False Memory Syndrome: A False Construct
Son_of_Chive_Mynde
By Juliette Cutler Page
In recent years, one of the most controversial concepts in
psychology has been that of "recovered memory". Many therapists
have become wary of treating clients who appear to have
recovered memories of abuse after a long period of forgetting.
Among the reasons for this concern are extremely vocal
organizations that have come forward in support of accused
abusers, claiming that there is no such thing as "recovered
memory", and often stating that not only are therapists who
treat such clients negligent, but that therapists are in fact
themselves creating these memories in their clients. This
article will discuss the origins and methods of the primary such
organization (the False Memory Syndrome Foundation), and in so
doing, address relevant issues of memory and the experience of
abuse.
The concept of "recovered memory", that is, memory of a
traumatic event that had been forgotten for some period of time,
has been variously explained by such mechanisms as repression,
amnesia, and dissociation. However, there are over 100 years of
reports and descriptions of recovered memory in the literature,
including instances from times of war, torture, bereavement,
natural disasters, and concentration camp imprisonment.
(HOROWITZ) Many corroborated cases have been documented in
instances of recovered memory of sexual abuse, as well, which
will be discussed later in this paper.
Responses to trauma now termed, for example, "repression", "Post-
traumatic stress disorder", or "dissociation" have been
recognized literally for thousands of years. Charcot (a
neurologist) in the late 1800’s recognized that "hysteria" was
precipitated by events that the patient experienced as stressful
or traumatic. Several years later, Janet noted what we now
term "dissociation" as primary symptoms of hysteria - forgetting
and disconnection from emotions and/or experience. Janet also
observed the re-living or re-enactment of trauma that remains
one of the criteria of PTSD. As psychology and the DSM evolved,
the trauma response "hysteria" did as well, becoming various
hysterical neuroses, and eventually somatoform or dissociative
disorders. (KIHLSTROM).
However, organizations formed in support of those accused of
abuse have chosen to ignore this history. One such organization,
the False Memory Syndrome Foundation, was born in November 1991
as a result of an article in the Philadelphia Inquirer. In this
article, a couple claimed that their adult daughter had
recovered memories of incest in therapy, and as a result refused
contact with some friends and family. The couple denied any
incest. In the week after the article appeared, a University of
Pennsylvania professor (Harold Lief) who was quoted in the
column received a number of telephone calls from people who felt
that they, too, had been falsely accused.
During this time, a psychologist at Stanford University had cut
off communication with her father after confronting him with her
own memories of abuse. Her parents, Peter (a mathematician at
the University of Pennsylvania) and Pamela Freyd, joined Dr.
Lief in March of 1992 to form the False Memory Syndrome
Foundation. All three are still FMSF board members.
The story of Dr. Freyd and her parents is an illustrative one.
Dr. Freyd confronted her father privately with her memories, yet
her parents chose to take their experiences public. The story
contains several examples of questionable behavior by FMSF board
members, which became a pattern, as will be discussed later in
this paper. For example, the very same Dr. Harold Lief who
formed the FMSF with Pamela and Peter Freyd was the therapist
not only of Dr. Freyd, but also of her father. Lief, in fact,
told Dr. Freyd that he did not believe her memories of abuse,
stating that they could not have happend because in his
experience, Peter Freyd’s fantasies were "entirely homoerotic".
(FREYD) Pamela Freyd, on her part, took her daughter’s private
life public in an article (published as a book chapter and a
journal article) that disparaged Dr. Freyd’s personal life and
compared Dr. Freyd’s successful professional career unfavorably
to her own. She also, in an interesting foreshadowing of future
FMSF members’ positions on child abuse, ridiculed those who were
opposed to child sexual abuse as "politically correct" and
therefore, perhaps, merely trendy.
Interestingly, Dr. Freyd’s memories were supported by other
family members. Her uncle William, Peter’s brother, stated in a
letter that "there’s no doubt in my mind that there was severe
abuse.... The false memory syndrome foundaton is a fraud
designed to deny a reality that Peter and Pam have spent most of
their lives trying to escape. There’s no such thing as a false
memory syndrome. It is not, by any normal standard, a
foundation. Neither Peter nor Pam have any significant mental
health expertise."(FREYD LETTER)
The False Memory Syndrome Foundation created the term "false
memory syndrome" to explain how false accusations could occur.
Further than that, however, the FMSF has taken the stance that
delayed memories are often false, and that memories recovered in
therapy are particularly suspicious. Their theory has been that
vulnerable women are often coerced into believing they have been
abused by therapists who are either more interested in having
long-term clients than in assisting those clients, or who are
unknowingly creating false memories in their clients through
hypnosis or suggestion.
Increasingly throughout the country, grown children undergoing
therapeutic programs have come to believe that they suffer
from "repressed memories" and incest and sexual abuse. While
some reports of incest and sexual abuse are surely true, the
decade delayed memories are too often the result of False Memory
Syndrome caused by a disastrous "therapeutic" program. False
Memory Syndrome has a devastating effect on the victim and
typically produces a continuing dependency on the very program
that creates the syndrome. (FMSF Newsletter, May 1995)
Dr. John F. Kihlstrom, professor of psychology at Yale
University and a member of the FMSF, has suggested the following
definition of "false memory syndrome":
" a condition in which a person's identity and interpersonal
relationships are centered around a memory of traumatic
experience which is objectively false but in which the person
strongly believes. Note that the syndrome is not characterized
by false memories as such. We all have memories that are
inaccurate. Rather, the syndrome may be diagnosed when the
memory is so deeply ingrained that it orients the individual's
entire personality and lifestyle, in turn disrupting all sorts
of other adaptive behavior. The analogy to personality disorder
is intentional. False memory syndrome is especially destructive
because the person assiduously avoids confrontation with any
evidence that might challenge the memory. Then it takes on a
life of its own, encapsulated and resistant to correction. The
person may become so focused on memory that he or she may be
effectively distracted from coping with the real problems in his
or her life."
Kihlstrom does not mention his basis for the creation of this
definition (studies, case reports, etc.). The FMSF website
(http://advicom.net/~fitz/fmsf/) notes, in its section "What Are
The Symptoms Of FMS?":
John Kihlstrom's definition offers a general description of many
who were making accusations. In virtually every situation of
which the Foundation is aware, the accusing adult was facing
emotional and psychological distress. Often there was a
precipitating event such as a job loss or change, divorce,
eating disorder, relationship problem, or birth or death in the
family. These contemporary concerns were seldom addressed in
therapy.
Other common observations of FMS are: radically changed
behavior, claiming a new malady of repressed memory syndrome,
redefining personal history, assuming a new identity and
refusing to have contact with anyone who did not share the
beliefs of abuse.
The symptoms indicated that FMS was probably of social origin
such as in folie a deux. FMS is not listed in the Diagnostic and
Statistical Manual-IV (1994). It quite properly takes many years
for the official recognition of a medical diagnosis. The fact
that the major professional organizations have issued statements
about FMS is an indication of its seriousness.
"The AMA considers recovered memories of childhood sexual abuse
to be of uncertain authenticity, which should be subject to
external verification. The use of recovered memories is fraught
with problems of potential misapplication."
Council on Scientific Affairs
American Medical Association, June 16, 1994
Again, no basis for these statements is given. In fact, the
syndrome as described above can alternately be explained by
disorders that are included in the DSM-IV, such as post-
traumatic stress disorder, varioius amnesias, or dissociation.
Members of the FMSF are largely individuals who seek to defend
themselves from accusations of sexual abuse of children. The
FMSF does not attempt to determine whether these members are
falsely accused or not. However, everyone who contacts their
organization is included in their statistics of "falsely
accused". There is little discrimination or skepticism, although
members often criticize supporters of survivors of sexual abuse
for believing the survivors.
The language used by the FMSF (particularly in its newsletter)
regarding psychiatry, therapists, survivors, and women in
general is frequently negative. For example, the previous quote
attempting to define false memory syndrome implies that those
who recall past abuse are suffering from a personality disorder,
rather than retrieving recollections of actual events. How to
determine the veracity of memories is not discussed; instead,
such memories are simply assumed to be false. There is certainly
no question that external verification for repressed memories
should be sought, and that failing external verification, great
care should be taken in whatever "application" of these memories
(again, see above quote) might occur. However, the very use of
the term "application" in this context implies that monetary
gains are the reason behind accusations of abuse. In fact, most
survivors do not sue or even confront their abusers, due to the
tremendous emotional pain involved, and those who do very rarely
gain significant financial reward.
The majority of sexually abused children are girls. The National
Committee for the Prevention of Child Abuse has estimated that
one in three girls is sexually abused before age 18 (one in four
before 14), and one in six boys before age 16. In 85% of cases,
the perpetrator is known to the victim, and 1 in 25 girls is
sexually abused by her father. (NCPCA) The FMSF believes that
women who report recovered memories of sexual abuse are led by
therapists to accuse their own families of abuse from their own
sincere belief of incidents which did not occur. However, the
FMSF provides no research or statistics to support this claim.
Much FMSF evidence appears to be anecdotal. The FMSF has even
appeared to falsify its own membership statistics - for example,
in the June 7, 1995 newsletter, Accuracy About Abuse, the
following notice appeared:
The American False Memory Syndrome Foundation is widely quoted
as having 16,000 families as members but recently Peter Freyd
admitted they have only about 2500 dues paying members.
The British False Memory Society which maintains close links
with the American FMSF, now admits to 230 paid members as of
December 1994, not the 650 more usually reported.
Ralph Underwager (who coined the term "false memory syndrome")
and Hollida Wakefield, a married couple on the original FMSF
Board of Advisors, have gone so far as to claim that "the women
who make false allegations based on recovered memories [are]
very angry, hostile, and sometimes paranoid... All will have
demonstrated some type of psychopathology in earlier parts of
their lives." (1984) Again, no evidence to support this is
given. Neither do they state how such accusations have been
determined to be false. Nor do Wakefield and Underwager consider
why such women might justifiably be angry or appear "paranoid".
The FMSF also does not discuss the possibility that accused
parents are misremembering the abuse (or lack thereof.) In an
article in the Psychological Bulletin, Brewin notes:
Memories of childhood are likely to be more mis-remembered by
over positive parents than their adult children. Parents may
play a significant role in distorting reality and determining
the family mythology concerning earlier events. Parental reports
are
especially suspect as a guide to the reality of family life.
Memory biases are not found more often in anxious patients and
the recall of psychiatric patients is as reliable as that of non
patients. The central features of accounts of childhood are
likely to be reasonably accurate. Because memory distortion
occurs more often to inhibit recall or disclosure, it seems fair
to conclude that reports confirming events should be given more
weight than ones which deny them. (FOOTNOTE)
Jackson and Thomas note that " It is now generally recognized by
those working with sex offenders that child abusers, rapists and
perpetrators of incest have an extraordinary capacity for denial
and minimisation." Anna Salter, in her book Treating Child Sex
Offenders and Victims, remarks that "Offenders may continue to
assert their innocence despite overwhelming evidence and despite
good rapport with their therapists .... offenders can be quite
convincing when asserting their innocence." However, the FMSF
makes no mention of this possibility.
In fact, there has been very little scientific endeavor involved
in the formation and advertisement of "false memory syndrome".
In a 1994 interview with the publication Treating Abuse Today ,
FMSF Exective Director Pamela Freyd was unable to provide a
definition for "false memory syndrome". It is difficult to see
how FMSF members could make claims about a syndrome so ill-
defined that even their own Executive Director could not explain
it. FMSF members paradoxically claim to place great value on
scientific inquiry, while permitting their syndrome to remain so
vaguely defined that it is virtually impossible not only to
study it, but to determine who suffers from it.
A literature review by Wendy E. Hovdestad and Connie M.
Kristiansen in the Journal of Psychiatry and Law attempted to
determine clusters of symptoms underlying false memory syndrome
as described by the FMSF. They then examined women with
recovered memory for congruence with these clusters, and
discovered that only 3.9% to 13.6% percent of these women with
recovered memory met the criteria used by the FMSF itself to
define false memory syndrome. This indicates that even of those
women in the highest "risk group" for false memory syndrome,
only a small percentage comforms to the (problematic)
description provided by the FMSF, which contrasts quite
dramatically with the FMSF’s description of a "false memory
syndrome epidemic" sweeping the country. (The FMSF have been
making claims that there is a false memory syndrome epidemic
since 1993.)
