by CrimePsych | Jul 16, 2023 | Blog
Gaslighting is a silent form of manipulation that can have a profound impact on individuals’ mental and emotional well-being. In this blog series, we aim to shed light on gaslighting, raise awareness, and create a supportive community where individuals affected by gaslighting can find empowerment and support. Together, let’s unmask the manipulation and empower positive change.
Gaslighting: A Silent Form of Manipulation
Gaslighting is more common than we might think. This manipulative tactic is designed to distort someone’s perception of reality, making them doubt their own thoughts, feelings, and experiences. It involves subtle or overt behaviors that aim to undermine the victim’s confidence and control over their own life. By raising awareness about gaslighting, we can help others recognize its signs and create a supportive and informed community. Together, we can make a difference in combating gaslighting.
Break the Silence: Gaslighting in Relationships
Gaslighting can occur in various types of relationships, including romantic partnerships, friendships, or even within families. It is characterized by the manipulation of emotions, perceptions, and reality. Gaslighting erodes trust, self-esteem, and autonomy, leaving victims feeling confused and powerless. It’s time to break the silence surrounding this issue and raise awareness about the damaging effects of gaslighting. Together, we can create a culture of healthy and respectful connections.
Gaslighting at Work: Know Your Rights
Gaslighting can also manifest in the workplace, creating a toxic environment that undermines individuals’ confidence and well-being. Gaslighters may use tactics like undermining, manipulating information, or shifting blame to exert control and power over their victims. It is crucial for individuals to know their rights and recognize these behaviors in order to protect themselves. By understanding their rights, individuals can take steps towards creating a healthier and more supportive work environment.
Gaslighting in Family Dynamics: Unmasking the Manipulation
Gaslighting can occur within families, affecting emotional bonds and individual identities. It can be especially challenging when the manipulator is a close family member. By bringing awareness to this issue, we can promote healthier family dynamics and support those who may be experiencing gaslighting within their families. Open dialogue, empathy, and validation are key in fostering an environment where individuals feel safe to express their emotions and regain their autonomy.
Break Free from Gaslighting: Reclaim Your Power
Gaslighting can have a profound impact on one’s mental health and well-being. It is crucial to raise awareness about the effects of gaslighting and empower individuals to break free from its grip. By providing support, resources, and strategies, we can help individuals reclaim their power, rebuild their self-esteem, and establish healthy boundaries. Together, let’s inspire change and create a community that fosters healing and empowerment.
Conclusion
Gaslighting is a pervasive form of manipulation that can have lasting effects on individuals’ lives. By unmasking gaslighting, raising awareness, and providing support, we can empower those who have experienced it to reclaim their power and foster positive change. Stay tuned for the upcoming posts in this series, where we will delve deeper into each aspect of gaslighting and provide valuable advice and insights for overcoming its impact. Together, we can create a world where gaslighting has no place, and individuals can thrive in healthy, supportive relationships.
by CrimePsych | Dec 28, 2020 | Blog
When PTSD is discussed alongside offending behaviour, the majority of academic papers and articles examine the link between child sexual abuse and future child sexual offending. However, PTSD can be relevant to other crime types too.
There have been cases where soldiers returning from combat are suffering PTSD which affects their mental health a great deal. Some are suffering so badly that they go on to commit violent crimes or have psychotic episodes which leads them to commit crimes.
Government statistics from the United States show that veterans form the largest single occupational group within the prison and probation services and that they are more likely to have committed a violent or sexual offence than offenders who have not served in the military.
Other research in this area suggests that some military activities can increase the risk of offending. For example, deploying in a combat role and exposure to trauma during deployment, have been shown to increase the risk of violent offending by military personnel on return. That isn’t to say that all military personnel who experience a traumatic event or serving in a combat role will go on to be violent offenders, it simply increases the risk.
A UK study that of 2,700 men serving in the armed forces under the age of 30, 20.6% had been convicted of a violent offence, compared with 6.7% in the general population. Men who had seen combat in Iraq and Afghanistan were 53% more likely to commit a violent offence than those in non-front line roles. And personnel who had multiple experiences of combat had a 70% to 80% greater risk of being convicted of acts of violence.
That particular study states: “More frequent exposure to traumatic events during deployment increased the risk of violent offending. We noted a strong link between PTSD and violent offending. Combat veterans with PTSD and other mental health concerns frequently present with problems of anger and aggression.” However, it also notes that troops who volunteer and are trained for fighting are not chosen randomly.
