Return to FMSF Home Page
**********************************************************************
3401 Market Street suite 130, Philadelphia, PA 19104, (215-387-1865)
This address and the phone numbers have changed as of July 15, 2000
**********************************************************************
The FMSF Newsletter is published 10 times a year by the False
Memory Syndrome Foundation. A hard-copy subscription is in-
cluded in membership fees. Others may subscribe by sending a
check or money order, payable to FMS Foundation, to the ad-
dress above. 1994 subscription rates: USA: 1 year $30, Stu-
dent $10; Canada: $35 (in U.S. dollars); Foreign: $40; Foreign
student $20; Single issue price: $3. ISSN #1069-0484
**********************************************************************
INSIDE:
McHugh
Lindsay
Ross
British Psychological Society
Harrington
Hochman
Legal Corner
From Our Readers
**********************************************************************
Dear Friends,
"It is probably no news to you that society today has a growing
distrust of psychotherapy."
Advertisement for special issue of
Journal of Psychohistory
"Backlash Against Psychotherapy"
If this is so, perhaps it is because the American public is now
behaving more as responsible consumers instead of passive bystanders.
After all, psychotherapy is an essential service and people who need
that service should be assured of quality care.
"Sustained pressure or persuasion by an authority figure could lead
to the retrieval or elaboration of memories of events that never
actually happened. The possibility of therapists creating in their
clients false memories of having been sexually abused in childhood
warrants careful consideration, and guidelines for therapists are
suggested here to minimize the risk of this happening."
Executive Summary Report of the British Psychological Society
This is an important point. It affirms the reality of false
memories. It is another reason for therapists to follow the June 1994
AMA statement that recovered memories of childhood sexual abuse
"should be subject to external verification"
If a new drug were invented that cured some people from a terrible
disease but that also maimed and killed others to whom it was given,
would it continue to be used? Would the risk be worth it? Consider
Thalidomide. How long did it take to remove it from the market after
the negative effects were discovered? Indeed, it was never allowed on
the American market. Did anyone argue that it should be available
until more research was done? Did doctors say, "We don't understand
why it is having the bad effect on some people so we'll continue to
use it until more research is completed?" Did they say, "The problem
only involves a small number of people so it is OK to continue?"
This analogy mimics some of the arguments made by some in the
clinical community. It may be this kind of thinking that accounts, in
part, for "growing distrust of psychotherapy." "I may be wrong," can
be one of the more difficult things for some people to say. It may be
especially difficult for therapists in our society to say because they
have been given so much authority. Yet, this is what it will take to
stop the harm being done by ill-conceived and non-scientific thinking.
Broad public distrust for psychotherapy builds when existing
societal mechanisms fail to take the corrective actions that bring
therapeutic practice in congruence with science. Consumers first turn
to the professional organizations and licensing boards to correct the
wrongs they experience. Until recently, these organizations seemed to
turn their backs on these legitimate grievances. The slow pace of
these organized bodies in responding to people harmed by therapy only
adds to the distrust that people have.
This may be turning around. Originally, only a small handful of
therapists were public in their concern about the problems created by
the misapplication of knowledge around memory. They are being joined
by more of their colleagues. Distrust may ebb as more concerned
clinicians speak publicly to their professional organizations, state
licensing boards and to the public at large. The Foundation stands
ready to help lessen the distrust that people have about
psychotherapy.
There are many positive things going on that indicate we are getting
closer to a conclusion of the FMS phenomenon. The article by Paul
McHugh on page 2 about the cycle of crazes is helpful in terms of
seeing just where we are. This is an important perspective for those
families who have not had any change in their personal situations. It
may help them to understand that each time an accuser reaches out to
resume contact, the cycle is moving forward even if it has not yet
resulted in personal relief. As the cycle inevitably moves forward,
the probability for relief in an individual family increases.
Each time an article appears that presents accurate information, we
move forward and are closer to seeing an institutionalization of the
scientific view of memory. The 1995 Information Please Almanac devotes
two full pages to the topic of recovered memories. A new Abnormal
Psychology textbook by R. Comer (W. H. Freeman & Co, 1995) has two
pages about false memories. In addition to on-going articles in mental
health journals, newspapers that cater to the legal community have
begun to report regularly on the recovered memory cases in a
scientific context. Two new books have appeared that add to our
understanding of the issues. Diagnosis for Disaster:The Devastating
Truth about False Memory Syndrome and Its Impact on Accusers and
Families by Claudette Wassil-Grimm (Overlook) and Survivor Psychology:
The Dark Side of a Mental Health Mission by Susan Smith (Upton Books).
Does this mean that there is nothing more to do? On the contrary.
Two books about how to treat "survivors" of intergenerational satanic
cults have recently crossed our desk. The American Psychological
Association has published a book that promotes the use of a symptom
check list for diagnosing incest survivors and using hypnosis for
finding memories. A high school health class is required to memorize
and then take a "true-false" test on Blume's check list of symptoms.
There seems a near desperate attempt by critics to try to prove that
they are right -- so much so that they forget that they put themselves
at risk in using techniques or theories that may bring harm. "First,
do no harm." Have our critics forgotten this? Each of us,
professionals or families, must do everything we can to end this
misdirection of clinical thought and to again put our resources where
they will help children, victims of abuse and families.
PAMELA
**********************************************************************
THE FALSE MEMORY CRAZE
Paul R. McHugh, MD
Henry Phipps Professor and Director, Department of Psychiatry
The Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions
It is easy to believe that the false charges against families of
having abused their children years ago will continue unabated. The
great difficulty of proving the negative and assembling this proof,
years after the event, encourages this pessimistic view. As well, the
fact that many professional mental health workers, if not joined into
the accusations, seem to retire and take the "balanced view" of the
matter is also discouraging. Finally, the increasing numbers of these
charges against families and the great publicity the charges receive
can provoke the view that we have only begun to discover mistreatment
of children that is the cause of a variety of mental disturbances in
later life.
Those of us who are calling for standards of psychiatric practice
that would examine these charges and, as well, demonstrate the illogic
of the argument and the shabbiness of the data on which the argument
is based, all of which have been discussed in the pages of the False
Memory Syndrome Foundation newsletter, can, however, find some
optimism if we recognize that the false memory epidemic is a human
phenomenon of crowd behavior. Many of us have commented about the
similarity of this situation to the witch trials and to the lynch mobs
in which anger and violence against people have been generated without
evidence. It is useful to recognized that our social scientists have
long since demonstrated that cultures can be swept by a craze for a
false idea that takes a very standard course almost predictable in its
form.
The best discussion of crazes was written in the 1950s by
L.S. Penrose who, in his book, Objective Study of Crowd Behavior,
described five different stages that crazes go through, both crazes of
an innocuous as well as a dangerous kind.
PHASE I - LATENT PHASE. Penrose defined this initial phase in the
craze by stating that the idea which is the source of the problem is
found in a few minds, but is not spreading. An example of this in our
situation might be the idea that Multiple Personality Disorder was an
expression of dissociation and child abuse that Cornelia Wilbur and a
few of her associates held in the early 1970s.
PHASE II - EXPLOSIVE PHASE. During this phase the idea spreads
exponentially within a community of interested people. For example,
beginning in the late 1970s and early 80s the idea that repressed
memories could include historical aspects of a person's life spread
within much of the mental health community and took on remarkable
forms, including beliefs about satanic ritual abuse and even alien
abduction. The susceptibility seemed to rest upon the search for some
explanation for a variety of mental disorders that are often difficult
to treat. The repressed memory concept satisfied this need.
PHASE III - SATURATION PHASE. This phase is characterized by the
market of "susceptible" minds in the community becoming saturated and
the number of new converts to the idea slackening. It seems to me that
we are in this phase with the repressed memory craze. Fewer people
seem ready to immediately acquiesce to the idea. This phase, though,
is difficult to distinguish from the following phase.
PHASE IV - IMMUNITY PHASE. This phase is characterized by resistance
to the idea developing within the community and enthusiasm weakens for
it, even amongst the initially involved. Resistance develops as
individuals study the idea and its implications. In our case, the
study from many excellent investigators of the logic behind the
concept of "repressed memories" and the shabbiness of the data that
generated the ideas and supports it today provokes much of this
resistance and, as has been seen by many of the initial proponents,
they begin to recognize that their reputation may be damaged if they
are not more careful in their advocacy of these ideas. I believe that
our situation with false memories could be considered somewhere
between the Phase III/Phase IV stages as outlined by Penrose.
PHASE V - STAGNANT PHASE. This phase is characterized by the idea
fading away, except perhaps in the minds of a few enthusiasts. This is
the place where false memories will be within the next five to ten
years. The phase will be generated in part by science, but in part by
legal processes in which the malpractices that generated the idea of
repressed memories will be demonstrated, and eventually
psychotherapeutic practices will be restored to their initial
integrity. The important point is that one cannot expect everyone to
recover nor all to see the misdirection that the repressed memory idea
generated. We must accept the fact that this idea will remain in the
minds of some who will become progressively more marginalized in the
field of mental health by their support of these views.
I am optimistic that exactly this course is being followed but it
carries the implications that we must continue our efforts to immunize
the public and document as best we can this historical moment of grief
and misdirection in our field.
______________________________SIDEBAR_______________________________
/ \
| The FMS Story: Letters from a daughter |
| |
| SEPTEMBER 1988 "And that's one other thing that I want to thank |
| you for, Mom and Dad. I feel that I have the 'ideal' parents and |
| I'm so privileged to have a beautiful spiritual heritage that you |
| both have given me. There is no better family to live in! I thank |
| God for you both." |
| |
| JULY 1990 "When I got out of my first session, I was stunned and |
| totally shocked. My counselor pointed out that my problems may |
| have resulted from being sexually abused as a child...Since that |
| first visit, I have become totally convinced that yes, indeed, I |
| was sexually abused. Due to the horror of those occasions in my |
| childhood, I chose to block out what happened to save myself from |
| the pain. With the help of my therapist and a lot of digging on my |
| own, I've been able to recall a lot from my childhood." |
| |
| JANUARY 1992 "I'm writing to say good-bye to you. It's been a year |
| now since you and I last met and, Dad, it's apparent after this |
| much time just how unwilling you are to be reconciled with me...If |
| you desire reconciliation, please do as I have asked you in the |
| past -- see a therapist." |
\____________________________________________________________________/
**********************************************************************
STOP CHILD SEX ABUSE *AND* MEMORY RECOVERY THERAPY
D. Stephen Lindsay, Ph.D.
At the recent conference in Baltimore, I summarized highlights
from Poole, Lindsay, Memon, and Bull's (in press) surveys of
psychotherapists' opinions, practices, and experiences regarding
clients' memories of childhood sexual abuse (CSA). I prefaced my
report by commenting on the broader cultural context in which the
popularity of memory recovery therapies arose. My central argument in
those prefatory remarks was that there is no contradiction in being
concerned about the reality of CSA while at the same time being
concerned about the risks of memory recovery techniques. In making
that argument, I stated that even when CSA is defined quite narrowly
(e.g., to include only cases of physical sexual contact) the best
available evidence indicates that there are millions of people in
North America who were victimized in this way as children.
After my talk, I learned that some audience members had found my
statements about "millions" of victims confusing. Several people
approached me about this, and one said something along the lines of
"If there really are millions, maybe therapists who think many of
their clients have hidden memories of CSA are right." It occurred to
me later that some therapists have made the same mistake that these
audience members had made.
What one must keep in mind is that there are some 300 million
people in North America. Thus, for example, if we accept Russell's
(1983) finding that 5% of women in a large retrospective survey
reported actual or attempted contact CSA perpetrated by fathers, then
millions of women in North America experienced such abuse as children.
