dry drunk’ notion, does that not mean members must also go through some kind of thought reform to be accepted? They will tell us that the Steps are but suggestions, yet all over the literature it is made very clear we must practice them or we sign our ‘own death warrant.’ Another slogan I would like to introduce at this point is “N.U.T.S. – Not Using The Steps!” Treatment centres have the right to effectively detain an individual and the coercive nature and practices used to break ‘denial’ are in breach of many human rights. When I went to my first treatment centre at 19 for heroin addiction, I told them I was not an alcoholic because I had not really drunk – I did not mix heroin with alcohol for obvious reasons – until I admitted I had drunk lots and lots and that the consequences were horrific, I was not accepted as a member of my peers; I am ashamed to say I had to lie about the amounts I drank and increase them in order to feel a part of the unit and to get them to stop calling me a liar. What about another slogan, “Don’t Drink and Don’t Think!” That again, is designed to stop the individual thinking for themselves and is a war on the individuality of the person it is aimed at. What about the fact that Bill Wilson even advises people to hold off from mentioning God to the new recruit in the Big Book chapter, Working With Others? In this section I would also like to bring to the fray the fact that once you leave AA or cease to go to meetings no one in AA wants anything to do with you unless they are trying to coerce you back to a meeting. Anyone who has anything against AA is shunned, and members get very very defensive indeed. Note that recently one member contacted me accusing me of effectively being responsible for the death of someone who watched one of my videos.

3. Economic, sexual, and other exploitation of group members by the leader and the ruling coterie.

13th Stepping is a very common phrase used within AA – it is the process used to describe how long time members pursue their sexual interests in the newcomer. I have seen this happen on numerous occasions, and even pro-AA members who have visited my site admit that this phenomenon is deeply disturbing to them. As a straight man I was ‘hit on’ by several other men and when I was new and very vulnerable it took a lot of resolve to be able to reject their advances. The newcomer is reminded how much everyone owes AA and with that to reject any advances from its ‘senior’ members or old-timers, makes one feel mightily guilty. AA appears to escape the cult experts eye based on one criteria, and that is the fact that it has no official leader, but within its many groups ‘leaders’ do exist, despite the fact they are never labelled as such. There is a clear hierarchy which is demonstrated with terms like ‘old-timer,’ ‘newcomer,’ and sobriety time.

The barriers to exit point I have already made very clear in my previous posts – ‘Do The Steps or Die,’ ‘AA is the Last Stop on the Track.’ One other very disturbing aspect of AA is how sponsors and old-timers often tell newcomers not to take medication that has been prescribed to them by a qualified doctor – is that not akin to the kind of practices cited to describe other groups on this site as cults, like the Jehovah’s Witnesses that tell their members to avoid medical advice in the form of blood transfusions? Since when did an AA member who has no formal medical training have the right to veto the medical advice of learned and trained General Practitioners? I really hope the sensible amongst us can see how dangerous this might be. AA not only defines and diagnoses the alcoholic, whilst offering the ‘only solution’ but some of its members then miraculously become experts on medicine. You may well argue that this is a rare occurrence, but I am afraid it is not, and even if it was, does the fact that some people are so brainwashed that they decide to take the advice of a so-called spiritual advisor over that of their own proven doctor, not enough evidence to show that thought reform is rife in AA?
And last but not least you claim that AA is not destructive to the individual and that it is only other members that can be destructive to others. I beg to differ. Studies done in the US on alcoholics sent to AA by the courts show that they are FIVE times more likely to indulge in binge drinking having attended AA than those that had no treatment at all. If that is not destructive, what is? The slogan “AA can’t prevent a relapse but it can ruin one” springs to mind. If we take that apart what is that really saying? Is it not saying that once you have been to AA your drinking will get worse?

There is also experimental evidence that the A.A. doctrine of powerlessness leads to binge drinking. In a sophisticated controlled study of A.A.'s effectiveness (Brandsma et. al.), court-mandated offenders who had been sent to Alcoholics Anonymous for several months were engaging in FIVE TIMES as much binge drinking as another group of alcoholics who got no treatment at all, and the A.A. group was doing NINE TIMES as much binge drinking as another group of alcoholics who got rational behavior therapy. (Retrieved [www.orange-papers.org])

My concern is that anyone who wants to question AA is not only silenced within the rooms, but also outside of them and we are reduced to people who merely want to destroy AA so that we may be allowed to justify our ‘destructive self-will.’ This is not the case at all – all I want to do is reach the truth.

