F M S F O U N D A T I O N N E W S L E T T E R (e-mail edition) Vol 3 No. 10, November 1, 1
F M S F O U N D A T I O N N E W S L E T T E R (e-mail edition)
Vol 3 No. 10, November 1, 1994
3401 Market Street suite 130, Philadelphia, PA 19104, (215-387-1865)
The FMSF Newsletter is published 10 times a year by the False
Memory Syndrome Foundation. A hard-copy subscription is in-
cluded in membership fees. Others may subscribe by sending a
check or money order, payable to FMS Foundation, to the ad-
dress above. 1994 subscription rates: USA: 1 year $30, Stu-
dent $10; Canada: $35 (in U.S. dollars); Foreign: $40; Foreign
student $20; Single issue price: $3. ISSN #1069-0484
Australian Psychological Society
[A quotation will appear in the hard-copy edition here from the
December 1, New York Review of Books.]
Extraordinary developments continue: scholarly articles, retrac-
tions, legal decisions, professional guidelines, even a TV series with
the FMS issue raised (Sisters). They continue because of the joint ef-
forts of families, retractors and professionals to educate the public
and the profession about a terrible problem. The developments continue
because the issues we have raised about memory and therapy techniques
are important issues. Yes, some critics still cling to their tactics:
referring to "so-called false memory syndrome"; insisting that the
FMSF is protecting perpetrators; equating our questions about therapy
and memory processes to a denial that sexual abuse of children exists;
and -- most inappropriately -- personal attacks on the Director and
Advisory Board members. But this is finally beginning to be seen by
many professionals as an embarrassment to their field and nothing but
an attempt to deflect from self-examination of the issues raised.
Whatever our critics may think of particular people, whatever our
critics may think politically, the issues of memory and therapy pro-
cesses must be addressed on their own merits.
Last year, the FMS Foundation records were examined to see if fund-
ing came from known perpetrators, "organized Satanists," or the mafia!
This year critics seem to think that the Foundation is funding or en-
couraging lawsuits against therapists. At one recent conference in
Washington, a lawyer noted publicly that her group expects to use the
RICO act to bring lawsuits against the Foundation. Isn't that for
organized crime? We do hope that our critics will come to the "Memory
and Reality: Reconciliation" conference in Baltimore on December 9-11
to learn first-hand about the issues of concern to the Foundation and
to learn about memory from a collection of the most noted and respect-
ed memory experts in the world.
The discussion at the conference is sure to be lively. On October
25, in the New York Times Science Section, an article appeared with
the title, "New Kind of Memory Found to Preserve Moments of Emotion."
We have reprinted this article by Dan Goleman which reports on the
work of Cahill, Prins, Wever & McGaugh in a Letter to Nature, Vol 371,
No 6499, pp 702-704, October 10, 1994. Does this research suddenly
change what is known about memory? Does this research really justify
the conclusion that traumatic memories involve different processes?
Science can be more exciting than a mystery story. Which arguments and
which research will withstand scrutiny and what will it mean? The an-
swer to these questions must be in the hands of memory researchers who
specialize in neurobiology because the experiments deal with the ad-
ministration of drugs. Lay readers can note:
(1) The type of research reported is "laboratory" research which
traumatists such as Lenore Terr, M.D. or Judith Herman, M.D. have said
is irrelevant. If traumatists do embrace this research, they must also
embrace other laboratory research and weigh scientific evidence with
the rest of us. Science is principled -- the rules of what is accepted
as evidence must be consistent.
(2) The research does not deal with the problem of what is "traumat-
ic" to a person. (The subjects in this research found the stimuli
slides only moderately traumatic.)
(3) The research notes particularly why traumatic memories are re-
membered. "Psychologists have said for decades that motivation is im-
portant for learning," said Dr. McGaugh. "We'd say excitement is im-
portant. In my judgment, it would do no harm to make learning more
exciting." At the same time, McGaugh believes the results suggest
that, "it might be possible to mute the formation of [traumatic]
symptoms by inactivating this system."
(4) The research says nothing about the claims in the reports to the
Foundation of amnesia for decades and amnesia for hundreds of differ-
(5) This research says nothing about accuracy of memories. The best
available scientific evidence indicates that all memories, traumatic
or not, are subject to the same ordinary processes of misperceptions,
distortions, decay and change. A constant in research with memory is
its extreme malleability.
(6) Finally, this research says nothing about false memories, for
the simple reason that it was studying not false but true memories.
It's not often in life that we get to examine the actual "doing of
science" at this level. For all the recent tragedy, for all the pain
and the loss, our misguided children gave us much love and happiness
as they grew, and they have now given us a first row seat on some of
the most exciting science developments in this century. While they may
have broken our hearts, our children's mistakes have surely expanded
and enriched our minds as we have tried to understand what happened to
| INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE |
| Memory and Reality: Reconciliation |
| CoSponsored by |
| The False Memory Syndrome Foundation |
| and |
| The Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions |
| Baltimore, MD December 9, 10, 11 1994 |
| Registration in order of application receipt. |
| Become part of the solution to the False Memory problem. |
"In the end, everyone benefits from a policy which deters false
accusations and encourages true accusations."
AN INTERESTING DECISION:
State must establish validity of memory repression
"Before testimony of the victim's memory of the alleged assault may
be admitted, a hearing shall be held at which the burden shall be
upon the State to establish that the phenomenon of memory repression
and the process of recovery through therapy have gained general ac-
ceptance in the field of psychology. The State must establish the
validity of the phenomenon and process by demonstrating that the
reasoning or methodology underlying the testimony is scientifically
valid; and that it is capable of empirical testing and can properly
be applied to the facts in issue. (See Daubert v. Merrill-Dow pharm-
aceutical, Inc. supra, at page 2796)"
The State of New Hampshire Superior Court, Northern District
September 13, 1994 No. 94-s-45 thru 47 and No. 93-s-1734
The New Hampshire decision above is likely to be widely discussed in
coming months. Researchers, clinicians, families, lawyers -- all will
be wondering how it will affect the recovered memory discussion.
[Footnote: In preparation for a possible appeal to the NH Supreme
Court, attorney Maggiotto is attempting to ascertain the successes or
failures of other litigants who have attempted to preclude testimony
based upon recall of allegedly repressed memories. If you have any in-
formation concerning any case where court had either admitted or de-
nied testimony based on Daubert, please contact Paul Maggiotto
(1-800-427-1109) or Michael Iacopino (1-603-668-8300).]
SCIENTIFIC REASONING: What is meant by scientific reasoning and em-
pirical testing in this context? It seems almost ironic that we heard
of the recent death of Sir Karl Popper at the same time that we re-
ceived the New Hampshire decision. Popper, philosopher of science, had
a profound influence on scientific thinking because of his observation
that while scientific "laws" cannot always be verified, they can be
shown to be false. A scientific proposition is one in which it is pos-
sible to show that it could be false. This marks a difference between
belief in something and science.
The argument of being able to be falsified is a stumbling block in
the discussions of recovered memory therapy. Accused parents have no
way to falsify the accusations. While researchers feel that the abil-
ity to show that something can be false is a necessary condition for
it to be scientific, non-researchers often think that this aspect of
science is neither important nor necessary for the practice of thera-
py. What will the court determine?
IS SCIENTIFIC REASONING RELEVANT TO REPRESSION? In a long review
that appeared in the May 12 edition of The New York Review of Books,
Thomas Nagel argued that it is not the scientific method that is rel-
evant when it comes to believing in Freudian theory, but instead, the
theory's ability to provide explanations for the otherwise mysteri-
ous. Of course, Nagel is entirely correct. The scientific method is
irrelevant not just when it comes to believing Freudian theories but
all sorts of theories. It is always their ability to provide explana-
tions that compels belief. To illustrate the breadth of Nagel's obser-
vation, consider the two columns below. The first is his original ap-
plication. The second is another.
ORIGINAL APPLICATION ANOTHER APPLICATION
For most of those who believe For most of those who believe
in the reality of repression and in the reality of astrology and
the unconscious, whether or not the occult, whether or not
they have gone through they have had a good
psychoanalysis, the belief is horoscope, the belief is
based not on blind trust in the based not on blind trust in the
authority of analysts and authority of astrologers and
their clinical observations but their clinical observations but
on the evident usefulness of a on the evident usefulness of a
rudimentary Freudian outlook rudimentary astrological outlook
in understanding of ourselves and in understanding of ourselves and
other people, particularly erotic other people, particularly love
life, family dramas and what life, financial affairs and what
Freud called the Nancy Reagan called the
psychopathology of everyday orderly running of the country's
life. Things that would otherwise life. Things that would otherwise
surprise us do not; behavior or surprise us do not; behavior or
feelings that would otherwise feelings that would otherwise
seem simply irrational become seem simply irrational become
nevertheless comprehensible. nevertheless comprehensible.
You feel miserable all day, and You feel miserable all day, and
then discover that it is the then discover that it is the
forgotten anniversary of the it is the day of the conjunction
death of someone who was of the third house and the
important to you; you find fifth planet; you find
yourself repeatedly becoming yourself repeatedly becoming
absurdly angry with certain absurdly angry with certain
women in your professional life, women in your professional life,
and come to realize that your and come to realize that your
anger is a throwbackto a anger is a natural consequence
childhood struggle with your of the opposition of your
mother. In the end, if we are to signs. In the end, if we are to
believe that Freud was getting believe that astrology is getting
at the truth, we must be able in at the truth, we must be able in
some degree to make use of his some degree to make use of this
approach ourselves. Since approach ourselves. Since
controlled and reproducible controlled and reproducible
experiments are impracticable experiments are impracticable
here, the kind of internal here, the kind of internal
understanding characteristic of understanding characteristic of
psychoanalysis must rely on the astrology must rely on the
dispersed but cumulative dispersed but cumulative
confirmation in life that confirmation in life that
supports more familiar supports more familiar
psychological judgments. astrological judgments.
How is a belief in repression (the kind of repression theory that al-
lows for memories of space alien abduction, past lives and intergener-
ational satanic conspiracies) different from a belief in astrology? It
will be different only if scientific reasoning and empirical testing
The Australian Psychological Society Limited
GUIDELINES RELATING TO RECOVERED MEMORIES
October 27, 1994
A C O D E O F P R O F E S S I O N A L C O N D U C T
The Australian Psychological Society Code of Professional Conduct
sets forth principles of professional conduct designed to safeguard
* the welfare of consumers of psychological services
* the integrity of the profession
The General Principles of the Code are:
Psychologists remain personally responsible for the professional
decisions they make
* Psychologists are expected to take cognizance of the foreseeable
consequences of their actions and to make every effort to ensure that
their services are used appropriately.
* In working with organizations, whether as employees or
consultants, psychologists shall have ultimate regard for the highest
standards of their profession.
Psychologists shall bring to and maintain appropriate skills and
learning in their areas of professional practice.
* Psychologists must not misrepresent their competence, qualifica-
tions, training or experience.