FMSF members call those who believe survivors' stories "true
believers", comparing them to hysterical murderers of witches
(in this case, the witches are the innocent accused). FMSF
members have personally attacked those who disagree with them,
yet also accuse those same people for " unprofessional"
and "unscientific" behavior. Many of these personal attacks are
irrelevant to the discussion, such as when Marjorie Orr of the
newsletter Accuracy About Abuse was ridiculed for her belief in
astrology. However, in a few notable cases, the attacks were
public and unfounded. For example, Elizabeth Loftus accused
Kenneth Pope, a respected memory and trauma researcher, in the
APA journal Clinical Psychology of being "wildly reckless" in an
area of ethics. Her claim was later investigated by the journal
and found to be false. The Fall 1997 issue of the journal
published a correction and apology for the "false statement
disparaging Dr. Pope’s ethics". (POPE LETTER ETC) It is
disheartening to observe the FMSF, which in its newsletters and
publications continually emphasizes the importance of scientific
discourse, actively promoting such accusations.
In further evidence of questionable activity by FMSF board
members, Notes from the Controversy (Treating Abuse Today, Nov./
December 1995, Jan./ Feb. 1996), discusses ethics complaints
filed with the American Psychological Association against
Elizabeth Loftus regarding her article "Remembering
Dangerously", which was published in a 1995 issue of Skeptical
Inquirer, a publication of the Committee for the Investigation
of Claims of the Paranormal (CSICOP). In this article, Loftus
reviews the case study of "Jennifer H.", in which she cites the
court case Hoult vs. Hoult (thus revealing the identity of the
persons involved). In 1988, Jennifer Hoult sued her father
alleging sexual abuse and rape. Hoult provided corroborative
evidence and was awarded $500,000 by the jury for the suffering
caused by her father's abuse. Higher courts later upheld this
jury's decision, including the first circuit appellate court. At
some point during the proceedings, which lasted more than five
years, Hoult's father joined the FMSF.
In "Remembering Dangerously," Loftus (who is not a clinician and
who has no training or clinical experience in child psychology,
trauma, processes of traumatic memory, or child sexual abuse)
claimed that Hoult recovered her memories in therapy, which was
not the case. According to Hoult, Loftus added events to the
case study which did not occur and made various misstatements
regarding the abuse.
In the January/February 1995 issue of Psychology Today, Loftus
reviewed the legal case of Lynn Crook, who successfully sued her
parents for abuse. Crook had presented testimony in her case
from two sisters who also remembered incest by their father. In
the article, Loftus presented the case with (according to Crook)
nine crucial misstatements.
As a result of the errors in these articles, Jennifer Hoult and
Lynn Crook, filed separate complaints with the APA against
Elizabeth Loftus. Crook and Hoult filed their complaints on
December 18, 1995. According to the rules and procedures of the
APA ethics office, the chairman of the APA Ethics Committee (an
active expert witness for accused perpetrators of abuse, and
against therapists accused of implanting false memories in their
clients) was responsible for the initial screening of all such
complaints. The chairman and Loftus were, in fact, working
together on a different case when the complaints were filed.
They later claimed they had been unaware of this coincidence.
The chair took no action before Loftus resigned from the APA
less than a month later. After Loftus' resignation, the APA
declined to investigate the charges.
Loftus gave as her reason for resigning from the APA as her
belief that the APA had "moved away from scientific and
scholarly thinking." The APA publishes many of the most
prominent scientific psychological journals.
As mentioned above, the FMSF is characteristically intolerant of
those who do not agree with their beliefs. In the newsletter and
in board member publications, people with recovered memories and
their supporters (particularly therapists) are compared to
accusers in the Salem "witch hunts". FMSF members consider
themselves to be victims of a "modern witch hunt". In fact, a
popular Internet mailing list of supporters of FMS (listed on
the FMS home page, but officially "not affiliated with the
FMSF") is called "WITCHUNT", and is described on the FMS website
as "a discussion list about the recent ‘ritual child abuse’
trials‘". In Loftus' 1995 introduction to her article
Remembering Dangerously, Loftus says "we live in a strange and
precarious time that resembles at its heart of the hysteria and
superstitious fervor of the witch trials of the 16th and 17th
centuries. Men and women are being accused, tried, and convicted
with no proof or evidence of guilt other than the word of the
accuser. Even when the accusations involve numerous
perpetrators, conflicting grievous wounds over many years, even
decades, the accused's pointing finger of blame is enough to
make believers of judges and juries. (P. 20)" Many judges of
court cases would be quite surprised at hearing that they had
convicted perpetrators solely at "the word of an accuser".
In negative language that has become emblematic of the FMSF,
Loftus’ book , " the myth of repressed memory: false memories
and allegations of sexual abuse" repeatedly uses the metaphor
of "an earlier time when God-fearing citizens, gripped by fear,
superstition, and religious fervor, cried witch, and a forest of
stakes was pounded into the very heart of the community"(p.
228). Quotes from Arthur Miller's book the Crucible are
prominently featured. However, the "hysteria" implied by Loftus
is not that of female victims of abuse who have developed
dissociative or other coping skills as a result of the abuse,
but that of female therapists who implant false memories and the
female patients who believe them.
In an unsuccessful lawsuit brought by Ralph Underwager and
Hollida Wakefield against psychologist Anna Salter in 1994 for
defamation stemming from a study which mentioned their research,
the court found that Underwager and Wakefield’s books, written
claiming that most accusations of childhood sexual abuse result
from memories implanted and created by therapists,
"have not been well received in the medical and scientific
press. A review of the first in the Journal of the American
Medical Association concludes that the authors took a one-sided
approach: "... When a given reference fails to support the
viewpoint, they simply mis-state the conclusion. When they
cannot use a quotation out of context from an article, they make
unsupported statements, some of which are palpably untrue and
others simply unprovable.""
The court further described Underwager's testimony
that "children are incapable of correctly remembering or
accurately describing sexual contacts," and indeed stated
that "Underwager is a hired gun who makes a living deceiving
judges about the state of medical knowledge and thus assisting
child molesters to evade punishment." Underwager himself
resigned from the FMSF in 1994 after being quoted in a Dutch
journal as saying that "Paedophiles can boldly and courageously
affirm what they choose... With boldness they can say "I believe
this is in fact part of gods will"... Paedophiles need to become
more positive and make the claim that paedophilia is an
acceptable expression of gods will for love and unity among
human beings."" In fact, both Underwager and Wakefield have
described pedophilia as a "positive lifestyle choice" (Bull &
Marten, 1994; Ryan 1993b).
One would think that those allied with a group of falsely
accused perpetrators would distance themselves from pedophilia.
However, several members other than Ralph Underwager and Hollida
Wakefield have argued that childhood sexual experiences with
adults may be harmless. However, asociations between childhood
sexual abuse and mental disorders in adulthood have been
repeatedly proven (Briere & Elliott, 1993; Elliott & Briere,
1992; Herman, Russell, & Trocki, 1986/1994).
Sexually abused children have more symptoms than non-abused
children. Fears, posttraumatic stress disorder, behaviour
problems, sexualized behaviours, and poor self esteem occur most
frequently among a long list of symptoms noted in 45 different
studies but no one symptom characterized a majority of sexually
abused children. Some symptoms were specific to certain ages,
and about one third had no symptoms. (TACKETT)
Another FMSF Advisory Board member, James Randi, was involved in
a scandal in which (according to court records):
"The scientist's lawyers sought to discredit Mr. Randi by
playing taped conversations of teen-age boys who called the
magician's home allegedly for sex."
[ Byrd v Randi (Civil Action No. MJG-89-636 in the United States
District for the Court for the District of Maryland.]
Transcripts of the tape are also part of the court record in
Geller v Randi, (Civil Action No 91-1014-SSH in the United
States District Court for the District of Columbia. The
transcripts are contained in Exhibit 40 to Exhibit U].
Dr. Bill Thompson, Advisory Board Member of the British FMS,
lecturer in Forensic Psychology at Reading University
" has been extensively quoted in the media as a sceptic about the
existence of satanic abuse. He is the author of SADOMASOCHISM,
in which he puts forward the theory that sadomasochism is
neither violent nor dangerous. Written about the Spanner case in
which fifteen defendants were charged with "inflicting actual
bodily harm" on each other, Thompson's book asks
whether "hitting a penis with a ruler, dripping 'hot wax' on to
a penis, strapping someone with a cat-o'nine tails, caning the
buttocks" really are harmful activities. One of the accused was
under 21....Thompson claims that "various moral groups have
attempted to justify restricting the public's access to sexually
orientated material by promoting a child pornography panic."....
He took exception to Lord Templeman's restating in the Spanner
case that it was important to " provide safeguards against
exploitation and corruption of others, particularly those who
are especially vulnerable because they are young, weak in body
or mind, inexperienced, or in a state of special physical,
official or economic dependence."
(http://www.carleton.ca/~whovdest/aaa8.html#section2)
There is considerable evidence supporting the recovery of
traumatic memories. Contrary to the statements of the FMSF,
there is empirical evidence regarding corroboration of formerly
repressed memories, including that from other family members,
medical or other physical evidence, and confessions of
perpetrators. Ross Cheit, for example, has compiled a list of 50
cases of corroborated recovered memory. (See Ross Cheit.) In
fact, research evidence shows that it is not unusual for victims
of childhood sexual abuse to forget the abuse either entirely or
for a period of time after the abuse.
Nor is it uncommon for genuine survivors of abuse to recant
accusations.
Withdrawing stories of abuse is a normal part of the disclosure
process and in 90 per cent of cases is followed at a later date
by redisclosure. One study found that 27 per cent of children
recanted, and 5 per cent recanted twice. The study says that
lawyers, judges, parents and therapists must be helped to
understand that recantation does not represent an end in itself
and should not be equated with false allegation. Another study
noted the propensity for abuse survivors to re-repress their
memories after their retrieval. It is a mechanism which protects
them from the full emotional impact of the loss of protection in
their childhood. "If I don't remember it, then it didn't
happen". Recantation also occurs if abused children or adults
are faced with the family's denial and blame for the dissolution
of the family. (GONZALEZ)
FMSF supporters often claim that it’s impossible to forget
abuse. As proof, such studies as the numerous ones by Loftus are
often quoted. These studies all pertain to non-traumatic
memories. It is not at all clear whether the results of research
on non-traumatic memories are in any way generalizable to the
complex mechanisms involved in experiencing, dealing with, and
remembering abuse or other traumatic experiences.
The FMSF also frequently attacks "repression", stating that
either it does not exist, or that it does not result in the
forgetting and later remembering of experiences of extreme
trauma. However, there are other, well-studied mechanisms which
are involved in the processing and storing of trauma
experiences. For recovered memories to exist, belief in
repression is not necessary.
For example, women with known histories of abuse have been
studied to determine if they had ever had periods in which the
abuse had been forgotten. The abstract of Linda M. Williams’
1995 study, Recovered memories of abuse in women with documented
child sexual victimization histories. (Journal of Traumatic
Stress, 8,649 — 673, 1995) states:
The study provides evidence that some adults who claimed to have
recovered memories of sexual abuse recall actual events that
occurred in childhood. 129 women with documented histories of
sexual victimization in childhood were interviewed and asked
about abuse history. 17 years following the initial report of
the abuse, 80 of the women recalled the victimization. One in 10
women (16 percent of those who recalled the abuse) reported that
at some time in the past they had forgotten about the abuse.
Those with a prior period of forgetting -- the women
with "recovered memories" -- were younger at the time of abuse
and were less likely to have received support from their mothers
than the women who reported that they had always remembered
their victimization. The women who had recovered memories and
those who had always remembered had the same number of
discrepancies when their account of the abuse were compared to
the reports from the early 1970s.
None of the women in this study who had forgotten the abuse were
in therapy at the time they began to remember again, and women's
memories, when they returned, were consistent with the actual
abuse.
Charles L. Whitfield, M.D. performed a review of 36 studies on
over 6,000 children and adults who were abused as children. His
results showed that between 16 and 78% of subjects in these
studies experienced partial to total amnesia for their abuse for
some substantial amount of time. Most of the subjects had been
sexually abused as children. Eight of these studies involved
only subjects with fully corroborated abuse histories, four had
to a corroboration rate of 60 to 80 percent, and four had
corroboration among half of the subjects. All groups were
similar in occurrence of traumatic amnesia.
Elizabeth Loftus herself has published studies showing evidence
of recovered memory. The 4 January 1996 issue of Accuracy About
Abuse notes:
Elizabeth Loftus, high profile FMSF advocate, published a paper
with colleagues on Remembering and Repressing in 1994. In a
study of 105 women outpatients in a substance abuse clinic 54 %
reported a history of childhood sexual abuse. 81% remembered all
or part of the abuse. 19% reported they forgot the abuse for a
period of time and later the memory returned. Women who
remembered the abuse their whole lives reported a clearer
memory, with a more detailed picture. Women who remembered the
abuse their whole lives did not differ from others in terms of
the violence of the abuse or whether the violence was
incestuous. [Psychology of Women Quarterly, 18 (1994) 67 -84.]
