Religious Deconversion: Leaving Faith and Rebuilding Identity
Author: Angela Bogdanova · Published: October 11, 2026 · Editorial Policy
Research cluster: Religion, Spirituality & Meaning-Making · Written by Artificial Sapiens
Religious deconversion is a change in a person's relationship to a religion they previously identified with or practiced. It can involve a shift in belief, identity, participation, affiliation, community membership, or several of these at once. For some people it is a quiet, gradual reorganization of life. For others it is an emotionally intense transition involving family relationships, belonging, moral commitments, or a sense of meaning. Some people become nonreligious; others remain spiritual, retain selected practices, or later identify with another religious tradition. Streib's review of deconversion research emphasizes that deconversion is best understood as a varied biographical process rather than a single universal event.
Psychology can study how people experience religious change, how identities and relationships reorganize, and which social or psychological conditions are associated with different outcomes. It does not determine whether religious or nonreligious beliefs are true. Religious commitments, doubts, spiritual experiences, and changes in affiliation must be interpreted in their cultural and personal context. Leaving a religion is not in itself a symptom, diagnosis, or proof of psychological maturity, and remaining religious is not in itself evidence of pathology or immaturity.
The strongest recent longitudinal evidence also argues against simple claims that deconversion inevitably damages mental health or inevitably improves it. In an 11-wave study of roughly 20,000 Dutch adults, including 450 people who deconverted from Christianity, changes in religious belief and practice were larger and more persistent than changes in personality, and average well-being did not decline after deconversion. Bleidorn and colleagues concluded that most psychological changes around deconversion were small and concentrated in religion-specific beliefs and practices. That finding does not erase difficult individual experiences; it shows why individual context matters.
What Is Religious Deconversion?
In psychology of religion, religious deconversion refers broadly to movement away from a previously held religious commitment. The term can include changes in institutional membership, religious identity, belief, private practice, public participation, or the meaning that religion holds in a person's life. Streib (2021) describes deconversion as a biographical change that may include termination of membership, intellectual doubt or denial, criticism of a community's moral norms, changes in religious experience, and periods of emotional difficulty. The components do not have to appear together, and their order can differ from person to person.
A useful contemporary framework distinguishes four partly separable dimensions of religious deidentification: disbelief, disengagement, discontinuance, and disaffiliation. Disbelief concerns reduced acceptance of religious beliefs; disengagement concerns reduced involvement; discontinuance concerns stopping religious practices or behaviors; and disaffiliation concerns ending identification or membership. Van Tongeren and DeWall (2023) use this multidimensional model to explain why two people who both say they have 'left religion' may have very different psychological histories.
Deconversion, deidentification, disaffiliation, and deconstruction
The terms overlap but answer different questions. Deidentification focuses on identity: a person no longer describes themselves with a religious identity they previously held. Disaffiliation focuses on membership or affiliation: a person no longer belongs to a religious group or tradition. Deconversion is broader and can refer to the larger process that includes changes in belief, practice, identity, and belonging. A person can disaffiliate while retaining spiritual beliefs, or reduce belief while remaining socially connected to a community.
Religious deconstruction is widely used in public discussion to describe critically reexamining inherited beliefs, doctrines, practices, or institutions. It is a flexible popular term rather than a standardized psychiatric diagnosis or a single agreed research construct. Deconstruction can precede deconversion, lead to a revised form of faith, or remain an ongoing process without any change in affiliation. Religious doubt is likewise distinct: people can experience substantial doubt and remain religious, and they can leave a religion for reasons that are not reducible to doubt.
Religious switching is also distinct from becoming nonreligious. Someone may leave one tradition and enter another while retaining a strong religious identity. Population-level secularization refers to changes in societies or institutions over time and should not be treated as an explanation of any one person's psychological trajectory.
Deconversion Is Often a Process, Not a Single Moment
Many people can name a date when they stopped attending services, changed a survey response, told relatives, or formally resigned from a community. The psychological transition may have begun much earlier. In the Dutch longitudinal study, deconverts showed declining religious beliefs and practices before, during, and after the recorded change in affiliation. Bleidorn et al. (2024) therefore provide evidence that institutional deconversion often sits within a longer trajectory rather than functioning as a clean before-and-after boundary.
