Talk:Sea Org

Section on Marriage and Family needs to be updated

This section appears to be out of date, as it implies Sea Org members are still allowed to have children.

Couples with children must leave the Sea Org and return to other staff positions within the church until the child is six years old; thereafter the children are raised communally and allowed to visit their parents in the Sea Org on weekends or about an hour a day. Children of members have themselves joined the Sea Org when they came of age.

This is no longer true. In the early 2000's, the Cadet Org was disbanded.

Also, originally children born into the Sea Org were raised communally from the outset and their parents never left their Sea Org posts (or did not do so for very long). That must have changed at some point, so this section probably needs to be expanded as well as updated. JapanOfGreenGables (talk) 14:37, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

You're right. Everything you said. Needs updating.   ▶ I am Grorp ◀ 15:49, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

Sea Org ranking heirarchy

One significant difference between Sea Org ranks and US Navy ranks is that there is no parallel career track of officers versus enlisted personnel (as in the Navy) and no sorta-enlisted-sorta-officer NCO level. Instead of being two parallel series, the ranks are stacked in the Sea Org with all the officer-type ranks above all the enlisted-type ranks. The entire ranking system from Swamper through Petty Officers through Lieutenants and Captains to Commodore is one steady stream from bottom to top. The diagram in section "Ranks" needs to be worked on. It appears to be some sort of comparison chart with US Navy insignia, however there is no narrative to explain such a chart. It should be illustrated from top (highest rank) to bottom (lowest rank) with no comparisons to the Navy's structure, and no break for 'enlisted' personnel because 'enlisted' is a non-existent concept in the Sea Org structure.   ▶ I am Grorp ◀ 04:18, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 December 2025

Add in a new section under the heading "Controversies"/"Legal Disputes" (or similar). There is a discrepancy between this page and its analogues in other languages - specifically that there is no mention of the "Headley v. Church of Scientology International" case, nor are there any links to the Wikipedia page for that case (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Headley_v._Church_of_Scientology_International) which is, itself, fully referenced:

Bolado, Carolina (July 24, 2012). Bowen, Elizabeth (ed.). "9th Circ. Junks Ex-Scientologists' Forced-Labor Claims - Law360". Law 360. Portfolio Media, Inc. Archived from the original on April 7, 2016. Retrieved March 25, 2016.
O’Scannlain, Diarmuid F. (July 24, 2012). "United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit" (PDF). United States Courts for the Ninth Circuit. Archived (PDF) from the original on March 4, 2016. Retrieved March 25, 2016.
Childs, Joe; Tobin, Thomas C. (January 14, 2013). "FBI Scientology investigation gets a fresh witness, but hits a legal roadblock". The Tampa Bay Times. Archived from the original on August 29, 2025. Retrieved July 11, 2024.
"Judgment — Document #171". CourtListener. August 5, 2010. Archived from the original on December 21, 2024. Retrieved June 15, 2023.
De Atley, Richard K. (July 24, 2012). "CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY: Two former ministers' lawsuit loses on appeal". Riverside Press-Enterprise. Archived from the original on July 26, 2012. Retrieved February 22, 2013.
"Marc And Claire Headley Lose Forced Labor Lawsuit Against Church Of Scientology". AP News. July 24, 2012. Archived from the original on July 28, 2012 – via HuffPost.
"Headley v. Church of Scientology International". Law.com. Retrieved August 25, 2025.
Tobin, Thomas C. (September 6, 2012). "Defectors Claire and Marc Headley say Church of Scientology tried to bargain for info on critics". Tampa Bay Times. Retrieved June 15, 2023. ~2025-37463-76 (talk) 11:41, 1 December 2025 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. You have not proposed what actual content/text you want to be added to this article. Please note that Wikis in different languages are not direct copies or translations of each other, and inclusion in a different language's wiki does not automatically guarantee inclusion here. Any proposed edit will be judged on its own merits. Additionally, I am not certain that a singular court case warrants an entire subsection of its own, but that will entirely depend on what exactly you actually propose to insert here. SI09 (talk) 12:01, 1 December 2025 (UTC)

@~2025-37463-76: You're right that it isn't mentioned and probably should be. See my comment below under section "Should the analysis part be updated?"   ▶ I am Grorp ◀ 14:09, 1 December 2025 (UTC)

Should the analysis part be updated?

Just wondering if the analysis should include more recent allegations. https://allthatsinteresting.com/scientology-human-trafficking Koandabär (talk) 11:58, 1 December 2025 (UTC)

Allegations aren't actual legal cases or published books (like Morton and Wright), and there are a lot of allegations against conditions in the Sea Org. Most of the "allegations" that have been followed up with legal cases are mentioned in Scientology and law. Note that the Sea Org isn't a corporate body and cannot be sued as an entity. That's why most lawsuits name Church of Scientology International or Religious Technology Center or David Miscavige as defendants. The case you point to is covered in Scientology and law § Ongoing litigation under subheading "Valerie Haney v. Scientology" (who is no longer a Jane Doe).

The subheading "Analysis" is a bit of a misnomer, because that's really a controversies section. I agree that such a section could easily be expanded by using reliable published sources. I could maybe work on that.

If you have other pointers to what should be included, please mention them here.   ▶ I am Grorp ◀ 14:06, 1 December 2025 (UTC)

I added a short section for Lawsuits with a list of several I could identify as former Sea Org members suing about abuses when they were in the Sea Org.   ▶ I am Grorp ◀ 07:12, 2 December 2025 (UTC)

History is missing

The basic history is missing from this article -- creation of the Sea Project, why Hubbard went to sea in the first place, etc. Grorp (talk) 01:03, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

I resurrected this thread from auto-archive because it isn't done. To elaborate, I'm referring to the omission of "why" the Sea Org was created, which is described in Life of L. Ron Hubbard from 1953 to 1967 § Search for a safe haven amid government scrutiny, and spills into Life of L. Ron Hubbard from 1967 to 1975.   ▶ I am Grorp ◀ 16:35, 5 May 2026 (UTC)