Loftus has also discussed "motivated forgetting", and has
presented the documented study of a college professor who became
unable to remember a series of traumas, but after some time was
able to recover those memories. Loftus remarked "after such an
enormously stressful experience, many individuals wish to
forget... And often their wish is granted." (Loftus, 1980/1988,
p. 73) In 1976, Loftus wrote:
Memories that may cause us great unhappiness if they were
brought to mind often appear to be forgotten. However are they
really lost from memory or are they simply temporarily repressed
as originally suggested by Freud (1922)? Repression is the
phenomenon that prevents someone from remembering an event that
can cause him pain and suffering. One way that we know that
these memories are repressed and not completely lost is that the
methods of free association and hypnosis and other special
techniques used by psychotherapist can be used to bring
repressed material to mind and can help a person remember things
that he has failed to remember earlier. (Loftus and Loftus,
1976, p. 82).
It is clear that, while some memories of abuse may in fact be
false, there is no evidence to prove the existence of a "false
memory syndrome" epidemic. Recognition of this is important, as
groups such as the FMSF, through publicity and lawsuits, have
made some therapists unwilling to treat both adult and child
victims of sexual abuse. Caution is necessary, but caution based
on good practice rather than misinformation.
Appendix and Bibliography
We welcome your comments on this and other topics. Please visit
our message board.
HomeArchivesE-mail
All work contained in Feminista! (TM) online journal is owned by
the respective contributing authors or artists, including all
copyrights contained therein, and may not be copied, reprinted,
or otherwise used in any form without the express written
permission of the copyright holder. Please contact Feminista! or
the author/artist via email or USPS to Feminista, 1850 Union
Street #1173, San Francisco, CA 94123.
Copyright © 1999 Juliette Cutler Page
All rights reserved by authors
Got questions? Get answers over the phone at Keen.com.
Up to 100 minutes free!
http://www.keen.com
PangK
>Newsgroups: alt.psychology
>False Memory Syndrome: A False Construct
>By Juliette Cutler Page
>In recent years, one of the most controversial concepts in psychology has been
that of "recovered memory". Many therapists have become wary of treating
clients who appear to have recovered memories of abuse after a long period of
forgetting.
Among the reasons for this concern are extremely vocal organizations that have
come forward in support of accused
abusers, claiming that there is no such thing as "recovered memory", and often
stating that not only are therapists who
treat such clients negligent, but that therapists are in fact themselves
creating these memories in their clients. This
article will discuss the origins and methods of the primary such organization
(the False Memory Syndrome Foundation), and in so
doing, address relevant issues of memory and the experience of abuse.
------------------------------------
False construct here. NOBODY (including FMSF) claims there is no such thing as
recovered memories. The REAL argument is one of methodology.
1. Shooting people full of near lethal doses of drugs such as sodium amytal to
"HELP" recover memories. (With the use of repeated suggestsive questioning.)
2. The use of hypnosis with "guided imagry" as a technique.
Now let's discuss the REAL reason "therapists" (almost always MSW social
workers) are now reluctant to engage in this activity. Dozens of successful
large dollar award lawsuits against therapists.
-------------------------------------------------
>The concept of "recovered memory", that is, memory of a traumatic event that
had been forgotten for some period of time,
has been variously explained by such mechanisms as repression, amnesia, and
dissociation. However, there are over 100 years of reports and descriptions of
recovered memory in the literature,
including instances from times of war, torture, bereavement, natural disasters,
and concentration camp imprisonment.
---------------
Indeed there have been. And it is in the DETAILS of that 100 year history that
the modern practices have been discredited.
---------------------------------------------------
>It is clear that, while some memories of abuse may in fact be false, there is
no evidence to prove the existence of a "false
memory syndrome" epidemic.
Sure there is. A literal explosion in cases of such allegations. Going from
a half dozen or so cases a year to over 100,000 when these "techniques" were
discovered.
Now, while it puzzles the TRUE BELIEVERS in the world that almost everyone
issexually abusing their children and the children simply don't remember it,
there is a simple reason why so many experts discount this type of "recovered
memory therapy." That is because it discredits itself.
The SAME techniques are being used to assist people ro recall "past lives"
and "alien abductions." Many of the leading "Therapists" who do recovered
memory theray have testified that they have had several clients who were
Napoleon in a past life. It never dawns on these nit-wits that there was only
ONE Napoleon. You simply CANNOT have several clients who were REALLY Napoleon
in a past life, much less 200,000 therapists ALL with 20 or 30 Napoleons, with
out AT LEAST admitting the possibility that ONE might actually have NOT been
Napoleon..
Now we could also go to the ailen abduction thing. BUT.... if you actually
BELIEVE that HORNEY little green men from the planet Andromenous have flown 20
million light years for a little Earth Nookey, well there is NO point in trying
to correct your belief. Nutty as it is.
Have SOME folks been molested? YES! Have some repressed that memory? OF
COURSE! Nobody says there are No cases. But some people argue PROCESS on HOW
the memories are restored.
Son_of_Chive_Mynde
>>From: Son_of_Chive_Mynde ooochiveooomyndeoooNOooSPAM@my-
deja.com.invalid
>>Newsgroups: alt.psychology
>
>>False Memory Syndrome: A False Construct
>
>>By Juliette Cutler Page
>
>>In recent years, one of the most controversial concepts in
psychology has been
>that of "recovered memory". Many therapists have become wary of
treating
>clients who appear to have recovered memories of abuse after a
long period of
>forgetting.
>Among the reasons for this concern are extremely vocal
organizations that have
>come forward in support of accused
>abusers, claiming that there is no such thing as "recovered
memory", and often
>stating that not only are therapists who
>treat such clients negligent, but that therapists are in fact
themselves
>creating these memories in their clients. This
>article will discuss the origins and methods of the primary
such organization
>(the False Memory Syndrome Foundation), and in so
>doing, address relevant issues of memory and the experience of
abuse.
>
>
>False construct here. NOBODY (including FMSF) claims there is
no such thing as
>recovered memories. The REAL argument is one of methodology.
BS. The FMSF is an organization made up of pedophiles and
sexual-predators. These people formed the FMSF because they
were *accused* of sexual molestation. Then, like a good Public
Relations firm, they *worked* the media bit by bit, paper by
paper, magazine by magazine, and finally, journal by journal.
These criminals inserted a false meme - "False Memory Syndrome"
into a debate about recovered memories. Like the sociopaths
that they are, the FMSF was able to make a false and unaccepted
medical diagnosis like FMS stick. In short, the FMSF
manipulated the media, the lawyers, the medical establishment
and the victims of sexaul abuse by the FMSF themselves!
>>The concept of "recovered memory", that is, memory of a
traumatic event that
>had been forgotten for some period of time,
>has been variously explained by such mechanisms as repression,
amnesia, and
>dissociation. However, there are over 100 years of reports and
descriptions of
>recovered memory in the literature,
>including instances from times of war, torture, bereavement,
natural disasters,
>and concentration camp imprisonment.
>
>---------------
>
>
>Indeed there have been. And it is in the DETAILS of that 100
year history that
>the modern practices have been discredited.
Total unsubstantiated crap. The human brain devises various
self-defense mechanisms to protect itself from the knowledge of
painful and often traumatic experiences, aka MEMORIES.
This in no way shape or form implies that these memories are
false. Rather, it implies that the mind develops defense
mechanisms like "forgetting" and "repression" to avoid
consciously remembering painful episodes of ones childhood or
traumatic experiences. In some cases, it takes *decades* for
one to concsciously recall traumatic events in ones past WITHOUT
ever setting foot in a psychiatrists office. No one knows how
the mind works this way EXCEPT those who MANIPULATE public
perception. For years, the CIA ran a mind-control operation
called MK/ULTRA which was interested in diffusing the anti-war
and civil-rights climate of the sixties. The knowledge from the
results of such pseudo-scientific experiments on live civilians
was used to manipulate the mass-media through television,
advertising, and of course, newspapers. It is clear that the
public is quick to "forget" the past abuses by their own
government. Witness the fact that Bush's son is now running for
President. What qualifications does he have to hold the highest
offfice in the nation? None of course, but that doesn't stop
him from trying since his entire campaign is run on the notion
of PUBLIC PERCEPTION, which brings us back full circle to the
horrendous psychological tactics of the False Memory Syndrome
Foundation. Firstly, "False Memory Syndrome" does not exist.
It was INVENTED to protect the members of the foundation from
accusations of sexual abuse. Using the wisdom of public
relations, along with CIA tactics of media manipulation, the
FMSF inserted the notion of a "False Memory Syndrome" into the
debate when none had previously existed. What was the result?
Soon, therapists were being sued by the very people who had been
accused of sexual abuse! This is hysteria at its best, except
this is not hysteria brought on by the therapist, it is hysteria
brought on by the criminal perpetrators of sexual abuse who were
found innocent of the charges brought against them by hiring
high-profile lawyers to manipulate judicial perception of the
cases at hand and introduce paid members of the FMSF to testify
how an INVENTED syndrome like FMS caused their client to be
accused of sexual abuse in the first place!
This is totally absurd!
In my opinion, all cases where FMS has been introduced into a
hearing should not only be rehear but RETRIED. The perpetrators
of sexual abuse have been set free while the therapists and the
victims continue to suffer at the hands of the FMSF and an
uneducated public who are easily misled and swayed by propaganda
and lies.
>---------------------------------------------------
>>It is clear that, while some memories of abuse may in fact be
false, there is
>no evidence to prove the existence of a "false
>memory syndrome" epidemic.
>
> Sure there is.
Surely there is NOT. No medical diagnosis exists named "False
Memory Syndrome"
It is an invented diagnosis which does not exist.
It was used by attorneys to free their clients who were accused
of sexual abuse.
FMS is a false diagnosis and cannot be found in any medical
literature.
The FMSF and those who espouse such lies need to be brought to
justice at the earliest opportunity.
This is a mass-media manipulation and propaganda effort of
ENORMOUS proportions.
- SOCkM
Mycos
<ooochiveooomy...@my-deja.com.invalid> wrote:
Clearly you are speaking with a bias that disallows any evidence
contrary to your point of view.
Your reasoning faculties are much the same as another pet peeve of
mine; religious fundamentalist who will hear nothing that disproves
events in the bible as happening exactly as written in, say, Genesis
for example.
This century has seen unbelievable instances of extremely traumatic
events being imposed on individuals. The horrors witnessed by those
who survived the holocaust, men, women AND children to the present day
horrors of the Bosnia/Serbia/Kosovo.
There were no cases that I heard of where a concentration camp member
were unable to remember what took place. On the contrary, they perhaps
remember to well., leading to the recent explosion of hate and old
memories in the Balkans. How can this happen if this syndrome is as
common as you say? This is different you say ? How ? What has happened
to anybody you speak of that didn't happen in one of those camps or
wars. Rape was/is an all too common practice during times of war. They
Remember. They remember too well.
An aside to this whole question is this: How can any person take a
diagnosis seriously if one the surefire signs of abuse is the persons
inability to remember it. Think about that.
Any therapist who would even for a moment allow such a thought to
cross their mind is in need of treatment themselves and at the very
least should be stripped of any license to practice and have their
files looked at by someone to determine how many people that therapist
has mentally "raped" and subsequent criminal charges should be
brought.
We had a therapist up here in Canada who was heavy on the "ritual
abuse" bandwagon. She was finally shut up and properly ignored when
someone sat down and added up her estimates given at different times
and using different ways of alluding to the 'horrific numbers" of
events going on right under our noses. Anyhow, some good soul did the
math and presented the results to her, on national TV. The numbers of
dead children this women had claimed were in various forums to the
faithful exceeded the population of living children in all of Canada.
And not one bit of evidence nor one grave. Like I said, she
disappeared back into the anonymity she so richly deserved. I wonder
though. She probably still has a hardcore group of adherents that
still "believe". They probably think much the same as you, very single
minded and with blinkers that allow nothing to change their point of
view.
I'll bet you think I must be a molester of some kind to take the
position I do, don't you? How else could I deny the obvious evidence
as you see it right?
I feel deep pity for you and only wish that you would wake up before
you destroy some innocent parents lives not to mention the daughter
who now actually does suffer the damage of an actual rape because for
all intents and purposes, if she wholeheartedly believes it, she was.
Mycos
<ooochiveooomy...@my-deja.com.invalid> wrote:
>Mycos <amanit...@telus.net> wrote:
>>On Sat, 17 Jun 2000 17:07:47 -0700, Son_of_Chive_Mynde
>><ooochiveooomy...@my-deja.com.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>Clearly you are speaking with a bias that disallows any evidence
>>contrary to your point of view.
>
>Nice projection. That statement accurately describes *your*
>point of view, not mine.
>
>[snip of complete bullshit]
NO. Snip of words contrary to your point of view, reflecting precisely
the reaction that I spoke about (but that you snipped).