“In the UK, infantry units have traditionally promoted aggression as a desirable trait and such units frequently recruit individuals who are socially disadvantaged and are likely to have low educational attainment.”
The report goes on to write that the vast majority [83%] of serving and ex-serving UK military personnel do not have any sort of criminal record, and the likelihood of violent behaviour is lower among older veterans [aged over 45] than in the general population.
Of course, PTSD is not limited to those who have served in the armed forces. Those who have a victim of child sexual abuse can also suffer from PTSD. However, it must be noted that being sexually abused does not cause someone to sexually offend and that the majority of those who are sexually abused do not go on to commit abuse.
However, the traumatic events of being a victim appear to have different trajectories for males and females. This is because most victims of child sexual abuse are female, whereas most perpetrators are male.
One study explored these trajectories and identified four factors that may be associated with a boy’s transition from the victim to the offender. They argue that these four factors share a common theme, that is, that they represent experiences of power (for the abuser) and powerlessness (for the victim).
There is a common misconception that being sexually abused ‘causes’ a boy to become sexually abusive. As a result, many men who have suffered sexual abuse are faced with an often overwhelming fear of ‘becoming a perpetrator.’
There are a range of factors that have been identified as being linked to sexual offending, and there are disputes amongst researchers as to which of these is most significant. However, I don’t believe it is at all helpful to examine gender roles within sexual offending. There is a danger of the characterising all men as perpetrators and all women as victims. If we examine the characteristics of male perpetrators, traits will be linked to all men.
Research over the past 40 years has identified a number of risk factors that can contribute to the likelihood of a person committing sexual offences. Compared to the general population, adults who commit sexual offences against children tend to:
- Show greater aggression and violence, non-violent criminality, anger/hostility, substance abuse, paranoia/mistrust, and have diagnosable antisocial personality disorders.
- Be more likely to show anxiety, depression, low self-esteem, and external locus of control (i.e. feel that they are not in control of, or responsible for, their own actions).
- Generally have more problematic sexual patterns (including fantasies and sexualised coping strategies).
- Have low social skill/competence, report more feelings of loneliness, more difficulties with intimate relationships, and lack of secure attachment.
- Have poorer histories of family functioning, including more harsh discipline, poorer attachment or bonding, and generally worse functioning of their family of origin, including physical abuse, and sexual abuse.
- Express more tolerant attitudes to child sexual abuse and minimize the perpetrator’s culpability.
In conclusion, then, we should be examining how we can support the mental health of those who have experienced traumatic events. This would reduce the risk of PSTD forming. If we focused more funding on supporting mental health, other services such as police and the judicial system would receive fewer cases.
by CrimePsych | Dec 16, 2020 | Blog
An eyewitness is considered to be someone who has seen or hear a crime being committed. When the police are investigating a criminal act, they interview everyone who was in the area at the time to determine whether they saw or heard anything which may be of use in securing a prosecution.
Witnessing a crime can be a distressing event for some people, especially if it is violent or involves a weapon. Plus, psychological studies into memory show that we recall different types of information in different ways and this can cause inaccuracies and biases. People can make mistakes when trying to remember specific pieces of information. It is possible to remember whole events that did not happen.
The person who witnessed the event is likely to be interviewed several times. They can be interviewed by police, prosecution lawyers, def3ence lawyers at various times throughout the investigation. Sometimes these interviews can be conducted several months after the original event. Eyewitness accounts are often seen as very valuable by police officers and juries. However, the quality and quantity of information a person recalls can be greatly affected by several psychological factors.
Numerous studies show how inaccurate eyewitness testimony can be. Any mistakes that they eyewitnesses make will lead to a wrongful conviction. One particular study by Garrett (2011) found that some people were exonerated after their conviction because of DNA evidence. One-third of those convicted had been found guilty based on the evidence of eyewitness testimony alone.
There are several high profile cases where victims of crime have incorrectly identified the culprit. For example, Ronald Cotton was convicted of rape and sentenced to life imprisonment. DNA evidence proved that he was not the perpetrator and was released. Thankfully, the real rapist was then found. However, the testimony from the victim, Jennifer Thompson, caused an innocent man to spend 10 years behind bars.
We have developed a very good understanding of how people construct and recall memory. This has led to improvements in interviewing and gathering information from eyewitnesses. These changes have drastically reduced the number of errors that people make when recalling information.