* Psychologists shall refrain from offering or undertaking work or
advice beyond their professional competence.
The welfare of clients, students, research participants and the
public, and the integrity of the profession, shall take precedence
over a Psychologist's self-interest and over the interests of the
psychologist's employer and colleagues.
* Psychologists must respect the confidentiality of information
obtained from persons in the course of their work as psychologists.
They may reveal such information to others only with the consent of
the person or the person's legal representative, except in those un-
usual circumstances in which not to do so would result in clear danger
to the person or to others. Psychologists must inform their clients of
the legal or other contractual limits of confidentiality.
* Psychologists shall refrain from any act which would tend to bring
the profession into public disrepute.
B G U I D E L I N E S R E L A T I N G
T O R E C O V E R E D M E M O R I E S
These guidelines set forth conclusions and recommendations de-
signed to safeguard psychologists and clients who are dealing with
reports of recovered memories.
I SCIENTIFIC ISSUES
Memory is a constructive and reconstructive process. What is remem-
bered about an event is shaped by what is observed of that event, by
conditions prevailing during attempts to remember, and by events oc-
curring between the observation and the attempted remembering. Memor-
ies can be altered, deleted, and created by events that occur during
and after the time of encoding, and during the period of storage, and
during any attempts at retrieval.
Memory is integral to many approaches to therapy. Repression and
dissociation are processes central to some theories and approaches to
therapy. According to these theories and approaches, memories of trau-
matic events may be blocked out unconsciously and this leads to a per-
son having no memory of the events. However, memories of these trau-
matic events may become accessible at some later time. Although some
clinical observations support the notion of repressed memories, em-
pirical research on memories generally does not. Moreover the scien-
tific evidence does not allow general statements to be made about any
relationship between trauma and memory.
"Memories" that are reported either spontaneously or following the
use of special procedures in therapy may be accurate, inaccurate, fab-
ricated, or a mixture of these. The level of belief in memory or the
emotion associated with the memory does not necessarily relate direct-
ly to the accuracy of the memory. The available scientific and clin-
ical evidence does not allow accurate, inaccurate, and fabricated mem-
ories to be distinguished in the absence of independent corroboration.
Psychologists should recognize that reports of abuse long after the
alleged events are difficult to prove or disprove in the majority of
cases. Independent corroboration of the statements of those who make
or deny such allegations is typically difficult, if not impossible.
Accordingly, psychologists should exercise special care in dealing
with clients, their family members, and the wider community when al-
legations of past abuse are made.
II CLINICAL ISSUES
Psychologists should evaluate critically their assumptions or biases
about attempts to recover memories of trauma-related events. Equally,
psychologists should assist clients to understand any assumptions that
they have about repressed or recovered memories. Assumptions that
adult problems may or may not be associated with repressed memories
from childhood can not be sustained by available scientific evidence.
Psychologists should be alert to the ways that they can shape the
memories reported by clients through the expectations they convey, the
comments they make, the questions they ask, and the responses they
give to clients. Psychologists should be alert that clients are sus-
ceptible to subtle suggestions and reinforcements, whether those com-
munications are intended or unintended. Therefore, psychologists
should record intact memories at the beginning of therapy, and be
aware of any possible contagion effects (e.g., self-help groups,
Psychologists should be alert to the role that they may play in
creating or shaping false memories. Equally, psychologists should be
alert not to dismiss memories that may be based in fact. At all times,
psychologists should be empathic and supportive of the reports of
clients while also ensuring that clients do not jump to conclusions
about the truth or falsity of their recollections of the past. They
should also ensure that alternative causes of any problems that are
reported are explored. Psychologists should recognize that the context
of therapy is important as is the content.
Psychologists should not avoid asking clients about the possibility
of sexual or other abusive occurrences in their past, if such a ques-
tion is relevant to the problem being treated. However, psychologists
should be cautious in interpreting the response that is given. Psych-
ologists should never assume that a report of no abuse is necessarily
indicative of either repressed or dissociated memory or denial of
known events. Nor should they assume that a report of abuse indicates
necessarily that the client was abused.
Psychologists should understand clearly the difference between nar-
rative truth and historical truth, and the relevance of this differ-
ence inside the therapy context and outside that context. Memory re-
ports as part of a personal narrative can be helpful in therapy inde-
pendent of the accuracy of those reports. However, to be accepted as
actual history, those reports should be shown to be accurate. Psych-
ologists should seek to meet the needs of clients who report memories
of abuse, and should do this quite apart from the truth or falsity of
those reports. Psychologists should recognize that the needs and well-
being of clients take precedence and should design their therapeutic
III ETHICAL ISSUES
Psychologists treating clients who report recovered memories of
abuse are expected to observe the Principles set out in the Code of
Professional Conduct of the Australian Psychological Society, and in
the Code of Professional Conduct of the Psychologists' Registrations
Boards in States in which they are registered as psychologists. Speci-
fically, psychologists should obtain informed consent at the beginning
of therapy in relation to the details of the therapeutic process and
its possible consequences.
Psychologists should inform any client who recovers a memory of
abuse that it may be an accurate memory of an actual event, may be an
altered or distorted memory of an actual event, or may be a false mem-
ory of an event that did not happen. Psychologists should explore with
the client the meaning and implications of the memory for the client,
rather than focus solely on the content of the reported memory. Psych-
ologists should explore with the client ways of determining the ac-
curacy of the memory, if appropriate.
Psychologists should be alert particularly to the need to maintain
appropriate skills and learning in this area, and should be aware of
the relevant scientific evidence and clinical standards of practice.
Psychologists should guard against accepting approaches to abuse and
therapy that are not based in scientific evidence and appropriate
clinical standards. Psychologists should be alert also to the personal
responsibility they hold for the foreseeable consequence of their
IV LEGAL ISSUES
Psychologists should be aware that some approaches and writings con-
cerning abuse and recovered memories urge clients to engage in legal
action against the alleged abuser and any others who may question the
accuracy of any recovered memories. Psychologists should recognize
that their responsibilities are to the therapeutic needs of clients,
and not to issues of legal action or revenge. Given that the accuracy
of memories cannot be determined without corroboration, psychologists
should use caution in responding to questions from clients about legal
Psychologists should be aware that their knowledge, skills, and
practices may come under close scrutiny by various public and private
agencies if they are treating clients who recover memories of abuse.
Psychologists should ensure that comprehensive records are maintained
about their sessions with clients who recover memories of abuse.
Psychologists should in no way tolerate, or be seen to tolerate,
childhood or adult sexual abuse, or abuse of any kind. They should
ensure that their psychological services are used appropriately in
this regard, and should be alert to problems of deciding whether
allegations of abuse are true or false. They should be alert especi-
ally to the different demands and processes of the therapeutic and
legal contexts in dealing with such allegations.
V RESEARCH ISSUES
Psychologists should be aware that research is needed to understand
more about trauma-related memory, techniques to enhance memory, and
techniques to deal effectively with childhood sexual abuse. Psycholo-
gists should support and contribute to research on these, and related,
issues whenever possible.
Note -- These guidelines have been adapted from:
McConkey, K.M., & Sheehan, P.W. (in press)
"Hypnosis, Memory, and Behaviour in the Forensic Setting"
New York: Guildford Press.
MONITORING ALSO NEEDED
Probably most FMSF families are relieved to see the publication of
guidelines about recovered memories. At the very least, such guide-
lines afford our children the opportunity to compare their own therapy
experience with the standards of the profession. For this we thank
Will these guidelines also do the job of improving practice? While
such guidelines are obviously necessary, they are not sufficient. In
addition to guidelines, there must be the establishment of effective
monitoring procedures. We report examples where guidelines were not
The first example of a monitoring problem comes from the October 3,
1994 issue of Alberta Report (Canada) where Celeste McGovern writes of
outrageous cases in which professionals were involved in court cases.
In one of these cases, the judge actually noted that "the evidence of
the witnesses...was scary and unprofessional." Their therapy was
"almost a brainwashing procedure." The accused people (fathers with
young children) in these cases did not have enough money left after
their defenses to bring lawsuits for false accusations. They did,
however, believe that the therapists should be held accountable for
their actions. These fathers filed complaints with the Psychological
Association of Alberta.
According to the Alberta Report author, "The PAA inquest was immedi-
ately closed to the public, unexpectedly brief, and refused to hear
damning evidence. The psychologists were completely exonerated by the
three-member panel, whose reasons for the decision will not be dis-
closed. For fathers falsely accused of sexual abuse by the... psych-
ologists, the decision was the final insult. For many psychologists,
including those absolved, it was a victory licensing them to continue
controversial sex abuse 'therapy.' But for critics within the mental
health industry, the...hearings demonstrate something gravely awry.
Psychology, they say, has become a grossly unregulated business..."
A second example typifies the problem faced by families in the
United States when they try to get a problem situation examined. Note
that the psychologists' Code of Ethics states that, "As practitioners,
psychologists know that they bear a heavy social responsibility be-
cause their recommendation and professional actions may later alter
the lives of others. They are alert to personal, social, organization-
al, financial, or political situations and pressures that might lead
to misuse of their influence." Psychologists have a fine code, but
doesn't the systematic refusal to hear complaints by affected parents
nullify this particular part of the code?
Under the current monitoring restrictions in Oregon, for example,
there seems to be no way that a monitoring board can check up on a
psychologist after the license is given unless the psychologist agrees
to open his or her records. From reports that we have received, if the
Board of Psychology Examiners notes in the license exam that a psych-
ologist should improve skills in a particular area such as different-
ial diagnosis, there appears to be no way that the Board can determine
at a later date if this recommendation was followed. In other words,
while guidelines and ethics codes are improving and are very welcome,
it is still the case that the current monitoring of mental health pro-
fessionals is inadequate. To improve this aspect of the mental health
field is essential. To do less is to undermine the efforts and credi-
bility of all competent, ethical and caring mental health profession-
Because monitoring is so ineffective, indeed, virtually non-exis-
tent, people with complaints resort to lawsuits. In 1995, a line of
lawsuits involving satanic ritual abuse brought by former patients are
scheduled to be heard.
| The AMA action is fine, but it has no teeth. It is now incumbent |
| on the state boards, in California and elsewhere, that license |
| therapists to bring closer oversight to psychotherapy, which is |
| largely unregulated. Too many families have been torn apart by ap- |
| parently imagined memories for this to go on without intervention |
| by the normally lax medical authorities. |
| Therapy Watch, June 17, 1994, Los Angeles Times |
THERE'LL BE THE DEVIL TO PAY: THE FUTURE OF AMERICA'S RECOVERED MEMORY
MOVEMENT IS AT STAKE IN A $35M LAWSUIT.
