Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-cb9f654ff-hn9fh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-08-06T19:04:23.105Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Chapter 9 - Comorbid Major Mental Disorders

from Section 2 - Confounding Factors and Special Populations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 June 2025

Tyler Durns
Affiliation:
University of Utah
Charles Scott
Affiliation:
University of California, Davis
Paul Whitehead
Affiliation:
University of Utah
Barbara E. McDermott
Affiliation:
University of California, Davis
Get access

Summary

Research into serious mental illness is limited in both cult leaders and followers. Problematically, extant data is often biased: leaders tend to only be evaluated when they attempt to plead insanity after they are charged with criminal acts, and followers may only be evaluated when leaving the cult. Major mental disorders appear to be less common in cult leaders than are personality disorders and substance use disorders. When completing evaluations of cult leaders, it is important to consider whether a delusional sounding belief is, instead instrumental, and being put forth as a form of manipulation. Another critical consideration, in either cult leaders or followers, is whether a belief – even if firmly held – is truly delusional, or whether it is a part of the subculture’s belief system. This chapter details various characteristics which may be more common among followers; however, these are difficult to quantify as both the presence in and leaving of the cult confound the presentation of those symptoms.

Information

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2025

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Ryan v. Kenney, 281 F. Supp. 2d 1008 (D. Neb. 2003).Google Scholar
Galanter, M, Rabkin, R, Rabkin, J, Deutsch, A. The “Moonies”: a psychological study of conversion and membership in a contemporary religious sect. American Journal of Psychiatry. 1979;136(2):165–70.Google Scholar
Dean, RA. Moonies: a psychological analysis of the unification church. D Phil doctoral thesis. University of Michigan; 1981.Google Scholar
Galanter, M, Buckley, P. Evangelical religion and meditation: psychotherapeutic effects. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease. 1978;166(10):685–91.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ross, M. Clinical profiles of Hare Krishna devotees. American Journal of Psychiatry. 1983;140(4):416–20.Google ScholarPubMed
Saliba, JA. Psychiatry and the cults: an annotated bibliography. Routledge; 1987.Google Scholar
FBI. The Vault, WACO / Branch Davidian Compound. https://vault.fbi.gov/waco-branch-davidian-compoundGoogle Scholar
Leonetti, C. Eye of the beholder: the wrongful conviction of Charles Milles Manson. Southwest Law Review. 2015;45(2):257331.Google Scholar
Lundgren v. Mitchell, 440 F.3d 754 (6th Cir. 2006).Google Scholar
State v. Lundgren, 1993 Ohio App. LEXIS 4394 (Ct. App. Sep. 1, 1993).Google Scholar
State v. Lundgren, No. 90-L-15-140, 1993 WL 346444, at *1 (Ohio Ct. App. Sept. 14, 1993).Google Scholar
State v. Lundgren, 653 N.E.2d 304 (Ohio, 1995).Google Scholar
State of Ohio, Respondent-Appellee, v. Jeffrey D. Lundgren, Petitioner-Appellant, 1999 WL 33840275 (Ohio), 13.Google Scholar
McPherson, SB. Death penalty mitigation and cult membership: the case of the Kirtland killings. Behavioral Sciences & the Law. 1992;10:6574.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
State v. Lundgren, CASE NO. 97-L-110, 1998 Ohio App. LEXIS 6164 (Ct. App. Dec. 18, 1998).Google Scholar
Singer, M, Lalich, J. Cult in our midst: the continuing fight against the hidden menace. Jossey-Bass; 2003.Google Scholar
United States v. Mitchell, 706 F. Supp. 2d 1148 (D. Utah 2010).Google Scholar
Olsson, PA. Malignant pied pipers: a psychological study of destructive cult leaders. Strategic Book Publishing & Rights Agency; 2017.Google Scholar
Burke, J. Antisocial personality disorder in cult leaders and induction of dependent personality disorder in cult members. Cultic Studies Review. 2006;5(3):390410.Google Scholar
State v. Barzee, 177 P.3d 48 (Utah 2007).Google Scholar
Forensic panel report on Brian David Mitchell. 2009. https://archive.org/details/BDMCSTReportGoogle Scholar