This does not mean, however, that a large percentage of psychotherapy
clients are likely to have hidden memories of extensive histories of
CSA. For one thing, this prevalence estimate includes reports of
"attempted" as well as "actual" abuse, and reports of one-time as well
as multiple instances; thus although the number of victims is
staggeringly large, only a very small percentage of the population has
histories of repeated incestuous contact CSA. For another thing,
research indicates that few victims of CSA -- especially repeated
contact abuse that occurred beyond the first few years of life -- are
likely to forget that it occurred. Thus, even under the assumption
that survivors of abuse are more likely to seek therapy than other
members of the population, people with recoverable hidden memories
would, at most, make up a tiny minority of clients. Furthermore,
there is little reason to believe that therapists can discriminate
between clients with hidden histories of abuse and clients with no
histories of abuse. Finally, there is no evidence to support the
notion that attempting to recover such memories helps clients, and
ample evidence supports the concern that searches for hidden memories
are risky. Thus acknowledgement of the prevalence and importance of
CSA should not be construed as support for "therapeutic" searches for
hidden memories (although it may help understand why some therapists
have promulgated such searches).
The sexual abuse of children is an extremely important problem.
People concerned about false memories must continually remind
themselves and others that support for victims and survivors of abuse
must not be undermined by efforts to stop the use of risky memory
recovery therapies. If we are clear about this, there is no
contradiction between pursuing these goals simultaneously. Indeed, I
would argue that it is only when one has an exclusive focus on
detecting survivors of abuse, or an exclusive focus on avoiding false
reports of abuse, that unappealing trade-offs become inevitable. I
suggest as a slogan for the Foundation: "Stop Child Sexual Abuse AND
Stop Memory Recovery Therapies."
______________________________SIDEBAR_______________________________
/ \
| "...families can and do survive real incest. But it is very |
| difficult to recover from imagined incest." |
| Frank Pittman, M.D. |
| "Ask Dr. Frank" Psychology Today Nov/Dec 1994 |
\____________________________________________________________________/
**********************************************************************
REPORT ON THE
JOHNS HOPKINS/FALSE MEMORY SYNDROME FOUNDATIN MEETING,
BALTIMORE, DECEMBER 9-11, 1994
Colin A. Ross, M.D.
[Colin A. Ross, M.D., author of many books and Director of the
Dissociative Unit at Charter Hospital in Dallas, Texas, has several
times been the subject of disparaging comments in this Newsletter
(Vol 2, Nos. 4,5,8). He is often considered to be one of the most
prominent advocates of treatment for multiple personality disorder.
He has contributed the following communication for the FMS
Foundation Newsletter. We are delighted to print it. Responses, as
usual, will be welcome.]
I am submitting this report simultaneously to the Newsletters of the
International Society for the Study of Dissociation (ISSD) and the
False Memory Syndrome Foundation (FMSF). As immediate past President
of the ISSD, I was concerned that I might receive a hostile reception
at the meeting in Baltimore. In fact the response to my presence was
warm and cordial, with a few exceptions, and numerous people said that
they were glad to see me there, and that the two camps need to begin a
conversation -- the individuals who expressed this view included
accused fathers, recanters who have successfully sued their
therapists, wives of accused fathers, lawyers who have won false
memory suits, psychologists, and psychiatrists.
The social process and dynamics of the Baltimore meeting were
identical to those of the multiple personality meetings held in
Chicago in the mid to late 1980's. Both meetings were in part
expressions of a social cause, with the audience providing standing
ovations when stirring orators espoused the group political doctrine.
The audience at both meetings was a mixture of survivors,
paraprofessionals, and clinicians, and at both meetings victims in the
audience could be seen receiving back rubs form significant others. At
both meetings the speakers were predominantly male M.D.s and Ph.D.s.
There were survivor forums at both meetings, and undisguised cases
were presented on stage in Baltimore. Both meetings involved a great
deal of belief and insufficient empiricism.
The meetings differed demographically,with an upward age shift in
Baltimore, and many more males in the audience in Baltimore. The key
difference was a rotation of the victim-rescuer-perpetrator triangle
-- both meetings were focused on championing the cause of the victim.
In Chicago in 1988 the highest-ranking victim was the female MPD
patient whose perpetrator was a male Satanist and rescuer a therapist,
while in Baltimore in 1994 the victim was a falsely accused father,
the rescuer the lawyer, and the perpetrator the MPD therapist. The
demographics of the roles had shifted but the dynamics were identical.
At both meetings the projected bad self was clearly identified --
in 1994, ISSD members tend to view the FMSF as "perps incorporated"
while FMSF members tend to view the ISSD as "incompetent hysterics of
America." Both these perceptions are based on the sociology of rumor,
the psychodynamics of projection, and overgeneralization from biased
samples. Many FMSF members, I learned, have attitudes towards me which
are based on rumor -- this is the inverse of the Satanic panic
analyzed by Victor (1993) and Mulhern (1994).
ISSD members tend towards an equation according to which FMSF
membership = perpetrator = denial, while FMSF members tend to accept
the equation MPD diagnosis = hysteria = false memories = patient and
family harm. Many professional FMSF members are below scholarly
standard in terms of knowledge of the dissociation literature, while
many ISSD members are insufficiently aware of the literatures of the
imprecision of memory, demand characteristics, and coercive
persuasion. The two organizations are mirror opposites of each other.
Both have a lot to teach each other, although in both groups there are
ideologically fixed extremists. Both groups tend to be highly critical
of the other, but blind to the same logical errors made by themselves.
Many of the Baltimore talks could be given at an ISSD meeting, and
be well accepted there. ISSD members need to be aware that there is a
wide diversity of viewpoints among speakers at FMSF meetings, as there
is in the ISSD -- in Baltimore different speakers stated that there is
no such thing as repression, espoused classical psychoanalytical
theory, described treatment of a retractor based on classical Janetian
trauma-dissociation theory, and described a variant of cult exit
counseling. Much of the focus was more on standards of practice than
memory issues, and I agreed with more than half of what was said.
One of my goals is to convince FMSF members that the key variable of
mutual interest should be impaired professionals and bad therapies.
According to substantial but not definitive data MPD/DID is a reliable
and valid diagnosis according to the DSM-IV system rules. The DSM-IV
diagnosis of MDP/DID does not require adherence to a theory of "robust
repression," a reported history of sexual abuse, or belief in any
particular mental mechanism or metaphychological construct. This is
analogous to panic disorder -- establishing that the diagnosis of
panic disorder is reliable and valid has nothing to do with Freudian
theories of signal anxiety. The DSM system is atheroretical and
phenomenological thought, including in the dissociative disorders
section. The belief that the validity of MPD/DID stands or falls based
on theories of repression is simply wrong.
I would like to convince FMSF members that MPD/DID should be
disconnected from the problem of bad therapies and impaired
therapists. Until 1991 I was a fulltime salaried academic in Canada --
I saw countless examples of wildly incompetent polypharmacy with major
harm to patients, any of which would be grounds for a successful
malpractice suit. I'm not convinced that the percentage of impaired
clinicians is higher in dissociative disorders field than in
biological psychiatry.
It is true that there are impaired therapists practicing in the
dissociative disorders field. I believe, based on my clinical
experience, that some patients with Satanic ritual abuse memories are
suffering from DSM-IV dissociative disorder not otherwise specified
resulting from exposure to coercive persuasion and indoctrination in a
destructive psychotherapy cult. However, the false memories are only a
minor component of the problem clinically. Why? What is really harming
patients and families is generic bad clinical practice, and basic
ethical and boundary violations. It is possible to have false memories
in a good therapy and no false memories in a bad therapy.
The problem is not the existence of the false memories as such, it
is how they are managed and handled in therapy. I think the FMSF has
over-attributed the causality of the false memories to therapist
variables, and over-attributed the problems in bad therapies to the
memories. On the other side many ISSD members have been blind to the
damaging effects of their failure to maintain therapeutic neutrality
with regard to the reality of the memories.
The primary error of FMSF members is that, since someone has to be
bad, the family can only achieve reconciliation if it is the therapist
who caused the problems.
The primary error of ISSD members is that the FMSF crowd are only
interested in protecting perpetrators. This simply isn't true. Both
groups overgeneralize from subsamples within the opposing population.
My motive for going to the Baltimore meeting was in part my knowledge
that meeting someone face-to-face is a powerful counter to projection
of badness. It is time that psychiatrists and psychologists in both
camps sought a common ground, and took an empirical and scientific
approach to complex problems. The mental health field suffers from
MPD/DID -- the ISSD and FMSF are "alters" within a larger system who
are refusing to talk to each other or inhabit the same body. This does
not work inside individuals, nor does in work in the mental health
field.
Mulhern, S. (1994). Satanism, ritual abuse, and multiple personality
disorder: a sociohistorical perspective. International Journal of
Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 42: 265-288
Victor, J.S. (1993). Satanic Panic. The Creation of a Contemporary
Legend. Chicago: Open Court.
______________________________SIDEBAR_______________________________
/ \
| Another problem in understanding who is receiving psychotherapy is |
| that there is still no agreed-upon definition of psychotherapy. |
| Consequently, when a person makes a visit to a mental health |
| specialist, it is still hard to know just what treatment that |
| person is receiving. |
| John Vessey & Kenneth Howard |
| Who Seeks Psychotherapy? |
| Psychotherapy 30 (4) 546-553 |
\____________________________________________________________________/
**********************************************************************
NEW BOOK
The American Psychological Association had recently published a
book with the subtitle "A practical guide for the psychotherapist"
that suggests using hypnosis to recover memories. Although published
by the APA its author is not the Association but Lenore E.A. Walker,
Ph.D. Until recently Dr. Walker has been most famous as the inventor
of the Battered-Woman Syndrome. (We say "until recently" because her
presence as an O.J.Simpson defense witness has become a matter of much
comment.) Her new book comes with a foreword by Laura S. Brown, Ph.D.
(member of the APA's task force on recovered memories). Dr. Walker's
book, whose full title is "Abused Women and Survivor Therapy: A
practical guide for the psychotherapist" does indeed include a section
on hypnosis and it reports with apparent approval that "Hypnosis is
often used as an adjunct to verbal therapy in order to gain access to
buried memories, particularly buried memories of incest and other
early abuse." (p.425)
Earlier in the book (p.85) Dr. Walker asks about people such as
Elizabeth Loftus, "Why would adult memory researchers contradict the
clinical findings?" (She answers -- it is amusing to note -- that
among the things that "may figure into such motivation" is the
"enjoyment of the recognition provided by groups that rally around men
who are allegedly falsely accused.") And what are the clinical
findings? Immediately preceding is a paragraph describing Linda Meyer
Williams's frequently cited study. Unfortunately, Dr. Walker can make
many errors in her 343 words describing this study. We'll mention just
a few of them: She misreports the number of subjects; she inflates by
a factor of three the percent of subjects that "did not report any
sexual abuse had occurred during their childhood" (the actual
percentage was 12%; 38% failed to report the index event); she claims
that "Most of these women appeared to be amnestic for such abuse," (a
claim Williams carefully refrained from making).
But most disturbing in this APA publication is its endorsement of
check-lists. On page 113 we read:
The importance of sorting out the most accurate diagnosis lies in the
acceptance of treatment by victims and survivors and in appropriate
treatment planning. Blume (1989) listed more than 30 common symptoms
of what she called "postincest survivor syndrome" in her checklist.
Dr. Walker then gives her own version of the Blume list. On the left
below is the original Blume list with its original numbers. On the
right is the Walker list (to which we've added the numbers). There are
some remarkable differences. There are also similarities. Neither
checklist includes information about the reliability, validation,
standardization or outcome studies for their use.
Blume's List Walker's List
1. Fear of being alone in the 1) fears of being alone, night
particularly at night; dark, of terrors (especially of pursuit,
sleeping alone; nightmares, threat, entrapment);
2. Swallowing and gagging 2) swallowing and gagging reflex
sensitivity; repugnance to water sensitivity and problems with
on one's face when bathing or feelings of suffocation, especially
swimming (suffocation feeling). when water gets on one's face;
3. Alienation from the body -- 3) poor body image;
not at home in own body; failure
to heed body signals or take care
of one's body; poor body image;
manipulation of body size to
avoid sexual attention.