The Independent (London), October 17, 1994
"After seven years in therapy, in and out of hospitals until Febru-
ary 1992, Kathryn Schwiderski [who entered therapy for mildd depres-
sion] is divorced and has no contact with her husband, children,
grandchildren, sister or parents. She was subjected to criminal inves-
tigation and interrogation and reported to the Child Protection Serv-
ices, she says, without any evidence. She became convinced she was a
member and victim of a satanic cult since her childhood and that she
sexually and physically abused her own children; now she believes the
memories were false, implanted by therapists through hypnotism and
drugs. She continues to experience extreme emotional problems."
Dennis Schwiderski, Texas oil company executive, was "investigated
by a grand jury for allegedly abusing his son, but the case was not
pursued, he says, because there was no evidence against him." He is
trying to find one of his children, Kelly 23, who has disappeared and
believed to be hiding. She apparently still believes she was a member
and victim of a cult.
The family contends that "therapists created false memories as part
of a scheme to collect millions of dollars in fees for treatment of
non-existent abuse at the hands of a satanic cult." The case will go
to trial next year. "The defendants include some of America's leading
exponents of recovered memory techniques. They are Judith Peterson, a
psychologist from Houston, who first treated the family; Roberta
Sachs, a psychologist from Illinois; and Bennett Braun, an Illinois
doctor who specializes in multiple personality disorder. The family
members are also suing the hospitals where they were treated. In
total, there are 25 defendants. Not all face every allegation, but all
are defending the action."
"Over the years, Dennis was sent bills totaling $2 million -- health
insurance covered most of it."
"All the defendants have filed a defense denying the allegations
without detailing their arguments, as is common in US courts. They
stand by the therapists' diagnosis that the Schwiderski family were
members of a satanic cult and therefore their treatment was justi-
PROOF LACKING FOR RITUAL ABUSE BY SATANISTS
New York Times, October 31, 1994
"In a survey of more than 11,000 psychiatric and police workers
throughout the country, conducted for the National Center on Child
Abuse and Neglect, researchers found more than 12,000 accusations of
group cult sexual abuse based on satanic ritual, but not one that
investigators had been able to substantiate." Dr. Gail Goodman, a
psychologist at the University of California at Davis directed the
"The survey found that there was not a single case where there was
clear corroborating evidence for the most common accusation, that
there was 'a well-organized intergenerational satanic cult, who sexu-
ally molested and tortured children in their homes or schools for
years and committed a series of murders,' Dr Goodman said."
"Many psychotherapists who have been vocal about a supposed epidemic
of sexual abuse by well-organized satanic rings have grown more cau-
tious of late. "There's clearly been a contagion, a contamination of
what people say in therapy because of what they see on TV or read a-
bout satanic ritual abuse," said Dr. Bennet Braun, a psychiatrist who
heads the Dissociative Disorders Unit at Rush-North Shore Medical Cen-
ter in Chicago."
POLYGRAPH STUDY "FALSE MEMORY SYNDROME VS TOTAL REPRESSION"
to appear: "For the Defense"
Stan Abrams, Ph.D., Portland, Oregon
Polygraph results of alleged sexual abusers when no repression was
involved (N=300) were compared with the results of alleged sexual a-
busers when the victims assumedly repressed the memory (N=46). Both
groups of tests were defense-attorney referred. The only difference
was that in the group of alleged offenders in which the accuser "re-
pressed" the abuse, the act was supposed to have taken place twenty or
thirty years ago. Polygraphers would agree that when the act was com-
mitted is inconsequential compared to the fact that any punishment for
the crime will be carried out in the present. Therefore, subjects in-
volved in crimes committed years ago could be expected to be equally
as fearful of detection as those accused of contemporary crimes.
The results showed that in the group of alleged offenders in which
repressed memory was involved, 4% of the subjects were found to be de-
ceptive (N=2). In the group of alleged offenders in which memories of
the accusers were not repressed, 78% were classified deceptive
(N=234). The difference is striking and will surely spur more research
in this area. Contact author for information: 503-221-0632.
NEWS FROM DUBLIN, IRELAND
We have been informed that a scandal seems to be developing in
Ireland. One aspect of the problem involves complaints from seven
fathers who all claim that they were falsely accused of sexually
abusing their children by one particular doctor. The controversy
includes the question of the number of reported cases of incest. On
the one hand, the official figures of the Garda Commissioner's reports
on Crime, from 1986 to 1991 show that there have only been 14 convic-
tions for the crime of incest and 20 convictions for defilement of
children. On the other hand, the center at which the doctor in ques-
tion was employed received government funds to treat hundreds of in-
cest offenders during this time period. An investigation is underway.
USA Today, October 6, 1994, 3A
"A 22-year-old Cincinnati woman who says she has 10 personalities has
accused bus driver Joseph Howard, 47, of sexual assault. Two of the
personalities say she consented. Howard says he never touched her. His
lawyer wants to depose the personalities for trial."
NEWS FROM AUSTRALIA
The Australian False Memory Association has now been formally or-
ganized. The links between the AFMA and Australian professionals seem
strong and the fact that the Australian Psychological Society has
already established guidelines for recovered memory situations indi-
cates a positive and determined approach by professionals to deal with
A letter from Dr. Jerome Gelb, a psychiatrist in Australia, affirms
this optimism. He states, "I am writing to keep you up to date with
events in Australia regarding FMS and Recovered Memory Therapy.
Australian Psychiatrists are, apart from very few exceptions, fully
aware of the iatrogenesis of so-called repressed memories, MPD and
Satanic Abuse. The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psych-
iatrists has been helpful in publishing on the issue."
Dr. Gelb mentioned the television and newspaper articles that have
recently appeared in Australia noting that they understand the iatro-
genic nature of some memories. Dr. Gelb said that he had published a
detailed letter to the Editor in the December 1994 RANZCP Journal of
Psychiatry and that the journal of Australasian Psychiatry, Vol 2, No
4 , August 1994, pp 179-180 had published his article, "Reality Re-
Dr. Gelb went on to write that, "I feel that public opinion in
Australia is supportive and the media is also. Most importantly,
Australian Psychiatrists are almost universally wary of American ther-
apy fads and are highly critical of poorly trained therapists and the
inappropriate use of suggestion, persuasion and memory recovery tech-
niques of all kinds. Please let your membership know of these develop-
ARTICLES OF SPECIAL ITEREST
International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis XLII No 4
October 1994 SPECIAL ISSUE: HYPNOSIS AND DELAYED RECALL: Part 1 Single
issue is $17.00. Sage Publications, Inc.; fax/order line: 805-499-0871
Articles by: Mulhern; Spence; Ceci, Loftus, Leichtman & Bruck;
Frankel; Kihlstrom; Nash; Garry & Loftus; Erdelyi; Ofshe & Singer;
Spiegel & Scheflin; Spanos, Burgess & Burgess.
(***Especially note Frankel article reviewing research on
"flashbacks" and Mulhern article with historical focus.)
FREDERICK CREWS. "The Revenge of the Repressed" Part I and Part II.
The New York Review of Books. November 17, 1994 and Part II December
RICHARD GARDNER, MD. "You're not a Paranoid Schizophrenic -- You only
have Multiple Personality Disorder." Academy Forum , Vol 38, No 3,
Fall 1994, pp 11-14.
RUSSELL POWELL & DOUGLAS BOER. "Did Freud mislead patients to confab-
ulate memories of abuse?" Psychological Reports, 1994, 74, 1283-1298.
| A T T E N T I O N A L L : |
| To be as cost-effective as possible, the FMSF newsletter is sent |
| out by bulk rate mail. This class of mail will not be forwarded. |
| If you move and do not give us a change of address, you will not |
| receive your newsletter. Please notify us of any change of address |
| 2 weeks before the change takes place. The Foundation can not be |
| responsible for issues that you have missed because you have fail- |
| ed to give us a change of address. |
PSYCHOTHERAPIES: VALIDATED AND UN
August Piper, M.D.
The False Memory Syndrome Foundation has recently begun to note that
recovered-memory therapy is an unvalidated form of psychotherapy, im-
plying that such therapy is experimental (see page one of the October
Newsletter). Though the concerns leading to these criticisms are un-
derstandable, attempts to make such implications oversimplify a com-
In scientific terminology, if something is valid, it does what it is
supposed to do. Thus, a validated therapy effectively treats the con-
dition it is intended to treat. As correctly noted in the October
newsletter, investigators have measured the effectiveness of various
talk therapies. However, such measurement is extraordinarily diffi-
cult, for several reasons.
Psychotherapy is severely hobbled by a distressing lack of agreement
among its practitioners on the answers to several critical questions.
First is the question of what the goals of treatment are. Does the
therapist intend simple symptom relief, recovery and reliving of past
stressors, insight into the causes of the patient's problems, change
in maladaptive behaviors, a thorough remaking of the personality, or
what? Second, what criteria should be used to measure improvement?
Measuring psychotherapy-induced change is a minefield of difficulty.
Third, how much time should treatment require? Some therapists seri-
ously recommend compressing an entire treatment course into a single
session, whereas at the other extreme, treatment has endured in some
cases for years. I have even heard of one patient who was in analysis
for thirty (!) years.
Another difficulty is that psychotherapy has failed to adopt a uni-
formly-accepted method of classifying and designating the conditions
it is concerned with. Such a system of classifying and arranging dis-
orders is called a nosology. The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual,
now in its fourth edition (DSM-IV), represents a good start toward
such a nosology. However, it is only a start; DSM shows particular
problems in classifying disorders that are treated by psychotherapeut-
ic methods (as opposed to pharmacological ones).
In the absence of a good nosology, attempting to do psychotherapy
research becomes an arduous, frustrating undertaking. This is true be-
cause the symptoms of psychological conditions overlap so much. For
example, depression is a very common symptom of all psychological dis-
orders. In some, depression is the legitimate focus of therapy: it is
the problem. In others, however, the very same symptom picture results
from any or all of a host of other conditions: drug or alcohol use;
marital, social, or economic problems; medical conditions; other
psychiatric disorders; childhood stressors; etc. Determining the
"real" cause of the depression can be nearly impossible -- witness the
acrimonious debate over those therapists who claim that childhood sex-
ual abuse is the real cause of many, if not all, adult psychiatric
problems, including depression. This overlap, in turn, means that re-
searchers can never be sure that their study groups differ only in the
variable under study.
With so many problems and so much disagreement within the field, and
with no formal arrangements for those outside the discipline to estab-
lish standards for psychotherapy, no one should be surprised that
poorly-validated treatments for psychological problems periodically,
like locusts, overrun psychotherapy. Counting the protuberances of a
patient's head (phrenology); believing that runaway black slaves have
a disease (drapetomania); passing magnets over the body (mesmerism);
spraying patients with water, or putting them in wet packs or rapidly-
rotating chairs; believing that a woman can have excessive envy of the
penis, or develop a wandering uterus (hysteria); surgically attacking
the brain (lobotomies) -- all have had their days in the sunlight.