One of the leading pioneers into the psychology of eyewitness testimony is Elizabeth Loftus. In one of her earliest studies she found that by giving people misinformation, they were able to change the memories people recalled. In their study, students watched a small red car hit a pedestrian. They were then asked misleading questions such as ‘how fast was the car travelling when it went through the give way sign?’ (it was a stop sign). Others were asked about the stop sign. When they were late presented with two pictures, one containing a give way sign and the other a stop sign, students who were misled were more likely to choose the picture with the give way sign. This and many other studies have shown it is possible to change a person’s memory by giving them misleading information.
Other aspects such as social conformity can affect the accuracy of the information that eyewitnesses recall. Some studies have been designed so that a group watch a video and then discuss the information contained in it. The majority of participants in the group were fake and only a few genuine participants. It was found that when the fake members of the group said that something occurred, the genuine participants agreed and also said that it had. Therefore, it is possible to change our memory of events to ‘fit in’ with other people’s accounts.
There is also a phenomenon known as ‘schema’ which is based on what we would normally expect to find or come across in various contexts. For example, we would expect to come across shelves and books at a library and therefore we do not put any effort into remembering the details of these. Our attention would be directed towards other aspects of the scene. We have a limited ability to take in all of the information in our surroundings and so tend to use a set of ‘short cuts’.
We can create memories in our mind that we can 100% believe are genuine but have never happened. We can also completely forget about other things that have happened. Sometimes a victim of a violent crime can completely forget that the crime occurred, this is called a repressed memory. Often, these memories are not recalled until years after the original event.
When the police are interviewing a suspect, they can create false memories. This was proven in a major study by Crombag and colleagues (1996). They conducted a study about details of a crash involving a Boeing 747 into a residential area of Amsterdam. At the time the news incident was being reported, there were no pictures or video of the crash available. However, when participants were interviewed they were misled into thinking they had seen such images. Their recollection included details that they could not have seen.
Some eyewitnesses can be very confident about the information that they are recalling and others can be very unsure. Several studies have found that confidence is not linked to accuracy. Just because a person is very confident in what they are saying does not mean it is more likely to be true. Similarly, just because someone is unsure whether or not they are recalling things accurately doesn’t mean it is unreliable.
It is not all bad news when it comes to eyewitness testimony though. We do know that certain kinds of information can be accurately recalled. Things such as gender, eye shape, face shape, and hair colour are usually highly accurate. The timing of recalling the information is also of great importance. The sooner the information is recalled and collected, the more accurate it is likely to be.
When eyewitnesses are asked to pick the offender out of an identity parade, they may feel pressured to pick a person out even though they may not be 100% sure they have chosen the correct suspect. They may pick someone out because they assume the offender must be in the line-up.
By putting in stringent frameworks it is possible to reduce the number of incorrect identifications. Several procedures have been put into everyday practice by police to reduce the possibility of incorrect identification of a suspect. Measures, such as the officer not knowing who the suspect is so as not to influence the witness, the witness being told the offender may not be in the line-up, having similar looking people used in lineups, and no feedback to be given to the witness, can all help to reduce inaccurate information by eyewitnesses.
Both the quantity and quality of information drawn out from witnesses and suspects is of great importance. Therefore, a comprehensive semi-structured interview technique has been proven to improve the quantity and quality of information from both suspects and eyewitnesses. The Cognitive Interview is grounded within psychology and contains several important factors within an interview: establish rapport; listen actively; encourage spontaneous recall; ask open-ended questions; pause after responses; avoid interrupting; request detailed descriptions; encourage intense concentration; encourage the use of imagery; recreate the original context; adopt the rememberers perspective; ask compatible questions and encourage multiple retrieval attempts.
In an attempt to make this simpler so it could be adopted into everyday policing practices, the PEACE interview was developed. PEACE is an acronym where all of the letters stand for something to be done. This summarizes the main components of the cognitive interview to Planning and preparation; Engage and explain the purpose of interview and process; Account – free recall; Clarify challenge and conclude; Evaluate – and new lines of enquiry. By using these principles during an interview, both the quantity and quality of information is enhanced.
In conclusion, several factors can affect the quality and quantity of information that people remember. It is possible to ask questions in a way that can create false memories. Therefore, stringent and well-regulated frameworks are put into practice to avoid this happening.
by CrimePsych | Dec 9, 2020 | Blog
With the second wave in full flow in the UK, we have all begun to feel the psychological strain of having our movements restricted. This has had an even bigger impact on the prison population who were already restricted. Even before the Covid-19 pandemic, there was a recognition that those entering the prison service have mental health needs that need addressing. 26% of women and 16% of men said they had received treatment for a mental health problem in the year before custody.