Kind regards,

J a m e s G

James G.:

Thanks for expressing your opinion.

No recognized cult expert that I know of has ever compared AA to Lifton per the criteria you have used regarding thought reform (including Lifton) or cult formation, and concluded that AA is a "cult" or that it somehow "brainwashes" people, but you are entitled to your opinion.

I don't receive complaints from families about AA making such claims concerned about their loved ones.

This seems strange given that other groups much smaller and more recently established than AA have generated a steady stream of complaints regarding their "cult-like" practices, such as Landmark Education, Amway, International Church of Christ, Children of God etc., etc.

It does appear though that there is a steady and deeply devoted group of people that are focused on criticizing AA. And that this group has effectively used the Internet to communicate its opinions.

A common complaint made by AA critics seems to be that AA promotes a relgious belief through its "higher power" teaching. And that this is offensive to those who don't wish to believe in any such power.

OK.

Atheists and humanists would be unhappy in AA.

Interestingly, more orthodox religionists have also criticized this same AA teaching saying it's not religious enough and should be far more specific and defined according to the bible.

AA critics seem reasonable when they complain about judges that sentence people to AA meetings, i.e. that a belief should not be forced upon people as a part of sentencing, given the traditional American separation of Church and State.

But that doesn't make AA a "cult."

AA has a belief system it teaches people through its meetings and this can be seen as indoctrination, but not what Lifton calls "thought reform" or "brainwashing."

See [www.culteducation.com]

Note the distinctions that Margaret Singer makes though her chart of persuasion techniques.

Rick thanks for your response – I will use my own quoting system seeing as yours does not work or I do not know how to use it properly!

Quoting rrmoderator “ No recognized cult expert that I know of has ever compared AA to Lifton per the criteria you have used regarding thought reform (including Lifton) or cult formation, and concluded that AA is a "cult" or that it somehow "brainwashes" people, but you are entitled to your opinion.”

Might it be the case that this has arisen because none of those experts have been exposed to AA fully? Have any of them been addicts or alcoholics? Two or three meetings does not cover what might be called a thorough examination of the practices of any group. If it was so obvious AA is a cult they would not make this apparent in anyone’s first few meetings. To do so would work against them. In an email you sent to me you stated the following:

Quoting Rick Ross: “I have been professionally involved with 12-step groups to some extent.”

May I be so bold as to ask you to what extent that is?

Quoting Rick Ross: “I don't receive complaints from families about AA making such claims concerned about their loved ones.”

Rick to be fair there are plenty of sites that allow ex members of AA as well as their families to describe in detail their horrific experiences of AA. Have you read the book, ‘AA Horror Stories’? I am curious to know why you are so defensive of AA. Are you absolutely sure you have no business, nor personal, interest in its PR machine? I ask this merely to quash the thoughts that have arisen in my mind as a result of your posts on here, and no doubt I am not alone in thinking this. I am concerned because I feel as though you have reached your conclusions and you are determined to prove those before hearing what others have to say. Do you read what I have to say with the notion of understanding it or do you do so from the outset with a call to arms to protect AA? Again, this is merely a question. I want to also say that AA makes it very clear, falsely, that anyone who relapses is to blame and AA is faultless – most families take this view on.

Quoting Rick Ross: “This seems strange given that other groups much smaller and more recently established than AA have generated a steady stream of complaints regarding their "cult-like" practices, such as Landmark Education, Amway, International Church of Christ, Children of God etc., etc.”

I ask you to look beyond your own site which I get a sense is often mistaken for one that is endorsed by Scientology – they run a site called The Cult Awareness Network – this may sadly prevent people posting on here. I trust my instincts and I don’t think you are trying to silence any of us, but rather going on what you know, which is precisely what I am doing, but at the same time I am willing to expose myself to views that are contrary to mine, as are you, but perhaps this false association with Scientology is harming the integrity of this site. I am of course assuming you have no connection with Scientology.

Quoting Rick Ross: “It does appear though that there is a steady and deeply devoted group of people that are focused on criticizing AA. And that this group has effectively used the Internet to communicate its opinions.”

This very forum is Internet based, is it not? I think people are frightened of speaking out against AA and with that the forum of the Internet is attractive. I have been willing to show my face on the videos I have made and I have put forward my name on countless sites, but only because I researched my views before expressing them and as such felt confident they had some basis. AA is quick to remind us that a public doubting of the program leads to relapse which in turn leads to death – is it any wonder no one wants to be publicly exposed for doing so?

