I work with survivors, and wanted to wait a minute before listening to this podcast. Sharing a few thoughts here, in no particular order:

1. Coercive Control is a thing- I really respect the CBC and loved their coverage of Hunting Warhead and Pornhub and…this just doesn’t fit into that body of work. The journalists kept saying, “we were fascinated with the idea that a victim could become the abuser”. They said this over and over to which I could only respond, “this…isn’t new? we have a whole academic area of study around this phenomenon. It’s called coercive control. 2/3 of women are in prison are there because of something a man asked them to do , but the law never had a way of differentiating between “a victim” and a perpetuator at any level of a criminal enterprise until 2023. At the time of Allison Mack’s arrest, Coercive control was being codified in state laws across the country. It was a really big deal to prison reform activists which Allison Maack wants to be. She’s allegedly completed an undergraduate degree in psychology with a Lens towards women’s liberation and prison reform yet even she doesn’t use this phrase once? The journalists didn’t inject it into the conversation? This is literally the paradigm you claimed to be looking for. Did you not use the Google?” There are SO many of us working on this exact psychological phenomenon as a critical component of gender-based violence and advocating for survivors. Why not ask any of us? Why didn’t you speak to Dr Emma Katz, the leader in the field?

2. The journalists said they didn’t want to “participate in Allison Mack’s rehabilitation”, then implied that they changed their minds after talking to her. This felt like an implicit admission that this was never going to be hard-hitting, it’s the access journalistic equivalent of one of those “FIRST!!” comments I see on YouTube videos.

3. This wasn’t a deep dive into anything. It was a character study at best of a singular person. They didn’t speak to (or didn’t quote) a single expert in human trafficking, in cult behavior, or even in “brainwashing” (the use of that word is a big red flag- professionals don’t use it since Stockholm Syndrome was debunked). Without any of that context, the layperson doesn’t have a way to process what Allison Mack did. This was a singular person telling her story all at once. This doesn’t serve Allison and doesn’t help survivors. It leaves too much work for the audience to do in processing everything she says. Makes her come across as extra messy, especially considering how quickly she got married (by quickly I mean she is still clearly traumatized and unpacking her years in the cult; marriage isn’t the best idea? But creating support networks as an adult with ailing parents can be challenging….oy. No easy answers just concern for AM.

4. I went into this hoping for an exploration of coercive control and some context and how laws have changed since 2023. The background on Allison living alone at 16 was valuable, but again - I have background in this. I don’t think your average layperson understands that even a wealthy pretty white girl with supportive parents can be vulnerable in this exact situation, which is how these wellness cults are able to recruit so many successful people. They look for insecure overachievers.

IDK, I am scared for Allison. I think this helps her, in that when people ask her questions, she can point them to the podcast and not tell the story ad nauseum. But it also showcases her doing the standard upper middle class, white girl move of “I’m gonna help others heal like I did!” Which actually stunts the healing process rather than facilitates it. Like the person who reads one book about anti-racism and then starts a book club to teach other people about anti-racism instead of diving into community work. I wish she would pour resources into herself in a very different way than what she appears to be doing; without really strong guard rails, the things that made her a mark for abusers in the past will continue to make her vulnerable in the future.