4. Gastrointestinal problems;
gynecological disorders
(including spontaneous vaginal
infections); headaches;
arthritis or joint pain.
5. Wearing a lot of clothing, 4) covering one's body with lots of
even in summer; baggy clothes; loose clothing;
failure to remove clothing even 5) extreme privacy needs in the
when appropriate to do so (while bathroom or bedroom;
swimming, bathing, sleeping);
extreme requirement for privacy
when using bathroom.
6. Eating disorders, drug or 6) eating or substance abuse
alcohol abuse (or total disorders;
abstinence); other addictions;
compulsive behaviors.
7. Self-destructiveness; skin 7) cutting one's skin and other
carving, self-abuse. self-destructive behaviors;
8. Phobias. 8) phobias;
9. Need to be invisible, perfect 9) need for invisibility or
or perfectly bad. exhibitionism;
10. Suicidal thoughts, attempts, 10) suicide ideation and attempts;
obsession (including "passive
suicide").
11. Depression (sometimes 11) obsessive rumination;
paralyzing); seemingly baseless
crying.
12. Anger issues: inability to 12) anger and rage issues;
recognize, own, or express anger,
fear of actual or imagined rage;
constant anger; intense hostility
toward entire gender or ethnic
group of the perpetrator.
13. Splitting (depersonalization); 13) depersonalization and other
going into shock, shutdown in forms of numbness;
crisis; psychic numbing; physical
pain or numbness associated with
a particular memory emotion
(e.g., anger), or situation
(e.g., sex).
14. Rigid control of one's 14) no sense of humor or constant
thought process; humorlessness or wisecracking;
extreme solemnity.
15. Childhood hiding, hanging on, 15) intense anxiety and fears as a
cowering in corner (security- child;
seeking behaviors); adult
nervousness over being watched or
surprised; feeling watched;
startle response.
16. Trust issues: inability to 17) inability to trust or
trust (trust is not safe); total indiscriminate trust;
trust; trusting indiscriminately.
17. High risk taking ("daring the 16) high risk taking or inability
fates"); inability to take risks. to take risks;
18. Boundary issues; control 18) fear of losing control and need
power, territoriality issues; for intense control;
fear of losing control;
obsessive/compulsive behaviors
(attempts to control things that
don't matter, just to control
something).
19. Guilt, shame; low self- 27) great appreciation of small
esteem, feeling worthless; high favors by others;
appreciation of small favors by
others.
20. Pattern of being a victim 19) multiple victimization
(victimizing oneself after being experiences;
victimized by others),
especially sexually; no sense of
own power or right to set limits
or say no; pattern of
relationships with much older
persons (onset in adolescence).
21. Feeling demand to "produce 21) relationships demanding
and be loved"; instinctively unconditional love;
knowing and doing what the other 22) extreme need to please others;
person needs or wants;
relationships mean big tradeoffs
(love was taken, not given).
22. Abandonment issues. 20) abandonment issues;
23. Blocking out some period of 24) blocking out early childhood
early years (especially 1-12), or years;
a specific person or place.
24. Feeling of carrying an awful
secret; urge to tell, fear of its
being revealed; certainty that
no one will listen; being
generally secretive; feeling
"marked" ("the scarlet letter").
25. Feeling crazy; feeling
different; feeling oneself to be
unreal and everyone else to be
real, or vice versa; creating
fantasy worlds, relationships, or
identities (especially for women:
imagining or wishing self to be
male, i.e., not a victim).
26. Denial: no awareness at all;
repression of memories;
pretending; minimizing ("it
wasn't that bad"); having dreams
or memories ("maybe it's my
imagination"); strong deep,
"inappropriate" negative
reactions to person, place or
event; "sensory flashes" (a light,
a place, a physical feeling)
without a sense of their
meaning; remembering the
surroundings but not the event.
27. Sexual issues: sex feels
"dirty"; aversion to being
touched, especially in
gynecological exam; strong
aversion to (or need for)
particular sex acts; feeling
betrayed by one's body; trouble
integrating sexuality and
emotionality; confusion or
overlapping of affection, sex
dominance, aggression, and
violence; having to pursue power
in sexual arena which is actually
sexual acting out (self-abuse and
manipulation, especially among
women; abuse of others,
especially among men);
compulsively "seductive" or
compulsively asexual; must be
sexual aggressor or cannot be;
impersonal, "promiscuous" sex
with strangers concurrent with
inability to have sex in intimate
relationship (conflict between
sex and caring); prostitute,
stripper, "sex symbol," porn
actress; sexual acting out to
meet anger or revenge needs;
"sexaholism"; avoidance;
shutdown; crying after orgasm;
all pursuit feels like violation;
sexualizing of meaningful
relationships; erotic response of
abuse or anger, sexual fantasies
of dominance or rape (Note:
Homosexuality is not an
aftereffect)
28. Pattern of ambivalent or 23) ambivalent or conflict ridden
intensely conflictive relationships;
relationships (intimacy is a
problem; also focus shifted from
incest issue).
29. Avoidance of mirrors 28) frequency of certain behaviors
(connected with invisibility, such as stealing, firesetting, and
shame/self-esteem issues, avoidance of mirrors;
distrust of perceived body image). (also appears beside 33)
30. Desire to change one's name
(to disassociate from the
perpetrator or to take control
through self-labeling).
31. Limited tolerance for 25) limited tolerance for happiness
happiness; active withdrawal and other limited range of
from happiness, reluctance to emotions;
trust happiness ("ice-thin").
32. Aversion to making noise 26) quiet-voiced;
(including during sex, crying,
laughing, or other body
function); verbal hypervigilance
(careful monitoring of one's
words); quiet-voiced, especially
when needing to be heard.
33. Stealing (adults); stealing 28) frequency of certain behaviors
and starting fires (children). such as stealing, firesetting, and
avoidance of mirrors;
(also appears beside 29)
34. Multiple personality.
**********************************************************************
CORRECTION
We said last September that David Calof of Seattle, Washington, had
no known credentials. He asked us to list the following as his
credentials: he is an RMHC (Registered Mental Health Counselor) in the
State of Washington, he is a Visiting Faculty Member of the San
Francisco Family Institute, and he is a Senior Consultant, Psychology
Training Center, Seattle Mental Health Institute.
**********************************************************************
What are credentials? Chuck Noah, also of Seattle is a retired
construction worker who recently applied for and received an RMHC
credential. Like the other 13,000 people who have been given RMHC
credentials by the State of Washington it cost him $78.50 and he was
required to take a 4-hour AIDS course.
**********************************************************************
REPORT OF BRITISH PSYCHOLOGICAL SOCIETY
In January, the British Psychological Society issued the report on
which it has been working for the past 18 months. We urge readers to
obtain the full report as it is a testament to the thinking and
compromises by clinicians and scientists on the issue of recovered
memories. We print the Executive Summary and Guidelines for
Therapists. To obtain the full copy, enclose a cheque for $20 (twenty
dollars). British Psychological Society, St. Andrew House, 48,
Princess Road East, Leicester LE1 7DR, United Kingdom. The report will
be sent by return airmail.
RECOVERED MEMORIES:
THE REPORT OF THE WORKING PARTY OF THE BRITISH PSYCHOLOGICAL SOCIETY
JANUARY 12, 1995
_________________
Executive Summary
The working party was charged with reporting on the scientific
evidence relevant to the current debate concerning Recovered Memories
of Trauma and with commenting on the issues surrounding this topic.
We have reviewed the scientific literature, carried out a survey of
relevant members of the British Psychological Society, and scrutinized
the records of the British False Memory Society. On this basis we came
to the following conclusions:
* Complete or partial memory loss is a frequently reported
consequence of experiencing certain kinds of psychological traumas
including childhood sexual abuse. These memories are sometimes fully
or partially recovered after a gap of many years.
* Memories may be recovered within or independent of therapy. Memory
recovery is reported by highly experienced and well qualified
therapists who are well aware of the dangers of inappropriate
suggestion and interpretation.
* In general, the clarity and detail of event memories depends on a
number of factors, including the age at which the event occurred.
Although clear memories are likely to be broadly accurate,they may
contain significant errors. It seems likely that recovered memories
have the same properties.
* Sustained pressure or persuasion by an authority figure could lead
to the retrieval or elaboration of memories of events that never
actually happened. The possibility of therapists creating in their
clients false memories of having been sexually abused in childhood
warrants careful consideration, and guidelines for therapists are
suggested here to minimize the risk of this happening. There is no
reliable evidence at present that this is a widespread phenomenon in
the UK.
* In a recent review of the literature on recovered memories,
Lindsay and Read commented that "the ground for debate has shifted
from the question of the possibility of therapy-induced false beliefs
to the question of the prevalence of therapy-induced false beliefs".
We agree with this comment but add to it that the ground for debate
has also shifted from the question of the possibility of recovery of
memory from total amnesia to the question of the prevalence of
recovery of memory from total amnesia.
_________________________
Guidelines for therapists
The following guidelines are intended to apply to a range of
psychological therapies.
1. It may be necessary clinically for the therapist to be open to the
emergence of memories of trauma which are not immediately available to
the client's consciousness.
2. It is important for the therapist to be alert to the dangers of
suggestion.
3. While it is important always to take the client seriously, the
therapist should avoid drawing premature conclusions about the truth
of a recovered memory.
4. The therapist needs to tolerate uncertainty and ambiguity regarding
the client's early experience.
5. Whilst it may be part of the therapists' work to help their clients
to think about their early experiences, they should avoid imposing
their own conclusions about what took place in childhood.
6. The therapist should be alert to a range of possibilities, for
example that a recovered memory may be literally true, metaphorically
true or may derive from fantasy or dream material.
7. If the role of the professional is to obtain evidence that is
reliable in forensic terms, they need to restrict themselves to
procedures that enhance reliability (e.g. use of the Cognitive
Interview and avoidance of hypnosis or suggestion and leading
questions).
8. CSA should not be diagnosed on the basis of presenting symptoms
such as eating disorder alone. There is a high probability of false
positives, as there are other possible explanations for psychological
problems.
___________________
Overall Conclusions
* Normal event memory is largely accurate but may contain distortions
and elaborations.
* With certain exceptions, such as where there has been extensive
rehearsal of an imagined event, the source of our memories is
generally perceived accurately.
* Nothing can be recalled accurately from before the first birthday
and little from before the second. Poor memory from before the 4th
birthday is normal.
* Forgetting of certain kinds of trauma is often reported, although
the nature of the mechanism or mechanisms involved remains unclear.
* While there is a great deal of evidence for incorrect memories,
there is currently much less evidence on the creating of false
memories.
* Hypnosis makes memory more confident and less reliable. It can also
be used to create amnesia for events.
* There are a number of significant differences between false
confessions and false (recovered) memories which preclude generalizing
from one to the other.
* There are high levels of belief in the essential accuracy of
recovered memories of child sexual abuse among qualified
psychologists. These beliefs appear to be fueled by the high levels of
experience of recovered memories both for CSA and for non-CSA
traumatic events. The non-doctrinaire nature of these beliefs is
indicated by the high level of acceptance of the possibility of false
memories.
* There is not a lot of evidence that accusers fit a single
profile. From the British records, at least, there is no good evidence
that accusers have invariably recovered memories from total
amnesia. Further documentation of the phenomenon is needed by the
False Memory societies in order to obtain a more reliable picture. It
appears that only in a small minority of instances do the accusations
concern abuse that ended before the age of five.
* Guidelines can be laid down for good practice in therapy.
The members of the Working Party were:
John Morton - MRC Cognitive Development Unit, London (chair);
Bernice Andrews - Royal Holloway University of London;
Debra Bekerian - MRC Applied Psychology Unit, Cambridge;
Chris Brewin - Royal Holloway University of London;
Graham Davies - Leicester University;
Phil Mollon - Dept of Psychiatry, Lister Hospital, Stevenage.