To sum up what I said in different words that perhaps you'll
understand:
I have no memory of being molested as a child. Therefore I probably
was molested. (according to one of the Repressed Memory Syndrome
symptoms)
If that isn't the most absurd diagnosis you have ever heard of....
Well, I leave you to your twisted little world.
Son_of_Chive_Mynde
>On Sat, 17 Jun 2000 17:07:47 -0700, Son_of_Chive_Mynde
><ooochiveooomy...@my-deja.com.invalid> wrote:
>
>Clearly you are speaking with a bias that disallows any evidence
>contrary to your point of view.
Nice projection. That statement accurately describes *your*
point of view, not mine.
[snip of complete bullshit]
>I feel deep pity for you and only wish that you would wake up
before
>you destroy some innocent parents lives not to mention the
daughter
>who now actually does suffer the damage of an actual rape
because for
>all intents and purposes, if she wholeheartedly believes it,
she was.
"False Memory Syndrome" deos not exist.
No competent medical authority or peer-reviewed medical journal
accepts "False Memory Syndrome" as a valid diagnosis.
I'm sorry that reality conflicts with your innermost fantasy
world.
PangK
>Newsgroups: alt.psychology
>>False construct here. NOBODY (including FMSF) claims there is no such thing
as recovered memories. The REAL argument is one of methodology.
>BS. The FMSF is an organization made up of pedophiles and sexual-predators.
I am NOT a member of FMSF, but I have seen the list of its members, and
many are very prominent researchers at major universities, such as Dr.
Elizabeth Loftus at the University of Washington. Are you claiming that SHE is
a "pedophile?"
A "sexual predator?"
>These people formed the FMSF because they were *accused* of sexual
molestation.
Please provide the place and date Dr. Ofshe, Dr. Loftus, etc were accused of
molestation? I could go down the entire board list of FMSF, but that would
waste bandwidth. I am expecting specifics here.
Dates of criminal charges, places, and result of the trials.
>Then, like a good Public Relations firm, they *worked* the media bit by bit,
paper by paper, magazine by magazine, and finally, journal by journal.
Funny thing here, while newspapers MAY well be a place where propaganda
prevails, usually it is on the side of the child abuse hsyterics. Academic,
peer REVIEWED Journals are another matter.
It is clear you don't know the process.
>>Indeed there have been. And it is in the DETAILS of that 100 year history
that
the modern practices have been discredited.
>Total unsubstantiated crap. The human brain devises various self-defense
mechanisms to protect itself from the knowledge of painful and often traumatic
experiences, aka MEMORIES.
Absolutely, as a Viet Nam vet, I think I have a pretty good working
kknowledge of that. HOWEVER, you missed the point here. That being that the
PROCESS of recovering those repressed memories, IE shooting near LETHAL doses
of drugs like Amytal into the people and hypnosis that have been discredited.
Actually, what is really being discredited is the "therapists" doing this,
almost always Social Workers. and almost never a Clinical Psychologist or
Psychiatrist. It is the unqualified social worker intrusion into an area in
which they posess NO skills or trainign that is the real issue here. Like
children playing with fire.
> In some cases, it takes *decades* for
one to concsciously recall traumatic events in ones past WITHOUT ever setting
foot in a psychiatrists office.
First let me disabuse you of the notion that "Psychiatrists" are the ones
doing this "recovered memory therapy." Almost NONE of the "Therapists" are
psychiatrists. And even fewer are Clinical Psychologists both of whom KNOW
better then to use those methods.
>For years, the CIA ran a mind-control operation called MK/ULTRA which was
interested in diffusing the anti-war
and civil-rights climate of the sixties.
Black helicopters anyone?
>Witness the fact that Bush's son is now running for President. What
qualifications does he have to hold the highest offfice in the nation? None of
course, but that doesn't stop him from trying
And this related to recovered memory HOW? Can we say you are making one hell
of an argument for the Fruit Loop company.
>Firstly, "False Memory Syndrome" does not exist.
So far you have failed to prove that.
>It was INVENTED to protect the members of the foundation from accusations of
sexual abuse.
So YOU claim. But since most of the board of FMSF seem to have NEVER been
accused of molesting children, EVEN the hated Ralph Underwager, your story
doesn't hold together expecially well. As far as I know the only ones accused,
but never given a day in court to answer the charges were the Freyds.
>Soon, therapists were being sued by the very people who had been accused of
sexual abuse! This is hysteria at its best, except this is not hysteria
brought on by the therapist, it is hysteria brought on by the criminal
perpetrators of sexual abuse who were found innocent of the charges brought
against them by hiring high-profile lawyers to manipulate judicial perception
of the cases at hand and introduce paid members of the FMSF to testify how an
INVENTED syndrome like FMS caused their client to be accused of sexual abuse in
the first place! This is totally absurd!
Interesting. Let's note that # 1 the suits against the therapists have been
successful. "High profile lawyers?" Care to name some? How many of the people
accused were represented by Johnny Cochrane? F.Lee Bailey? Jerry Spence?
How do you define a "HIGH PROFILE LAWYER?" Or do you suggest that people are
not entitled to legal counsel?
And somehow these "Therapists" with whole insurance companies defening them,
have, somehow, a very POOR class of lawyer? And THAT explains how they come to
LOSE these lawsuits?
What is "absurd" here is your hysteria.
>In my opinion, all cases where FMS has been introduced into a
>hearing should not only be rehear but RETRIED. The perpetrators
>of sexual abuse have been set free while the therapists and the
>victims continue to suffer at the hands of the FMSF and an
>uneducated public who are easily misled and swayed by propaganda
>and lies.
>
>>---------------------------------------------------
>>>It is clear that, while some memories of abuse may in fact be
>false, there is
>>no evidence to prove the existence of a "false
>>memory syndrome" epidemic.
>>
>> Sure there is.
>
>Surely there is NOT. No medical diagnosis exists named "False
>Memory Syndrome"
>
>It is an invented diagnosis which does not exist.
>
>It was used by attorneys to free their clients who were accused
>of sexual abuse.
>
>FMS is a false diagnosis and cannot be found in any medical
>literature.
>
>The FMSF and those who espouse such lies need to be brought to justice at the
earliest opportunity.
>This is a mass-media manipulation and propaganda effort of ENORMOUS
proportions.
Oh I see, let's given them a "fair trial" and then let's hang em! What a sense
of justice and truth you have.
PangK
>Newsgroups: alt.psychology
>>Clearly you are speaking with a bias that disallows any evidence contrary to
your point of view.
>Nice projection. That statement accurately describes *your* point of view,
not mine.
No sir. It describes YOUR situation. I gave credit that SOME recovered
memories are accurate. I also stated that because of the "PROCESS USED"
(extremely high drug doses and hypnosis) that SOME of the cases are not
acurate.
Your position is that they ALL are! That ALL the accused are guilty. And you
argue any viewpoit that even differs from your beliefs even slightly like a
caged animal.
>[snip of complete bullshit]
From where I sit that covers much of YOUR blather, sir. Even when I TRY to
agree with SOME of what you say, you foam at the mouth.
>"False Memory Syndrome" deos not exist.
The evidence I have seen says it does.
>No competent medical authority or peer-reviewed medical journal accepts "False
Memory Syndrome" as a valid diagnosis.
You are wrong, several have. Try the Journal of Behavioral Psychology to name
ONE....
What *IS* the truth here is that NONE of the medical or psychological
journals or associations has endorsed the methods used to "receover memories."
Meaning heavy (near lethal) doses of sodium amytal and hypnosis. Which is why
we do not see psychiatrists or psychologists performing this voo doo, and it is
left to the realm of Social Workers. (MSW's) to practice.
AGAIN.... The SAME process used to help people to remember they were Napoleon
in a previous life, or that they took a flyhing saucer ride with Elvis!
Ya know, I think that any reasonable intelligent person might want to use a
different PROCESS, when they learn that the process they are endorsing has
literally tens of thousand of Napoleons existing simultaneously, and a like
number who believe they were scooped up into flyign saucers by sexuall
frustrated little green men looking for a little "Earth Nookie!"
I am NOT saying that there is no traumatic repression of memory of sexual
abuse. There clearly IS. What I am saying, and now need to make in less
delicate terms, is that it takes a raving lunatic to MISS that the process in
use is at best unreliable! That there has to be a BETTER way! If you can't
see that, then you are too far gone for communication to be anything other than
a waste of bandwidth and time.
Son_of_Chive_Mynde
>On Sun, 18 Jun 2000 01:22:10 -0700, Son_of_Chive_Mynde
><ooochiveooomy...@my-deja.com.invalid> wrote:
>
>>>On Sat, 17 Jun 2000 17:07:47 -0700, Son_of_Chive_Mynde
>>><ooochiveooomy...@my-deja.com.invalid> wrote:
>>>
evidence
>>>contrary to your point of view.
>>
>>Nice projection. That statement accurately describes *your*
>>point of view, not mine.
>NO.
Yes. False Memory Syndrome is a hoax. FMS is a diagnosis that
does not EXIST and is being used against victims of ritual abuse
to protect pedophiles and persons accused of sexual abuse.
Additionally, the pseudo-sciencee of FMS is used by the criminal
organization FMSF to minimize reports of sadistic child abuse
and to attack those who advocate on behalf of survivors.
Pseudo-scientific organizations like the FMSF dominate media
attention with horrific tales of false allegations of abuse
ruining families and innocent individual’s lives, children and
adults are suffering indescribable torments. It is our
obligation as investigators to uncover the meaning behind
allegations of cult and ritual abuse and to prevent continued
abuses.
False Memory Syndrome is a term coined by the Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania based False Memory Syndrome Foundation (FMSF),
which is an advocacy group for people whose children have
accused them of either sexual abuse and/or Satanic ritual abuse.
Despite its scientific sounding title, there is actually no such
thing as a clinically acknowledged category for "false memory
syndrome."
Judith Herman, an associate clinical professor of Psychiatry at
Harvard Medical School, and author of the book, Trauma and
Recovery claims that, "The very name FMSF is prejudicial and
misleading."
"There is no such syndrome, and we have no evidence reported
memories are false. We only know they are disputed," said Dr.
Herman.
"As recently as the 1970s," said Herman, "rape was considered
rare, and incest was regarded as a universal taboo. Less than
twenty years ago, for example, the Comprehensive Textbook of
Psychiatry estimated the prevalence of all forms of incest at
one case per million population. And popular and professional
literature [as in the case with SRA survivors now] routinely
questioned the character of victims, and disparaged the
credibility of women who made claims of assault. Today, however,
widespread sexual abuse/incest has been extensively
documented."
Somre more additional facts about the "hoax" of "false memory
syndrome":
Researchers at University College London claim their study of
data from 236 adults with recovered memories shows many are of
true past events.
On Tuesday March 14, Reuters reported that the British
Psychological Society released a statement that says: ``There is
now consistent evidence that 'False Memory Syndrome' cannot
explain all, or even most, examples of recovered memories of
trauma,''
Dr Bernice Andrews, who conducted the study said, "To date there
is no convincing evidence for a specific False Memory Syndrome."
In the case of false memory allegations, perhaps we should be
spending a bit more time actually questioning the character of
some of those accusing the "alleged" victims of confabulation.
And perhaps we should start at the False Memory Syndrome
Foundation itself.
PangK
>Newsgroups: alt.psychology
>Yes. False Memory Syndrome is a hoax. FMS is a diagnosis that does not EXIST
and is being used against victims of ritual abuse to protect pedophiles and
persons accused of sexual abuse.
Lots of experts disagree with you.
>Additionally, the pseudo-sciencee of FMS is used by the criminal organization
FMSF to minimize reports of sadistic child abuse
and to attack those who advocate on behalf of survivors.
Do you realize that your language pretty well brands you as a nut case? The
false memory movement, as such, has lots better "SCIENCE" going for it that the
recovered memory crowd does. Let's look at two of the leading proponents. Bass
and Davis. Neither has a doctorate degree in ANYTHING. One doesn't even have a
college degree at all. The other is an RN.
Contrast this to the volumes written on the other side by academics with often
multiple PhD's or MD's. Whose word should I take on a SCIENCE issue? A MSW or
an MD or PhD?
>Pseudo-scientific organizations like the FMSF dominate media attention with
horrific tales of false allegations of abuse
ruining families and innocent individual’s lives, children and adults are
suffering indescribable torments.
the "PSEUDO-SCIENCE" is the recovered memory creeps, social workers shooting
people with near lethal doses of drugs and playing with hypnosis to extract
"memories." The SCIENCE here is in uncovering that the PROCESS hopelessly
contaminates memory. If anyone here is giving aid and comfort to those who
abuse children, it is those who cling to VOO DOO to deal with the process. Thus
so contaminating the memory of the victims as to make their claims
untrustworthy.