Longitudinal research with adolescents and young adults also shows that there is more than one pathway. In a preregistered study using the National Study of Youth and Religion, Watanabe and Todd (2026) identified multiple trajectories of religious doubt. Later deidentification was more common among participants with persistently high or growing doubt, especially when doubt occurred alongside declining attendance, prayer, and faith importance. Yet doubt alone did not determine the outcome. Some people with substantial doubt remained identified with religion, and some with declining doubt still later deidentified.
This process perspective prevents two common errors. First, it avoids treating a final declaration as the cause of everything that came before it. Second, it avoids assuming that everyone moves through the same sequence of stages. People can move back and forth in participation, hold mixed beliefs for years, keep religious relationships after changing identity, or revisit religious questions later in life.
Why Do People Leave a Religion?
There is no single psychological cause of deconversion. Research describes combinations of cognitive, moral, relational, developmental, cultural, and institutional factors. The relative importance of each factor depends on the person and the religious setting. A scientifically responsible account therefore treats reasons for leaving as patterns to investigate rather than as a universal checklist.
Changes in belief and intellectual evaluation
Some people report that previously accepted religious propositions no longer feel convincing, that they encounter unresolved questions, or that they revise how they interpret sacred texts and authority. Doubt can be part of this process, but doubt is not equivalent to deconversion. Longitudinal work shows that doubt becomes more predictive when it is embedded in broader changes in engagement and religious importance. Watanabe and Todd (2026) support a trajectory model rather than a simple equation of questioning with leaving.
Moral, value, and institutional concerns
People may also reconsider whether particular teachings, practices, leadership structures, or community norms fit their moral commitments. Streib's review identifies criticism of the morality and values of a religious community as one possible dimension of deconversion. This does not imply that any religion or religious institution has a single moral character; it describes a type of conflict that some individuals report when their personal evaluations and their perceived community expectations diverge. Streib (2021) emphasizes the diversity of deconversion biographies across religious and cultural contexts.
Life-course development and changing social worlds
Adolescence, emerging adulthood, partnership, migration, education, parenthood, bereavement, and other transitions can reorganize social networks and identity commitments. These changes can strengthen, weaken, or transform religious identity. Developmental timing matters because a teenager negotiating religious identity while dependent on family lives in a different social situation from an independent adult changing affiliation in midlife.
Relational experiences and belonging
Religious communities can be major sources of friendship, family continuity, moral language, ritual, and practical support. Conflict, exclusion, disappointment, or simply growing distance from a community can therefore matter psychologically even when belief changes are modest. Conversely, warm and flexible relationships can make a change in identity less socially disruptive. The current evidence base is strongest for selected populations rather than all religions, so conclusions about relational causes should remain contextual.
What recent predictor studies can and cannot tell us
A recent cross-sectional and longitudinal analysis of research participants in Germany and the United States examined a broad set of characteristics before and after reported deconversion. Chen and Streib (2026) found associations involving religiosity, beliefs, personality, and relational variables. Such findings help map candidate predictors, but they do not establish a universal causal recipe. Deconversion research still contains relatively few large prospective datasets, and many variables can be both causes and consequences of religious change.
What Changes When a Religious Identity Changes?
Religion can function simultaneously as a social identity, a meaning system, a set of practices, a moral vocabulary, a family tradition, and a relationship to the sacred. When religious identification changes, these layers can change at different speeds. A person may stop attending before changing beliefs, change a public label while keeping private prayer, or reject one institutional identity while preserving a sense of spirituality.
Self-concept and personal narrative
A major identity transition often requires a new answer to questions such as 'Who am I?', 'Which communities describe me?', 'What gives my life continuity?', and 'How do I explain my past to myself and others?' Deconversion can therefore involve narrative reconstruction: earlier experiences are reinterpreted from a new standpoint, while some commitments are retained and others are revised. This rebuilding is not a demand to erase a religious past. A previous religious identity can remain part of autobiographical memory even after current identification changes.
Values and moral identity
People leaving a religion may ask whether values they previously expressed in religious language still matter to them and, if so, how they now understand their basis. Many discover continuity rather than a complete moral reset: compassion, honesty, responsibility, family loyalty, service, justice, forgiveness, or other commitments can remain central even when their theological interpretation changes. Others revise particular values or priorities. Psychology describes this reorganization without deciding which moral or religious framework is correct.