______________________________SIDEBAR_______________________________
/ \
| One welcomed the decision of the BPS to set up a Working Party to |
| report on the widely debated question of "Recovered Memories." |
| Indeed, given the deep clinical and social importance of the |
| question it was prudent for it to do so. In the event, |
| unfortunately, the Report of the Working Party is deeply |
| disappointing and, at its most crucial junctures, is badly flawed. |
| It has helpfully issued a short list of some sensible guidelines |
| for therapists. But its "preliminary survey" of BPS accredited |
| therapists, itself incompletely reported, and its analysis of the |
| problem and its treatment of evidence will do little to redress |
| anxieties that have been widely expressed about particular |
| clinical practices. |
| Professor L. Weiskrantz |
| Emeritus Professor of Psychology |
| University of Oxford |
\____________________________________________________________________/
**********************************************************************
TWO NEW BOOKS ON SATANIC ABUSE
______________________________________________________________
Safe Passage to Healing: a Guide for Survivors of Ritual Abuse
by Chrystine Oksana
HarperCollins, 1994.
By starting the book with her own story, the author documents the
therapeutic practices that led her into spending the rest of her life
as a ritual abuse survivor. It is a painful process. The key passage
begins on page xxi: "Although my therapy work took nine years, the
majority of my healing took place in two and a half years, once I
found a therapist who could move me confidently through recovery.
Every time I asked 'Do you believe me?' she always answered 'Yes!'"
She goes on to say that she had finally found a therapist who
"believed me unreservedly." The body of the book is a step by step
guide for gaining your own memories, your own alters, your own circle
of fellow survivors, finally, your own life as a Survivor of Ritual
Abuse. (Sample advice: "work only with a therapist who believes that
ritual abuse exists and that your memories are valid." p.268) This
book will stand forever as evidence of just how much damage today's
psychotherapy can accomplish.
___________________________________
Treating Survivors of Satanic Abuse
Edited by Valeri Simson
Routledge, 1994
Chapter 15 of this book is written by Phil Mollon, a member of the
committee that produced the British Psychological Society report on
recovered memories. Clinical Illustration 2: Mary is revealing. At
the beginning of therapy she had no relevant memories and idealised
her parents. She had a drug-assisted abreaction. "Disclosures of
flashback memories have very often been followed by suicidal urges,
and I believe this may be typical of ritually abused patients." Need
we say more?
______________________________SIDEBAR_______________________________
/ \
| Copyright 1994 Guardian Newspapers Limited |
| September 10, 1994, Pg. T13 |
| By Catherine Bennett |
| The Satanic Verses |
| |
| No evidence of satanic abuse has been uncovered in Britain. But |
| still the victims of this invisible epidemic clamour to be heard. |
| And still the experts listen. Should we be mounting a witch-hunt? |
| Or seeking a more realistic way of treating some very damaged |
| people? |
| Dr Phil Mollon, a consultant clinical psychologist and |
| psychotherapist, mentions a baby sucking at a bottle of blood. |
| When I asked him how the congealing process could allow bottle |
| feeding, he said: 'Yes, there are all sorts of questions of |
| practicalities in these things that crop up.' Could he not have |
| been deluded? 'I accept it's always a possibility,' he said. 'But |
| it's a risk I have to take.' |
| |
| Dr. Phil Mollon is a member of the British Psychological Society |
| committee that produced the Report on Recovered Memories |
\____________________________________________________________________/
**********************************************************************
INSTITUTIONALIZING SRA
The government of Ontario, Canada continues to fund groups devoted to
propagating belief in satanic ritual abuse in spite of the complete
lack of evidence for such acts (Lanning,1992, LaFontaine, 1994, and
Goodman et al 1994).
In November, the Ontario health ministry gave $3,876 for a two-day
women-only conference at which participants were instructed that they
must not wear all black, white or red, or wear stripes or religious
symbols. Lawyers, therapists and abuse survivors attended the
conference and discussed how to root out memories of being abused by
satanists and others and how to get the legal system to accept the
allegations. The title of the conference was "Fighting the False
Memory Backlash." (Tracey Tyler, Toronto Star, December 22, 1994)
Donna Laframboise reports that the Thunder Bay conference that we
described in the January 1995 newsletter has received $10,000 from the
Ontario Women's Directorate through the office of Marion Boyd, the
minister responsible for women's issues, and $5,000 more from the
Ministry of Northern Development and Mines' family violence prevention
initiative to put on that event.This is the conference that promises
to address Masonic ritual torture in Canada. (Toronto Star, Jan 9,
1995).
______________________________SIDEBAR_______________________________
/ \
| From an interview on radio station CBQ, CBC affiliate in |
| Thunder Bay, Ontario, 26 January |
| |
| Most of those memories involved really horrendous kind of accounts,|
| child sacrifice, fairly intense...sexual deviations, a lot of |
| emotional and psychological abuse and so on....The role of alleged |
| Masonry in these accounts varies from account to account. Some of |
| the accounts, however, seem to have taken place in buildings which |
| sound like they were Lodges. Moreover, a lot of these accounts |
| involve group abuse and some people have very strong suspicions |
| that the network in which their, in most cases, fathers allegedly |
| moved were Masonic networks. So a lot of people believe that other |
| alleged abusers were also Freemasons....I do not get other |
| accounts about semi-secret male philanthropic organizations. That |
| is to say I do not get similar kinds of accounts about the |
| Optimist Club or the Rotarians or the Knights of Columbus and so |
| on....people could be drawn into this kind of behaviour because of |
| what they would consider to be a secret tradition within |
| Freemasonry, a tradition that would bring them worldly power by |
| veneration of a particular deviant god and performing rites and |
| rituals to that deviant god.... there's nothing in any of the in- |
| depth normal Masonic literature that I've seen or read or heard |
| about that would give any intentional validity to the kinds of |
| extreme abuse that I've heard. And yet, I still have to come back |
| to the point that the Masons are the only male, philanthropic, |
| semi-secret organization about which I've received accounts along |
| these lines. |
| Dr. Stephen Kent., Dept of Sociology,U of Alberta. |
\____________________________________________________________________/
**********************************************************************
RESEARCH NOTE
Evan Harrington
Recently there has been much debate about the results of a paper
which is without doubt one of the most important yet on the topic of
adult recall of childhood sexual abuse. The paper is by Dr. Linda
Meyer Williams of the Family Research Laboratory of the University of
New Hampshire and has just recently been published in the Journal of
Consulting and Clinical Psychology (Williams, 1994). Professionals in
the field have been debating over the meaning of the results of this
paper and those who attended the recent FMS conference in Baltimore
had the opportunity to listen to both Dr. Williams and some of those
who disagreed over what the findings meant. Dr. Williams is
praise-worthy for sharing her results at the conference.
Dr. Williams followed into adulthood a group of female children
admitted to a hospital emergency ward (seventeen years earlier) by
their parents ostensibly because the children had been sexually
abused. When interviewed as adults 38% of these women did not report
the hospital visits they underwent as children. Some reported other
instances of abuse but not the case for which they were admitted to
the hospital. Various measures were assessed and tested across those
women who reported knowledge of the event ("recall") and those who did
not report knowledge of the event ("no recall"). These variables
included age, degree of force used, severity of penetration, and
closeness to perpetrator.
Most discussion of this paper centers on why some women were
apparently unable to recall their abuse. Age was the single best
predictor of recall such that younger children had less recall (but
some women who were very young at the time still had recall and some
who were older when the abuse occurred had "no recall"). The
possibility exists that some of the women simply refused to report
that they were abused even though they might have recalled it (Pope &
Hudson, in press). Other reasons that might account for failure to
report the event and the implications of non-recall are discussed in a
paper (Loftus, Garry, & Feldman, 1994) immediately following the
Williams article in the Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology.
Rather than review these discussions I would like to point out a
couple of items concerning the reporting of statistics by Williams
(1994) in the hope that this will help clarify the data.
It appears that there is a typographical error which might confuse
readers. Dr. Williams at one point writes: "There is a tendency for
women who were subjected to more force to not recall the abuse,"
(p. 1172, italics added). That this statement is in error has been
confirmed by Dr. Williams. The tendency is that as force increases
recall also increases. The data indicating this trend are in table 2,
which is a table of the t tests. Table two is problematic. The tests
are apparently one-tailed, though the table does not note this. It is
proper procedure to note the use of one-tailed t tests and to provide
justification for why such tests were used instead of two-tailed
tests. Usually, when a researcher uses a one-tailed t, a prediction is
stated such that the results of the tests are expected to be in the
predicted direction. Neither justification nor prediction were
supplied. The actual t values were not reported in this table, as is
also the custom. Finally, if a one-tailed t test is run and the
results are in the opposite direction from the prediction, the p
values get closer to 1 the larger the t gets, whereas a two-tailed t
will have the same p value regardless of the direction of the
test. For example, if Dr. Williams had a two-tailed t test with t =
1.98 (df = 100) the p value would be the same (p = .05) regardless of
the whether the 1.98 was positive or negative. In a one-tailed test
the p value will only be .05 if the result is in the predicted
direction so that a finding of t = -1.66 (df = 100) will be p = .95
rather than .05. So, if Dr. Williams intended to do a one-tailed test
(which is unknown) the p value reported in Table 2 for force should be
p = .941 rather than .059 as is reported. If Dr. Williams did not
intend to report one-tailed t tests then all of the p values in this
table are in error and should be transformed to the more conservative
values associated with two-tailed tests.
This may seem very arcane, and indeed this material would only
really be important for researchers who are sticklers for detail
(having the t values, noting the use of a one-tailed test, etc.)
except for the fact that the Publication Manual of the American
Psychological Association is explicit about the reporting of such
information (American Psychological Association, 1994, pp. 15-16):
Statistical Presentation. When reporting inferential statistics
(e.g., t tests, F tests, and chi-square), include information about
the obtained magnitude or value of the test, the degrees of freedom,
the probability level, and the direction of the effect. Be sure to
include descriptive statistics (e.g., means or medians); where means
are reported, always include an associated measure of variability,
such as standard deviations, variances, or mean square errors....If
there is a question about the appropriateness of a particular test...
be sure to justify the use of that test.
Additionally, the relationship of force on recall may be important
to different researchers for different reasons and so it is very
important that this data is reported accurately. Dr. Williams was most
interested in demonstrating that some women will not recall documented
cases of abuse from their childhoods. She then assessed several
variables to see which would be the best predictors of lack of
recall. Other researchers may have different specific hypotheses which
these data could either support or fail to support and having accurate
reporting of data would be crucial for such researchers. Thus, proper
reporting of the data in Table 2 is important and the way it is
presented could be clearer.
It is felt by this writer that one prediction made by trauma theory
would be that as force goes up recall should go down, thus giving
support for the theory of repression of traumatic memory. Any other
state of affairs would be a failure to support a hypothesis generated
by the theory of repression. The data for force do not indicate that
as force goes up recall goes down, thus this writer feels that the
data fail to support such an hypothesis. An argument may be made that
Lenore Terr's (1991, 1994) Type I (single event) and Type II (multiple
event) trauma may play a role in increasing or decreasing recall and
that this variability may have a confounding effect on the force-
recall relationship. Dr. Williams, with the limited data that were
available regarding multiple abusive events, ran a test of those
identified as Type I and Type II to see if they had differing amounts
of recall. There was no significant difference between amount of
recall for those who were identified as Type I and II. Indeed, as
Loftus and colleagues (1994) note, those who were known to have
experienced repeated abusive events had slightly higher
(nonsignificant) rates of recall, which is in the opposite direction
as that predicted by Terr's (1991) theory. However, the possibility
that differing rates of recall for Type I and Type II trauma may have
confounded the effect of force on reduced recall should not be
completely ruled out. Future designs of this nature should attempt to
test separate hypotheses on Type I and Type II trauma victims. Barring
the possibility of confounding by this factor it is felt by this
writer that the results of the t test on the effect of force on recall
fail to support the theory of repression. If the theory of repression
would generate the hypothesis that increased use of force should
result in decreased recall then the trend shown in the data (like that
for Type I and II trauma) is in the opposite direction.