United States v. Mitchell, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 106865 (D. Utah, 2009).Google Scholar
State v. Ryan, 233 Neb. 74 (1989).Google Scholar
Ryan v. Kenney, 281 F. Supp. 2d 1008 (D. Neb. 2003).Google Scholar
American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders. 5th ed. American Psychiatric Association; 2013.Google Scholar
Rahman, T, Hartz, SM, Xiong, W, Meloy, JR, Janofsky, J, Harry, B, et al. Extreme overvalued beliefs. Journal of American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law. 2020;48(3):319–26.Google ScholarPubMed
Kim, N. In the end, State never does kill Michael Ryan. Falls City Journal. 2015 May 27. https://fcjournal.net/2015/05/27/in-the-end-state-never-does-kill-michael-ryan/Google Scholar
Singer, MT. Coming out of the cults. Psychology Today. 1979;72–82.Google Scholar
Hopkins, RP. The hospital viewpoint: mental illness or social maladjustment? Journal – National Association of Private Psychiatric Hospitals. 1978;9(4):1921.Google ScholarPubMed
Ungerleider, JT, Wellisch, DK. Coercive persuasion (brainwashing), religious cults, and deprogramming. American Journal of Psychiatry. 1979;136:279–82.Google ScholarPubMed
Clark, JG. Problems in referral of cult members. Journal – National Association of Private Psychiatric Hospitals. 1978;9(4):2729.Google ScholarPubMed
Levine, SV, Salter, NE. Youth and contemporary religious movements: psychosocial findings. Canadian Psychiatric Association Journal. 1976;21(6):411–20.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Halperin, DA. Psychiatric perspectives on cult affiliation. Psychiatric Annals. 1990;20:204–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
State v. Applin, 67 P.3d 1152 (Wash. Ct. App. 2003).Google Scholar
United States v. Fishman, 743 F. Supp. 713 (N.D. Cal. 1990).Google Scholar
State v. Ryan, 409 N.W.2d 579 (Neb. 1987).Google Scholar
State v. Ryan, 249 Neb. 218 (Neb. 1996).Google Scholar
Molko v. Holy Spirit Association, 46 Cal.3d 1092 (Calif. 1988).Google Scholar
Molko v. Holy Spirit Association. Brief amicus curiae of The American Psychological Association et al. 1987 10 Feb.Google Scholar
State v. Luff, 621 N.E.2d 493 (Ohio Ct. App. 1993).Google Scholar
Washington v. Harper, 494 U.S. 210 (1990).Google Scholar
Sell v. United States, 539 U.S. 166 (2003).Google Scholar
Minute Entry, Document 171. United States v. Mitchell et al., Case No. 2:08-cr-00125-DAK-2 (D. Utah Nov. 17 2009).Google Scholar
Reavy, P. Wanda Barzee sentenced to 15 years in federal prison, gets scolding from Elizabeth Smart’s mother. Desert News. 2010 May 22. www.deseret.com/2010/5/22/20116683/wanda-barzee-sentenced-to-15-years-in-federal-prison-gets-scolding-from-elizabeth-smart-s-motherGoogle Scholar
Chambers, WV, Langone, MD, Dole, AA, Grice, JW. The Group Psychological Abuse Scale: a measure of the varieties of cultic abuse. Cultic Studies Journal. 1994;11(1):L88117.Google Scholar
Almendros, C, Carrobles, JA, Rodriguez-Carballeira, A, Gamez-Guadix, M. Reasons for leaving: psychological abuse and distress reported by former members of cultic groups. Cultic Studies Review. 2009;8(2):118–38.Google Scholar
Spero, MH. Psychotherapeutic procedure with religious cult devotees. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease. 1982;170:332–44.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Aronoff, J, Lynn, SJ, Malinoski, P. Are cultic environments psychologically harmful? Clinical Psychology Review. 2000;20(1):91111.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Weiss, AS, Comrey, AL. Personality characteristics of Hare Krishnas. Journal of Personality Assessment. 1987;51(3):399413.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Latkin, CA. The self-concept of Rajneeshpuram commune members. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion. 1990:91–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sundberg, ND, Latkin, CA, Littman, RA, Hagan, RA. Personality in a religious commune: CPIs in Rajneeshpuram. Journal of Personality Assessment. 1990;55(1–2):717.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Accessibility standard: Unknown

Accessibility compliance for the PDF of this book is currently unknown and may be updated in the future.

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×