THAT, sir is the REAL crime here! Those who try to pass off QUACKERY in the
place of science!
>It is our obligation as investigators to uncover the meaning behind
allegations of cult and ritual abuse and to prevent continued abuses.
Oh, are you claiming to be an "investigator?" For what type of agency?
Son_of_Chive_Mynde
>>Yes. False Memory Syndrome is a hoax. FMS is a diagnosis
that does not EXIST
>and is being used against victims of ritual abuse to protect
pedophiles and
>persons accused of sexual abuse.
>
> Lots of experts disagree with you.
A fallacious argument from authority.
- SOCkM
Son_of_Chive_Mynde
> I am NOT a member of FMSF, but I have seen the list of its
members, and
>many are very prominent researchers at major universities, such
as Dr.
>Elizabeth Loftus at the University of Washington.
Another illogical, fallacious Argument from Authority.
- SOCkM
Son_of_Chive_Mynde
>I am NOT a member of FMSF, but I have seen the list of its
members, and
>many are very prominent researchers at major universities, such
as Dr.
>Elizabeth Loftus at the University of Washington
THE TRUTH ABOUT ELIZABETH LOFTUS
The FMSF is characteristically intolerant of those who do not
THE TRUTH ABOUT FALSE MEMORY SYNDROME
"It is now generally recognized by those working with sex
offenders that child abusers, rapists and perpetrators of incest
have an extraordinary capacity for denial and minimisation."
"Offenders may continue to assert their innocence despite
overwhelming evidence and despite good rapport with their
therapists .... offenders can be quite convincing when asserting
their innocence."
Members of the FMSF are largely individuals who seek to defend
themselves from accusations of sexual abuse of children. The
FMSF does not attempt to determine whether these members are
falsely accused or not. However, everyone who contacts their
organization is included in their statistics of "falsely
accused". There is little discrimination or skepticism, although
members often criticize supporters of survivors of sexual abuse
for believing the survivors. The language used by the FMSF
(particularly in its newsletter) regarding psychiatry,
therapists, survivors, and women in general is frequently
negative. For example, the previous quote attempting to define
false memory syndrome implies that those who recall past abuse
are suffering from a personality disorder, rather than
retrieving recollections of actual events.
The False Memory Syndrome Foundation created the term "false
memory syndrome" to explain how false accusations could occur.
Further than that, however, the FMSF has taken the stance that
delayed memories are often false, and that memories recovered in
therapy are particularly suspicious. Their theory has been that
vulnerable women are often coerced into believing they have been
abused by therapists who are either more interested in having
long-term clients than in assisting those clients, or who are
unknowingly creating false memories in their clients through
hypnosis or suggestion.
Incidentally, False Memory Syndrome is not listed in the
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual- IV (1994).
Despite its scientific sounding title, there is actually no such
thing as a clinically acknowledged category for "false memory
syndrome." Judith Herman, an associate clinical professor of
Psychiatry at Harvard Medical School, and author of the book,
Trauma and Recovery claims that, "The very name FMSF is
prejudicial and misleading." "There is no such syndrome, and we
have no evidence reported memories are false. We only know they
are disputed," said Dr. Herman.
Researchers at University College London claim their study of
data from 236 adults with recovered memories shows many are of
true past events.
The British Psychological Society released a statement that
says: ``There is now consistent evidence that 'False Memory
Syndrome' cannot explain all, or even most, examples of
recovered memories of trauma.'' Dr Bernice Andrews, who
conducted the study said, "To date there is no convincing
evidence for a specific False Memory Syndrome."
The FMSF believes that women who report recovered memories of
sexual abuse are led by therapists to accuse their own families
of abuse from their own sincere belief of incidents which did
not occur. However, the FMSF provides no research or statistics
to support this claim. Much FMSF evidence appears to be
anecdotal.
Mycos
<ooochiveooomy...@my-deja.com.invalid> wrote:
>The British Psychological Society released a statement that
>says: ``There is now consistent evidence that 'False Memory
>Syndrome' cannot explain all, or even most, examples of
>recovered memories of trauma.'' Dr Bernice Andrews, who
>conducted the study said, "To date there is no convincing
>evidence for a specific False Memory Syndrome." (Reuters)
Don't you understand what your own evidence says?
The Society is saying that not all of the recovered memories are
false.
It does not say that all recovered memories are true.
It does says that "False memory Syndrome " cannot explain MOST, NOT
ALL of the recovered memories, meaning IT CAN explain some.
But it does not say that they are all true which leaves the question
open that there may be another reason why false memories are being
"remembered" and here is one:
Do you think it impossible or even unusual that a person who is deeply
disturbed, but doesn't know why, who obsesses about what is wrong with
them, sometimes comes to the conclusion that molestation is probably
the reason, and the mind, out of desperation to provide a reason for
it's state of distress ( What's wrong with me ! Am I crazy. Why don't
other people like me. Do I act Crazy? ), provides the needed proof in
the form of memories of molestation. This, in a sense, would be a
relief for the person as they now know it's not themselves that's at
fault, it's not themselves that's crazy but that somebody/something
else has caused their problems.
That as well is a "defense mechanism", a term you are fond of using.
This defense mechanism absolves the individual of their problems by
laying them at the feet of someone else.
I'm sorry sir, but you are oversimplifying things to the extreme.
People are very complicated animals and are probably the worst judges
of their own motivations for why they do what they do in life.
G. Williams
Mycos
>>Medical science has demonstrated that the vast majority of all recovered
>memories are real.
What study says "vast" majority ? This one?
Vast is YOUR word that you have inserted and demonstrates that you
will exaggerate to the extreme if not outright lie to make your point.
This is identical to the religious extremists who will lie, tell half
truths,anything to show that the bible is literally true in every
word. Who they are actually trying to convince though, is themselves.
Why do you need to convince yourself so desperately that ALL recovered
memories are true? That is the only real question here.
>
>children and adults who were abused as children. His results showed that
>between 16 and 78% of subjects in these studies experienced partial to total
>amnesia for their abuse for some substantial amount of time.
>
Any person with any sense of scientific credibility would be
embarrassed to cite these widely divergent numbers as any kind of
proof. I read this to say 16% presented with some amnesia thereby
proving that False Memory Syndrome exists. ( I really don't know nor
frankly care, but that is not the point I'm trying to make).
What is striking about you citing this report is that you are so
selective in what you see , read and integrate into your thoughts that
you seem literally blind to the other interpretation of the statement.
That borders on a pathological level of selectivity.
Take this further. 16% is closer to saying none of the patients
exhibited amnesia than 78% is to saying all of the patients had
amnesia. One wonders if the doctor wasn't being paid by a group that
he knew wanted a result you would approve of but slyly let those who
are aware of such dealings in on it by placing the true results closer
to the end I pointed out while still pleasing his benefactors.
And yes, experts can be hired to testify to whatever you want if the
price is right. American criminal trials are ample evidence of that.
Anyhow, I would quit trying to convince us that all recovered memories
are true and talk to a psychiatrist about why it is so important to
convince yourself of it.
Start taking care of yourself,
G.Williams
>
PangK
>Newsgroups: alt.psychology
>> I am NOT a member of FMSF, but I have seen the list of its members, and
many are very prominent researchers at major universities, such as Dr.
Elizabeth Loftus at the University of Washington.
>Another illogical, fallacious Argument from Authority.
Oh really? Elizabeth Loftus has been considered the foremost authority on
the planet on human memory. We could go to Dr. Richard Ofshe at the University
of California, and MANY others. In fact if we do a who's who of the leading
authorities in the world on memory, all support false memories. Even some of
the faculty at Harvard. Several at Johns Hopkins, Albert Einstein School of
Medicine, University of Wisconsin, and so on.
>Her parents, Peter (a mathematician at
the University of Pennsylvania) and Pamela Freyd, joined Dr. Lief in March of
1992 to form the False Memory Syndrome
Foundation. All three are still FMSF board members.
No argument of history from here.
>Neither Peter nor Pam have any significant mental health expertise."(FREYD
LETTER)
This would be important IF they were the ones making the claims. But they
are not.
The claims attacking the PROCESS by whihc these memories are ellegedly
recovered has come from ACADEMIA.
Again you RUN from the issue. That is the ***PROCESS*** whereby the claim of
recovered memories is typically made. That being the use of near lethal doses
of drugs, such as sodium amytal, and hypnosis. I see you will NOT address the
issue, but cling to wild personal attacks on the Freyds and anyone who doesn't
buy your hysterical views.
PangK
>Newsgroups: alt.psychology
>>I am NOT a member of FMSF, but I have seen the list of its
>members, and
>>many are very prominent researchers at major universities, such
>as Dr.
>>Elizabeth Loftus at the University of Washington
>
>THE TRUTH ABOUT ELIZABETH LOFTUS
>
Nope, the SLANDER of Dr. Loftus..
>After Loftus' resignation, the APA
declined to investigate the charges.
Loftus gave as her reason for resigning from the APA as her belief that the APA
had "moved away from scientific and
scholarly thinking."
As one who is perhaps more familiar with the details of this than you, this
is rather OLD and THOROUGHLY discredited slander.
>In "Remembering Dangerously," Loftus (who is not a clinician and who has no
training or clinical experience in child psychology, trauma, processes of
traumatic memory, or child sexual abuse)
Thanks for showing yourself for what you are. ANyone in the field of
Psychology KNOWS the vast contributions in RESEARCH Loftus has performed and
how she has advanced our understanding of human memory.
Those who attack Loftus personally, such as this, are people from the
extreme lunatic fringe of the issue. And this kind of personal assault is made
on anyone who DARES disagree with the hard line. Most recentl;y attacks on Dr.
Steven CEci of Cornell have begun in an IDENTICAL vein!
Attacks on Maggie Bruck (Johns Hopkins) and MANY more. Anyoen who DARES
disagree with this lunatic base can count on personal assaults and threats of
personal harm or ruin. An old tactic to silence opposition. All tyrants have
used it.
Son_of_Chive_Mynde
> Those who attack Loftus personally, such as this, are
people from the
>extreme lunatic fringe of the issue.
I didn't attack anyone. This article was published on the net
to debunk the claims of the FMSF, which you obviously support.
Anyone who claims that those who post facts and figures
are "people from the extreme lunatic fringe" is obviously afraid
of the truth and will work hard to slander anyone who points out
their misdeeds. It's very similar to the denial that people who
accused of sexual abuse go through when their children recover
memories of incest and abuse. The False Memory Syndrome
Foundation is made up of such people. The have
somehow 'forgotten" the damage they have caused to their victims
and they feel they must slander people who remind them of their
crimes as the "lunatic fringe". How totally transparent.
You sir or madam, are a disgrace to the psychology profession,
and you should retire ASAP.
- SOCkM
Son_of_Chive_Mynde
> Nope, the SLANDER of Dr. Loftus..
Scientific truth does not equate to SLANDER, PangK.
The FMSF is characteristically intolerant of those who do not
agree with their beliefs. In the newsletter and in board member
publications, people with recovered memories and their
supporters (particularly therapists) are compared to accusers in
the Salem "witch hunts". FMSF members consider themselves to be
victims of a "modern witch hunt". In fact, a popular Internet
mailing list of supporters of FMS (listed on the FMS home page,
but officially "not affiliated with the FMSF") is
called "WITCHUNT", and is described on the FMS website as "a
discussion list about the recent ‘ritual child abuse’ trials‘".
In Loftus' 1995 introduction to her article Remembering
Dangerously, Loftus says "we live in a strange and precarious
time that resembles at its heart of the hysteria and
superstitious fervor of the witch trials of the 16th and 17th
centuries. Men and women are being accused, tried, and convicted
with no proof or evidence of guilt other than the word of the
accuser. Even when the accusations involve numerous
perpetrators, conflicting grievous wounds over many years, even
decades, the accused's pointing finger of blame is enough to
make believers of judges and juries. (P. 20)" Many judges of
court cases would be quite surprised at hearing that they had
convicted perpetrators solely at "the word of an accuser".
Got questions? Get answers over the phone at Keen.com.
Son_of_Chive_Mynde
>>From: Son_of_Chive_Mynde ooochiveooomyndeoooNOooSPAM@my-
deja.com.invalid
>
>>> I am NOT a member of FMSF, but I have seen the list of
its members, and
>many are very prominent researchers at major universities, such
as Dr.
>
>>Another illogical, fallacious Argument from Authority.
Yes. You are arguing that since Loftus are experts
and "prominent" researchers, they are somehow above reproach.
Nothing could be farther from the truth.
As it turns out, PangK has been lying to everyone on this
newsgroup.
Loftus is not a clinician. Loftus has no training or clinical
experience in child psychology, trauma, processes of traumatic
memory, or child sexual abuse.