My purpose here is neither to make excuses for psychotherapy's prob-
lems, nor to attack the discipline, but rather to point out how diffi-
cult it is to validate therapies. The reader who recognizes this will
not think an unvalidated therapy is necessarily a bad therapy: because
it is so difficult to prove that a given psychological treatment is
effective, many commonly-used psychotherapies are unvalidated. Nor
will the reader fail to realize that saying a therapy is valid does
not go far enough: the question should be, "For which conditions is it
After all the above is said, however, the essential points made in
last month's newsletter article remain correct: many investigators
have carefully gathered evidence documenting that one or another
treatment, if performed properly, helps patients. In other words,
these psychotherapies have been validated. Also, instruction manuals
for several different types of psychotherapy are available to practi-
tioners. The manuals are intended to insure that the therapy is per-
Many patients, who have disorders treatable by validated psychother-
apies, see recovered-memory practitioners instead. These practitioners
have recently come under increasing fire because of the harm their
treatments can do. Therefore, the question must indeed be asked: with
so many better choices available, why would anyone see therapists who
practice a form of treatment that can do such harm? People consider-
ing psychotherapy are well advised to spend a few minutes, either on
the telephone or in person, to find out whether the clinician utilizes
a kind of therapy that has reasonable evidence for efficacy. The list
in last month's newsletter might be helpful.
August Piper Jr. M.D. is a psychiatrist in private practice in
Seattle, Washington. He is a member of the FMSF Scientific and
Professional Advisory Board.
| The purest treasure mortal times afford |
| Is spotless reputation: that away, |
| Men are but gilded loam or painted clay. |
| A jewel in a ten-times-barr'd-up chest |
| Is a bold spirit in a loyal breast. |
| Mine honor is my life; both grow in one; |
| Take honor from me, and my life is done: |
| Richard II Act I Scene 1 |
FROM OUR READERS
MAKE A DIFFERENCE
This is a new column that will let you know what people are doing to
challenge the FMS madness. Remember that three years ago FMSF didn't
exist. A group of 50 or so people found each other and today we are
over 15,000. Together we have made a difference. How did this happen?
YOUR LETTERS HAVE MADE A DIFFERENCE
* The Governor of Washington will be reviewing Paul Ingram's case on
December 1, 1994. Many are demanding a full pardon. (Larry Wright
wrote about Paul in Remembering Satan.)
* In Washington, families go about the state picketing in a mobile
home and utility trailer. In Olympia at Evergreen Community College,
their utility trailer (parked on campus property) was destroyed by
arson. The contents, professionally made picket signs, etc. were all
lost. The college was shocked! It seems that free speech appeals to
some people only when they agree with the message.
* The Illinois FMS Society sponsored a booth at the Senior Fair held
at the College of du Page. Information was handed out to more than
5,000 people. This is an excellent way to inform and educate.
* Many Wisconsin families wrote to University and State officials to
protest the fact that University of Wisconsin sponsored conference on
Child Sexual Abuse and Incest did not properly balance their program.
They invited an "adult survivor," as keynote speaker but did not also
include a "retractor" to warn of dangers. Last year this conference
eliminated all vendor booths rather than allow FMSF material. Maybe
next year a retractor will be invited.
* Helen, Geraldine and Ben Barr were on Donahue to discuss Geral-
dine's new book, "My Sister Roseanne." We all recognize how difficult
it is to make ourselves vulnerable in front of others, much less a
national TV audience. The audience consisted of 121 people, who prior
to the show were unaware of the topic of conversation or the guests.
This was a relatively unbiased studio audience. Following the taping
three people identified themselves to Helen as suffering the heart-
break of a family member with FMS. This demonstrates again that we are
probably seeing only the tip of a "horrible and dangerous iceberg."
* Several people reminded us that families should inquire to see if
their employers have a matching gift program. This is a good way to
support the FMS Foundation. (Most United Way programs will arrange to
have donations sent to FMSF too.)
* JANUARY IS FMS MONTH at a university library in Ontario. A special
display of all the new books that relate to recovered memory therapy
is in preparation. Why not ask your local library to display these
important new books?
You can make a difference. Please send me any ideas that you have
had that were or might be successful so that we can tell others. Write
to Katie Spanuello c/o FMSF.
ZIP + 4 PLEASE
A Retractor's Question:
DOES IT HAVE TO GET WORSE BEFORE IT GETS BETTER?
by "Maria Meyers"
What ever happened to the mental health theme of working through the
problems of the present and focusing on the future? I believe many
people enter therapy because they are concerned about today and want
to think in a more positive manner. It appears to me that those basic
facts are totally ignored and perhaps even scoffed at by many thera-
pists practicing repressed memory therapy. With the aid of hypnosis
and medications, patients are suddenly finding themselves focused for
months or even years on past "memories," and they are certainly not
The impending prognosis is not good. The retractors I have spoken to
say that their former therapists told them that they would have to get
worse before they could get better. I am also a retractor and was told
this many times. It didn't mean getting a little more confused or a
little more depressed. It meant nearly going insane. It meant retriev-
ing memories so horrid and terrifying I couldn't eat or drink and
ended up on IV's. Then I was told that it is normal to have this
reaction when recalling "repressed memories."
This belief is tragic. People are losing families, friends, jobs,
and their homes. They are filing for bankruptcy after spending months
in hospitals. The depression deepens, the present is unbearable, the
future looks hopeless and any former beliefs of a happy childhood have
been stripped away. In working so hard with their doctors to "get
worse in order to get better" some people give up. They cannot endure
one more day with the pain, the constant sadness and the fear from
torture they see in their mind. Some people commit suicide.
I was deeply moved during the past two weeks when I talked about
this subject with four other retractors. These four retractors knew a
total of seven people in this kind of therapy who had committed sui-
cide. Is this unusual? What does it mean?
Following is a poem I wrote for a person I met while we were hospit-
alized for similar mental conditions. I wrote the poem when I was
still in the hospital. She committed suicide by taking an overdose at
a time when I still believed all my horrible memories were true. She
was a college student, very bright and intelligent with many goals for
her life. She believed her parents were active members of the occult
and that she had also been a cult member as a child and that now she
was in danger because she was talking about it. She had been diagnosed
with dissociative and multiple personality disorders. Perhaps for her
all this was true, but in light of what happened to me and what has
happened to others, I have to wonder if it was true. I will probably
never know. What we must consider is, even if she did have a childhood
of satanic ritual abuse, even if her parents were still involved, and
even if her life was in jeopardy, is this type of therapy effective or
is it dangerous? I'm not going to say these activities do not occur in
this world. I'm not saying people should not be responsible for them-
selves. What I am saying is repressed memory therapy appears to make
people worse. What I'm saying is that some therapists justify the
worsening condition of their patients by telling them, "You have to
get worse before you can get better."
QUESTIONS FOR A FELLOW VICTIM WHO DIDN'T WIN
Why my friend did you have to die,
Why did you give in to that deceitful lie?
Why did you listen to those voices from the past,
Why didn't you see all the pain wouldn't last?
Why did you think only of the hurtful things,
Why couldn't you see the happy times life brings?
Why didn't you fight one more time,
Why did you think your life should be different than mine?
Didn't you think about how afraid I would be,
Didn't you know it would be difficult for me?
Didn't you think about the memories it would start,
Didn't you care they would threaten to tear me apart?
Didn't you think that maybe it would be too much to bear,
Didn't you know those voices would start calling me there?
Didn't you know they were only voices of the past,
Didn't you know what they wanted most you gave them at last?
Didn't you know by giving in they finally would win,
Do you know that now I too am battling to save myself from that sin?
Did you know that I really cared for you my friend:
But I will not let the voices of the past determine my end.
Editor's note: In the past two months, we have been informed by par-
ents of three more suicides. One took place last year and two took
place during the past two months. To the best of our knowledge, two of
these suicides took place while the people had a full belief in memor-
ies that their families say never happened, and one was in the confus-
ing process of questioning the beliefs developed in therapy. Arriving
at the time of these reports, the poem and letter from Maria Meyers
prompted us to contact our Advisory Board about this matter. A re-
search plan for a preliminary study to determine whether there is any-
thing unusual about the incidence of suicide reports has been design-
ed. We will report on the results as quickly as possible.
BIRDS OF A FEATHER DO NOT ALWAYS FLOCK TOGETHER
To: A Professional and A Mom
From: A Dad and A Professional
Your letter, Rare Bird, in the October 1994 Newsletter presents your
perspective, as a professional, about the use of the phrase Recovered
Memory Therapy (RMT). As a Social Worker I disagree with your opinion,
and there is a factual aspect of your column that requires a response.
If the record isn't set straight, readers of the Newsletter may come
to believe that the Foundation created that term. I don't believe that
to be so. RMT is widely used in various other types of publications,
including professional journals, books and texts, and the popular
press. When FMSF uses that term, they are using a phrase that has
meaning for its readers. I also strongly reject the notion that FMSF
is assigning blame by the use of that term. If others choose to "as-
sign blame", that is their choice. I believe it is important for you
to separate the assigning of blame from the analysis of the research
and the techniques that have brought so much pain to our children and
to families like ours.
You may be targeting the wrong issue in your letter. Clearly, the
"...coining of the term RMT" does not remove the obligation of"...
'good' therapists from responsibility to examine and change their
thinking..." (p.9). The NASW Code of Ethics should cover that for us
just like other professional codes of ethics speak to our colleagues
in the other helping professions. Your energy as it relates to your
"Mom" role may be better used with our professional organization. Now
that NASW (National Association of Social Workers) has been successful
in pushing licensing laws through state legislatures, and the number
of states where social workers qualify to receive third-party payments
keeps growing, concerned parents and professionals would be well-ad-
vised to turn their attention to Continuing Education. The quality of
the required continuing education courses should be monitored. At this
point, monitoring is virtually non-existent, and the economic benefits
to providers of these programs can be vast. Continuing education pro-
grams are where RMT and other similar non-scientific notions are
spread. Since hypnosis (as well as memory) is not part of a social
worker's formal MSW education, I'm certain from your description of
your professional use of hypnosis and guided imagery that you are a-
ware of the importance of continuing education as a vehicle for pro-
Finally, I think it is important that the readers of the Newsletter
become aware that not all social workers (or therapists) believe that
"Repressed memory questions go to the heart of our cherished beliefs
as therapists." (ibid. ). If you believe that to be true, I think you
should be able to document that statement. Many therapists, including
myself, don't know the validity of that concept because of the lack of
scientific support for it. I don't hold professional "cherished be-
liefs" in something that is unproved. I hope I am not in the minority
among my colleagues.
CLEARING MY NAME
"I'm sure you understand why I have to clear my name. The conse-
quences of not resolving this accusation before I die is that the
whole family and ancestors will suffer."
A Dad (83 years)
"I have found a closure for what has happened to me. All the fami-
lies I have talked to all agree that the hardest part of this is that
there is no closure. As I began my walk through this valley of loss,
I wrote down in a journal my feelings and experiences as they happen-
ed. In the last months, I have put into my journal excerpts, dates,
other articles, etc. for the day when my grandchildren might want to
know what happened to their family. This is now completed, and that
has been my way of achieving closure on this part of my life."