The World Health Organisation’s Health In Prisons Program (HIPP) was established in 1995 is to support Member States in improving public health by addressing health and health care in prisons, and to facilitate the links between prison health and public health systems at both national and international levels. HIPP has since developed into an international movement to promote health in prison settings.
HIPP’s main activity is to give technical advice to Member States on the development of prison health systems and their links with public health systems and technical issues related to communicable diseases (especially HIV/AIDS, hepatitis and tuberculosis), illicit drug use (including substitution therapy and harm reduction) and mental health.
HIPP aims:
- to encourage cooperation and establish integrated work between public health systems, international nongovernmental organizations and prison health systems to promote public health and reduce health inequalities;
- to encourage prisons to operate within the widely recognized international codes of human rights and medical ethics in providing services for prisoners;
- to help reduce reoffending by encouraging prison health services to contribute fully to each prisoner’s rehabilitation, especially but not exclusively concerning drug addiction and mental health problems;
- to reduce prisoners’ exposure to communicable diseases, thereby preventing prisons’ becoming focal points of infection; and
- to encourage all prison health services, including health promotion services, to reach standards equivalent to those in the wider community.
Whilst this sounds perfectly reasonable on paper, it is rarely delivered to this standard. 70% of people who died from self-inflicted means whilst in prison had already been identified as having mental health needs. However, the Prisons and Probation Ombudsman (PPO) found that concerns about mental health problems had only been flagged on entry to the prison for just over half of these people. Self-inflicted deaths are 8.6 times more likely in prison than in the general population.
Prison needs to be a careful balance between punishment and rehabilitation. However, the structure has not changed much in modern times. The WHO agrees with the prison reform trust that prison should provide an opportunity for personal development, without harming self or others. However, self-inflicted deaths are much more likely in prison compared to outside.
In thinking about the functions of prisons in the 21st century, it’s useful to identify the problems that contribute to offending, and then think about how imprisonment relates to them. Many people in prison have hurt other people, and what follows is not intended to excuse that behaviour in any way. Much of the evidence about the damage caused by prisons is focused on offenders, and not on their families or prison staff. Yet, prison staff are also affected by many of the same problems, including stigma, a risk to personal safety, and poor working conditions. Prison Reform Trust researchers have found that the vast majority of staff are dedicated professionals, who struggle, against the odds, to work with prisoners.
Knowledge about the ways imprisonment routinely harms people should be a cause for concern for anyone who aims to reduce reoffending. Because of the way prisons operate, even the best are likely to contribute to the loss of housing, the break-up of families and social support networks, and long term unemployment.
The psychological effects of imprisonment go beyond the offender. Families and loved ones often feel the strain of reduced contact, social isolation and financial hardship. One of the main concerns of prisons should be to support offenders to reform and make better choices in life. I order to do this, it is necessary to understand why people might offend in the first place. The reconviction rate for people coming out of prison with one previous prison sentence is 41%. For those with four previous prison sentences, the reconviction rate is 57%. And those with six to ten previous experiences of prison are reconvicted at a rate of 65% (MoJ, Table A9, page 30). Therefore, more needs to be done to support and rehabilitate offenders rather than focus solely on punishment.
Many of those who are incarcerated have experienced neglect or abuse during childhood. When women are separated from their families because they have offended, it may evoke guilt and depression, and memories of their childhood neglect. It does not make sense to take people who have experienced abusive relationships as children and send them to places that inevitably destabilise any relationships they may have built up. Yet, proximity to home is a low priority for the Prison Service. And for everyone, prisons limit access to families. Even telephone calls are restricted to certain times, and at exorbitant rates negotiated with BT. Social isolation makes it more difficult for the person to interact with others on release. Social isolation can also increase the risk of reoffending.
Theft, drug-dealing, and robbery are also far more widespread than outside. The risks prisoners must live with creates trauma and stress which affect prisoners and prison staff.
There is also a risk of violence and intimidation. This can make prisoners and staff feel more stressed and may lead to staff sicknesses. However, in contrast, the pressure on prison governors is to reduce staff numbers, which further undermines their ability to prevent violence.