It is hoped that the present discussion of the statistics reported
in Table 2 of the paper by Dr. Williams will aid those researchers who
need to extract information from this table. It is also hoped that the
present discussion of the effect of force on recall will aid those who
are casually reviewing the paper. Dr. Williams has undertaken a
difficult task and has provided a wealth of information which will be
meaningful for researchers for years to come. The critical attention
bestowed upon this paper speaks much of its importance,
References
American Psychological Association (1994). Publication Manual of the
American Psychological Association (fourth Ed.). Washington, DC:
Author.
Loftus, E.F., Garry, M., & Feldman, M. (1994). Forgetting sexual
trauma: What does it mean when 38% forget? Journal of Consulting and
Clinical Psychology, 62, 6, 1177-1181.
Pope, H.G. & Hudson, J.I. (In Press). Can memories of childhood
sexual abuse be repressed? Psychological Medicine.
Terr, L. (1994). Unchained Memories: True Stories of Traumatic
Memories, Lost and Found. New York: Basic Books.
Terr, L.C. (1991). Child Traumas: An outline and overview. American
Journal of Psychiatry, 148, 10-20.
Williams, L.M. (1994). Recall of childhood trauma: A prospective
study of women's memories of child sexual abuse. Journal of Consulting
and Clinical Psychology, 62, 6, 1167-1176.
[Evan Harrington is a Graduate Student at Temple University in
Philadelphia, PA.]
______________________________SIDEBAR_______________________________
/ \
| QUESTION: |
| Are there really true memories? If you go back far enough back |
| into childhood, how much of your memory is true? Can you trust |
| your memory? |
| ANSWER: |
| I place a lot less trust in my memory than I used to. But you |
| can't go through life not trusting your memory to a great extent. |
| Our memories must be reasonably good or we would not be here. In |
| fact, we can all see how good our memories are if we compare |
| ourselves to brain-damaged people with spectacular memory failures,|
| referred to as organic amnesia. Amnesic patients lose the ability |
| to remember new events and must live in supervised settings. |
| I have trouble believing the repressed memory business in general.|
| To my knowledge there is no direct evidence for it. I couldn't |
| point you to one solid piece of laboratory evidence for repressed |
| memory. The whole idea flies in the face of two basic facts I know |
| to be true about memory. |
| One is that we typically have excellent memories for powerful |
| emotional events, even negative ones. In many cases, child abuse |
| victims are obsessed with their memories. They can't get them out |
| of their minds. And we usually have good memories for traumatic |
| events in our lives even when they are quite painful. |
| Yet those who believe in repressed memories say that "if a |
| terrible event only happened to you once it is very memorable, but |
| if it happens repeatedly then it gets repressed." Well, a second |
| fact that we know about memory is that repeated events are |
| generally much better remembered than events that only happen to |
| you once. So, the whole claim of these repressed memory cases |
| flies in the face of what I know about how memory works." |
| Henry Roediger, Rice News .April 21, 1994 |
| "Issues and Answers/Repressed Memory" |
\____________________________________________________________________/
**********************************************************************
MEMORY RECOVERY THERAPY: A SUBCULTURE OF THERAPY CULTS
John Hochman, M.D.
There are three forces, the only three forces capable of conquering
and enslaving forever the conscience of these weak rebels in the
interests of their own happiness. They are: the miracle, the
mystery, and authority.
--F. Dostoyevsky
The Brothers Karamazov
Chapter. "The Grand Inquisitor"
I became involved with the False Memory Syndrome Foundation through
my continuing researches into cults. As more retractors appear, I am
seeing similarities that they share with former cult members. But they
weren't in cults. Or were they?
Dictionary definitions of cults are inadequate, so I came up with my
own, based on my empirical observations of many groups with disparate
ideologies. Some groups were inspired by the Bible, some by Hindu
scriptures, some by New Age philosophies, some by political doctrines
...and some by psychological theories. However, former members of
all these groups find they shared much in common.
We think of cults as having definable leaders, who preside over a
clear chain of command. Some leaders are public figures and some are
only known to cult members. Memory recovery therapy (MRT), by
contrast, seems to be more of a social movement or subculture led
indirectly by "culture heroes" through their writings and lectures.
However, I see MRT subculture as having produced not one, but
thousands of cult leaders: individual therapists, all presiding over
their own patients in a vast conglomeration of mini-cults, reinforced
by the MRT subculture of books and survivor meetings. Compare it,
please, to a coral reef, which seems like a single organism, but is a
conglomeration of thousands of single-celled organisms.
MRT, like all cults, promises salvation -- the psychological
variety. It introduces antidotes to boredom -- noble and sweeping
goals to make society a better place by keeping perpetrators at bay
and stamping out child abuse. Instead of existential anxiety it
offers simple answers and structure -- all personal problems are due
to childhood molestation, and solved by finding the memories of
same. Instead of alienation, patients meet a community of fellow
survivors. Instead of impotence -- patients strike out against
"perpetrators" and even a vast "Satanic Cult."
Cults sprout up when traditional values and structures of a society
crumble. The 1960's spawned a counterculture that romanticized drug
usage, revolution in general (the sexual revolution in particular)and
retreat to communes. As baby boomers entered their teens, America's
fertility rate plummeted, while the rate of divorces and adolescent
suicides began to climb. During the 1980s the counterculture went
mainstream: Drug use continued unromanticized, now at the high school
level. The sexual revolution became legitimized through legislation
and "safe sex" education. People lost interest in family, marrying
less and later, cohabiting more outside marriage, and having increased
out of wedlock births.
In the midst of moral chaos, cults fill the breach and offer their
own absolutist moralities, which are ultimately self-serving. MRT
takes "family values" and turns them on their heads. The family,
rather than being a harbor of safety and security, is dangerous and
filled with perpetrators; despair not, since a "safe place" is no
further than your therapist's office. Therapists, while taking
increasing control of their patients' lives, teach them that it was
their family that made them powerless. Forget love, think
"empowerment." Identity questions are cleared up by the drama of
becoming a "survivor."
CULTS AND THOUGHT REFORM: DEFINITIONS
Cults are groups using thought reform to recruit and control
members, by employing:
a) Miracle: ideology imputing miraculous power to leaders and/or
activities.
b) Mystery: secrecy obscuring actual beliefs and practices.
c) Authority: claims on members' time, talents, bodies or
property to meet group needs.
Thought reform is a hyper-efficient indoctrination achieved when
secrecy impairs indoctrinees' awareness of what is happening to them
and what they are becoming; thus, there is no full informed
consent. Brainwashing or mind control are popular terms for thought
reform.
MIRACLE, MYSTERY AND AUTHORITY IN CONTEMPORARY CULTS
Miracle. The suspension of "natural" and "ordinary" routines, to
produce an atmosphere of awe, is implicit in the ideology of every
cult. In MRT, therapists have found a miracle therapy based on
unfailing theories: after all, if the patient gets worse, don't worry
about the theory being wrong--just keep digging for more repressed
memories. Sometimes therapists will introduce "proven" methods to
counteract the stupefying "brainwashing" of (nonexistent) Satanic
Ritual Abuse.
Mystery: Cults typically use deception in recruiting, which hides
undesirable aspects of cult routine. Recruitment into MRT is done by
therapists and/or hospital units, and occurs without informed
consent. Patients anticipate "recovery" or "healing" and generally
have no idea that their lives will probably devolve into chaos as they
ignore daily life demands to concentrate on their therapy. They are
unaware that their treatments may run for years. If patients knew from
their first session that MRT would entail risks of destroying their
family life as they know it, result in prolonged psychiatric
hospitalizations, and possibly involve them in lawsuits against
"perpetrators" that they would be likely to lose, then MRT would
vanish.
Authority: This is maintained by individual MRT therapists and heads
of "dissociative disorder units" in psychiatric hospitals. They have
abandoned traditional practices of "therapeutic neutrality" in which
patients were encouraged to make adult decisions, replacing them with
active encouragement to conform to the values of the MRT
subculture. Once therapists undermine relationships with relatives,
"orphaned" patients may become increasingly dependent upon them, which
further increases the perceived authority of the therapist. This
explains why some retractors are telling stories of therapists
becoming increasingly maniacal as therapies progressed. Survivor
groups maintain social pressures, where questioning of group
assumptions can lead to banishment from what becomes a crucial social
support.
FUTURE TRENDS.
MRT advocates are finding themselves increasingly obliged to defend
their ideas. Rather than ponder that they might be presiding over a
pseudoscience, some have turned to personal attacks against critics,
often outlandish ones. This is a frequent tactic of cults, but they
do not have a monopoly on these methods.
As the number of retractors increases, I expect a cascade effect
encouraging more retractors. Meanwhile, MRT advocates and "survivors"
who see their ranks dwindling may raise the tenor of their attacks on
their critics and adopt increasingly bizarre practices. Reactions of
other MRT therapists will include retraction, backpedaling, and
possibly suicide attempts in some extreme cases.
Since cults see themselves as the guardians of the ultimate truth,
they need candidates for Siberia when things go sour. Psychiatrist
Robert Lifton, in his studies of brainwashing in Communist China,
called this "Doctrine over Person." MRT finds a unique solution to
this problem. Cult members who experience suffering learn that their
suffering shows they have failed to properly follow cult
doctrines. However, when MRT patients do not recover, "perpetrators"
get the blame.
Cults often have doctrines that neutralize criticisms of cult
members by relatives, describing them as Satanic "suppressive
persons," etc. While relatives can generally redeem themselves by
approving of the cult member's activities, redemption is impossible
for accused relatives of MRT patients. MRT therapists often go beyond
labeling family members as "perpetrators" who are "in denial" and
encourage their patients to actively wreck relationships with
relatives. All of this leaves retractors from MRT with unique burdens
of guilt with which they are now struggling to come to terms.
This article is based on a more extended paper discussing the
general nature of cults. If you wish a copy of that article, you can
contact me at 6345 Balboa, Ste. 255, Encino CA 91316
[John Hochman, MD is a member of the FMSF Advisory Board and a
psychiatrist in private practice in California.]
______________________________SIDEBAR_______________________________
/ \
| "But as records of courts and justice are admissible, it can |
| easily be proved that powerful and malevolent magicians once |
| existed and were a scourge to mankind. The evidence (including |
| confession) upon which certain women were convicted of and |
| executed was without a flaw; it is still unimpeachable. The judges'|
| decisions based on it were sound in logic and in law. Nothing in |
| any existing court was ever more thoroughly proved than the |
| charges of witchcraft and sorcery for which so many suffered death.|
| If there were no witches, human testimony and human reason are |
| alike destitute of value." |
| Ambrose Bierce, "The Devil's Dictionary" |
\____________________________________________________________________/
**********************************************************************
LEGAL CORNER
FMSF Staff
"Testimony Limit Set on Child Abuse; The Supreme Court by a 5-4 vote
complicated prosecution. It ruled out testimony after a certain
point"
Aaron Epstein, Philadelphia Inquirer, January 11, 1995
The U.S. Supreme Court limited the admission of some out-of-court
statements made by an accusing witness in child abuse cases,
especially when those statements offered to rebut defense allegations
that the accusing witness was motivated or influenced to lie. (Tome v
United States, No. 93-6892 (U.S. Supreme Court, Argued October 5,
1994, Decided January 10, 1995)). When a child makes an accusation of
sexual abuse, it is common for defense lawyers to contend that the
child was improperly influenced by police officers, social workers or
other adults. Prosecutors in order to rebut those allegations then
summon witnesses to testify that the child made similar statements to
them.