"Many thanks for your FMS Foundation's Newsletter. My husband reads
it once, deriving some satisfaction in your efforts to turn up the
heat on incompetent psychotherapist. I read your Newsletter several
times. First, with a blur of tears, sharing the deep hurt with other
FMS families; then I tuck the Newsletter into my purse or place it on
the snack bar to read and reread it several times before filing it
away with past issues."
"Why do I do this? Maybe it's unresolved anxiety or comfort of not
being alone or that your Newsletter fills the void of an FMS daughter
I have not seen for four years or heard her voice or know where she
lives. Many thanks."
WON'T TALK ABOUT ACCUSATION
"My daughter has resumed communication but will not talk about the
accusations. It bothers me a great deal because I don't think it is
possible to be completely relaxed around anyone if certain subjects
are taboo. She is still seeing the same therapist and I am angry that
my daughter who does not make very much money has been paying this
person $50 a week for the past four and a half years. Even though not
being able to discuss therapy causes there to be an invisible wall
between us and I am always on guard because I never know what trouble
that therapist will cause next, still I am thankful every day that I
am again able to see her and talk with her about the normal part of
her life. She still has a wonderful sense of humor."
DEAR "A MOTHER"
I have read your letter in the October '94 FMSF Newsletter many
times, and I am writing to tell you that you have put into words my
own feelings precisely.
My daughter's first assault upon me occurred in the summer of 1989
when I received a series of vicious letters which angrily accused me
of vague, unspecified maltreatment. I was absolutely devastated. I
won't bother to go into details now, other than to say that I was
instructed by her not to contact her for "an indefinite period of
time." Her therapist had advised this. And so, the communication
A year later, the letters and accusations began again. This time, I
responded only briefly. For three years, I agonized and grieved for my
daughter. I couldn't believe she would say and think these things a-
After three years of nonstop, miserable ruminating, I consulted a
therapist myself, a very competent man who, among other things, put me
in touch with FMSF. These two events helped me to pull away and real-
ly look at what had happened.
In the two years since then, I have had a significant change of
heart. I feel very much as you do. By thinking more objectively about
her behavior, I came to realize that my daughter, too, had "turned on
a bright light" (to use your phrase) and forced me to see what a
thoroughly self-centered person she was. I also realized that I no
longer liked her very much. Like you, I too cherish the memory of my
daughter when she was young and when she was growing up. But I do not
care for the person who (occasionally) still calls or writes to inform
me about how wretched her lot is or how great her suffering, but who
refused to take any responsibility for her own life -- or aknowledge
some of the loss she has caused others, including, I might add, her
Now, after not having seen my daughter for 5 1/2 years, I find that
I can get through most days without giving her much thought. I no
longer grieve, and (finally) to see other women relating comfortably
with their adult daughters no longer cuts me to pieces.
I feel that those of us who have come to the conclusion that you and
I have -- that it is time to get on with our lives and be done with
the past -- need all the support we can get. Despite some expressed
opinions to the contrary, we both know that this is no easy step to
Thank you again for your letter. It needed to be said.
FINDING EACH OTHER
"After WWII, the Red Cross and community bulletin boards seemed to
be the common ground for people to locate each other. Then, like now,
families were separated beyond repair. But, some survived to find each
other. And where they went was to common bulletin boards looking for
"It seems that retractors call the Foundation because it is their
'Red Cross.' And those of us who have had our families torn from us
also call the Foundation because the Foundation has been there for
"I doubt if our accusing daughter will ever contact us directly, nor
do I expect that. But, if she wanted to, would she be as afraid to
contact us as we are to push the issue and contact her? And aren't
there others like us?"
"Right now retractors seem to be contacting the Foundation. Could
this be the bulletin board that says 'Go ahead and call your parents;
they have indicated that they want to communicate?'"
"I don't know the logistics, possibilities, costs, etc. just the
availability of databases and the intense desires of parents and prob-
ably their children. This is a vague idea but maybe something can be
"...For myself, I cannot just forgive and forget. Understanding --
yes; forgiving -- maybe; forgetting -- no. No matter how much we miss,
or love the daughter that was, we cannot forget that our daughter
chose to follow. She chose to destroy. She did not afford us choices
in the matter...If she were to call me today, (one of those fantasy
dreams), I would expect her to be prepared to admit her own part in
this before I could even begin to bridge the gulf between us. It is
just as fundamental to the person she was as to the person I have
| "For many families, people (especially accusers) may need to |
| rebond before they will be able to review what happened." |
| Margaret Singer, Ph.D |
BEWARE THE TALKING CURE: PSYCHOTHERAPY MAY BE HAZARDOUS TO YOUR HEALTH
by Terence W. Campbell, Ph.D.
ppbk, 265 pages, Upton Books, a division of SIRS $14.95
Review by Jaye Sharp, Editor of Michigan PFA Newsletter.
"Traditional psychotherapy faces a crisis of enormous proportions,"
(p 34) writes Dr. Terence Campbell, Michigan clinical and forensic
psychologist. Campbell sees little hope for the field of psychothera-
py unless it undergoes a radical "paradigm shift." The reader should
not be put off by the term "paradigm," although such a reaction would
be understandable considering the trivialization it has suffered at
the hands of writers of popularized psychobabble. It is a perfectly
good and descriptive term and the reader is urged to put aside any
negative associations and remember "paradigm" as meaning simply a
"model" or "standard".
Science philosopher Thomas S. Kuhn, writes Dr. Campbell, "defines
prevailing theories, methods, and procedures of a profession as its
'paradigm.' When the existing paradigm of a profession is no longer
viable -- as in the case of traditional psychotherapy -- a crisis
prevails and the profession must undertake a 'paradigm shift.' Other-
wise, it jeopardizes its legitimacy as a profession. Once a profes-
sion has accomplished a paradigm shift, 'it (quoting Dr. Kuhn)...will
have changed its views of the field, its methods, and its goals.'"
Briefly, Campbell defines traditional psychotherapy as Analytic
therapy, Client center-humanistic (or CC-H) therapy, and Behavioral
therapy. Analytic therapy has as it goal a client's insights into
his/her own behavior. (p 54) CC-H therapy encourages the client to
value getting in touch with feelings as opposed to achieving any
intellectual awareness. Behavioral therapy assumes that a client's
psychological distress comes from learned patterns of behavior. (p 87)
All three therapeutic approaches share the same defect, from Camp-
bell's point of view -- in spite of their different approaches -- in
that they do not adequately serve the client's true needs. The client
is, in all three orientations, subservient to therapy ideology. With
such traditional psychotherapy, says Campbell, "unless changes in the
paradigm of each of these therapeutic orientations occur, there will
be no change in views, methods or goals." In other words, until or un-
less there is change in the theoretical ideology of a therapy, there
is no change in the practice of the therapy.
FMS readers may initially be disappointed that Campbell does not
cover "recovered-memory" therapy in depth. But this is not within the
book's objectives, which are, rather, a critical look at the failures
of traditional therapies, an urgent plea for changes within the tradi-
tional therapeutic community, and a guide for the lay person seeking
Recovered-memory therapy is dealt with under "incest-resolution
therapy," in Part III of the book: Therapeutic Relationships, Thera-
pist as Prosecutor. This makes sense within the context of the book.
Recovered-memory therapy, or as it is referred to in the book, incest
resolution therapy, fulfills all the conditions of traditional psycho-
therapy. It isolates the client from his/her family, makes the thera-
pist the only important person in the client's life, and disregards
research in the field while adamantly adhering to a rigid ideology.
Not surprisingly, Campbell does not see much hope for a paradigm shift
in this area. "...therapists whose professional identities and incomes
depend largely on their reputations as 'incest resolution experts'
might find it particularly difficult to objectively assess the pit-
falls of their orientation." (pp 181 -182)
Campbell is scathing in his view of his profession, but not rancor-
ous. At the same time that he condemns traditional psychotherapy (the
current paradigm) for its failings, he offers concrete and attainable
solutions for " a professional in crisis." He is adamant, for example,
in his insistence that the client-therapist relationship needs to be
reoriented from a client preoccupation toward a client- family (or
significant others) preoccupation. This therapeutic approach enlists
the people who are closest to the client -- involving them as part of
the client's therapeutic solution -- and places the therapist in a
more peripheral role. (pp 217-218) "Unless psychotherapists undertake
the necessary paradigm shift," warns Campbell, "they will reduce them-
selves to the status of charlatan and faith-healers." (p 245)
Beware the Talking Cure: Psychotherapy May be Hazardous to your
Health is above all, a cogent, concise, and relevant guide for a
anyone thinking about entering therapy. It dispels the confusion and
defuses the agony involved in choosing and assessing a therapist. In
the book's Afterword, Hiring and Firing a Therapist, the lay person is
offered the kind of advise that will save many a potential client a
lot of time, money, and anxiety. Campbell insists that potential
clients should not hesitate to ask a therapist about his/her training.
Such questions, writes Campbell, "are altogether necessary and appro-
priate. Any therapist who refuses to answer, or responds evasively, is
a therapist to avoid." (p 248) For the person already in therapy,
there is a list of 40 questions which serves as an invaluable aid in
assessing one's own therapeutic experience. If the person in therapy,
for example, answers 'yes' to ten or more questions, "you need to
carefully question your therapist about the relevance of your thera-
py..." advises Campbell. "He is probably doing you more harm than
good." (p 251) There is an additional implied message here, and that
is that the client should assume a less passive role in the client-
therapist relationship and accept a greater responsibility in order to
insure a successful therapeutic outcome.
Is there hope for a genuine improvement in psychotherapy? "The Amer-
ican public," says Campbell, "deserves more than the illusory effec-
tiveness of wise words, kind words, and encouraging words. Most
likely, the impetus for a paradigm shift will come from an informed
public demanding it. (Emphasis added) At this point in time, the
public possesses greater potential for objectivity about psychotherapy
than psychotherapists do. In their dogged determination to protect
their obsolete paradigm, traditional therapists have sacrificed their
objectivity." (pp 245-246)
Beware the Talking Cure is a book which should be on the shelves of
every library and every book store in the country. It will go a long
way toward educating consumers about the pitfalls of traditional
psychotherapy and informing them about the kinds of mental health
services they have a right to demand: effective, constructive therapy
from well-trained effective therapists.
NEW KIND OF MEMORY FOUND TO PRESERVE MOMENTS OF EMOTION
by Daniel Goleman
New York Times, Tuesday, October 25, 1994
Reprinted with permission of The New York Times.
Do you remember where you went on your first date? Or the most ter-
rifying scene of the last movie that really frightened you? Or what
you were doing when you heard the news that the space shuttle Chal-
lenger had blown up?
The fact that most people have detailed answers for such questions
testifies to the power of emotion-arousing events to sear a lasting
impression in memory.
Scientists believe they have now identified the simple but cunning
method that makes emotional moments register with such potency: it is
the very same alerting system that primes the body to react to life
threatening emergencies by fighting or fleeing.
