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

from Shaka Wednesday, March 24, 2004 - 22:27 (Agree/Disagree?) If you know for sure that they're leaving to India or China, the best thing to do is sic every Child Protective Service and lawyer you can call on them. India is a nightmare for young Family members. I'm not sure about China but I do know that some of the homes in India are still comparable to the ones of 10-20 years ago in the way of severe mental and phyisical abuse. Not to mention the horrible living conditions. Wish you luck. (reply to this comment)

from Jules Wednesday, March 24, 2004 - 20:49 (Agree/Disagree?) The issue of parents moving abroad with their children is personally one of my most serious concerns. In the Family’s history, most of the more serious institutionalized abuse took place in Asia and South America. Individual perverts have always thrived all over in the group, but when they tried to take the Asian models and set up “a Victor Program in every home” in Europe they faced a court case and a full-scale mutiny from the young people. There are things you can get away with in a completely foreign country than you cannot in your country of origin. While the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child is the most ratified document in the world, in practice, human rights are generally respected much more in western society. Human life is cheap in a country full of poverty and when seven year olds outside your door are being sold by their parents into prostitution, the average monthly wage is a few dollars and a bribe can buy you anything, it’s hard to get law enforcement to care too much about foreigners who might be abusing their own children. Children being raised in the Family also have a much greater chance of some exposure to the outside world in a country where they speak the language and understand the culture than one in which they do not. In Asia or Africa, simply being Caucasian entitles you to special treatment among the people there. It is easy to think of the Family as being so much better than the real world if you as a missionary are treated with respect and open arms everywhere you go. In their native country, children are much more likely to see a more realistic picture of the social status of the Family, and understand how many more opportunities are open to them as a citizen than the few they have been confined to. If children really want to get away from their parents, they have many more opportunities to do so in their native country. There are safeguards all over (doctors, teachers, relatives, people they meet proselytizing, even the woman in the grocery store). Running away as a child or teenager is always dangerous, but especially so in some of these countries. My own parents (who live in Canada) were planning to move to Thailand some years back. As soon as I found out I let my brothers and sisters know that if they ever saw any signs of this actually happening, they should call me immediately. I also let my parents know I would fight them on this every step of the way and would try to get custody of their children myself if they tried to move out to Asia. I don’t know how I would or could have managed the seven children my parents still have at home, but for me this did work and they did not move. (reply to this comment)

from anovagrrl Tuesday, March 23, 2004 - 12:34 (Agree/Disagree?) Your question about demographics is something I've wondered about for some time. I agree with Spat's analysis about the aging FGAs and the burden their inevitable physical decline will place on the younger, healthier, more energetic members. IMO, this is a major factor that will drive much of what happens in the years to come. If it is true that the SGAs who remain in TF are producing fewer offspring--a natural demographic trend that may stem in part from more stable relationships between married partners--I think even the most loyal SGAs will feel like an oppressed and increasingly disenfranchized minority, particularly when top leadership (all FGAs)continues to call the shots that affect their live and fortunes of ordinary rank and file membership. I cannot imagine an SGA moving into a top position of leadership as long as Zerby is still alive. If it were to happen, it's likely to be something like King Kelly with an SG trophy wife. Your sister's dream of escaping the materialistic snares of America by moving to a developing country overlooks a major demographic & economic trend known as "globalization." Multinational corporations, mass transportation, and mass communication capabilities are creating a global village, such that people living in Kathmandu, Buenes Aires, Singapore, and St. Petersburg, may all enjoy eating Big Macs, watching the Olympics on CNN, or surfing the internet. Furthmore, the UN stats show an unprecedented level of immigration & global displacement of people for socioeconomic reasons. She would have to go to a fourth world country--a place like Haiti or Malawi--to escape the "corrupting" tentacles of globalization. The Islamic Republic of Iran also might work. Question is, could she and her family endure the hardships of living in such desperately poor places or in countries where Christian missionaries are imprisoned or shot? The Family largely supports itself on the surplus of a local economy and the goodwill of locals, so there's a limit as to how far and how long any particular Family missionary can get from the System. Old Order Amish might be looking for new blood. But even THEY have problems with retaining youth. Too many young folk have been joining up with those liberal, car-driving Mennonites. However, groups like the Amish been able to hold the line with an 8th grade education, so they continue retain a fair number of their young adults. They farm and learn skilled trades like carpentry. Amish young adults can actually aspire to something besides begging for a living & waiting for Jesus to return. (reply to this comment)