The court majority found that out-of-court statements made prior to
the alleged fabrication of a motive to lie would have been "a square
rebuttal of the charge that the testimony was contrived." Statements
made afterward, however, shed only "minimal light" on whether the
witness was motivated to lie. The majority held that under Federal
rule of Evidence 801(d)(1)(B) hearsay statements made after the
alleged introduction of motive are inadmissible. The court left open
whether such statements might be admissible under other rules of
evidence.
_____________________________
"Sexual abuse suit dismissed"
Knoxville News-Sentinel, January 7, 1995
An $8 million lawsuit brought by two daughters of an Oak Ridge
physicist has been dismissed. The daughters alleged that the father
sexually abused them "on many and frequent occasions..during their
childhood," and they repressed the memories. The women began recalling
the events after they started undergoing therapy in 1989. The
complaint was dismissed after a pretrial conference when attorneys for
the daughters were asked to provide evidence concerning the validity
of repressed memory claims.
___________________________
"Judge Kill Nun's Sex Suit"
Stuart Vincent, Newsday, January 11, 1995
A $3.75 million civil suit filed by a Long Island nun who said she
was sexually abused by her mother superior more than 25 years ago has
been dismissed because the statute of limitations for bringing that
change expired. In November, State Supreme Court Justice Alfred
S. Robbins noted that "New York law does not recognize psychological
trauma or repression as justification for avoiding the statute of
limitations." Even if the statute has been extended to the maximum 10
years allowed by law under an insanity disorder, it was still filed
more than 14 years too late.
__________
"Memories"
Pat Grossmith, NH Union Leader, December 27, 1994
A New Hampshire case that is getting national attention is State
v. Joel Hungerford and State v. John Morahan. Two women entered
therapy and recovered memories of being raped years earlier, one by
her father and one by her junior high teacher. Both men were indicted.
Hillsborough County Superior Court Judge William J. Groff stated that
before either woman can testify at trial, the state must prove that
"repressed memories" exist and that remembering them through therapy
is generally accepted in psychology. The state must also show that
once recovered, those memories are accurate.
The hearing for the admissibility of recovered memory evidence has
been set for March 27, 1995. The experts for the state are Jon Conte,
Ph.D., Bessel van der Kolk, MD, and Daniel Brown, MD. The experts for
the defense are Elizabeth Loftus, Ph.D., Paul McHugh, M.D., James
Hudson, M.D.
_________________________________________
"Justices to hear repressed memory cases"
Detroit Legal News, January 11, 1995, by Chris Parks
The Michigan Supreme Court is hearing two cases that involved
repressed memories. One case has been brought by Marlene Lemmerman who
claims that she had flashbacks in March of 1989 about being sexually
abused as a child. She says that she took a picture of herself as a
toddler and confronted her father Benjamin Fealk in a hospital room.
She also claims that an aunt also physically and sexually abused her
from age 3 to puberty. She says her mother physically abused her and
should have known about the other abuse. When the case was first
brought it was dismissed because of the statute of limitations but
that decision was reversed by the Michigan Court of Appeals.
The second case was filed by a woman who sued her 84 year old father
in 1993 over abuse that allegedly took place more than 40 years ago.
The Appeals court said corroborating evidence is not required
under the rule allowing some suits over late-discovered injury. The
court said the harm to a defendant sued on a stale claim must be
balanced against the harm to a plaintiff denied compensation through
litigation.The court also said repressed memory is a form of insanity
which stops the statute of limitations from running.
______________________________SIDEBAR_______________________________
/ \
| Our justice system and the many fine agencies which protect our |
| children must, in the future, be more careful when bringing |
| charges. All too many times an innocent person will be locked away |
| for years and then released when the child recants their original |
| accusation. |
| Many times the evidence was incredibly flimsy and uncorroborated.|
| This only results in discrediting the court system and the child |
| protection agencies themselves. |
| Stephen Black, Times-News, Hendersonville, NC |
| January 8, 1995 |
\____________________________________________________________________/
**********************************************************************
FROM OUR READERS
MAKE A DIFFERENCE
This is a column that will let you know what people are doing to
counteract the harm done by FMS. Remember that three years ago FMSF
didn't exist. A group of 50 or so people found each other and today we
are over 15,000. Together we have made a difference. How did this
happen?
January was FMS Month at a university library in Ontario, Canada.
There was a special display of all the new books that relate to
recovered memory therapy. Why don't you get a copy of the New York
Review of Books from Nov 17, and Dec 1 1994 and take it to your local
librarian to make sure that they carry these important books.
February will see a display of FMS books and articles in the Main
Branch of the Santa Cruz, California Public Library. This came about
because some concerned people approached the library and asked to have
the new books about FMS featured.
Dozens of families have written to say they have purchased some of
these new books and presented them as gifts to their local libraries.
In December, the Illinois FMS Society arranged to have the FMSF
Executive Director make a presentation to the North Shore Senior
meeting in Northfield, IL. In addition to the 75 Seniors attending,
Robert Kriz who heads the Chicago office of the Illinois Department of
Licensing and Regulation was present to get information. Once again,
when the meeting was concluded a few people identified themselves as
being touched by FMS and asked for more information. Every time this
happens, we suspect that we see just the tip of this iceberg.
You can make a difference. Please send me any ideas that you have
had that were or might be successful so that we can tell others. Write
to Katie Spanuello c/o FMSF.
**********************************************************************
EMDR, Who invented it?
Answer: My mother, that's who!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
By quickly waving her right index finger to and fro before our faces
she resolved most problem behavior and restored the unhappy situation
very quickly. Once again peace and harmony reigned until the next
time.
______________________________SIDEBAR_______________________________
/ \
| Price list for the booklet |
| "Frequently Asked Questions" |
| Quantity Price per Packet |
| 1-4 $1.00 |
| 5-9 $0.90 |
| 10-19 $0.80 |
| 20-49 $0.65 |
| 50-100 $0.60 |
\____________________________________________________________________/
**********************************************************************
RETRACTORS' CORNER
There are so many things to write about when you are a retractor. So
many feelings to express, so many important aspects of Repressed
Memory Therapy that you can share. The hurts, the frustration, the
confusion, the embarrassment, not to mention the public humiliation.
You may be asking yourself, "Why would anyone want to share these most
personal aspects of their lives?" I can answer that very easily: it's
an obligation I feel called to do. As an individual that experienced
repressed memory therapy and its "finest," I can help others
understand what did happen to them, what may be happening to them,
what could happen to them, and hopefully, in some small way help
parents, relatives, friends, co-workers and the general public
understand what it is like inside somebody's mind when they are going
through this treatment, and what it is like coming out of it.
Sometimes it feels so overwhelming as to where and how to start that
it would be easier for me to do nothing. But, in doing nothing, I feel
I would be contributing to the continued decay of human lives and the
destruction of families. Recently, someone told me I had the ability
to see the mental health profession in an objective manner, that even
after having experienced this treatment, I didn't view therapy or
therapists in a black or white manner. This really got me to thinking
about how my family, friends, and even myself became very untrusting
toward the profession as a whole. We all experienced trauma, pain, and
loss. We have a right to be opinionated, to say the least, toward
therapists and therapy. For some reason, I was not hardened to the
profession as a whole. Perhaps it's because I have a degree in social
work and believe in the value of being able to sort through situations
in life. Perhaps it is because when I was at my worst, it was
necessary for me to begin seeing a new therapist and doctor. At the
time it felt like the worst possible thing that could happen, but,
little did I know that change would help capture me from further
destruction. Two extremely ethical doctors and a social worker helped
redirect me to a path of independence, security, and self respect.
I feel that this experience leaves me with an obligation to express
my belief that all therapy is not bad, nor are all therapists. I feel
very strongly about this because in hating this medical specialty,
people may chose to avoid getting help they could benefit from. It's
natural, especially when what has happened has been a form of abuse,
and for some, even a mental torture, under the direction of well
respected, professional individuals. So, like any abused or frightened
person we learn to mistrust the people we thought were the safest
people to talk to.
There are many individuals who believe retractors and the FMSF hate
all psychiatrists, psychologists, social workers, and therapists. I
have not found this to be the case. One of the most gratifying things
I have seen in a long time happened at the Memory and Reality
conference in Baltimore. In a round table I had the opportunity to
speak at, a psychiatrist apologized for her profession. Nearly in
tears, she commented to retractors and families her sincere sorrow and
anger at what has occurred in the therapy profession. She didn't offer
excuses nor did she ask us to forgive. There were many other
professionals who expressed the same sentiment throughout the
weekend. For me, wounds began healing upon hearing this. My faith in
the profession was definitely coming back. Really, retractors who have
endured this therapy are similar to individuals who have been
physically and sexually abused. We feel the same way toward the people
who hurt us. These professionals should be held accountable for their
actions just as other abusers are responsible for their behaviors.
But, to say all therapists are bad is simply not true. I have the
proof, two doctors and a social worker who helped me regain my
strength, my ability to bring back control to my mind, and the belief
I need not be dependent on therapists.
It is my sincere desire that my thoughts may help others to see both
sides. I do not expect everyone to see things as I do and it is
certainly not my intention to convince hurt people to trust people
they have no desire to trust. I do want everyone to be careful.
People need to set their own agendas and boundaries in therapy. People
should not assume that what others believe is necessarily the truth.
With that in mind, if you feel the need to talk to someone, there are
mental health professionals who are safe to consult.
A Retractor
____________
JEAN'S STORY
I started seeing a therapist in October of 1990 due to post
traumatic stress syndrome -- caused by being raped three times by an
ex-financee -- in a period of two years. After a period of about nine
to ten months, my therapist and my psychiatrist made the suggestion
that I be hospitalized for a period of four weeks. From the time of
admission on, everyone at the hospital seemed like zombies (mechanical
robots). I had to wait until 10:30 p.m. to see my therapist. I was so
tired of waiting for him that I didn't want to see him at all. From
then on, he would show up at various times of the day and I would see
my psychiatrist every day -- usually during group sessions. My
ex-psychiatrist is the one who started putting the abuse issues into
my mind. And then, it was my therapist -- sometimes in the
consultation room at the hospital. With my written consent, my
therapist and my psychiatrist arranged for me to undergo sodium
amytal. I had to write out 10 questions and submit copies to my
therapist and my psychiatrist two days before I underwent it. The test
revealed that I had been abused by my father. I only got to hear part
of the tape before I was led to confront my father on the abuse
charges. As far as I know, that tape is nowhere to be found -- it's
lost for good.
Little did I know than that my dad never did abuse me. It almost
split my parent's marriage of 32 years apart and destroyed the close
relationship that my dad and I had. I am presently seeing another
therapist who has helped me face a lot of the issues. I did not
realize that my memories were false ones until a few months ago when a
friend of mine had the same problems with the hospital and her
therapist as well.
I am in the process of suing: the hospital, my ex-therapist, and my
ex-psychiatrist for all of the damages they have done in my life. I am
an FMS survivor and I hope and pray that my story will help others out
there who were tricked into believing that they were abused by their
fathers and also were abused by their therapists and psychiatrists as
well.
**********************************************************************
TO ALL MEMBERS OF F.M.S.F.
December 17, 1994
It has been an unique experience for us, this "house arrest", but
the incredible ability of the human mind and body to adjust to
changing situations is just beyond imagination. We do very well day by
day with the support of our family, friends and so many members of
FMSF who have become our friends through the mail and telephone. The
outpouring of love and support has carried us through to this point.
We are so blessed by this and we are so very grateful.
We have been given advice, very good advice, by so many and have
taken it seriously. We keep our minds and our hands busy. While we
feel sorrow and heartbreak as many others do we have found that time
has been a healer. Our thoughts are projected more outwardly to
others and by doing this our own burden is lighter.
We look forward to a date for appeal which will most likely be late
spring or early summer. Our attorneys have worked very hard for us and
we pray for a successful outcome. Time is on our side.
