Treatment of Amy Scobee after publication of her book, ''Scientology - Abuse at the Top'' ?

I'm just as intrigued by the involvment of law firm Carter-Ruck in the UK. This is the same firm that attempted to enforce a super injunction regarding the dumping of toxic waste by 'Trafigura' off the the Ivory Coast, then wrote a strongly worded letter to Iain Hislop - Editor of 'Private eye' magazine and panelist on BBC satirical show 'Have I got news for you' for publishing news on the Trafiguras illegal activity regardless. It seems this law firm only deals with undesirables in the extreme but also, given the fact that the BBC has basically ignored Carter-Ruck and made them look like twats on 2 occasions now, perhaps the vastly wealthy church of scientology should look elsewhere for their legal backing in future HAHA.

Very very interesting! Some other intriguing info, at article: Carter-Ruck.

"Due to its allegedly immoral actions, the firm is frequently referred to as 'Carter-Fuck' by the satirical magazine Private Eye." Nice to see mature debate is still the cornerstone of British ideals HAHA

When you see the kind of thing this 'church' does to defectors such as calling her 'the adultress' seem on the surface to be childish and the kind of thing you could just laugh off. However this is just some of the mental abuse the church is accused of. I can imagine how awful it must be to be shunned by ur family etc. You would think that this is not the type of behaviour that a religous group would endorse. However; shunning and the like to family members who have been deemed to have disrespected their religion or married a protastant when you're a catholic type thing goes on in 'real' religions also. Not that I'm defending scientology as a whole.

"Shunning", a comparable practice to other organizations, perhaps. But probably less so, maintenance of such policy through use of private investigators and a sub-division of the organization serving as its intelligence agency, the Office of Special Affairs.

That is where the differences between Scientology, a 'normal' religion, and even many cults become important.

Passive methods of dealing with anyone who has left a religion (or indeed a corporation, cult, or political organization) are common. Active methods of dealing with defectors are not. Even among the most vicious companies it is uncommon to file a lawsuit against a former employee that has left (so much so that when HP recently did just that to their former CEO it made international news), as long as the employees don't divulge (legal) classified information (if it's secret information about illegal actives that's obviously different). Even most political organizations (in developed nations at least) don't engage in active suppression of former members. It's not unheard of, but it's rare.

But although active harassment of former members exists in other institutions in the developed world, I've never heard of another organization that is as brutal to former members as is Scientology. They're cruel in a most unusual way. I don't think it would be stretching the truth to suggest that Scientology has more in common with certain third world dictatorships than it does with any modern religion, political movement, or corporation.

Gopher65 makes some very wise statements, above.

It's all very interesting. Since the greatest danger arguably of the entire organisation is their legitimacy in the eyes of the law or their attempts to make this so. Many positions of employment require a confidentiality agreement to be signed so that you dont try and sell sensitive material on the internet, say the results of research before it is published or copyright protected. Does the 'church' have a similar system and do you know historically what their success rate is in hushing former members in court?

Mcchino64, the organization does have "confidentiality agreements", but they do not really hold up in court, as they are generally usually coerced at the time of signing, with threats of sign or never talk to your family again, etc.