The "fight or flight" reaction has long been known to psychologists:
the heart beats faster, the muscles are readied and the body is primed
in the most primitive of survival instincts. These and other distinc-
tive reactions are triggered by the release into the bloodstream of
the hormones adrenaline and noradrenaline.
The same two hormones, it now appears, also prime the brain to take
very special note in its memory banks of the circumstances that set
off the flight-or-fight reaction.
The discovery "suggests that the brain has two memory systems, one
for ordinary information and one for emotionally charged information,"
said Dr. Larry Cahill, a researcher at the Center for the Neurobio-
logy of Learning and Memory at the University of California at Irvine.
Dr. Cahill and colleagues published the findings in the current issue
of the journal Nature.
The emotional memory system may have evolved because it had great
survival value, researchers say, insuring that animals would vividly
remember the events and circumstances most threatening to them.
The findings confirm in humans the relevance of 15 years of research
on the neurochemistry of memory with laboratory rats by Dr. James L.
McGaugh, director of the Irvine center and a co-author of the paper.
His work with animals had implicated adrenaline and noradrenaline in
emotional arousal and memory.
"I think it's very exciting," said Dr. Larry Squire, a research
scientist specializing in memory at the medical school of the Univers-
ity of California at San Diego. "When you study the effects on a rat's
brain of having its foot shocked, you don't really know what emotional
state that corresponds to in humans -- you could argue its analog in
humans is sheer panic. But this suggests it's related to more unusual
emotions, like hearing surprising news, being worried or a little
The new experiment depended on use of a drug known to block the ef-
fects of adrenaline and noradrenaline and on seeing if it impaired e-
motion-laden memories in subjects who have been told a horrifying
story. In the study volunteers watched a slide presentation with one
of two narratives. In the neutral, rather boring version a mother and
her son go for a walk to visit his father at the hospital where he
works; the story describes the bland details of what he saw on the way
and while he was there.
But in the upsetting version, the boy is critically injured in a
terrible accident on the way, and rushed to the hospital, where he
is treated for severe bleeding in the brain and a surgical team
struggles to re-attach his severed feet.
Before hearing one or another version of the story, half the volun-
teers received an injection of propanolol, a drug that nullifies the
usual effects of adrenaline and noradrenaline by plugging up the re-
ceptor sites on the surface of cells that normally respond to the two
A week later, the volunteers were given a surprise memory test for
details of the story. The volunteers who did not get the propanolol
remembered more of the upsetting details of the story than the neutral
parts, showing that even minor emotional distress enhances memory -- a
result found in many previous studies.
The key finding was that those volunteers who received the adrena-
line-defeating drug were worse at recalling the upsetting details of
the story -- but not the neutral details -- than were those who had no
injection. Blocking adrenaline and noradrenaline impaired just the
emotional memory of the subjects.
"This is a memory boost system that works in gradations, activating
in proportion to the emotional charge," said Dr. Cahill. "We find that
it doesn't depend on some intense trauma, but works even when you're
just mildly emotionally aroused. But it doesn't activate until there's
an emotionally loaded event."
The study is the first to make a definitive bridge to humans from a
parallel body of research on emotions and memory in animals. Dr. Mc-
Gaugh, through a long series of experiments with animals, has pin-
pointed the amygdala, a pair of walnut-shaped structures that regulate
emotion, as the key site where the adrenergic hormones, adrenaline and
noradrenaline, affect memory.
"We don't know the precise point of initiation in the brain," said
Dr. McGaugh, "but when we get excited about something, a nerve run-
ning out of the brain to the adrenals triggers their secretion of ad-
renaline and noradrenaline." The adrenals are glands that sit on top
of the kidneys; when they excrete adrenaline and noradrenaline, the
hormones surge through the bloodstream, making the heart beat faster
and otherwise priming the body for an emergency.
The adrenaline and noradrenaline appear to activate receptors on the
vagus nerve running into the brain. While one job of the vagus nerve
is to regulate the heart, it also carries signals to the amygdala.
"The noradrenaline activates neurons within the amygdala, which in
turn signal other brain regions, presumably cortical areas, to
strengthen memory," said Dr. McGaugh. "That's what makes us remember
emotionally arousing events so well."
The findings that a minor emotional surge is enough to implant in-
formation a bit more firmly in memory might imply, for example, that
the anxiety students feel while studying for an exam could itself im-
prove their memory for information -- at least to a point. Too much
agitation disrupts concentration on what one is trying to read, and so
interferes with its registering in memory in the first place.
"Psychologists have said for decades that motivation is important
for learning," said Dr. McGaugh. "We'd say excitement is important. In
my judgment, it would do no harm to make learning more exciting."
Another implication is for preventing trauma in people like rescue
workers who know they are about to enter an upsetting situation. The
fight-or-flight system seems to play a major role in the troubling and
intrusive memories that disturb people with post-traumatic stress dis-
order. "This suggests it might be possible to mute the formation of
symptoms by inactivating this system," said Dr. McGaugh. "People like
investigators of airplane crashes could take a propanolol-like drug to
prevent traumatic memories."
Still another implication is "a modest alert that some people taking
beta-blockers for treatments of heart conditions may find the medica-
tion attenuates their memory under emotionally arousing conditions,"
said Dr. McGaugh, referring to the general name for adrenaline-de-
feating drugs. Other studies of the effects of beta-blockers on memory
have come up with mixed results, but its effects specifically on emo-
tional memory have yet to be studied, said Dr. McGaugh.
The findings also suggest that compounds that enhance, rather than
block, the effects of adrenaline and noradrenaline might improve mem-
ory in humans, Dr. McGaugh said. That possibility is already supported
by work with laboratory animals.
Researchers say they are struck by the elegance of the brain's de-
sign for memory. "In evolution, this emotional memory system has ob-
vious adaptive value," said Dr. Cahill. "It's very smart of Mother
Nature to build a system that remembers things in proportion to how
much it helps you survive -- like what to eat and what eats you."
Preliminary results of the 1994 FMSF Legal Survey indicate that most
civil suits brought on the basis of "recovered repressed memories" of
childhood sexual abuse rely almost entirely upon the testimonial of
the complainant. Survey results indicate that for an inordinate number
of suits no objective corroborating evidence is presented or where
evidence is presented, it is found insufficient. Courts, therefore,
are faced with determining the intrinsic reliability of the "recovered
repressed memories" on which the claims are based. There are serious
grounds for doubting their reliability in light of the fact that --
-- the scientific community has challenged the assumption that
memories of repeated traumatic events may be repressed and then re-
trieved in pristine form, unaffected by the kind of well-documented
distortions known to occur with "normal" recollection;
-- many researchers, as well as the American Medical Association,
have shown that at least one memory recovery technique, hypnosis,
touted by some as effective in recovery of memories of traumatic
events, is known to increase suggestibility and confabulation, "memory
hardening", source amnesia and a loss of critical judgment. This view
has been corroborated by a number of leading clinicians and hypnother-
-- clinicians and researchers have warned that a patient's beliefs
about the accuracy of a retrieved memory can be influenced by a ther-
apist's assumptions about memory, repression and hypnosis;
-- there is no accepted "litmus test" with which to conduct an in-
ternal evaluation of the validity of the memory itself;
-- objective corroborative evidence is usually required by compe-
tent professionals in clinical practice to determine the validity of
the "refreshed" memory.
Hypnosis is one "memory enhancement technique" around which an ex-
tensive case law has developed. In most of these cases, hypnosis was
used by a forensic hypnotist to "enhance" the memory of a crime victim
or witness. To date, only a few decisions have referred to memories
induced after formal hypnosis in a therapeutic setting and every one
the author is aware of has been subjected to the criteria of reliabil-
ity of forensic hypnosis precedents. What have been the concerns of
the courts about the reliability of memory "enhanced" by forensic hyp-
nosis? How should those concerns apply to "memory recovery" resulting
from hypnosis in therapy?
Hypnosis is being touted as a "powerful" technique to uncover pain-
ful memories for victims of childhood trauma. Practitioners of hyp-
nosis in "memory recovery" often cite the need for extraordinary mea-
sures to combat the anxiety and defensive mechanism that impede recall
of traumatic experiences. In many cases, so much emphasis is placed on
the removal of obstacles that the reliability of the technique is not
discussed. It is not the place of this report to question the proprie-
ty of such assessments in clinical practice, but to focus on the po-
tential use of such recollections as testimony in a court of law. From
the importance given hypnosis by memory recovery advocates, we may ex-
pect to find hypnosis disclosed in the therapy records of Plaintiffs
in increasing numbers of repressed memory cases.
Over a decade of case law has reviewed studies showing how hypnosis
may alter a subject's memory, raising questions about its reliability
and therefore its admissibility as evidence in court. The rationale
given for the effectiveness of hypnosis as a "memory recovery techni-
que" must be juxtaposed against the concerns with the effect of hypno-
sis on memory as described in professional research, legal cases and
law review literature. These concerns include increased suggestibili-
ty, tendency to confabulate, possible creation of pseudomemory, a
tendency toward "memory hardening", source amnesia and loss of criti-
cal judgment. The United State Supreme Court  stated:
"Three general characteristics of hypnosis may lead to the introduc-
tion of inaccurate memories: the subject becomes 'suggestible' and may
try to please the hypnotist with answers the subject thinks will be
met with approval: the subject is likely to 'confabulate', that is, to
fill in details from the imagination in order to make an answer more
coherent and complete; and the subject experiences 'memory hardening'
which gives him great confidence in both true and false memories,
making effective cross-examination more difficult."
Other courts  have, after extensive review of relevant scientific
studies, considered the following six areas potential problems for the
reliability of a memory which was the subject of a hypnosis session:
1. A person in a hypnotic trance is subject to a heightened degree
of suggestibility. The source of the suggestion could be subtle verbal
or nonverbal cues of which even the hypnotist is not aware. Such sug-
gestion may be of particular concern when the hypnotist is not a
"neutral" party. Suggestions may be heightened by the subject's per-
ception that hypnosis will provide a more accurate recall or by a de-
sire to please the hypnotist.
2. Confabulation may occur when an individual remembers part of the
event and fills in the missing gaps in his or her memory with incor-
rect or inaccurate information. These additions, while plausible, may
consist of facts taken from an unrelated prior experience or from fan-
tasy. It is impossible for anyone, including the subject or a psychia-
trist or psychologist with extensive training in the field of hypno-
sis, to determine whether a particular piece of information is actual
memory or confabulation, absent independent verification.
3. Hypnosis may create a "pseudomemory" in the hypnotized individ-
ual. The vividness of hypnotic recall can give the impression of being
a real memory. Thus after being hypnotized, the individual may false-
ly believe his post-hypnotic recall of the event accurately reflects
the event itself.
4. "Memory hardening" refers to the subjective conviction that the
memory after hypnosis is accurate in every detail, and beyond even the
fallibility most subjects are willing to concede in day-to-day memory
recollection. Memory hardening is exacerbated by certain factors. Be-
fore being hypnotized the subject may be told (or believe) that hypno-
sis will help her/him to remember very clearly only truthful facts a-
bout an event and that the subject will not interject any fantasies.