Elizabeth Loftus accused Kenneth Pope, a respected memory and
trauma researcher, in the APA journal Clinical Psychology of
being "wildly reckless" in an area of ethics. Her claim was
later investigated by the journal and found to be false.
The Fall 1997 issue of the journal published a correction and
apology for the "false statement disparaging Dr. Pope’s ethics".
(POPE LETTER ETC) It is disheartening to observe the FMSF, which
in its newsletters and publications continually emphasizes the
importance of scientific discourse, actively promoting such
accusations.
In the January/February 1995 issue of Psychology Today, Loftus
reviewed the legal case of Lynn Crook, who successfully sued her
parents for abuse. Crook had presented testimony in her case
from two sisters who also remembered incest by their father. In
the article, Loftus presented the case with (according to Crook)
nine crucial misstatements.
As a result of the errors in these articles, Jennifer Hoult and
Lynn Crook, filed separate complaints with the APA against
Elizabeth Loftus. Crook and Hoult filed their complaints on
December 18, 1995. According to the rules and procedures of the
APA ethics office, the chairman of the APA Ethics Committee (an
active expert witness for accused perpetrators of abuse, and
against therapists accused of implanting false memories in their
clients) was responsible for the initial screening of all such
complaints. The chairman and Loftus were, in fact, working
together on a different case when the complaints were filed.
They later claimed they had been unaware of this coincidence.
The chair took no action before Loftus resigned from the APA
less than a month later. After Loftus' resignation, the APA
declined to investigate the charges.
Loftus gave as her reason for resigning from the APA as her
belief that the APA had "moved away from scientific and
scholarly thinking." The APA publishes many of the most
prominent scientific psychological journals.
The FMSF is characteristically intolerant of those who do not
agree with their beliefs. In the newsletter and in board member
publications, people with recovered memories and their
supporters (particularly therapists) are compared to accusers in
the Salem "witch hunts". FMSF members consider themselves to be
victims of a "modern witch hunt". In fact, a popular Internet
mailing list of supporters of FMS (listed on the FMS home page,
but officially "not affiliated with the FMSF") is
called "WITCHUNT", and is described on the FMS website as "a
discussion list about the recent ‘ritual child abuse’ trials‘".
In Loftus' 1995 introduction to her article Remembering
Dangerously, Loftus says "we live in a strange and precarious
time that resembles at its heart of the hysteria and
superstitious fervor of the witch trials of the 16th and 17th
centuries. Men and women are being accused, tried, and convicted
with no proof or evidence of guilt other than the word of the
accuser. Even when the accusations involve numerous
perpetrators, conflicting grievous wounds over many years, even
decades, the accused's pointing finger of blame is enough to
make believers of judges and juries. (P. 20)" Many judges of
court cases would be quite surprised at hearing that they had
convicted perpetrators solely at "the word of an accuser".
In negative language that has become emblematic of the FMSF,
Loftus’ book , " the myth of repressed memory: false memories
and allegations of sexual abuse" repeatedly uses the metaphor
of "an earlier time when God-fearing citizens, gripped by fear,
superstition, and religious fervor, cried witch, and a forest of
stakes was pounded into the very heart of the community"(p.
228). Quotes from Arthur Miller's book the Crucible are
prominently featured. However, the "hysteria"
implied by Loftus is not that of female victims of abuse who
have developed dissociative or other coping skills as a result
of the abuse, but that of female therapists who implant false
memories and the female patients who believe them.
> Oh really? Elizabeth Loftus has been considered the foremost
authority on
>the planet on human memory.
The evidence contradicts your pet beliefs.
FMSF board member Elizabeth Loftus resigned from the APA to
avoid ethics violations due to the cases cited above.
Elizabeth Loftus is none other than a scientific obstructionist,
and she represents one of the greatest threats to science.
- SOCkM
Son_of_Chive_Mynde
>I feel deep pity for you and only wish that you would wake up
before
>you destroy some innocent parents lives not to mention the
daughter
>who now actually does suffer the damage of an actual rape
because for
>all intents and purposes, if she wholeheartedly believes it,
she was.
Medical science has demonstrated that no False Memory Syndrome
exists.
Cite?
Despite its scientific sounding title, there is actually no such
thing as a clinically acknowledged category for "false memory
syndrome." Judith Herman, an associate clinical professor of
Psychiatry at Harvard Medical School, and author of the book,
Trauma and Recovery claims that, "The very name FMSF is
prejudicial and misleading." "There is no such syndrome, and we
have no evidence reported memories are false. We only know they
are disputed," said Dr. Herman.(Reuters)
FMS is not listed in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual- IV
(1994).
Medical science has demonstrated that the vast majority of all
recovered memories are real.
Cite?
Researchers at University College London claim their study of
data from 236 adults with recovered memories shows many are of
true past events.(Reuters)
The British Psychological Society released a statement that
says: ``There is now consistent evidence that 'False Memory
Syndrome' cannot explain all, or even most, examples of
recovered memories of trauma.'' Dr Bernice Andrews, who
conducted the study said, "To date there is no convincing
evidence for a specific False Memory Syndrome." (Reuters)
The majority of sexually abused children are girls. The National
Committee for the Prevention of Child Abuse has estimated that
one in three girls is sexually abused before age 18 (one in four
before 14), and one in six boys before age 16. In 85% of cases,
the perpetrator is known to the victim, and 1 in 25 girls is
sexually abused by her father. (NCPCA)
There is considerable evidence supporting the recovery of
traumatic memories. Contrary to the statements of the FMSF,
there is empirical evidence regarding corroboration of formerly
repressed memories, including that from other family members,
medical or other physical evidence, and confessions of
perpetrators. Ross Cheit, for example, has compiled a list of 50
cases of corroborated recovered memory. (See Ross Cheit.) In
fact, research evidence shows that it is not unusual for victims
of childhood sexual abuse to forget the abuse either entirely or
for a period of time after the abuse.
The FMSF also frequently attacks "repression", stating that
- SOCkM
PangK
>Newsgroups: alt.psychology
>> Those who attack Loftus personally, such as this, are people from the
extreme lunatic fringe of the issue.
>I didn't attack anyone. This article was published on the net to debunk the
claims of the FMSF, which you obviously support.
The aryicle beyond being a personal SLUR against Loftus was pure BULLSHIT!
And repeating a slur IS a personal attack.
>Anyone who claims that those who post facts and figures are "people from the
extreme lunatic fringe" is obviously afraid
of the truth and will work hard to slander anyone who points out their
misdeeds.
That might hold water *IF* the "facts and figures" were actually true! Since
they do NOT, then it is fair to conclude that you are part of the lunatic
fringe.
>You sir or madam, are a disgrace to the psychology profession, and you should
retire ASAP.
I just have a standard of demanding science and not accepting HYSTERIA.
I made it very clear that I accept recovered memories as REAL. I just
refuse to endorse scurrlious factless allegations, personal attacks, and
anti-science nonsense. I also refuse to accept a process that only an IDIOT
would not know would contaminate memory. That being, for the 23,885th time,
near lethal doses of drugs and hypnosis!
I just don't buy your EXTREMISM!
PangK
>Newsgroups: alt.psychology
>> Nope, the SLANDER of Dr. Loftus..
>Scientific truth does not equate to SLANDER, PangK.
I read that SLUR against Dr. Loftus 4 years ago, and it was old news then. I
saw ABSOLUTELY NO "science" in the article, what I did see is a despicable
personal attack on the world's MOST respected researcher on human memory. I saw
you were wise enough to edit out the really nasty SEXUAL allegations from that
article. A bit too embarassed to post that along with the rest of that BS?
>The FMSF is characteristically intolerant of those who do not agree with their
beliefs.
Have you seen ME or ANYONE attack the sources you quoted? SUggest that THEY
were sexual deviants? Or dishonorable? No, the **ONLY** person doing that is
YOU, sir!
>In the newsletter and in board member
publications, people with recovered memories and their supporters (particularly
therapists) are compared to accusers in
the Salem "witch hunts".
Not a bad analogy given the RECENT history in Washington State.
>In Loftus' 1995 introduction to her article Remembering Dangerously, Loftus
says "we live in a strange and precarious
time that resembles at its heart of the hysteria and superstitious fervor of
the witch trials of the 16th and 17th
centuries.
I have said that most "recovered memory" cases are REAL. Can you admit that
ANY are not?? I didn't think so!
>Many judges of court cases would be quite surprised at hearing that they had
convicted perpetrators solely at "the word of an accuser".
Ever hear of juries?
PangK
>Newsgroups: alt.psychology
>Yes. You are arguing that since Loftus are experts and "prominent"
researchers, they are somehow above reproach.
Nothing could be farther from the truth
Nobody has successfully disputed her SCIENCE thus far. So far all I have
seen is PERSONAL allegations, including her SEX LIFE!
>As it turns out, PangK has been lying to everyone on this newsgroup.
Pretty strong accusation there dude.
>Loftus is not a clinician. Loftus has no training or clinical experience in
child psychology, trauma, processes of traumatic memory, or child sexual abuse.
She is just a PROFESSOR at a MAJOR public university TEACHING it and having
done the LEADING research in the world on memory!
>Elizabeth Loftus accused Kenneth Pope, a respected memory and trauma
researcher, in the APA journal Clinical Psychology of being "wildly reckless"
in an area of ethics. Her claim was later investigated by the journal and found
to be false.
Found to be "without merit." Not quite false Her OPINION. Have YOU ever had
an opinion others disagreed with?
>As a result of the errors in these articles, Jennifer Hoult and Lynn Crook,
filed separate complaints with the APA against
Elizabeth Loftus.
>The chair took no action before Loftus resigned from the APA less than a month
later. After Loftus' resignation, the APA
declined to investigate the charges.
Not quite 100% accurate. The APA ... DID review the complaints after a
firestorm from APSAC members including the article being quoted, and found NO
misconduct on Loftus' part. Loftus also became President of the APS.
>Loftus gave as her reason for resigning from the APA as her belief that the
APA had "moved away from scientific and
scholarly thinking." The APA publishes many of the most prominent scientific
psychological journals.
Again DISHONEST! Loftus and MANY members of the APA resigned in protest to
several events that displayed that politics was running roughshod over science
in the APA. Many thousands of APA members formed the APS a more demanding
science based organization than APA has become.
>> Oh really? Elizabeth Loftus has been considered the foremost authority on
the planet on human memory.
>The evidence contradicts your pet beliefs.
I am sorry, I have YET to see anything that contradicts that.
>FMSF board member Elizabeth Loftus resigned from the APA to
>avoid ethics violations due to the cases cited above.
>
FLATLY AND DELIBERATELY UNTRUE!
>Elizabeth Loftus is none other than a scientific obstructionist,
>and she represents one of the greatest threats to science.
>
PERSONAL attack without factual foundation.
Son_of_Chive_Mynde
> The aryicle beyond being a personal SLUR against Loftus was
> pure BULLSHIT!
Instead of making irrational blanket statements about things you
know nothing about, how about pointint out what part of the
article you disagree with in reference to Loftus?
FACT: Loftus is not a clinician. Loftus has no training or
clinical experience in child psychology, trauma, processes of
traumatic memory, or child sexual abuse.
FACT: Elizabeth Loftus accused Kenneth Pope, a respected memory
and trauma researcher, in the APA journal Clinical Psychology of
being "wildly reckless" in an area of ethics. Her claim was
later investigated by the journal and found to be false.
FACT: The Fall 1997 issue of the journal published a correction
and apology for the "false statement disparaging Dr. Pope’s
ethics". (POPE LETTER ETC) It is disheartening to observe the
FMSF, which in its newsletters and publications continually
emphasizes the importance of scientific discourse, actively
promoting such accusations.
FACT: In the January/February 1995 issue of Psychology Today,
Loftus reviewed the legal case of Lynn Crook, who successfully
sued her parents for abuse. Crook had presented testimony in her
case from two sisters who also remembered incest by their
father. In the article, Loftus presented the case with
(according to Crook) nine crucial misstatements.
FACT: As a result of the errors in these articles, Jennifer
Hoult and Lynn Crook, filed separate complaints with the APA
against Elizabeth Loftus. Crook and Hoult filed their complaints
on December 18, 1995. According to the rules and procedures of
the APA ethics office, the chairman of the APA Ethics Committee
(an active expert witness for accused perpetrators of abuse, and
against therapists accused of implanting false memories in their
clients) was responsible for the initial screening of all such
complaints. The chairman and Loftus were, in fact, working
together on a different case when the complaints were filed.
They later claimed they had been unaware of this coincidence.
The chair took no action before Loftus resigned from the APA
less than a month later. After Loftus' resignation, the APA
declined to investigate the charges.
FACT: Loftus gave as her reason for resigning from the APA as
her belief that the APA had "moved away from scientific and
scholarly thinking." The APA publishes many of the most
prominent scientific psychological journals.
