This part of the project, led by Dr Sarah Harvey, analysed the INFORM database of information on around 5,000 new and minority religious groups to explore whether clear social and cultural risk factors for abuse in religious groups could be identified. This work involved an initial review of around 200  groups in this database which had been tagged with the theme/ ‘abuse’ and then a more detailed analysis of around 50  groups about whom more information was held. In-depth case studies of three specific groups were also undertaken to examine the complex inter-play of different factors in individual cases.

This analysis identified both social/structural and cultural risk factors in religious groups. The presence of these factors did not mean that abuse would necessarily take place within a religious group, but that risks of abuse could be increased. Whilst recognising the need to apply this model in a way that is sensitive to the particularities of different religious groups, this study found that six social/structural and six cultural risk factors could be clearly identified. These were:

Social/structural risk factors:

  1. A religious group’s social isolation from wider society.
  2. Insufficient accountability for those holding leadership roles.
  3. The facilitation of abuse, or failure to deal with abuse, through hierarchies operating within the group.
  4. Blurred boundaries in the group in relation to personal choices and relationships, intimacy and touch.
  5. Children’s isolation within, or from, mainstream education systems and inadequate standards and accountability of religious educational systems.
  6. Inadequate standards and accountability within religious and spiritual health practices.

 

Cultural risk factors:

  1. The role of a sense of ‘unique legitimacy’ within a religious group in emphasising its sense of separation from, and greater moral authority to, wider society.
  2. Teachings which emphasise gender and generational inequalities.
  3. Teachings which create, or fail to protect members from, relationships of control in sexual practices.
  4. Teachings which create, or fail to protect members from, relationships of control in relation to purification, or which encourage members to engage in self-harm.
  5. Religious and spiritual legitimacy for harmful practices of punishment.
  6. The effects of the high costs of leaving a religious movement, including shunning and exclusion of those who disclose or challenge abuse

 

Whilst abuse can take place in any type of religious group – as in any kind of organisation – the analysis undertaken by this study indicated that at least some of these factors were present in cases of abuse within the sample studied as well as within the wider range of abuse cases known to the project team. Although the data on which this study was drawn related particularly to new and minority religious groups, the project team recognised that these factors could also be found in larger or more ‘mainstream’ religious groups. In these contexts, they could be particularly associated with movements or initiatives seen as having potential for renewing that religious tradition or the emergence of a  charismatic authority regarded as having particular significance as a teacher, healer or spiritual guide.

The study found these factors are not entirely isolated from each other. A number of these factors can work together in the specific cases of individual groups to create environments in which members may be at heightened risk of abusive and harmful control. The factors can also contribute to nadequate monitoring and accountability within groups and resistance to effective engagement with external safeguarding agencies and standards. Some religious groups may demonstrate a large number of these factors, and others may demonstrate only some or relatively few.

The findings have important implications for faith groups who may wish to reflect on potential risks associated with elements of their structures and cultures. It is also relevant to public policy in indicating the importance of maintaining appropriate forms of regulation, standards and oversight for faith communities and the potential risks of allowing religious exemptions from these. It  also provides a conceptual framework that researchers might explore and test out in future studies, as well as a resource which may help victim-survivors to reflect on social and cultural dimensions of their experiences of abuse.