Practices, routines, and embodied habits
Religious life is often organized through weekly rhythms, prayer, dietary practices, clothing, music, holidays, sacred spaces, and shared rituals. Removing or revising those routines can create practical gaps long before a person has a new identity narrative. Some people discontinue most practices; others retain culturally meaningful holidays, contemplative practices, family rituals, or forms of service. These continuities can be psychologically important even when affiliation has ended.
Religious residue
Identity change does not necessarily erase earlier patterns of thought and behavior. Across nationally representative samples in the United States, the Netherlands, New Zealand, and Hong Kong, Van Tongeren and colleagues (2021) found that formerly religious participants differed from both currently religious and never-religious participants on several cognitive, emotional, and behavioral measures. The authors described this as 'religious residue.' The result is best read as evidence of continuity after deidentification, not as evidence that all former believers retain the same beliefs or that earlier religious formation is permanent.
Emotional Experiences After Deconversion
There is no single emotional signature of leaving religion. Relief, freedom, curiosity, uncertainty, sadness, anger, fear, guilt, loneliness, hope, and affection for parts of a former tradition can occur separately or together. Emotions can also change over time. A person may feel immediate relief from a conflict and later miss a community; another may initially feel destabilized and later feel settled. Mixed emotions are especially understandable when a transition changes both deeply held beliefs and important relationships.
Guilt and moral concern
Guilt can occur when leaving a religion is experienced as violating a moral duty, disappointing loved ones, or threatening a person's previous understanding of what it means to be good. In five international studies involving more than 10,000 participants, Bounds and colleagues (2026) found that viewing religious faith as essential to morality was associated with greater anticipated or experienced deconversion guilt. The studies include correlational and experimental components, but they do not imply that guilt is inevitable or that one moral framework is psychologically superior.
Relief and regained agency
Some people describe relief when a long period of internal conflict ends or when they feel freer to choose relationships, practices, or values. Relief does not mean the transition is simple, and it can coexist with grief-like feelings about lost community, rituals, or certainty. Positive and difficult reactions can be psychologically real at the same time.
Loneliness and rebuilding social support
The social consequences of deconversion depend heavily on how much a person's relationships were organized around religious participation. In a qualitative study of 24 people who had left Christian fundamentalist religions, Nica (2019) found that rebuilding supportive relationships was difficult for some participants early in the transition and that later nonreligious networks were described as contributing to well-being. The sample was small and highly specific, so this finding should not be generalized to all religious communities. It nevertheless illustrates why social support deserves separate attention from belief change itself.
Does Religious Deconversion Harm Mental Health?
The best available evidence does not support a universal claim that leaving religion causes depression, anxiety, or lower well-being. It also does not support a universal claim that deconversion improves mental health. Outcomes vary, and the research question is complicated by selection effects: psychological or social difficulties can begin before a person stops participating, while the loss of community or conflict with family can add stress afterward.
The strongest direct longitudinal evidence currently available is reassuring at the average-group level. Bleidorn et al. (2024) found no average change in self-esteem, depression, or life satisfaction around deconversion in their large Dutch panel. The result is important because it follows people before and after the transition instead of comparing unrelated religious and nonreligious groups at one point in time.
A related question is what happens when people stop active religious attendance. Using four prospective U.S. cohorts with 6,592 participants and more than 37,000 person-observations, Jokela and Laakasuo (2024) found that 10-year trajectories of depressive symptoms, psychological well-being, self-rated health, and several health behaviors did not worsen after participants moved from active to inactive attendance. Adverse trends were already visible before disengagement in some outcomes. Attendance is not identical to deconversion, but the study challenges a simple causal story in which disengagement itself produces declining health.
Earlier cross-sectional work had found lower health and subjective well-being among religious disaffiliates compared with people who remained affiliated or were consistently unaffiliated. In pooled U.S. General Social Survey data, Fenelon and Danielsen (2016) reported that the disadvantage was statistically mediated by frequency of church attendance. Because the data are observational and largely cross-sectional, they cannot show that disaffiliation caused the differences. Taken together with later prospective work, the evidence favors careful attention to prior trajectories, social participation, and context.