During the trance s/he may be given the suggestion that after s/he
awakes s/he will be able to remember the event clearly and comprehen-
sively. Some lay hypnotists have maintained that such suggstions actu-
ally guard against the process of confabulation because subjects obey
them to the letter. There is little evidence that such communications
will eliminate the inaccuracies: they are likely to remain the same
with or without the suggestions. The effect, in fact, may be to ensure
uncritical acceptance of the pseudomemory.
Many jurisdictions have noted that the memory-hardening phenomenon
may eliminate fear of perjury as a factor ensuring reliable testimony.
Additionally, effective cross examination may be seriously impeded,
when the witness cannot distinguish between facts known prior to hyp-
nosis, facts confabulated during hypnosis to produce pseudomemories,
and facts learned after hypnosis.
5. Another serious problem in the translation of belief into memory
in a hypnotic session is source amnesia. The subject may confound mem-
ories evoked under hypnosis with prior recall, believing that what was
post-hypnotic memory was known all along. When this happens, it is im-
possible to go back and recreate the subject's pre-hypnotic memory.
Very often hypnotic subjects have refused to believe they actually
went into a trance, others claim they were only pretending to be hyp-
Many jurisdictions conclude that only independent verification of
what the subject says can distinguish between the accurate and the in-
accurate. Many also insist that accurate records be made of the sub-
ject's pre-hypnosis memories to aid in the determination of reliabili-
ty and admissibility.
6. Researchers have shown that hypnosis allows a subject to lower
her/his critical judgment, becoming more willing to accept suggestion
as s/he is more willing to please her/his hypnotist. S/he may also be
more apt to speculate about the details of an experience and more wil-
ling to engage uncritically in fantasy and role playing.
The courts have taken three main approaches to admission of hypnoti-
cally-enhanced testimony. The approach adopted by a particular juris-
diction generally reflects its perception of the degree to which the
problems with hypnosis affect a person's memory of an event. Regard-
less of the approach followed, testimony based on memory created and
induced solely under hypnosis where no memory existed prior to the
hypnotic interview and where no independent objective corroboration is
presented, has been rejected. The use of hypnosis as a sort of "lie
detector test" has also been rejected. (The most recent edition of the
FMSF Summary of Legal Resources reviews relevant case law and includes
cites to professional research and law review articles related to the
admissibility of post hypnosis testimony.) These approaches can be
summarized as follows:
1. The first approach  establishes a per se rule excluding any
hypnotically refreshed or enhanced testimony at trial. However, even
under this rule some jurisdictions may allow the previously hypnotized
witness to testify about the details of events that are demonstrably
recalled prior to undergoing hypnosis. The burden is on the offering
party to show the extent of the testimony recalled without the aid of
hypnosis and in some courts to show that the new evidence has met the
Frye standard. The rationale in most of the cases adopting a per se
exclusion rule is derived from the admissibility requirement for
scientific evidence set by the United States Supreme Court in Frye v
2. The second approach  admits such testimony, holding that hyp-
nosis affects the weight and credibility of hypnotically-refreshed
testimony, not its admissibility. Credibility and weight are to be
determined at trial by cross-examination of the witness, based on
expert testimony or aided by cautionary instructions to the jury. A
basic tenet of this approach is that hypnotically-enhanced recall is
similar to ordinary recall and where differences exist they are only a
matter of degree. In other words, jurisdictions following this view
find that hypnotically-refreshed testimony is not inadmissible as a
matter of constitutional law.
3. The third approach  holds that hypnosis may affect reliability
of hypnotically-refreshed testimony and admits such testimony as long
as the party offering the testimony establishes compliance with cer-
tain procedural safeguards. Related to this approach are the jurisdic-
tions which consider reliability of the testimony on a "case-by-case"
or "totality of the circumstances" basis. Under this approach, proced-
ural safeguards as well as other factors are considered with the in-
tent of balancing the inherent dangers of hypnotically refreshed tes-
timony against the testimony's reliability. The safeguards suggested
are used by trial courts to determine reliability and subsequent ad-
missibility. Hypnotic testimony from a session which follows the sug-
gested guidelines is not automatically admissible, nor is testimony
automatically inadmissible where all possible safeguards were not fol-
lowed. A listing of some of the safeguards considered by the courts
is given below. Not every court has considered each of these, although
courts contemplating admission under the "totality of the circum-
stances" basis are likely to have done so. Again, see the FMSF Summary
of Legal Resources for related case cites. Safeguards considered
-- whether the hypnotist is a licensed, qualified psychiatrist or
psychologist trained in the use of hypnosis and aware of its possible
effects on memory so as to be able to aid in the prevention of improp-
er suggestions and confabulation;
-- whether the hypnotist is neutral with little investment in the
ultimate disposition of the case. The qualified professional should
have minimal preconceptions about the case;
-- any information given to the hypnotist prior to the session
should be noted in writing so that subsequently the extent of infor-
mation that the subject received from the hypnotist may be determined;
-- a detailed record should be made of pre-hypnosis description by
the subject to determine whether the hypnotic interview affected the
memory of the witness;
-- the session should be recorded, and preferably video-taped, so
that a permanent record is available to the court to determine the na-
ture of the questioning and the existence of any suggestive proced-
-- evaluation of any discernible motivation the subject may have
for remembering or forgetting the events in question;
-- the amount of confidence the witness had in his initial recol-
lection and whether hypnosis so enhanced the witness' confidence in
his original recollection that the opposing party's right to cross-ex-
amine has been substantially and materially impaired;
-- the appropriateness of using hypnosis to restore memory loss in
-- the existence of corroborating evidence independent of the pro-
How will the higher courts respond to the reliability of repressed
memory claims? Can the clinical needs of exploring "narrative truth"
be reconciled with the courts' requirements for "historical truth"?
Part II of this article, to appear in a subsequent newsletter, will
review the reasoning of courts which have considered the reliability
of testimony which was the subject of therapeutic hypnosis.
In the words of Judge J. Wright :
"Psychotherapists who engage in recovered memory methods are
considered either forensic or clinical. Each group uses different
techniques in attempting to retrieve a repressed memory because each
group is attempting to accomplish something fundamentally different.
The forensic psychotherapist is typically trying to elicit informa-
tion that will be admissible at trial and, therefore, will not 'pre-
pare' the patient, make suggestions, or ask leading questions during
therapy. The clinician's purpose, however, is completely different.
The clinician's goal is rehabilitation. The treatment program is
provided solely to benefit the patient. If a patient's rehabilita-
tion can be accomplished by assisting that patient to recall a trau-
matic memory heretofore repressed, whether the memory is fact or
fantasy, the clinician will encourage the patient to recall that
memory in whatever form. For it is not necessarily the recalling of
an accurate memory with which the clinician is concerned, but with
the patient's overall rehabilitation. For example, in attempting to
rehabilitate patients by helping them recall a traumatic memory,
clinicians may reveal their own expectations before the session about
the information they expect to recover, ask leading questions, and
encourage patients to use their imagination. None of these techni-
ques is appropriate in the forensic setting....The practice of mem-
ory recovery is fraught with unreliability and, when used in the
judicial system, should receive...skepticism and critical examina-
Part II of this article will appear in a subsequent newsletter.
 Herman, J. (1992) Trauma and Recovery. Basic Books.
 Rock v Arkansas, 483 U.S. 44, 62, 97 L.Ed.2d 37, 107 S.Ct.2704
 The points noted here are taken directly from decisions which
quoted relevant scientific findings. For an extensive listing of de-
cisions and jurisdictions which have reviewed these concerns in
making admissibility determinations, see FMSF Summary of Legal Re-
sources, 1994 edition which may be ordered from the FMS Foundation.
 See decisions from Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California,
Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Maryland,
Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, New York,
North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pensylvania, Utah, Virginia and
 Frye v United States, 54 App.D.C. 46, 293 F. 1013 (1923) sets
the standard for acceptance of scientific evidence, admitting only
if the offered evidence has met general acceptance in the relevant
scientific community. The purpose of this standard, where applied,
is to prevent the jury from being misled by unproven and unsound
scientific methods. The courts hold that the method hypnosis has
not gained general acceptance in the relevant scientific community,
nor can the enhanced memory, which is a product of the method, be
 See decisions from First Circuit, Third Circuit, Ninth
Circuit, Tenth Circuit, Louisianna, Mississippi, North Dakota,
 See decisions from Idaho, New Jersey, New Mexico, Texas,
Wisconsin, Fifth Circuit, Eighth Circuit.
 Several courts have rejected the "case-by-case" safeguards
approach, noting that safeguards refer to only one of the potential
problems with hypnosis, that of suggestibility. The other problems
affecting reliability can be neither limited nor measured by the
 Ault v Jasko, 70 Ohio St. 3d 114; 637 N.E.2d 870; 1994. Judge
J. Wright for the dissent. Ohio LEXIS 1840 (Ohio Supreme Court,
| This issue is the last newsletter of 1994. Members, however, will |
| soon receive a copy of a new FMSF booklet, |
| "Frequently Asked Questions." |
| We hope you will write with suggestions for improving it. |
| HAPPY HOLIDAYS |
FMSF FUNDRAISING DRIVE
When the FMS Foundation began, we really didn't have any understand-
ing of the scope of the problem that would be exposed. We wanted to
learn what was causing our children to rewrite their histories, to do
cruel things and to cut off contact. We wanted to find ways to reach
our children. We wanted to go out of business.
As we consider the strides we have made along with the things that
still need to be done, it has become clear that we should stick
around. The job is not done. If that is the case, then we need to
plan. The Foundation has been existing on a financial "hand-to-mouth"
status. Our critics' claims notwithstanding, stories of our great
wealth are as fantastic as the stories of alien abduction or satanic
cult abuse. We are, therefore, going to start a fund-raising drive.
The Foundation directors have asked Charles Caviness to assume the
leadership in a fund raising effort. Charles, a vice president and
financial consultant with a major brokerage house, has been an active
member in his local area and at the state level in California. He is
active in his home area in various secular and religious-affiliated
philanthropic areas and brings a wealth of experience to this impor-
tant volunteer role. Currently, along with a small planning committee,
Charles is completing the final preparation for the effort to contact
people who have been involved with the Foundation. When he or his
volunteers gets in touch with you, please be as generous as you can.
Confidentiality: Because of FMSF policies about strict confidentia-
lity, the Foundation cannot use many of the standard fund-raising
strategies of ordinary organizations. It's a dilemma and a challenge.