With warmest regards,
Shirley & Ray Souza
Massachusetts
[The Souzas have been under house arrest for more than a year and a
half. The problem started after one of their daughters had a dream
that she had been abused and extended to concern for her own
children. Ray and Shirley's grandchildren were taken to child abuse
professionals. Later, Ray and Shirley were accused of abuse
including keeping the grandchildren in a cage in the basement and
making them drink a green potion. The accusations became the basis
of a criminal trial in which the Souzas were found guilty.]
**********************************************************************
TEACHER, IS THAT FOR THE TEST...?
It is mid-term week in a suburban high school. Short school days
allow for long afternoons to prepare for the next examination. Like
many other teenagers, he will nap a little, lose himself in the music
resonating from his boom box, take a trip to the refrigerator, and
study in between.
"What are you studying for?" I asked. "Health. I have health and
French tomorrow," he replied. "What about in health," I asked
neglecting French as a foreign tongue to me. "I have to memorize this
list," he points to The Incest Survivors' Aftereffects Checklist
handout. A plain copy of thirty-four items without reference. "Why in
the world would anybody want to memorize this list? What are you
studying in health, anyway?" I asked in horror. "Nobody wants to
memorize this list, mother. It's going to be on the test. We'll have
to answer "True" or "False" to items on the list," he elaborated.
In the context of issues in childhood abuse, high school sophomores
were given a five-piece handout sorting "fact" from "myth". The Child
Abuse Fact Sheet had ten "facts" listed (i.e., every perpetrator was
once a victim; children rarely invent stories of abuse). The Incest
Survivors' Aftereffects Checklist provides "Alienation from the body
-- not at home in own body....wearing a lot of clothing, even in
summer..."
I was alarmed. As a mother, I asked how many teenage girls feel at
home in their bodies? I thought of the possibility of a teenage girl
diligently memorizing the checklist reading, "Do you find many
characteristics of yourself on this list? If so, you could be a
survivor of incest." She could become unnecessarily anxious thinking
that some of the items do apply to her. And item 26: "Denial: No
awareness at all; repression of memories..." Could it be?
But I was even more alarmed as a science educator. I was shaken at a
very basic level of my understanding of what constitutes academic
integrity. The use of term fact to denote ideas that are controversial
at best, while by definition a fact has to be agreed upon by all
observers, was particularly disturbing, serving as an example of so
much that is wrong in science education. I referred to the National
Science Education Standards (November, 1994), a serious attempt to
provide a vision of learning and teaching science. Here is one item on
the list of abilities of scientific inquiry, "Scientific explanations
must adhere to criteria such as: a proposed explanation must have a
logical structure; it must abide by the rules of evidence; it must be
open to questions and possible modifications; it must be based on
historical and current scientific knowledge; and the methods and
procedures scientists used to obtain evidence must be adequately
reported to enhance opportunities for further investigation."
Teachers are called upon to engage students in conversations that
focus on questions such as:
How do you know?
How certain are you of those results?
Is there an alternative scientific explanation for the one we
proposed?
Do we need more evidence?
How do you account for an explanation that is different from ours?
The act of providing students with this checklist -- no source, no
evidence, no alternative explanations, no questions -- violates every
aspect of science education. This incident may be local. It may be an
isolated event of poor educational judgment. But it may not be.
Mother and Teacher
**********************************************************************
DESTINATION UNKNOWN
A few years ago our adult daughter became deeply involved in "memory
retrieval therapy" also known as the "recovery movement." Knowing
that we are powerless to help her, our family has come to reluctantly
accept what has happened to her. Our daughter still does not perceive
the consequences of her misplaced trust, her involvement, or her
subsequent transformation of thought and personality.
Ever since we learned of her dilemma I have lamented all that she
has lost during her tenure as a "survivor" for she has lost so much.
Recently, however, I have come to the realization that she really
hasn't lost anything. With a lot of help from others, she has
purposefully and systematically thrown it all away.
In truth, she has thrown away her entire immediate and extended
family, her former friends, and all the nurturing and reinforcement,
the ups and downs that come with having those people in one's life.
She has thrown away her bona fide history and has replaced it with
frightening script, horrific scenarios, and a false yet horrifying
drama of early childhood abuse. All this is based upon an
unscientific, unproven theory of "repression," upon the hypnotic
persuasion of a person who calls himself a "therapist," and upon the
suggestion and manipulation of other true believers ensnared by he
movement.
She has thrown away joyous holidays, presents, happy feasts,
surprises, and the celebration of life and living. She has thrown
away happy times, sad times, in-between times, and the continuity of
life in the unique, protective, caring environment of her childhood
home. By opting for hatred, cruelty, and revenge, she has forsaken
her roots and poisoned the ground in which they grew.
It is extremely frightening to know that she has thrown away reality
and has replaced it with confabulation, delusion, paranoia, hysteria,
and zeal. She has thrown away good mental health and sound emotional
balance. She has adopted a new and different mindset, personality,
and persona and has adapted to and become frozen in those new
entities. She has thrown away her True Self and we wonder if she will
ever be able to recapture that Self or recover.
Most sadly of all, she has thrown away LOVE, that most precious of
all life's gifts. Once she was blessed with abundant, unconditional
love -- a love which, in effect, said: "No matter what you do or say,
we will always love you. We will always be there to stand by you, to
pick you up when you fall, to cheer you, to praise you, to comfort you
and give you strength through stormy days, through illness, or times
of heartache and sorrow." This, too she has chosen to turn her back
on. She has thrown away, discarded, rejected, renounced our love.
So many, many things are gone now...Thrown away by a person who has
chosen to become an island unto herself -- a Victim, a Hero, a Martyr.
She has opted to become separated from all former things. She has
literally become an orphan -- a most lamentable stranger traveling
alone on the precarious road of life. Where is she going? Who will
be there waiting to embrace her when she arrives at her journey's end?
What will she have gained and who will she become by the time her
sojourn is over?
Perhaps it is better not to contemplate these questions. Perhaps,
just for now, it is better not to think about it all . . .
**********************************************************************
MEMORY AND REALITY: EMERGING CRISIS
Video inspired by FMSF Valley Forge Conference in April, 1993
What is memory? What is false memory syndrome? Can memories be
repressed? Can memories be recovered through the use of "therapeutic
techniques?" All of these questions are addressed in an important and
special video presentation, MEMORY AND REALITY: EMERGING CRISIS.
This remarkable videotape presentation brings together prominent
memory researchers and mental health professionals who scrutinize
these questions, and bring to the discussion of repressed memories vs.
false memory syndrome, all of their experience, intelligence, and
expertise. These most highly qualified professionals share their
research and their knowledge, and explore the important and critical
subject of memory: What it is and what it is not. This video features:
Elizabeth F. Loftus, Ph.D., Richard A. Gardner, MD, Steven M.
Garver, Esq., Harold I. Lief., MD, Campbell Perry, Ph.D., Martin
E.P. Seligman, Ph.D., Paul R. McHugh, MD., Judge Lisa A. Richette.,
Michael D. Yapko, Ph.D., David F. Dinges, Ph.D., Richard J. Ofshe.,
Ph.D., George K. Ganaway, MD., Margaret T. Singer, Ph.D., Melody
Gavigan, retractor.
Gemini Productions, Inc. is pleased to offer this exceptional
videotape, Memory and Reality: Emerging Crisis, at the special rate of
$69.50 (including postage and handling). A complete transcript of the
videotape is also available for $15.00. To order or for more
information, contact:
Gemini Productions, Inc.
18630 Detroit Ave., Lakewood, OH 44107
Phone (216) 228-9440 Fax (216) 228-8024
______________________________SIDEBAR_______________________________
/ \
| Mental Health Bill of Rights |
| |
| * the right to an individualized, written treatment plan, |
| providing for periodic reassessment and revision; |
| * the right to know the objectives of a treatment, the possible |
| adverse effects of treatment, and any available alternative |
| treatments, services and providers; |
| * the right not to receive a mode or course of treatment in the |
| absence of informed, voluntary and written consent; |
| * the right not to participate in experimentation in the absence |
| of informed, voluntary, written consent; |
| * the right to appropriate protections in connection with one's |
| participation in an experimental treatment, including the right to |
| a reasonable explanation of the procedure to be followed, the |
| benefits to be expected, the relative advantages of alternative |
| treatments, and the potential discomforts and risks; |
| * the right and opportunity to revoke one's consent to an |
| experimental treatment; |
| * the right to freedom from restraint or seclusion; |
| * the right of a patient in a treatment facility to converse with |
| others privately and to see visitors during regularly scheduled |
| hours; if a treating professional denies access to a particular |
| visitor, it must be for a specific, limited, and reasonable period |
| of time, the denial must be incorporated into the written |
| treatment plan and must include the reasons for such denial; |
| * the right, upon admission to a treatment facility, to be |
| informed of the rights set forth above. |
\____________________________________________________________________/
Letters in response to the questions about PAIMI
(Protection and Advocacy for Individuals with Mental Illness)
From a Clinician
"I use an abbreviated form of the Mental Health Bill of Rights as a
part of my regular intake and evaluation. Except for the specific
reference to experimental treatments, the points covered are those
that would apply in an outpatient setting. I consider it an important
facet of the informed consent process."
From California
"The Mental Health Bill of Rights came about as a result of abuse in
the mental health care system. California law requires mental health
hospitals to give patients a Bill of Rights, but a therapist in his or
her office is not required to do this. Good clinics give the patient
the Bill of Rights to keep because the Mental Health Bill of Rights
may not be fully understood by patients who are depressed, confused or
anxious. "
From Delaware
Althea McDowell, Esq of the Disabilities Law Program at the
Community Legal Aid Society, Inc wrote to one of the families in
Delaware that "The Disabilities Law Program (commonly referred to as
the DLP), provides services to individuals under the Protection and
Advocacy for Individuals with Mental Illness Act (commonly referred to
as the PAIMI Act).
The general mission of the PAIMI Program is to ensure that the
rights of individuals with mental illness are protected through
advocacy activities to enforce the Constitution and federal and state
statutes and laws.
Client eligibility under the PAIMI Act, however, does not extend to
everyone who has a mental illness. The individual must have a mental
illness and reside in a public or private residential setting and have
a legal problem that arises while residing in such setting or within
90 days of discharge from that setting. Residential settings include
hospitals, nursing homes, institutions, community care homes, and
prisons. The Complainant may simply be a person who is concerned
regarding a person who falls within these guidelines."
More from Delaware
PAIMI information booklets are available for each person as they
enter the state run mental health facilities. It is not certain that
the materials stating the Bill of Rights of patients actually get into
the hands of the pa tients, however.
The resources availablethrough PAIMI are not well-known. Here are
some suggestions to make it and the Mental Health Bill of Rights more
effective:
1. Educate lawyers. Now many lawyers do not know about the existence
of PAIMI.
2. Educate the public. Many are unaware of the potential help from
PAIMI.
