Original sentence: , the target did not agree to the procedure but was taken by force (often will little or no legal sanction) and then held against their will.Advocates of this procedure justified it on the grounds of their were "rescuing victims" and giving them "information which the cult had hidden from them" so that they could "make an informed decision either to leave or to stay with the cult".Exit counseling is done in precisely the same way as "deprogramming" - the terms are actually synonyous.However, the distinction between forcible and voluntary "interventions" remained blurred for a long time.In increasing numbers, practioners gradually began to give up force.Opponents of this procedure argued against it chiefly of the following grounds:.The only difference is that during the 1970s and 1980s most deprogramming was done "on" someone - i.Very few practioners wanted to admit that they had violated their targets' rights or broken any laws.When deprogramming fell into disfavor in the late 1980s and early 1990s, advocates of the procedure begain to use the new term "exit counseling".that the information given about the group was almost entirely negative, and often slanted unfairly or even false.that the target is not allowed to make any decision - before or during the procedure - about whether to under go it.that the target of the procedure was held against his will and forced to listen
Edited sentence: Contrary to deprogramming, exit counseling is a voluntary act on the person's behalf – no coercion is involved.Those who practice exit counseling declare that its goal is to ensure that the person makes an informed decision either to leave or to stay with the cult