High-risk environments such as these influences people’s attitudes towards violence. A US study concluded that prisoners come to “believe that unless an inmate can convincingly project an image that conveys the potential for violence, he is likely to be dominated and exploited throughout the duration of his sentence” (McCorkle, cited in Haney, 2001).
The Chief Inspector of Prisons stated, “There is nothing worse for the mental well-being of those who find it difficult to cope with life in prison than being idle” (HMCIP, 1999: 62). Engaging in activities that are genuinely productive and experienced as meaningful can help prisoners to feel that their time inside has purpose. However, such opportunities exist for a small minority. The lack of meaningful activity is not evenly distributed. It is even more restricted under the current conditions of social isolation during the pandemic.
As a nation, I believe we are facing one of the most challenging and psychologically demanding times. This is even more marked for the current UK prison population. Many are being locked in their cells for 23 hours per day with no social interaction. There is a danger that these prisoners will not emerge as well-adjusted individuals who can contribute in a meaningful way to society.
The continuous caused by social isolation, lack of meaningful activity or contribution within their surroundings, and stress caused by the increase in violence and lack of long-term hope may well cause instances of post-traumatic stress disorder. Stress affects people mentally, physically and cognitively, with results ranging from psychological exhaustion and burnout. Watch my recent telephone interview with a current UK prisoner about what current conditions are like. https://youtu.be/UtMb-AbXWT0
This will have significant consequences for the long-term future of society and prison life. It is an issue that should be addressed and dealt with now.
http://www.prisonreformtrust.org.uk/WhatWeDo/Projectsresearch/Mentalhealth
http://www.prisonreformtrust.org.uk/uploads/documents/Mentalhealthsmall.pdf
https://digest.bps.org.uk/2018/07/13/research-into-the-mental-health-of-prisoners-digested/
by CrimePsych | Dec 1, 2020 | Blog
David Canter suggested that people reveal themselves through the locations where they commit crimes. Geographic profiling is the process of determining the most probable area of an offender’s base of activities through an analysis of his or her crime locations (Rossmo, 2000).
Geographical profiles are used in the investigation of a series of crimes to locate the likely home base of the offender. This base could be where the offender lives, but could also be a place of employment, friend or families house, or significant previous home. It could be any place that is meaningful to the offender.
Canter (2003) argues that geographical profiling was “born” in 1980 when a UK police investigator analysed the locations of crime scenes of the Yorkshire Ripper and computed the “centre of gravity” of the crime scenes thought to be linked to the case. It turned out that the offender lived in the town that the investigator predicted.
In the mid-1990s, more sophisticated models for predicting an offender’s home address were developed. These were building on the research conducted by Brantingham and Brantingham (1981). Rossmo (1999) summarized the research in this area which has been that most crimes occur in relative proximity to the offender’s home. Why travel 10 miles when what you want is available in 1?
Crime trips follow a distance-decay function, with the number of crime occurrences decreasing with distance from the offender’s home. In other words, the further away, the less crime. There has found to be differences in the distance travelled to offend for various crime types.
Research has shown that the most important influence on where criminals offend is where they go during their non-criminal activities (Bennett & Wright, 1984). These distances can be written into a mathematical model which is then used to predict the most likely home base of the offender. In doing this, investigative resources can be applied in a more targeted way. This mathematical equation has been used in several software programs to predict where the offender will live or work.
In some serial crime cases, the number of known suspects can be in the hundreds or thousands, and a geographic profile can help police manage this information (Rossmo, 2012). A geographic profile is used to prioritize suspects based on their address information. Analysts can use a geographic profile to prioritize records the police department already has access to, such as arrest records, field interviews, and jail booking sheets. These files often include the offender’s address, physical description, and prior arrest charges. Other databases may also be used in conjunction with a profile, such as parole, probation, and motor vehicle registration databases (Rossmo, 2006).
While it does not directly solve cases, geographic profiling can spatially focus an investigation and help manage large volumes of information.
by CrimePsych | Nov 16, 2020 | Blog
Within the psychological research, there are different explanations for involvement in cults. Some researchers believe that involvement in cults is an evolutionary trait. We know that our bodies have evolved to adapt to our environment and is passed on from generation to generation. However, evolutionary psychologists suggest that our minds evolve in the same way. They propose that society and groups have changed so rapidly that we simply haven’t been able to evolve our mind as quick. Therefore, they propose that involvement in cults occurs because we want and need to belong to small groups, or tribes, to satisfy a need for comfort.