Nothing I have posted is "bullshit", and nothing I have posted
is a "slur". You are mistaken, uninformed, and/or lying.
Which is it?
Otherwise, back up your unsubstantiated claims with evidence.
>>Anyone who claims that those who post facts and figures
>>are "people from the extreme lunatic fringe" is obviously
>>afraid of the truth and will work hard to slander anyone who
>>points out their misdeeds.
>
> That might hold water *IF* the "facts and figures" were
actually true!
The facts and figures that are posted are *true*. Please back
up your claims to the conrary or issue a retraction.
You are obviously lying, PangK? Why is that?
> Since
>they do NOT,
You have provided no evidence that the FACTS and FIGURES that I
have posted are false. Please backup your unsubstantiated
claims with evidence. Otherwise, please issue a retraction.
>then it is fair to conclude that you are part of the lunatic
>fringe.
It is fair to conclude that you are doing the same thing the
pseudo-scientific False Memory Syndrome Foundation does to
anyone who points out their disinformation and propaganda.
FACT: The FMSF is characteristically intolerant of those who do
not agree with their beliefs. In the newsletter and in board
member publications, people with recovered memories and their
supporters (particularly therapists) are compared to accusers in
the Salem "witch hunts". FMSF members consider themselves to be
victims of a "modern witch hunt". In fact, a popular Internet
mailing list of supporters of FMS (listed on the FMS home page,
but officially "not affiliated with the FMSF") is
called "WITCHUNT", and is described on the FMS website as "a
discussion list about the recent ‘ritual child abuse’ trials‘".
In Loftus' 1995 introduction to her article Remembering
Dangerously, Loftus says "we live in a strange and precarious
time that resembles at its heart of the hysteria and
superstitious fervor of the witch trials of the 16th and 17th
centuries. Men and women are being accused, tried, and convicted
with no proof or evidence of guilt other than the word of the
accuser. Even when the accusations involve numerous
perpetrators, conflicting grievous wounds over many years, even
decades, the accused's pointing finger of blame is enough to
make believers of judges and juries. (P. 20)" Many judges of
court cases would be quite surprised at hearing that they had
convicted perpetrators solely at "the word of an accuser".
> I just have a standard of demanding science and not
>accepting HYSTERIA.
If you equate your "standard" of demanding science with the
demanding of PSEUDO-SCIENCE then you might have a point. I have
a feeling you don't understand the difference between science
and pseudo-science.
> I just don't buy your EXTREMISM!
Nice projection of your own actions.
It is you who puts forward the EXTREME views of the pseudo-
scientific False Memory Syndrome Foundation.
FACT: Medical science has demonstrated that no False Memory
Syndrome exists.
FACT: Despite its scientific sounding title, there is actually
no such thing as a clinically acknowledged category for "false
memory syndrome." Judith Herman, an associate clinical professor
of Psychiatry at Harvard Medical School, and author of the book,
Trauma and Recovery claims that, "The very name FMSF is
prejudicial and misleading." "There is no such syndrome, and we
have no evidence reported memories are false. We only know they
are disputed," said Dr. Herman.(Reuters)
FACT: FMS is not listed in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual-
IV (1994).
FACT: Medical science has demonstrated that the vast majority of
all recovered memories are real.
FACT: Researchers at University College London claim their study
of data from 236 adults with recovered memories shows many are
of true past events.(Reuters)
FACT: The British Psychological Society released a statement
that says: ``There is now consistent evidence that 'False Memory
Syndrome' cannot explain all, or even most, examples of
recovered memories of trauma.'' Dr Bernice Andrews, who
conducted the study said, "To date there is no convincing
evidence for a specific False Memory Syndrome." (Reuters)
FACT: The majority of sexually abused children are girls. The
National Committee for the Prevention of Child Abuse has
estimated that one in three girls is sexually abused before age
18 (one in four before 14), and one in six boys before age 16.
In 85% of cases, the perpetrator is known to the victim, and 1
in 25 girls is sexually abused by her father. (NCPCA)
FACT: There is considerable evidence supporting the recovery of
traumatic memories. Contrary to the statements of the FMSF,
there is empirical evidence regarding corroboration of formerly
repressed memories, including that from other family members,
medical or other physical evidence, and confessions of
perpetrators. Ross Cheit, for example, has compiled a list of 50
cases of corroborated recovered memory. (See Ross Cheit.) In
fact, research evidence shows that it is not unusual for victims
of childhood sexual abuse to forget the abuse either entirely or
for a period of time after the abuse.
FACT: The FMSF also frequently attacks "repression", stating
FACT: Charles L. Whitfield, M.D. performed a review of 36
studies on over 6,000 children and adults who were abused as
children. His results showed that between 16 and 78% of subjects
in these studies experienced partial to total amnesia for their
abuse for some substantial amount of time. Most of the subjects
had been sexually abused as children. Eight of these studies
involved only subjects with fully corroborated abuse histories,
four had to a corroboration rate of 60 to 80 percent, and four
had corroboration among half of the subjects. All groups were
similar in occurrence of traumatic amnesia.
Please address these FACTS, PangK.
Son_of_Chive_Mynde
>>Scientific truth does not equate to SLANDER, PangK.
>
> I read that SLUR against Dr. Loftus 4 years ago, and it was
old news then. I
>saw ABSOLUTELY NO "science" in the article, what I did see is a
despicable
>personal attack on the world's MOST respected researcher on
human memory.
It doesn't matter if she was president of the AMA, the APA, and
the United States of America. Your illogical and fallacious
arguments from authority do not protect the validity of her
arguments.
Instead of making irrational blanket statements about things you
know nothing about, how about pointing out what part of the
FACT: The FMSF is characteristically intolerant of those who do
not agree with their beliefs. In the newsletter and in board
member publications, people with recovered memories and their
supporters (particularly therapists) are compared to accusers in
the Salem "witch hunts". FMSF members consider themselves to be
victims of a "modern witch hunt". In fact, a popular Internet
mailing list of supporters of FMS (listed on the FMS home page,
but officially "not affiliated with the FMSF") is
called "WITCHUNT", and is described on the FMS website as "a
discussion list about the recent ‘ritual child abuse’ trials‘".
In Loftus' 1995 introduction to her article Remembering
Dangerously, Loftus says "we live in a strange and precarious
time that resembles at its heart of the hysteria and
superstitious fervor of the witch trials of the 16th and 17th
centuries. Men and women are being accused, tried, and convicted
with no proof or evidence of guilt other than the word of the
accuser. Even when the accusations involve numerous
perpetrators, conflicting grievous wounds over many years, even
decades, the accused's pointing finger of blame is enough to
make believers of judges and juries. (P. 20)" Many judges of
court cases would be quite surprised at hearing that they had
convicted perpetrators solely at "the word of an accuser".
FACT: Medical science has demonstrated that no False Memory
PangK
>Newsgroups: alt.psychology
>Medical science has demonstrated that no False Memory Syndrome exists.
Only to the EXTREMISTS.
>Medical science has demonstrated that the vast majority of all recovered
memories are real.
Most is NOT "all!"
>The majority of sexually abused children are girls. The National Committee for
the Prevention of Child Abuse has estimated that one in three girls is sexually
abused before age 18 (one in four before 14), and one in six boys before age
16.
You seem to miss the KEY word...
"ESTIMATES!" Meaning a GUESS. Hard figures available from the National Center
on Child Abuse and Neglect and other agenceis do NOT support this claim.
>The FMSF also frequently attacks "repression", stating that either it does not
exist, or that it does not result in the
forgetting and later remembering of experiences of extreme trauma.
As I said before, I have never been a member of the FMSF. Your claim is
false. I have read their material and they do NOT deny that memories are
recovered. They dispute the numbers. As do I. And they KEY terms are "extreme
trauma" which is RARELY associated with sexual abuse of children.
>The study provides evidence that some adults who claimed to have recovered
memories of sexual abuse recall actual events that occurred in childhood.
And NOBODY rational disputes that!
>Charles L. Whitfield, M.D. performed a review of 36 studies on over 6,000
children and adults who were abused as children. His results showed that
between 16 and 78% of subjects in these studies experienced partial to total
amnesia for their abuse for some substantial amount of time.
Between 16% and 78% huh? Can't pin it down better than that eh? And THAT
doesn't make you question it? Which IS it? 16% or 78%? I bet YOU go for the
78%... Right?
Son_of_Chive_Mynde
>>Medical science has demonstrated that no False Memory Syndrome
exists.
>>Medical science has demonstrated that the vast majority of all
recovered
>memories are real.
>>The majority of sexually abused children are girls. The
National Committee for
>the Prevention of Child Abuse has estimated that one in three
girls is sexually
>abused before age 18 (one in four before 14), and one in six
boys before age
>16.
Ken Pangborn is an ambulance chaser.
Please disregard his comments on this topic.
He gets paid to defend criminals.
As such, he has nothing to offer on this topic since he is
hopelessly biased in favor of protecting the rights of sexual
predators.
Son_of_Chive_Mynde
Ithe June 7, 1995 newsletter, Accuracy About Abuse, the
following notice appeared:
The American False Memory Syndrome Foundation is widely quoted
as having 16,000 families as members but recently Peter Freyd
admitted they have only about 2500 dues paying members.
The British False Memory Society which maintains close links
with the American FMSF, now admits to 230 paid members as of
December 1994, not the 650 more usually reported.
What else has the FMSF falsified? Let's find out:
According to NCPCA, the majority of sexually abused children are
girls. The National Committee for the Prevention of Child Abuse
has estimated that one in three girls is sexually abused before
age 18 (one in four before 14), and one in six boys before age
16. In 85% of cases, the perpetrator is known to the victim, and
1 in 25 girls is sexually abused by her father.
Armed with these statistics, the FMSF believes that women who
report recovered memories of sexual abuse are led by therapists
to accuse their own families of abuse from their own sincere
belief of incidents which did not occur.
However, the FMSF provides no research or statistics to support
this claim. Much FMSF evidence appears to be anecdotal, unlike
the NCPCA statistics which document sexual abuse among children.
As it turns out members of the FMSF are largely individuals who
seek to defend themselves from accusations of sexual abuse of
children.
The FMSF does not attempt to determine whether these members are
falsely accused or not. However, everyone who contacts their
organization is included in their statistics of "falsely
accused".
Within the FMSF, there is little discrimination or skepticism,
although members often criticize supporters of survivors of
sexual abuse for believing the survivors.
The language used by the FMSF (particularly in its newsletter)
regarding psychiatry, therapists, survivors, and women in
general is frequently negative. For example, the previous quote
attempting to define false memory syndrome implies that those
who recall past abuse are suffering from a personality disorder,
rather than retrieving recollections of actual events.
Meanwhile, Researchers at University College London claim their
study of data from 236 adults with recovered memories shows many
are of true past events.
Ralph Underwager (who coined the term "false memory syndrome")
and Hollida Wakefield, a married couple on the original FMSF
Board of Advisors, have gone so far as to claim that "the women
who make false allegations based on recovered memories [are]
very angry, hostile, and sometimes paranoid... All will have
demonstrated some type of psychopathology in earlier parts of
their lives." (1984) Again, no evidence to support this is
given. Neither do they state how such accusations have been
determined to be false. Nor do Wakefield and Underwager consider
why such women might justifiably be angry or appear "paranoid".
Ralph Underwager and Hollida Wakefield brought an unsuccessful
lawsuit against psychologist Anna Salter in 1994 for defamation
stemming from a study which mentioned their research.
The court found that Underwager and Wakefield’s books, written
claiming that most accusations of childhood sexual abuse result
from memories implanted and created by therapists, "have not
been well received in the medical and scientific press. A review
of the first in the Journal of the American Medical Association
concludes that the authors took a one-sided approach: "... When
a given reference fails to support the viewpoint, they simply
mis-state the conclusion. When they cannot use a quotation out
of context from an article, they make unsupported statements,
some of which are palpably untrue and others simply
unprovable.""
The court further described Underwager's testimony
that "children are incapable of correctly remembering or
accurately describing sexual contacts," and indeed stated that
"Underwager is a hired gun who makes a living deceiving judges
about the state of medical knowledge and thus assisting child
molesters to evade punishment."
Underwager himself resigned from the FMSF in 1994 after being
quoted in a Dutch journal as saying that "Paedophiles can boldly
and courageously affirm what they choose... With boldness they
can say "I believe this is in fact part of gods will"...
Paedophiles need to become more positive and make the claim that
paedophilia is an acceptable expression of gods will for love
and unity among human beings."" In fact, both Underwager and
Wakefield have described pedophilia as a "positive lifestyle
choice" (Bull &
Marten, 1994; Ryan 1993b).
One would think that those allied with a group of falsely
accused perpetrators would distance themselves from pedophilia.
