This Note considers the applicability of the necessity defense in criminal prosecutions of parents and deprogrammers. Part I explores the conflicting policies that underlie the traditional necessity defense, and suggests that courts replace their unitary approach to necessity with a "choice of evils" defense - for actors reasonably attempting to avoid a greater evil - and a "compulsion" defense - for actors reacting understandably to the pressure of circumstances. Part II applies these defenses to deprogramming cases, and concludes that rarely may they be advanced successfully.
Michigan Law Review,
Cults, Deprogrammers, and the Necessity Defense,
Mich. L. Rev.
Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol80/iss2/5