We learn though observing others and imitate their behaviour. Therefore, if we have family members, friends, or relationships with those who are involved with a cult we are more likely to copy that behaviour and join the cult.
Social Identity Theory by Tajfel (1979) proposes that the groups (e.g. social class, family, football team etc.) which people belonged to were an important source of pride and self-esteem. Groups give us a sense of social identity: a sense of belonging to the social world. We divided the world into “them” and “us” based through a process of social categorization (i.e. we put people into social groups). Others have suggested that involvement in cults leads to a psychological process called Stockholm syndrome. Those who are intimidated, controlled, or made to suffer, begin to love, admire, and even sometimes sexually desire their controllers or captors. This would certainly be relevant once a person is part of a cult but fails to explain why people would join in the first place.
Involvement in cults is likely to be very complex. Therefore, we need to draw from several areas within psychology in order to explain it. Many researchers have rejected the use of the word cult and prefer a more generic description. Cults can be seen as an organised group or solitary person whose purpose is to dominate cult members by using psychological manipulation and pressure strategies.
One thing that researchers agree on is that those who join cults are vulnerable individuals. People are often surprised to learn that those who join cults are, for the most part, average people. They come from a variety of backgrounds. But research done in the past two decades has found that many people successfully recruited by cults are said to have low self-esteem. This isn’t to say that cult leaders actively seek out those with clinical depression or other traits. However, those with lower self-esteem are easier to break down, then build back up in an effort to teach them that the cult is the supportive environment they’re looking for.
Most people who join cults are looking for emotional comfort and reassurance. Very often, they will have experienced some difficulties and the cult appears to be an attractive solution for this. The need to seek emotional comfort and reassurance is a basic human instinct. Almost everyone attempts satisfy this need in one way or another.
People follow religions, they go to places of worship and pray to their gods and this gives them some comfort to know that there is an entity bigger than us who can take care of us. For Christians, it is God. For Muslims, it is Allah, for Buddhists it’s Buddha, for Pagans it is the Gods and Goddesses of the various elements, for Scientologists it’s their own spiritual identity and a God that is not described. Even those who profess to not believe in any religion may still believe that energy exists and cannot be destroyed.
All of these forms of religion or beliefs have some structure. They satisfy a need for belonging within us and give us hope. However, when we become diss-illusioned with these beliefs, it causes anxiety and a deep sense of loss. Any number of events can trigger this sense of loss and psychological trauma. It could be a breaking down of family or intimate relationship. It could be the death of a loved one. It could be drug use or abandonment. This is the point at which people are most likely to join a cult. A study by Rousselet and colleagues found that the reasons people joined a cult were most often due to spirituality, life dissatisfaction, and personal development.
How to leave a cult.
Leaving a cult can be difficult and requires a great level of strength. A person may have been born into a cult meaning that they have no friends outside of this. Those within the cult will most likely turn their backs on those that leave. Cult leaders use emotional manipulation to keep members.
You will need emotional and practical support so look for organisations that can help. An internet search or social media group can help support you and it is always comforting that others have successfully made the journey before you. Surround yourself with supportive people who understand your issues. The journey to recovery can take time so be kind to yourself and don’t put too much pressure on yourself.
Remember, there will be good times and bad days which is completely normal. Don’t rush into the arms of another seemingly supportive group and build up friendships slowly.
Thousands of people have taken this brave, daunting and liberating journey. It will take time to adjust to the unfamiliar freedom which at times can feel like loneliness. Try not to feel guilt, regret or bitterness, but go easy on yourself when you do. Nobody can change what has already happened, but we can acknowledge our part in that journey and be mindful not to make the same mistakes again.
People are always growing and changing. We never stop learning so don’t be too hard on yourself. It is only by making mistakes that we learn what we don’t want. Seek out a counsellor to work on forming your own new beliefs and build on your self-esteem.
Most people who join cults are looking for emotional comfort and reassurance. Therefore, you may need to learn how to identify healthier ways of getting that comfort and assurance.
Leaving a cult is similar to leaving a controlling and coercive partner in a relationship. It can be hard at first but gets easier over time. It is best not to make any major life decisions while you are healing. Accept help and support from voluntary organisations. Join new social groups or try volunteering to connect with others again. You now have an opportunity to reclaim activities that were previously denied.
Finally, learn how to put yourself and your own needs first. It is likely that cult life took away any sense of individualism. You have an opportunity to build your life up again how you want it to be. This isn’t going to be a quick process and you may need help. Take one day at a time.