Kind regards,

J a m e s G

James G.:

You said:

Quote

because none of those experts have been exposed to AA fully? Have any of them been addicts or alcoholics? Two or three meetings does not cover what might be called a thorough examination of the practices of any group.

This is very similar to cult member's comments on this board, offering the defense that no one can understand their group without becoming directly involved and the frequent statement made by Landmark Education participants "that's not my experience," as a response to complaints about that company's programs.

It is possible to draw conclusions about groups without participating directly and/or sharing in the experience.

As stated previously anti-cult organizations, cult experts and the usual people that receive complaints about "cult like" groups and "brainwashing" are not receiving such complaints about AA that I am aware of.

Quote

there are plenty of sites that allow ex members of AA as well as their families to describe in detail their horrific experiences of AA.

As stated previously, it is evident that AA critics has made good use of the Internet. But that doesn't change the fact that other those specific outlets, AA still isn't generating the complaints you would expect through more typical and/or conventional channels given its size and history.

Quote

people are frightened of speaking out against AA

Over the years people have spoken out despite their fears about very violent and dangerous cults. It seems unlikely that concerned families would be frightened to speak out about AA if they had complaints and serious concerns regarding loved ones.

Quote

AA is quick to remind us that a public doubting of the program leads to relapse which in turn leads to death – is it any wonder no one wants to be publicly exposed for doing so?

This seems like little more than a conveinent apology. However, that apology still doesn't explain why families with serious concerns about "brainwashing" would not come forward, if they think that AA is hurting rather than helping a loved one.

Quote

your own site which I get a sense is often mistaken for one that is endorsed by Scientology – they run a site called The Cult Awareness Network – this may sadly prevent people posting on here...perhaps this false association with Scientology is harming the integrity of this site. I am of course assuming you have no connection with Scientology.

Are you serious or joking here?

Scientology has sites attacking this site and me by name, including the so-called "New Cult Awareness Network." No one could possibly be confused or seriously concerned about any supposed connection to Scientology.

And Scientology has listed me as its perceived enemy for some time.

Quote

I am curious to know why you are so defensive of AA. Are you absolutely sure you have no business, nor personal, interest in its PR machine? I ask this merely to quash the thoughts that have arisen in my mind as a result of your posts on here, and no doubt I am not alone in thinking this.

No there is no conspiracy here.

I am not "defensive" because I have no personal or professional interest whatsoever regarding AA other than this; AA is not a "cult" and this board and other cult education resources, which are quite limited, should be focused on cults, cult-like groups and closely related subjects of interest.

It is important to make these distinctions regarding what is a "cult" and what is not, as well as not blur the lines between the different forms of persuasion as noted by Margaret Singer.

Quote

May I be so bold as to ask you to what extent that is? [professional involvement in 12-step groups]

As you were previously advised in an email earlier today, my work in the 1980s at a social service agency coordinating a program that included people with substance abuse problems involved locating resources such as support groups. The agency used 12-step programs such as AA and NA as support group resources. Some clients attended these groups. I once attended an NA meeting as an observer.

We never received any complaints that I am aware of.

My work at the agency ended in 1986 and that is the full extent of my professional work with 12-step groups.

I have no personal involvement whatsoever, other than like many people I have had aquaintences/friends that attended such programs.

Again, no complaints.

Could it be the case that the lack of complaints might be because people go to AA as a last resort, usually after a major consequence and with that the level of respect afforded them is at a low? Their concerns will fall on deaf ears because as a result of the drinking they have no credibility? Other cults don't recruit people at their worst and that might explain why their antics are more exposed and disturbing to any family members.

J a m e s G

James G.:

No.

Many groups called "cults" or "cult-like" have recruited people at their "worst."

For example Synanon, Straight, Set Free, Narconon (affiliated with Scientology), Victory Outreach, Deeper Life and Teen Challenge.

These groups focused largely upon people with serious substance abuse problems.

See the following:

[www.culteducation.com]

[www.culteducation.com]

[www.culteducation.com]

[www.culteducation.com]

[www.culteducation.com]

[www.culteducation.com]

[www.culteducation.com]

Likewise so-called "Teen Boot Camps" often focused upon young people with serious behavior problems.

See [www.culteducation.com]

Despite the personal history of people participating within these groups/programs, their complaints were recognized by families and the press and reported them.

Many "cults" typically target people for recruitment at a vulnerable point in their lives.