______________________________SIDEBAR_______________________________
/ \
| From a letter to a parent from |
| State of New York Department of Health |
| |
| I can understand your concern considering the sensitive nature of |
| this subject [memory retrieval] compounded by the potential for |
| devastation of families. This issue is very controversial. To date,|
| there is no legislation or standards of care in place. It is |
| therefore impossible to prove violations were committed. |
\____________________________________________________________________/
**********************************************************************
FEBRUARY 1995 FMSF MEETINGS
FAMILIES, RETRACTORS & PROFESSIONALS WORKING TOGETHER
STATE MEETINGS
INDIANA
Indianapolis
Sunday, April 23, 1:00 - 4:30 pm
Nickie (317) 471-0922 (phone); 334-9839 (fax)
Gene (317) 861-4720 or 861-5832
PENNSYLVANIA, NEW JERSEY, DELAWARE
Saturday, March 25, 1995, 10:00 am - 5:00 pm
Sheraton Convention Center
KING OF PRUSSIA, PA
Call Jim & JoAnne (610) 783-0396
=======================================
UNITED STATES
Call person listed for meeting time & location.
key: (MO) = monthly; (bi-MO) = bi-monthly
=======================================
ARKANSAS - Area code 501
Little Rock
Al & Lela 363-4368
CALIFORNIA
Northern California
Sacramento/Central Valley - bi-monthly
Charles & Mary Kay (916) 961-8257
San Francisco & Bay Area - bi-monthly
east bay area
Judy (510) 254-2605
san francisco & north bay
Gideon (415) 389-0254
Charles (415) 984-6626 (day); 435-9618 (eve)
south bay area
Jack & Pat (408) 425-1430
Last Saturday, (Bi-MO)
Central Coast
Carole (805) 967-8058
Southern California
burbank (formerly valencia)
Jane & Mark (805) 947-4376
4th Saturday (MO)10:00 am
central orange county
Chris & Alan (714) 733-2925
1st Friday (MO) - 7:00 pm
orange county (formerly laguna beach)
Jerry & Eileen (714) 494-9704
3rd Sunday (MO) - 6:00 pm
covina group (formerly rancho cucamonga )
Floyd & Libby (818) 330-2321
1st Monday, (MO) - 7:30 pm
west orange county
Carole (310) 596-8048
2nd Saturday (MO)
COLORADO
Denver
Ruth (303) 757-3622
4th Saturday, (MO)1:00 pm
CONNECTICUT - Area code 203
New Haven area
George 243-2740
FLORIDA
Dade-Broward Area
Madeline (305) 966-4FMS
Delray Beach PRT
Esther (407) 364-8290
2nd & 4th Thursday [MO] 1:00 pm
Tampa Bay Area
Bob & Janet (813) 856-7091
ILLINOIS
Chicago metro area (South of the Eisenhower)
2nd Sunday [MO] 2:00 pm
Roger (708) 366-3717
INDIANA
Indianapolis area
Nickie (317) 471-0922 (phone); 334-9839 (fax)
Gene (317) 861-4720 or 861-5832
See State Meetings notice
IOWA
Des Moines
Betty/Gayle (515) 270-6976
2nd Saturday (MO) 11:30 am Lunch
KANSAS
Kansas City
Pat (913) 738-4840
Jan (816) 931-1340
2nd Sunday (MO)
KENTUCKY
Lexington
Dixie (606) 356-9309
Louisville
Bob (502) 957-2378
Last Sunday (MO) 2:00 pm
MAINE - Area code 207
Bangor
Irvine & Arlene 942-8473
Freeport
Wally 865-4044
3rd Sunday (MO)
Yarmouth
Betsy 846-4268
MARYLAND
Ellicot City area
Margie (410) 750-8694
MASSACHUSETTS / NEW ENGLAND
Chelmsford
Jean (508) 250-1055
MICHIGAN
Grand Rapids Area - Jenison
Catharine (616) 363-1354
2nd Monday (MO)
MINNESOTA
St. Paul
Terry & Collette (507) 642-3630
MISSOURI
Kansas City
Pat (913) 738-4840
Jan (816) 931-1340
2nd Sunday (MO)
St. Louis area
Karen (314) 432-8789
Mae (314) 837-1976
3rd Sunday [MO]1:30 pm
Retractors support group also meeting.
Springfield - Area Codes 417 and 501
Dorothy & Pete (417) 882-1821
Nancy & John (417) 883-4873
4th Sunday [MO] 5:30 pm
NEW JERSEY (So.)-See PENNSYLVANIA (Wayne)
NEW YORK
Downstate NY - Westchester, Rockland & others
Barbara (914) 761-3627 - call for meeting info
4th Sunday, March 26, 1995 in lower Connecticut
Upstate / Albany area
Elaine (518) 399-5749
Western / Rochester area
George & Eileen (716) 586-7942
March 12, 1995 - 1:15 pm
OHIO
Cincinnati
Bob (513) 541-5272
2nd Sunday (MO) 2:00-4:30 pm
OKLAHOMA - Area code 405
Oklahoma City
Len 364-4063 Dee 942-0531
HJ 755-3816 Rosemary 439-2459
PENNSYLVANIA
Harrisburg area
Paul & Betty (717) 691-7660
Pittsburgh
Rick & Renee (412) 563-5616
Wayne (includes So. Jersey)
Jim & Joanne (610) 783-0396
See State Meetings notice
TENNESSEE
Middle Tennessee
Kate (615) 665-1160
1st Tuesday (MO) 1:00 pm
TEXAS
Central Texas
Nancy & Jim (512) 478-8395
Dallas/Ft. Worth
Lee & Jean (214) 279-0250
Houston
Jo or Beverly (713) 464-8970
VERMONT & Upstate New York
Elaine (518) 399-5749
WISCONSIN
Katie & Leo (414) 476-0285
=======================================
CANADA
BRITISH COLUMBIA
Vancouver & Mainland
Ruth (604) 925-1539
Last Saturday (MO) 1:00-4:00 pm
Victoria & Vancouver Island
John (604) 721-3219
3rd Tuesday (MO) 7:30 pm
MANITOBA
Winnipeg
Muriel (204) 261-0212
1st Sunday (MO)
ONTARIO
Ottawa
Eileen (613) 836-3294
Toronto - North York
Pat (416) 444-9078
Saturday, February 18 (Bi-MO) 1-3 pm
Studio 4, Civic Garden Ctr, 777 Lawrence St-East
ANNUAL MEETING - TORONTO, ONTARIO
Saturday, April 22, 1995, 1-5 pm
Pat (416) 444-9078
=======================================
AUSTRALIA
Ken & June, P O Box 363, Unley, SA 5061
NETHERLANDS
Task Force False Memory Syndrome of
"Ouders voor Kinderen"
Mrs. Anna de Jong, (0) 20-693 5692
NEW ZEALAND
Mrs. Colleen Waugh, (09) 416-7443
UNITED KINGDOM
The British False Memory Society
Roger Scotford (0225) 868-682
Deadline for MARCH 1995 Issue: Friday, February 17th
**********************************************************************
WHAT IF?
What if, parents who are facing lawsuits and want legal information
about FMS cases, had to be told, "I'm sorry, there isn't any such
thing available?"
What if, your son or daughter began to doubt his or her memories and
called FMSF only to get a recording, "This number is no longer in
operation?"
What if, a journalist asks you where to get information about the
FMS phenomenon, and you had to answer, "Sorry, I don't know?"
What if, you want to ask a question that only an expert, familiar
with FMS can answer, and find out that FMSF can no longer provide that
information? Where would you turn?
What if the False Memory Syndrome Foundation did not exist? A
frightening thought, isn't it?
Please support our Foundation. We cannot survive without your
support!
Reprinted from the August 1994 PFA (MI) Newsletter
**********************************************************************
Yearly FMSF Membership Information
Professional - Includes Newsletter $125______
Family - Includes Newsletter $100______
Additional Contribution: _____________
__Visa: Card # & expiration date:______________________________
__Mastercard: Card # & expiration date:______________________________
__Check or Money Order: Payable to FMS Foundation in U.S. dollars
Please include: Name, address, state, country, phone, fax
______________________________SIDEBAR_______________________________
/ \
| Do you have access to e-mail? Send a message to |
| pjf@cis.upenn.edu |
| if you wish to receive electronic versions of this newsletter and |
| notices of radio and television broadcasts about FMS. All the |
| message need say is "add to the FMS list". It would be useful, but |
| not necessary, if you add your full name (all addresses and names |
| will remain strictly confidential). |
\____________________________________________________________________/
**********************************************************************
The False Memory Syndrome Foundation is a qualified 501(c)3 corpora-
tion with its principal offices in Philadelphia and governed by its
Board of Directors. While it encourages participation by its members
in its activities, it must be understood that the Foundation has no
affiliates and that no other organization or person is authorized to
speak for the Foundation without the prior written approval of the Ex-
ecutive Director. All membership dues and contributions to the Founda-
tion must be forwarded to the Foundation for its disposition.
**********************************************************************
3401 Market Street suite 130, Philadelphia, PA 19104, (215-387-1865)
This address and the phone numbers have changed as of July 15, 2000
Pamela Freyd, Ph.D., Executive Director
FMSF Scientific and Professional Advisory Board, February 1, 1995:
TERENCE W. CAMPBELL, Ph.D., Clinical and Forensic Psychology,
Sterling Heights, MI; ROSALIND CARTWRIGHT, Rush Presbyterian St. Lukes
Medical Center, Chicago, IL; JEAN CHAPMAN, Ph.D., University of
Wisconsin, Madison, WI; LOREN CHAPMAN, Ph.D., University of Wisconsin,
Madison, WI; FREDERICK C. CREWS, Ph.D., University of California,
Berkeley, CA; ROBYN M. DAWES, Ph.D., Carnegie Mellon University,
Pittsburgh, PA; DAVID F. DINGES, Ph.D., University of Pennsylvania,
The Institute of Pennsylvania Hospital, Philadelphia, PA; HENRY
C. ELLIS, Ph.D., University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM; FRED
FRANKEL, M.B.Ch.B., D.P.M., Beth Israel Hospital, Harvard Medical
School, Boston, MA; GEORGE K. GANAWAY, M.D., Emory University of
Medicine, Atlanta, GA; MARTIN GARDNER, Author, Hendersonville, NC;
ROCHEL GELMAN, Ph.D., University of California, Los Angeles, CA; HENRY
GLEITMAN, Ph.D., University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA; LILA
GLEITMAN, Ph.D., University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA; RICHARD
GREEN, M.D., J.D., Charing Cross Hospital, London; DAVID A. HALPERIN,
M.D., Mount Sinai School of Medicine, New York, NY; ERNEST HILGARD,
Ph.D., Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA; JOHN HOCHMAN, M.D., UCLA
Medical School, Los Angeles, CA; DAVID S. HOLMES, Ph.D., University
of Kansas, Lawrence, KS; PHILIP S. HOLZMAN, Ph.D., Harvard
University, Cambridge, MA; JOHN KIHLSTROM, Ph.D., Yale University, New
Haven, CT; HAROLD LIEF, M.D., University of Pennsylvania,
Philadelphia, PA; ELIZABETH LOFTUS, Ph.D., University of Washington,
Seattle, WA; PAUL McHUGH, M.D., Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore,
MD; HAROLD MERSKEY, D.M., University of Western Ontario, London,
Canada; ULRIC NEISSER, Ph.D., Emory University, Atlanta, GA; RICHARD
OFSHE, Ph.D., University of California, Berkeley, CA; MARTIN ORNE,
M.D., Ph.D., University of Pennsylvania, The Institute of Pennsylvania
Hospital, Philadelphia, PA; LOREN PANKRATZ, Ph.D., Oregon Health
Sciences University, Portland, OR; CAMPBELL PERRY, Ph.D., Concordia
University, Montreal, Canada; MICHAEL A. PERSINGER, Ph.D., Laurentian
University, Ontario, Canada; AUGUST T. PIPER, Jr., M.D., Seattle, WA;
HARRISON POPE, Jr., M.D., Harvard Medical School, Cambridge, MA; JAMES
RANDI, Author and Magician, Plantation, FL; CAROLYN SAARI, Ph.D.,
Loyola University, Chicago, IL; THEODORE SARBIN, Ph.D., University of
California, Santa Cruz, CA; THOMAS A. SEBEOK, Ph.D., Indiana
Univeristy, Bloomington, IN; LOUISE SHOEMAKER, Ph.D., University of
Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA; MARGARET SINGER, Ph.D., University of
California, Berkeley, CA; RALPH SLOVENKO, J.D., Ph.D., Wayne State
University Law School, Detroit, MI; DONALD SPENCE, Ph.D., Robert Wood
Johnson Medical Center, Piscataway, NJ; JEFFREY VICTOR, Ph.D.,
Jamestown Community College, Jamestown, NY; HOLLIDA WAKEFIELD, M.A.,
Institute of Psychological Therapies, Northfield, MN; LOUIS JOLYON
WEST, M.D., UCLA School of Medicine, Los Angeles, CA.