Conclusion

One obvious conclusion from this selective review of cases around the world is that the brainwashing idea has been successfully exported from the American context. This is most obvious in the several cases discussed involving The Family, in which it is clear that anticult literature and sentiments have influenced efforts of authorities in a number of countries to exert control over newer religious groups. The Argentina Court of Appeals even included quite explicit criticisms of this outside influence in its opinion. The lengthy document produced by authorities in Victoria, Australia reads like an American anticult tract, with much of the language appearing to be from American anticult sources.

The several major cases around the globe involving The Family appear to share a common source, since the same small number of former members have appeared in the countries discussed, as well as some others, offering information and advice to any authorities who would listen. (89) However, the casual use of the brainwashing concept in the opinions of the European Court of Human Rights, the use of the term in discussions in Russia and other former Communist countries, and its appearance in the Spanish case discussed at length suggest that more than just a few apostates from the Family are spreading the brainwashing idea around the world.

The idea is spreading because some people and organizations have made deliberate efforts to spread this useful tool of social control. (90) It is also spreading because it serves the purposes of authorities in many societies who seek ways to exert control over the development of many different exotic religious and quasi-religious groups. Some of these new groups have been exported from the United States, which makes it quite understandable that the authorities would look to the U.S. experience for some explanation of what is happening and what to do about the perceived problem. Some new religious groups have developed within the other societies, but appear to share some characteristics with other foreign imports, thus suggesting to authorities that ideas applicable to imported groups might have application to home-grown ones as well.

Thus the spread of brainwashing claims around the globe and their use in legal actions is explicable in terms of functional theory. The spread of such ideas serve the purposes of those in the United States who have opposed the spread of new groups, with the adoption of such ideas elsewhere being something of a validity check for their use in the United States. The acceptance of such ideas by authorities elsewhere also is functional, for such ideas can be a very effective "social weapon" in battles by traditional religious organizations to maintain positions of dominance in a society, or to regain such a position, such as in former Communist countries.

The use of brainwashing-based claims is not always successful, of course, as some of the cases described demonstrate. The use of such claims as the basis of legal actions does not work very well when independent judicial authorities do a thorough job of investigating their scientific validity. This happened, for instance, in the case in Spain and in the case in Argentina, although in the latter situation the matter is not yet fully resolved. The case in Australia was resolved on other grounds (lack of evidence of any abuse of the children was determinative), but even then the investigation indirectly undercut claims that "mind control" was being used within The Family.

However, it must be understood that brainwashing claims work very well to initiate legal actions, as evidenced by some of the cases just mentioned, even though the eventual outcome rejected such claims. Brainwashing claims thus have been used to justify in part some quite dramatic actions (or inactions) by authorities around the world. It may be months or years before the authorities find out that they cannot substantiate such claims and the situation is rectified. Meanwhile, adults may spend months in prison, as was the case in Argentina, have their children retained by authorities for some time, or be placed in a mental institution for "deprogramming" against their will.

In some situations the claims are not refuted and they may serve as the basis for official actions that limit the religious freedom of individuals and groups. Thus, a new religious group may be refused the right to officially register in a country on the ground that it brainwashes its members, or it may have its representatives harassed or not allowed entry on such grounds. Such claims have been made quite recently by officials in France and in Germany, for instance, and there is growing concern about developments that limit religious freedom in some former Communist countries, as well. (91) Often those efforts are based in part on claims that the groups practice brainwashing (or one of its popular synonyms).

Thus, it is safe to say that brainwashing claims are playing an important role around the world in efforts to control new religions and to discourage people from participating in them. Such claims fuel popular concern about new religions and serve as a basis for many different types of legal actions. Those using such claims as the basis for legal actions or other bureaucratic control should, however, examine such ideas for scientific validity and face the fact that the claims are often used for ideological purposes; those using such ideas for ideological and political purposes should address the limitations on religious freedom brought about by using such notions.

Footnotes

Click on the footnote number to return to return to previous location.

89. For a fuller discussion of this apparent network of detractors of The Family, see Richardson, Recruitment to New Religions, supra note 1. A related case involving custody of one child in England also saw the same small group of former members involved in giving information, offering testimony, and assisting in any other way they could. This case, which was the longest running wardship case in English history, resulted in the child being allowed to remain in the group with its mother, under some conditions, even though the child's grandmother had expended large resources and much effort to get the child out of the group. This case, which involved the author as an expert witness, is noteworthy from the perspective of this Article because the judge, Justice Ward, explicitly rejected brainwashing ideas early in the case:

I am mightily relieved to have been spared the reams of paper and days of evidence that it seemed at one time might be inflicted upon me to resolve questions of brainwashing and mind control. These terms seem more likely to carry emotive weight than scientific backing. The anti-cult movement may believe it. I am most unlikely to have been helped by it at all. The fact is that most of those within the Family remain there because of their faith in what it offers.

In re ST (A Minor), Principal Registry, W 42, at 149-50 (Fam. 1992) (Eng.).

90. For a discussion of this effort in a number of different societies, see ANTI-CULT MOVEMENTS IN CROSS-CULTURAL PERSPECTIVE, supra note 54.

91. See, e.g., POUR EN FINIR AVEC LES SECTES: LE DEBAT SUR LE RAPPORT DE LA COMMISSION PARLIAMENTAIRE (M. Introvigne & J.G. Melton eds., 1996) (critiquing a recent official French report on sects and claims that lavage de cerveau (literally, washing of the brain) occurs in new religions).