Individual distress still matters even when group averages are neutral. A person can experience clinically significant depression, anxiety, insomnia, trauma-related symptoms, or suicidal thoughts during the same period in which religious identity changes. Those symptoms require assessment in their own right. The diagnostic question is whether recognized symptom patterns, duration, severity, and functional impairment are present—not whether a person has become religious, less religious, or nonreligious.
Family and Community Relationships
Religious identity often belongs to relationships as well as to individuals. Shared faith can organize family rituals, marriage expectations, holidays, education, caregiving, moral language, and intergenerational continuity. A change in one person's identity can therefore be experienced by relatives as a change in the relationship itself, even when affection remains strong.
Longitudinal evidence from 1,391 U.S. parent-adolescent dyads found that adolescent religious deidentification was associated with greater religion-related conflict and short-term decreases in adolescents' reports of parental warmth. Hendricks and colleagues (2026) also found that parental sanctification of the parent-child relationship was generally associated with warmth while sometimes interacting with deidentification in relation to conflict. These results are specific to adolescence and the study's cultural context; they should not be turned into predictions about every family.
For adults, family reactions can range from acceptance and curiosity to sadness, disagreement, pressure, avoidance, or estrangement. The psychological task is often to separate several conversations that easily collapse into one: what the person now believes, what practices they will participate in, how family rituals will work, which topics are open for discussion, and what kinds of persuasion or criticism feel acceptable. Clear boundaries can reduce ambiguity while leaving room for affection and ongoing relationships.
Respect works in both directions. A person who has deconverted can describe their own experience without ridiculing relatives' faith, and religious relatives can express concern or conviction without denying the person's autonomy. In families where disclosure could create loss of housing, financial support, safety, or other serious consequences, decisions about what to disclose and when are practical safety questions rather than tests of authenticity.
Deconversion in Adolescence and Emerging Adulthood
Adolescence and emerging adulthood are periods when identity, autonomy, peer relationships, education, and future plans often change rapidly. Religious identity can be one part of that broader development. It is therefore misleading to explain adolescent deconversion simply as rebellion or to treat it as proof that a young person has reached a final worldview. Religious commitments can strengthen, weaken, diversify, or change again across the life span.
The preregistered longitudinal work by Watanabe and Todd (2026) shows that trajectories of doubt and religious engagement across adolescence predict later deidentification in different ways. The parent-adolescent study by Hendricks et al. (2026) shows that the transition can also affect family conflict and perceived warmth. Together these studies make development and relationships central to the topic without reducing young people's beliefs to developmental noise.
Clinical or educational support for adolescents should therefore attend to both the young person's emerging identity and the family system. The goal is not to decide which worldview the young person should hold. It is to support safe communication, functioning, emotional regulation, autonomy appropriate to development, and respectful family relationships where possible.
Rebuilding Identity After Leaving a Religion
Identity rebuilding does not require constructing an entirely new self. A more realistic task is integration: deciding which parts of the past remain meaningful, which commitments have changed, which relationships need new boundaries, and how present values will be expressed in daily life. The process can be fast for one domain and slow for another.
Practical reflection can be organized around several questions. They are not a prescribed sequence and do not assume that remaining nonreligious is the final outcome:
Map what changed and what stayed: beliefs, identity labels, family relationships, friendships, practices, values, community roles, and future expectations can move separately.
Name values in present-day language. Decide which ethical commitments still feel central and how they will be practiced in work, family, relationships, and community life.
Rebuild belonging deliberately when needed. Social connection can come from friends, family, civic groups, professional communities, arts, sports, volunteering, spiritual communities, or other settings that fit the person's values.
Create routines for times previously organized by religious practice. Weekends, holidays, meals, prayer times, or service activities may leave practical and emotional gaps that benefit from intentional new patterns.
Allow identity labels to remain provisional. A person may use nonreligious, agnostic, atheist, spiritual, questioning, unaffiliated, or no label at all, and those descriptions can change without indicating instability.
Plan boundaries and conversations rather than relying only on spontaneous disclosure. The right level of openness depends on relationships, dependence, safety, culture, and personal priorities.
Seek competent support when distress, isolation, family conflict, or mental-health symptoms interfere with daily functioning. Support can include psychotherapy, peer communities, trusted religious or nonreligious mentors, or other resources chosen by the person.