from cassy Tuesday, March 23, 2004 - 05:20 (Agree/Disagree?) Maybe our insider can give us a break down of the population if he has access to it? Would help. (reply to this comment)

from Spat Monday, March 22, 2004 - 13:31 (Agree/Disagree?) Hmmm, interesting assessment, I think the child population in the Fam has dwindled 2nd generation adults have not been as productive as the 1st generation another key fact is the lack of new blood (disciples) of a young age this coupled with the number of 2nd generation adults that have left has caused growing decrease in the Fam’s child population. The Kid’s presently entering teenhood in the Fam are currently the residue of the original 2nd generation batch with a few 2nd generation offsprings. I believe the family leadership realized long time ago that their only shot of maintaining a decent proportion of the 2nd generation population was to place policies making marriage a viable and probable occurrence before the age of 21. This paired up with their birth control policies would turn out young adults with 1-2 kids by the age of 24 making any attempts to start off a new life and leave the group more difficult. The policy seemed to work at first with some, mostly people around the age of 30 or so now, but the majority of the Fam’s 2nd generation rejected this quick marriage strat and have since then moved out, I would dare say that at least a 65% of the people I grew up with have since left. This being said I think the challenges the family faces as a group right now are 2: 1.- Bettering their retention percentage of 2nd and 3rd generation youth once they reach adolescence, this has become a more difficult task due to the fact that the family has now implemented an education policy that requires high school level education (one of the few good new things they have done, making would be exmembers a little better prepared for adjustment to life outside the group) and the fact that most have now heard or seen exFam youth member/s that are actually making a new life for themselves outside the confimments of the cult, this has made the least adventurous more optimistic of their chances outside the group. 2.- Dealing with the inevitable aging/dying (yeah might sound cold but it’s a cold fact) of the 1st generation, this is becoming more and more of a problem. The fam’s long standing doctrine of Jesus’ return is not happening, and our parents are aging. The Fam’s economical doctrines have never been adequate for the conservation or production of wealth, and no matter how many windfalls, inheritances large donations have come their way, the hand to mouth mentality has systematically eliminated considerable amount of wealth some of its members possessed and left them in a precarious position. At this time most 1st generation members find themselves in a dilemma, they must face their financial responsibilities and prepare for the eventual inability (due to sickness, old age) of some members to pull their own weight while at the same time reconciling this reality with their beliefs of “Jesus is coming” and “God will Provide”. Bottom line I feel their biggest problem in the future will be when the 1st generation is unable to pull their own weight, and the 35% of the 2nd and 3rd generation they are currently keeping is unable to sustain their increased financial responsibility, so at the end Esops fable of the little ant and the grasshopper will not have a happy ending. (reply to this comment)

From exister Monday, March 22, 2004, 16:36 (Agree/Disagree?) The good news is that Burger King doesn't seem to be averse to hiring senior citizens. Wal Mart seems to find them handy for handing out shopping carts at the door too.(reply to this comment)

From cheeks Monday, March 22, 2004, 15:55 (Agree/Disagree?) I agree with you Spat. I was in the Family when Go for the Gold came out, and knew it was the Family's best effort to keep us bare foot and pregnant so to speak. What better way to keep someone dependant on you than to let them have kids and not let them have an education so they cannot go out and provide for those kids. As far as the teens leaving at twelve I think when the parent are not able to "control" their kids anymore they send them off to someone else so thay don't have to handle it. In the days of larger homes most of the parents did not even know their own kids and their likes and dislikes. We were the primary care givers and knew their kids better than they did. So when they had family day the parents could hardly get through it. It is so sad that so many kids lost out on the basics of their childhood and as a result never really bonded with their parents.(reply to this comment)

From KD Tuesday, March 23, 2004, 10:52 (Agree/Disagree?) TF leadership has also placed an incredible amount of time in getting the young girls knock up with the FGA's. I don't know how it is in other countries but in Brazil this is quite common, some of them "wed" these FGA's but most are single moms. A lot of these girls got pregnant when the leadership went around visiting the homes, since TF wants to create a bigger and stronger bond with their young ones what better way then to make them have babies and leave them handicapped and dependant on the "one wife" vision. What's interesting is that you don't usually see FGA women bonding and "bridging the gap" with the younger boys. (reply to this comment)