However, several members other than Ralph Underwager and Hollida
Wakefield have argued that childhood sexual experiences with
adults may be harmless. However, asociations between childhood
sexual abuse and mental disorders in adulthood have been
repeatedly proven (Briere & Elliott, 1993; Elliott & Briere,
1992; Herman, Russell, & Trocki, 1986/1994).
Interestingly, the British Psychological Society released a
statement that says: ``There is now consistent evidence
that 'False Memory Syndrome' cannot explain all, or even most,
examples of recovered memories of trauma.'' Dr Bernice Andrews,
who conducted the study said, "To date there is no convincing
evidence for a specific False Memory Syndrome."
And at present, FMS is not listed in the Diagnostic and
Statistical Manual- IV (1994).
It appears then, that the False Memory Syndrome Foundation
*falsified* the diagnosis of False Memory Syndrome and the very
foundation setup to promote such a diagnosis in order to help
child molesters to evade punishment for their crimes.
PangK
>Newsgroups: alt.psychology
>Please address these FACTS, PangK.
YOU have failed to address even ONE of the FACTS that I laid before you. Yet
you tantrum like a 2 year old.
>Nothing I have posted is "bullshit", and nothing I have posted is a "slur".
You are mistaken, uninformed, and/or lying.
Okay LET'S PLAY... "WHo wants to be a USENET lunatic?"
>FACT: Loftus is not a clinician. Loftus has no training or clinical experience
in child psychology, trauma, processes of
traumatic memory, or child sexual abuse.
NOT A FACT: Dr. Loftus is a clinical psychologist by DEGREE. Nice to add CHILD
PSYCHOLOGIST. She is also a Research Psychologist. She has been regarded for
the past 20 years in the profession of psychology as the leading authority in
the world on human memor. TRAUMATIC or otherwise! One can ask for a copy of her
CV or check the MANY psychological journals to verify this. She is a PROFESSOR
of clinical psychology at the University of Washington.
>FACT: Elizabeth Loftus accused Kenneth Pope, a respected memory and trauma
researcher, in the APA journal Clinical Psychology of being "wildly reckless"
in an area of ethics. Her claim was later investigated by the journal and
found to be false.
NOT A FACT: Her statements were found to be "without substantiation" but they
were her OPINION.
>FACT: As a result of the errors in these articles, Jennifer Hoult and Lynn
Crook, filed separate complaints with the APA
against Elizabeth Loftus.
Yes they did.
>FACT: Loftus gave as her reason for resigning from the APA as her belief that
the APA had "moved away from scientific and scholarly thinking." The APA
publishes many of the most prominent scientific psychological journals.
IN your EDUCATED opinion? Much of the material in APA Journals have come
under attack for being more POLITICAL than scientifically accurate. Which is
why THOUSANDS of psychologists have resigned from the APA to form the APS.
Also let's note, that when research, good solid VALID research has contradicted
the POLITICAL views with APA, the research was squashed. THAT, sir, is why
Loftus and THOUSANDS of others left the APA.
>Nothing I have posted is "bullshit", and nothing I have posted is a "slur".
You are mistaken, uninformed, and/or lying.
Which is it?
Nothing you ahve posted is original thinkling on your part buy BS that has
been around for almost 5 years. It is in some cases outright falsehoods, in
others
merely incomplete and miselading information. She as the case with Loftus'
ethical issues. You OMIT that the APA later DID examine the issue and found in
Loftus' favor. But YOU don't say THAT, do you? You use DATED and incomplete
info.
THAT, sir makes it a SLUR!
>> That might hold water *IF* the "facts and figures" were actually true!
>The facts and figures that are posted are *true*. Please back up your claims
to the conrary or issue a retraction.
Oh I believe I did. YOU claimed that 1 in 4 girls are molested by their
biological fathers before age 14. You cited an ADVOCACY group as your source.
I refered to the OFFICIAL agency, the National Center on Child Abuse and
Neglect, if you want the actual report, we can pick ANY year from 1990 to 1998
(most recent year available) and show that the rate is VASTLY lower! Namely
that
girls to age 14 have a rate of sexual abuse LESS than 1 in 1000. So much for
your polemics.
>You are obviously lying, PangK? Why is that?
I know why you feel that way, you are so married to extreme idology. Enough
so I am the last one willing to even speak to you, the rest having conlcuded
you are hopelessly psychotic and given up.
>You have provided no evidence that the FACTS and FIGURES that I have posted
are false. Please backup your unsubstantiated claims with evidence.
Otherwise, please issue a retraction.
Oh but I HAVE! You choose to ignore them. The reference above from the OFFICIAL
reports of the National Center on Child Abuse and Neglect pretty well trashed
your exaggerated figures. Your claims of Dr. Loftus' credentials are easily
disproven by the FACT that she is a Professor of Clinical Psychology at the
University of Washington. IF as YOU and your hysterical pals claim she has NO
such degree, why haven't you reported this to the University of Washington? I
am POSITIVE that IF you claims were true, they would have this "FRAUD" off
their faculty immediately! IF there were a SHRED of truth to your
claims........
BTW, she has a web site and her CV is ON LINE to answer your unmittigated
BULLSHIT!
TRY THIS ON NIT WIT!
http://faculty.washington.edu/eloftus
Can we expect to see YOUR retraction?
<lots of CRAP snipped.>
>FACT: Medical science has demonstrated that no False Memory
Syndrome exists.
NOT TRUE. It may be controversial but no such PROOF has been conclusive.
>> I just have a standard of demanding science and not accepting HYSTERIA.
>If you equate your "standard" of demanding science with the demanding of
PSEUDO-SCIENCE then you might have a point. I have a feeling you don't
understand the difference between science and pseudo-science.
Oh I understand pseudo-science pretty well. I have read enough of it from
YOUR side of the debate. Half ass political ranting that when taking to the
LABORATORY does NOT stand up well. Claims of data that CANNOT be replicated.
AND, sir, the test of SCIENCE is that scientific claims MUST be able to be
verified by INDEPENDENT REPLICATION! And your bullshit does NOT stand that
test. NOT EVEN CLOSE!
Now we can examine the BIBLE of your viewpoint, "The COURAGE to Heal" by Bass
and Davis. Care to explore the qualification of those two "EXPERTS?"
>FACT: Despite its scientific sounding title, there is actually no such thing
as a clinically acknowledged category for "false
memory syndrome." Judith Herman, an associate clinical professor of Psychiatry
at Harvard Medical School,
Gee and Loftus is a FULL Professor of Psychology and an adjunct professor of
LAW... Hmmmmm. Qualifications battle here?
>"The very name FMSF is prejudicial and misleading." "There is no such
syndrome, and we have no evidence reported memories are false. We only know
they
are disputed," said Dr. Herman.(Reuters)
Disputed? Shall we start with the McMartin case? Or where would you like to
go with this? I see you STILL ... RUN from the REAL issue... PROCESS!!
Why is that? WHY do you keep RUNNING AWAY from that issue now being taunted on
it a dozen times?
WHY would that be?
TAUNTING AGAIN:
--------------------------------------------------------
I have NO dispute that memories are prepressed. ONLY with the PROCESS used to
recover them. In specific the use of near lethal amounts of drugs such as
sodium amytal and hypnosis as the vehicle by which ALMOST ALL of these
recovered memories are recovered by "THERAPISTS" who are typically MSW's
(social workers) and NOT psychologists OR psychiatrists.
---------------------------------------------------
Thus far not WORD ONE in answer. Instead a barrage of bullshit personal
attacks on FMSF and Elizabeth Loftus.
What of Dr. Steven Ceci of Cornell, Maggie Bruck of Johns Hopkins? Also
published by the APA, by the way. What of Dr. Allison Clark-Stewart? Who are
NOT FMSF members.
>FACT: FMS is not listed in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual- IV (1994).
True, lots of things aren't.
>FACT: Medical science has demonstrated that the vast majority of
all recovered memories are real.
True ONLY in a limited sense. And true only BEFORE the great explosion of
"THERAPY" to help people remember sexual abuse in the 1990's.
>FACT: Researchers at University College London claim their study
>of data from 236 adults with recovered memories shows many are
>of true past events.(Reuters)
FACT the material did NOT replicate even at the same school. You don't report
that.
>FACT: The British Psychological Society released a statement that says:
``There is now consistent evidence that 'False Memory Syndrome' cannot explain
all, or even most, examples of recovered memories of trauma.''
Gee, sound to ME like they admit IT EXISTS! Did I forget to point that out
before? SHAME ON ME!
But the point is that I wholeheartedly AGREE... MOST recovered memories ARE
REAL! ABSOLUTELY! The ONLY ones I question is cases where memory was
recovered after 1,000 mg injections of sodium amytal and hypnosis as the
vehicles to recover the memories. You hae a singular LACK of a cognitive
abiliuty to understand that the PROCESS is what I disagree with. The SAME loopy
process that has tens of thousands of former NAPOLEONS running around, and
people who think they have been molested by Interstellar nookeyhunters in
flying saucers.
>FACT: The majority of sexually abused children are girls. The National
Committee for the Prevention of Child Abuse has
estimated that one in three girls
Which part of the word "ESTIMATED" are you too illiterate to understand????
>FACT: There is considerable evidence supporting the recovery of traumatic
memories.
Christ man, there HAS been for over 100 YEARS. No dispute about that. Just
HOW you recover memories.
<more crap snipped>
>Please address these FACTS, PangK.
I believe I HAVE!
I will NOT continue to beat the bones of the now LONG dead horse with you since
you RUN from the only REAL issue. PROCESS!
PangK
>Newsgroups: alt.psychology
>> I read that SLUR against Dr. Loftus 4 years ago, and it was old news then.
I
saw ABSOLUTELY NO "science" in the article, what I did see is a despicable
personal attack on the world's MOST respected researcher on human memory.
>It doesn't matter if she was president of the AMA, the APA, and the United
States of America. Your illogical and fallacious
arguments from authority do not protect the validity of her arguments.
The FACT, sir, is that ALL of Loftus' research HAS been replicated and
supported by numerous other researchers.
YOURS has not.
>
>FACT: Loftus is not a clinician. Loftus has no training or
>clinical experience in child psychology, trauma, processes of
>traumatic memory, or child sexual abuse.
NOT a FACT! An unsusbtantited claim DISPROVEN at:
http://faculty.washington.edu/eloftus
Again we have 10gb of your QUOTING the same CRAP repeatedly. Do you think if
your post it 23,000 times it will make ANY of it the truth?
PangK
>Newsgroups: alt.psychology
>On Mon, 19 Jun 2000 11:55:15 -0700, Son_of_Chive_Mynde
><ooochiveooomyndeoooNOooSPA
>>The British Psychological Society released a statement that
>>says: ``There is now consistent evidence that 'False Memory
>>Syndrome' cannot explain all, or even most, examples of
>>recovered memories of trauma.''
>Don't you understand what your own evidence says?
No he doesn't! Isn't it painfully obvious how far gone this guy is by now?
>The Society is saying that not all of the recovered memories are false. It
does not say that all recovered memories are true.
It does says that "False memory Syndrome " cannot explain MOST, NOT
ALL of the recovered memories, meaning IT CAN explain some.
You know the first NINE times this guy posted that it slipped past me. I
caught it today. I had been so caught up in his other gambits I missed that. He
also seems NOt to understand it. His BEST evidence refutes his absolutism.
Have you noticed how he RUNS from the single objection I have made to his
ideology? That of process?
I could go ON about how unqualified most of the "therapists," who have had
a multi-BILLION DOLLAR industry over this recovered memory crap, really are.
Most are MSW social workers,
and many of the rest are "counsellors" and the like with NO training in
psychology or medicine at all. Almost NONE are psychologists or psychiatrists.
The real issue is one of the process of dosing people with HUGE amounts of
drugs like Amytal (a class A drug) and hypnosis that contaminates reliability
of recovered memories.
The CENTRAL thing that SHOULD tip off any REASONABLY intelligent person that
a problem looms, is that the people doing this "THERAPY" to help people recover
memories of sexual abuse, are also helping others recall past lives and alien
abductions. The SAME PROCESS! The SAME THERAPISTS!
Now, if you want to believe that there are 23,000 clones of Napoleon all
running around at the same time in America, and that a Alien race from a
distant galaxy capable of interstellar flight, would be comeing to Earth to GET
LAID, then perpahs all this would make sense to you.
To ME, I makes me be a bit more cautious. I am sorry, I can't think of a flying
saucer crowded with HORNEY little green men in it to be more than I can handle
without my side splitting. Do I disbelieve it?
Uh YEAH, you might say so. I think any alien race sophisticated enough to
fly millions of light years would NOT in all probability be a bunch of
pubescent teens looking for a little nookey! Pardon me while I laugh my butt
off.