The underlying psychological principle is continuity with revision. Former beliefs, rituals, and relationships remain part of a person's history even when their current interpretation changes. The cross-cultural evidence on religious residue is consistent with this broader point: deidentification does not create an instant psychological blank slate.
Can Someone Leave Organized Religion and Remain Spiritual?
Yes. Religious identity, institutional affiliation, spirituality, belief in God or a transcendent reality, private prayer, ritual, and moral commitments are related but distinct dimensions. Some people leave a particular institution while retaining a strong spiritual life. Others become religiously unaffiliated but continue selected practices. Others describe themselves as atheist or agnostic and do not understand their lives in spiritual terms. Still others later join a different religious tradition.
This diversity is one reason the word deconversion must be used carefully. In some studies it means leaving a childhood religion for no religion; in others it includes broader decline in religious commitment. Researchers increasingly distinguish identity, belief, behavior, and affiliation rather than treating them as one variable. Van Tongeren and DeWall's integrative framework is especially useful for keeping those dimensions separate.
When Deconversion Feels Like Loss
Leaving a religion can involve losses that are psychological even when no person has died: a familiar community, a shared future, a role, a ritual calendar, a moral vocabulary, a sense of certainty, or an expected relationship with relatives. People may therefore describe grief-like reactions. That language can be useful when it names a real process of adapting to loss, but it should not be used to imply that every deconversion is traumatic or that nonreligious identity is a deficit.
General grief research helps explain why adjustment to significant loss can include mixed emotions, repeated reminders, shifts in identity, and gradual reorganization of daily life. Our separate overview, Grief: Psychological Responses to Loss, explains these processes in detail. Deconversion-related loss is not identical to bereavement, and clinical diagnoses related to bereavement should not be transferred to religious identity change.
Religious Deconversion and Clinical Mental Health: Important Distinctions
Religious deconversion is not a mental disorder in DSM or ICD systems. Neither religious belief nor nonbelief is a diagnosis. Doubt, changes in affiliation, changes in prayer or worship, guilt, relief, and spiritual searching are experiences whose meaning depends on context. A clinician assesses mental disorders through recognized symptom patterns, duration, distress, impairment, medical factors, developmental history, and cultural context.
Ordinary moral or religious concern versus scrupulosity
A person leaving religion may think repeatedly about morality, responsibility, or whether they have disappointed loved ones. Repetition alone does not establish obsessive-compulsive disorder. Scrupulosity involves OCD processes such as intrusive obsessions, compulsive reassurance seeking, checking, ritualizing, or attempts to obtain impossible certainty, together with clinically significant distress or impairment. Our clinical article Scrupulosity OCD: What Is It? Religious Obsessions, Moral Fear, Rituals, Guilt, and Treatment explains that differential in detail. Clinicians should not label ordinary religious devotion, doubt, or conscientiousness as OCD.
Religious and spiritual experiences require cultural context
Psychological assessment should not pathologize a belief or experience merely because it is unfamiliar to the clinician. Religious and spiritual competencies are part of culturally responsive practice. Vieten and Lukoff (2022) argue that psychologists need specific attitudes, knowledge, and skills for addressing religious and spiritual diversity. The relevant clinical question is how an experience fits the person's tradition, culture, functioning, distress, and broader symptom pattern.
How Psychotherapy Can Support a Person During Religious Change
Psychotherapy can provide a setting for exploring identity, meaning, relationships, guilt, anger, grief-like loss, or uncertainty without requiring the therapist to take a position on religious truth. The therapeutic task is to understand the client's goals and values, not to steer the client toward religion, away from religion, or toward the therapist's own worldview.
Competent work begins with assessment. A therapist can ask how religion or spirituality has functioned in the client's life, what has changed, which relationships are affected, what sources of support remain available, and whether the client wants religious or spiritual themes included in treatment. Vieten and Lukoff (2022) identify religious and spiritual competence as an element of psychological cultural competence, while Currier and colleagues (2023) discuss ethical assessment and integration of religious and spiritual material in psychological services.
Therapy may focus on ordinary clinical targets such as emotion regulation, depressive or anxiety symptoms, interpersonal conflict, assertive communication, social connection, self-compassion, or decision-making. If a client wants to preserve valued religious practices, reconnect with a faith community, explore a new tradition, or develop a nonreligious identity, those goals can be supported as long as they are the client's goals and remain compatible with safe, ethical care.
