Reader's comments on this article Add a new comment on this article

from true Friday, July 15, 2005 - 00:10 (Agree/Disagree?) the people magazine came out to day and i show it to all my friends..... every one seems to understand. i feel we may get some where after all taht has happend maybe we will win this war againts the evil that is the family and be able to deal with our past that is even here in our now......... peace true (reply to this comment)

from foster mom from hell Wednesday, July 13, 2005 - 12:28 (Agree/Disagree?) Letter to People Magazine Editor: Does the Family's past offer of counseling for those who "think they may have been abused" also extend to former members with extensive clinical evidence of sexual abuse? My foster daughter, who grew up in The Family, might agree to send Claire Borowik the bills for her most recent psychiatric hospitalization and ongoing outpatient care if People Magazine followed up with a story on how the Family responds to a former member's request for counseling assistance. Considering the financial burden associated with treatment of severe traumatic stress disorder, hundreds of former members would welcome closer public scrutiny of Borowik's claim that the Family has offered to provide counseling. System Name (reply to this comment)

From Big Sister Wednesday, July 13, 2005, 21:39 (Agree/Disagree?) This is a good letter. Let us know what response you get, if any. I would also be interested to hear the story of how you got a foster child who was raised in The Family. Foster children are usually children who are removed, by county social services and the legal system, from their original families because of abuse or neglect. How did a Family member manage to lose custody of their child to the state if TF has never lost a case of child abuse or neglect?(reply to this comment)

from monger Monday, July 11, 2005 - 16:53 (Agree/Disagree?) Kudos to Daniel, indeed. (Btw, I wasn't trying to start a dupe MovingOn article with this...tuneman's link to an alternate copy hadn't yet gone live when this was submitted.) (reply to this comment)

from TF Sucks! Monday, July 11, 2005 - 08:09 (Agree/Disagree?) "In the past, the Family has offered to provide counseling for any former members who believe that they may have been abused." WTF? This is a total lie! And plus, who would want or need to be counseled by Family Members who would just try to brainwash you into thinking that you were never abused in the first place?!?!?! These people are just sick!!!! “There are a number of ways of sharing – of clothes or of food. Sex is just one of the ways” How in god’s name can she even try to compare sexual abuse with sharing food and clothing?!?!?!?! What world is she living in? How she be so blatantly insensitive?!?!?! TF, you make me want to puke!!!! (reply to this comment)

From hope Monday, July 11, 2005, 18:12 (Agree/Disagree?) No kidding, Borowick is a delusional, mindless drone. She knows damn well that there was no real counseling. If Borowick is a "Family" member, she certainly knows that sharing means only one thing - SEX!! (reply to this comment)

From Wounded healer Thursday, July 14, 2005, 06:19 (Agree/Disagree?) When I was in the family when we went witnessing/litnessing/postering etc sometimes we would say that we did "counselling" or helped people come off drugs etc. This was a complete lie! -Since leaving the family I have had counselling to aid in my recovery and have infact studied to become a counsellor myself and am now qualified. There is no way that the family's idea of "counselling" could ever be considered as such! For example real counselling involves unconditional positive regard, acceptance, not judging and especially not having an agenda that is not in the best interests of the client. In real counselling the client is taught to be autonomous, to think for themselves and to remain in control of the counselling process. "Counselling" in the family is anything but this, and infact is the complete opposite! It would simply be an opportunity for the family to reabuse, manipulate and exploit those who are very vulnerable, as well as make sure that those abused did not speak up against them. However, if the family actually paid for those abused by them to be seen by bonafide, ethical, registered counsellors, well then that's another story, and one step that they could take in the right direction of putting right some of the wrongs that they have done and still continue to do. Why not stop their present abuse as well though? Somehow, I think that this offer of "counselling" is just a PR move to placate people.(reply to this comment)

From Thursday, July 14, 2005, 09:12 (Agree/Disagree?) First off, there has not been an "offer of counseling," but rather a claim that in the past counseling was offered. No details have been given, such as for how long the offer remained open, who qualified, and who the provider(s) would be. As somebody who has been spending a lot of time and money for years on receiving counseling, I have been surprised and sometimes frustrated by the lack of understanding some of my peers have as to what constitutes "bonafide, ethical, registered counselors" out here in the world and what they do. But when I consider the way the cult looked at psychology (remember "The Shepher's Crook"?) and the clowning around that Lilliston types did for the cult, I have to say it's quite understandable. I wish I could shout from the rooftops that what a "bonafide, ethical, registered counselor" would provide survivors is, as you pointed out, "unconditional positive regard, acceptance, not judging and especially not having an agenda that is not in the best interests of the client. In real counselling the client is taught to be autonomous, to think for themselves and to remain in control of the counselling process". I think many of my peers are afraid that what they'd get is another shepherd Uncle or Auntie whose ultimate loyalty is the cult. But even if more people did realize that, there is still the fact that with all of the catching up we have to do for so many years just to keep from slipping into marginalization, it is hard to find the energy, money and time. I imagine that for the young parents among us it would be particularly challenging. You know, if the cult actually put up funds for counseling (to be provided by someone not in their pocket), that would be a huge step in the right direction. (reply to this comment)

from moon beam Monday, July 11, 2005 - 06:54 (Agree/Disagree?) *Sharing* could mean sharing food or clothes! WTF? Claire borowick is a liar! Sharing was used as a code word for sex, simple as! Good job Dan and Celeste. (reply to this comment)

from rockyv Monday, July 11, 2005 - 01:11 (Agree/Disagree?) The same article has just hit shelves in Australia. WHO magazine july 18th edition pages 46-49.Daniel Roselle is a brave man it takes guts to speak out on such a subject with your photo for all to see,good on you mate you are what a man should be made of. (reply to this comment)

From rockyv Monday, July 11, 2005, 17:52 (Agree/Disagree?) I would also like to mention other brave individuals (men&women)that have been the face for many, or have told their stories for all to hear ,you are equally as strong,keep it up guys hopefully soon all pediphiles and alike will be held accountable for their actions.(reply to this comment)

from Zed Sunday, July 10, 2005 - 17:46 (Agree/Disagree?) Daniel, good job. Email me so I can send you a bottle of your favorite beverage. I mean it. You got guts. (reply to this comment)