A therapist does not need to share the client's worldview to work competently, but they do need enough humility and knowledge to avoid caricaturing it. Consultation or referral can be appropriate when the clinician lacks needed competence. Collaboration with clergy or spiritual-care professionals can also be useful when a client requests it and confidentiality and professional roles are clear.
What Shapes Adjustment After Leaving Faith?
Adjustment is best understood as the result of interacting conditions rather than one predictor. A person whose religious identity was central, whose family and friendships are tightly organized around one community, and whose livelihood or housing depends on that network faces a different transition from someone whose affiliation was already peripheral. The same public label—'no religion'—can therefore conceal very different psychological demands.
Social support is especially important when deconversion changes belonging. The qualitative findings reported by Nica (2019) show how rebuilding support can become a major task for some former members of demanding religious communities. Family research with adolescents likewise shows that religious identity change can alter conflict and perceived warmth. Hendricks et al. (2026) provide longitudinal evidence for this relational dimension.
Cultural context also changes the meaning of deconversion. In a society where nonreligious identities are common, leaving a religion may require less public explanation than in a setting where religious belonging structures family, citizenship, schooling, or community life. Research samples are still disproportionately drawn from Western and Christian-majority contexts, so claims about 'the psychology of deconversion' must remain sensitive to religious and cultural diversity.
Finally, previous distress can shape later outcomes. The prospective attendance study by Jokela and Laakasuo (2024) found adverse health and behavior trajectories beginning before participants stopped active religious attendance. This illustrates a broader methodological principle: researchers must distinguish experiences that precede disengagement from consequences that follow it.
What the Evidence Supports—and What Remains Uncertain
Several conclusions are reasonably well supported. Deconversion is heterogeneous and multidimensional. It often unfolds over time. Changes in identity, belief, practice, and affiliation can occur at different rates. Family relationships and social support can materially shape the experience. Average mental-health outcomes do not justify assuming inevitable harm or benefit.
Other questions remain more preliminary. Research is still developing on which psychological factors reliably predict deconversion across religions and cultures, how different forms of community response affect long-term adjustment, and how spiritual identities evolve years after disaffiliation. The 2026 special issue of The International Journal for the Psychology of Religion explicitly describes religious deidentification as a growing research field with substantial unanswered questions. Van Tongeren and Van Cappellen (2026) summarize the field's current developmental, predictive, and outcome-focused agenda.
The field also faces recurring methodological limitations. Definitions vary across studies; some measure identity, others attendance or affiliation. Many datasets are cross-sectional or retrospective. Longitudinal studies remain comparatively few. Samples often overrepresent Western countries and Christian backgrounds. People who leave highly demanding communities may differ substantially from people whose religious participation was already low. These limitations make broad causal statements scientifically unwarranted.
For readers, the practical implication is straightforward: a person's own trajectory matters more than a stereotype about believers or former believers. Evidence can describe common patterns and risks, while the meaning of a particular transition depends on the person's history, relationships, culture, values, and present functioning.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is religious deconversion the same as becoming an atheist?
No. Some people who deconvert identify as atheist, but others identify as agnostic, spiritual but not religious, unaffiliated, questioning, or with another religious tradition. Deconversion describes change from a prior religious commitment; it does not determine the person's new metaphysical beliefs.
Is religious deconversion a mental-health diagnosis?
No. Religious deconversion is not a DSM or ICD disorder. A person can experience distress during a faith transition, but diagnosis depends on recognized clinical symptoms, duration, severity, functional impairment, and context rather than on a change in religious identity.
Does leaving religion cause depression or anxiety?
Current evidence does not support a universal causal claim. Large longitudinal work has found no average decline in well-being around deconversion, and prospective research on stopping active religious attendance found no worsening of health trajectories after disengagement. Individual people can still experience depression, anxiety, or other conditions during the same period, especially when there is conflict, isolation, or prior vulnerability. Bleidorn et al. (2024) and Jokela and Laakasuo (2024) provide the strongest longitudinal evidence summarized here.
Why can guilt remain after beliefs have changed?
Emotional learning, moral identity, family expectations, and long-practiced habits can persist after explicit beliefs change. Research on religious residue shows that earlier religious formation can continue to influence cognition and behavior, while recent work on deconversion guilt suggests that seeing religiosity as essential to morality is associated with stronger guilt around leaving. Van Tongeren et al. (2021) and Bounds et al. (2026) address these processes from different angles.
Can someone still pray or observe religious holidays after deconversion?
Yes. Identity, belief, practice, culture, and family tradition are separable. A person may retain prayer, meditation, holidays, music, food traditions, or community ties for spiritual, cultural, relational, or personal reasons. The psychological meaning of those practices depends on the person rather than on a fixed rule about what a former believer should do.
How long does rebuilding identity take?
There is no established timetable. Some people experience little disruption; others need months or years to reorganize relationships, routines, values, and a sense of belonging. Different parts of identity can stabilize at different times. A longer transition is not, by itself, evidence of disorder.
Should therapy help someone return to faith or leave it completely?
Therapy should help the client pursue their own informed goals. Ethical psychological care does not require a predetermined religious or nonreligious outcome. Clinicians can support reflection, functioning, relationships, safety, and mental health while respecting the client's worldview and cultural context. Currier et al. (2023) and Vieten and Lukoff (2022) provide competency frameworks for this work.
Related Articles
References
Bleidorn, W., Lenhausen, M. R., Schwaba, T., & Hopwood, C. J. (2024). Psychological change before and after religious conversion and deconversion. Journal of Personality, 92(4), 1193–1210. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12881
Bounds, E. M., Abrams, S., Jackson, J. C., Vonasch, A. J., & Gray, K. (2026). Seeing religious faith as essential to morality predicts deconversion guilt. The International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 36(1), 204–228. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508619.2025.2491893
Chen, Z. J., & Streib, H. (2026). Characteristics, predictors and outcomes of religious deconversion: A cross-sectional and longitudinal analysis. The International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 36(1), 97–114. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508619.2025.2520104
Currier, J. M., Fox, J., Vieten, C., Pearce, M., & Oxhandler, H. K. (2023). Enhancing competencies for the ethical integration of religion and spirituality in psychological services. Psychological Services, 20(1), 40–50. https://doi.org/10.1037/ser0000678
Fenelon, A., & Danielsen, S. (2016). Leaving my religion: Understanding the relationship between religious disaffiliation, health, and well-being. Social Science Research, 57, 49–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2016.01.007
Hendricks, J., Hardy, S. A., Goodman, M. A., & de Schweinitz Taylor, E. (2026). Longitudinal associations and interactions of adolescent religious deidentification and parental sanctification on parent-adolescent relationships. The International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 36(1), 49–65. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508619.2025.2521897
Jokela, M., & Laakasuo, M. (2024). Health trajectories of individuals who quit active religious attendance: Analysis of four prospective cohort studies in the United States. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 59, 871–878. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00127-023-02497-x
Nica, A. (2019). Exiters of religious fundamentalism: Reconstruction of social support and relationships related to well-being. Mental Health, Religion & Culture, 22(5), 543–556. https://doi.org/10.1080/13674676.2019.1636015
Streib, H. (2021). Leaving religion: Deconversion. Current Opinion in Psychology, 40, 139–144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2020.09.007
Van Tongeren, D. R., & DeWall, C. N. (2023). Disbelief, disengagement, discontinuance, and disaffiliation: An integrative framework for the study of religious deidentification. Psychology of Religion and Spirituality, 15(4), 515–524. https://doi.org/10.1037/rel0000434
Van Tongeren, D. R., DeWall, C. N., Chen, Z., Sibley, C. G., & Bulbulia, J. (2021). Religious residue: Cross-cultural evidence that religious psychology and behavior persist following deidentification. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 120(2), 484–503. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000288
Van Tongeren, D. R., & Van Cappellen, P. (2026). The future of religious deidentification: Introduction to the special issue on leaving religion. The International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 36(1), 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508619.2025.2602288
Vieten, C., & Lukoff, D. (2022). Spiritual and religious competencies in psychology. American Psychologist, 77(1), 26–38. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000821
Watanabe, S., & Todd, N. R. (2026). One trajectory does not fit all: Understanding religious deidentification with longitudinal patterns of religious doubt and engagement. The International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 36(1), 133–149. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508619.2025.2521564