We count on your help and your resolve to put an end to this nonsense
| MEMORY AND REALITY:RECONCILIATION CONFERENCE TAPES |
| The Memory and Reality: Reconciliation conference will be |
| professionally videotaped and audiotaped by Aaron Video Company. |
| When tapes are available, you will be able to order directly |
| from Aaron Video. Information about ordering tapes and the cost of |
| the tapes will appear in the January 1995 FMSF Newsletter. |
| Aaron Video, 6822 Parma Park Blvd.,Parma, OH 44130 |
FMS FOUNDATION and JOHNS HOPKINS MEDICAL INSTITUTIONS
MEMORY AND REALITY: RECONCILIATION
Scientific, Clinical and Legal Issues of False Memory Syndrome
December 9 - 11, 1994
Stouffer Harborplace Hotel, Baltimore, Maryland
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 8, 1994
6-8 pm Registration, Stouffer Harborplace Hotel, Fifth Floor Foyer
FRIDAY, DECEMBER 9, 1994
7:15 Registration and Coffee, Fifth Floor Foyer
8:00 WELCOME AND OPENING REMARKS
Pamela P. Freyd, Ph.D.
Paul R. McHugh, M.D.
8:15 SCIENTIFIC ISSUES -- NATURE OF MEMORY
Chair: David S. Holmes, Ph.D.
KEYNOTE ADDRESS: SCIENTIFIC FINDINGS ON MEMORY DISTORTION
Elizabeth F. Loftus, Ph.D.
9:00 OVERVIEW OF RESEARCH ON MEMORY DISTORTION
Daniel L. Schacter, Ph.D.
9:30 Refreshment Break
9:45 ADULT MEMORIES OF CHILDHOOD SEXUAL ABUSE
Linda Meyer Williams, Ph.D.
10:15 PSYCHOTHERAPISTS' BELIEFS ABOUT RECOVERED MEMORIES
D. Stephen Lindsay, Ph.D.
10:45 MEMORY SYSTEMS OF THE BRAIN
Larry R. Squire, Ph.D.
11:30 Lunch (on your own)
12:45 SCIENTIFIC ISSUES -- SUGGESTIBILITY AND INFLUENCE
Chair: Campbell Perry, Ph.D.
KEYNOTE ADDRESS: INFLUENCE IN PSYCHOTHERAPY -- THE BIG PICTURE
Richard J. Ofshe, Ph.D.
1:30 HERMENEUTIC REASONING: A DOUBLE-EDGED SWORD
Phillip F. Slavney, M.D.
2:00 FALSE MEMORY SYNDROME: AN ANTHROPOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE
Michael G. Kenny, Ph.D.
2:30 HISTORICAL AND NARRATIVE TRUTH
Donald P. Spence, M.D.
3:15 Refreshment Break
3:30 CLINICAL ISSUES -- CONSEQUENCES OF IGNORING SCIENCE
Chair: Harold I. Lief, M.D.
DEMOGRAPHIC AND DESCRIPTIVE ASPECTS OF RETRACTORS
Harold I. Lief, M.D.
Janet M. Fetkewicz
3:55 WHEN MEMORIES INTERFERE WITH INSIGHT IN PSYCHOTHERAPY
George K. Ganaway, M.D.
4:20 APPROPRIATE AND INAPPROPRIATE THERAPY
IN RECOVERED MEMORY THERAPY
Margaret T. Singer, Ph.D.
5:00 Formal Program Adjourns
5:15 INFORMAL DISCUSSION GROUPS/POSTER SESSIONS
Coordinators: Allen Feld, M.S.W.
Joseph de Rivera, Ph.D.
SATURDAY, DECEMBER 10, 1994
8:00 CLINICAL ISSUES -- STANDARDS OF CARE
Chair: August T. Piper, Jr., M.D.
KEYNOTE ADDRESS: THE DO'S AND DON'TS
FOR THE CLINICIAN MANAGING MEMORIES OF ABUSE
Paul R. McHugh, M.D.
9:00 BELIEF IN THE PATIENT?
Harold Merskey, D.M.
9:30 CHILDHOOD SEXUAL ABUSE AND ADULT PSYCHIATRIC DISORDERS:
A REVIEW OF THE EVIDENCE
James I. Hudson, M.D.
Harrison G. Pope, Jr., M.D.
10:15 Refreshment Break
10:30 CLINICAL ISSUES -- RECONCILIATION
Chair: John Hochman, M.D.
FALSE MEMORY, DISSOCIATION AND PSEUDOIDENTITY
Louis Jolyon West, M.D.
11:30 REINTEGRATING FAMILIES
Paul W. Simpson, Ph.D.
11:50 EXPERIENCES WITH REBUILDING FAMILIES
Saul Wasserman, M.D.
12:30 Lunch (on you own)
1:45 LEGAL ISSUES -- FROM THE PLAINTIFF'S TABLE
Chair: Andre W. Brewster, Esq.
KEYNOTE ADDRESS: MEMORY AND TRUTH
Richard Harrington, J.D.
2:30 REPRESENTING THE PRIMARY VICTIM
Skip Simpson, J.D.
3:00 STATUS OF LAWSUITS
Anita J. Lipton
3:25 Refreshment Break
3:35 LEGAL ISSUES -- FROM THE DEFENSE TABLE
Chair: Richard Green, M.D., J.D.
DEFENDING THE FALSELY ACCUSED
Alan D. Gold, Barrister
4:00 CONSEQUENCES OF THE THERAPIST'S CLAIM,
"I'M NOT A DETECTIVE"
Steven P. Moen, J.D.
4:25 EVIDENTIARY CONSIDERATIONS RELATIVE TO
THE USE OF REPRESSED MEMORY THEORIES
Andrew J. Graham, J.D.
5:00 Formal Program Adjourns
5:15 INFORMAL DISCUSSION GROUPS/POSTER SESSIONS
Coordinators: Allen Feld, M.S.W.
Joseph de Rivera, Ph.D.
SUNDAY, DECEMBER 11, 1994
8:30 LEGAL ISSUES -- RIGHTS OF SOCIETY
Chair: Loren Pankratz, Ph.D.
DUTY OF CARE TO THIRD PERSONS
Ralph Slovenko, J.D., Ph.D.
MEMORY RECOVERY THERAPY: COSTLY CARE FOR NEGATIVE GAIN
Douglas E. Mould, Ph.D.
GOOD NEWS / BAD NEWS -- THE BURDEN IS OURS
Terence W. Campbell, Ph.D.
10:15 Refreshment Break
10:30 EDUCATIONAL ISSUES -- NEED FOR CHANGE
Chair: Robyn M. Dawes, Ph.D.
EDUCATIONAL ISSUES IN PSYCHIATRY
Paul R. McHugh, M.D.
EDUCATIONAL ISSUES IN SOCIAL WORK
Carolyn Saari, Ph.D.
EDUCATIONAL ISSUES IN PSYCHOLOGY
Lee Sechrest, Ph.D.
12:15 BECOME PART OF THE SOLUTION
Pamela P. Freyd, Ph.D.
Paul R. McHugh, M.D.
1:00 Conference Adjourns
SMALL GROUP SESSIONS - Tentative
Registration for these sessions will be done at the conference.
Sons as Accusers
Self-care tips for the falsely accused
Dealing with state licensing boards
Families being sued: A proactive stance
Mediation and trial preparation
For families new to FMS
Meeting with your child's therapist
Family's experience with reconciliation
Courage to stand: A parent's experience on being sued.
Dealing with the media
From MPD to DID: New names -- old problems
Living with False Memory Syndrome
State contact meeting
Spouses of the accused
Meeting of social workers
How to find a lawyer
Experiencing religious counseling
Canadian families meeting
Siblings caught in the middle
FAMILIES, RETRACTORS & PROFESSIONALS WORKING TOGETHER
3-Day Seminar: November 4, 5, 6, 1994
"Current Topics in the Law and Mental Health"
presented by Missoula Psychiatric Services
The Westin Hotel, Seattle
Call 406-542-7526 for information
Lunch meeting, November 19, 1994
Guest speaker: Richard Ofshe, Ph.D.
author of Making Monsters
Call San Francisco/Bay Area contacts
Lecture - Friday, December 2, 1994 - 7 pm
Guest speaker: Larry Hedges, Ph.D.
distinguished psychoanalyst & author of
Remembering, Repeating and Working Through Childhood Trauma
Call Chris or Alan(714) 733-2925 for information.
Call person listed for meeting time & location.
key: (MO) = monthly; (bi-MO) = bi-monthly
ARKANSAS - Area code 501
Al & Lela 363-4368
Sacramento/Central Valley - bi-monthly
Charles & Mary Kay (916) 961-8257
San Francisco & Bay Area - bi-monthly
east bay area
Judy (510) 254-2605
san francisco & north bay
Gideon (415) 389-0254
Charles (415) 984-6626 (day); 435-9618 (eve)
south bay area
Jack & Pat (408) 425-1430
Last Saturday, (Bi-MO)
Carole (805) 967-8058
burbank (formerly valencia)
Jane & Mark (805) 947-4376
4th Saturday (MO)10:00 am
central orange county
Chris & Alan (714) 733-2925
1st Friday (MO) - 7:00 pm
orange county (formerly laguna beach)
Jerry & Eileen (714) 494-9704
3rd Sunday (MO) - 6:00 pm
Covina group (formerly rancho
Floyd & Libby (818) 330-2321
1st Monday, (MO) - 7:30 pm
west orange county
Carole (310) 596-8048
2nd Saturday (MO)
Ruth (303) 757-3622
4th Saturday, (MO)1:00 pm
CONNECTICUT - Area code 203
New Haven area
Madeline (305) 966-4FMS
Delray Beach PRT
Esther (407) 364-8290
2nd & 4th Thursday [MO] 1:00 pm
Chicago metro area (South of the
2nd Sunday [MO] 2:00 pm
Roger (708) 366-3717
Indianapolis area (150 mile radius)
Gene (317) 861-4720 or 861-5832
Nickie (317) 471-0922 (phone & fax)
Betty/Gayle (515) 270-6976
Pat (913) 738-4840 or Jan (816)931-1340
2nd Sunday (MO) except december
Dixie (606) 356-9309
Bob (502) 957-2378
Last Sunday (MO) 2:00 pm
MAINE - Area code 207
Irvine & Arlene 942-8473
3rd Sunday (MO)
Ellicot City area
Margie (410) 750-8694
MASSACHUSETTS / NEW ENGLAND
Jean (508) 250-1055
Grand Rapids Area - Jenison
Catharine (616) 363-1354
2nd Monday (MO)
Terry & Collette (507) 642-3630
Pat (913) 738-4840 or Jan (816)931-1340
2nd Sunday (MO)
St. Louis area
Karen (314) 432-8789
3rd Sunday [MO]1:30 pm
Retractors support group also meeting.
Springfield - Area Codes 417 and 501
Dorothy & Pete (417) 882-1821
Nancy & John (417) 883-4873
4th Sunday [MO] 5:30 pm
NEW JERSEY (So.)-See PENNSYLVANIA (Wayne)
NEW YORK - Upstate / Albany area
Elaine (518) 399-5749
Bob (513) 541-5272
OKLAHOMA - Area code 405
Len 364-4063 Dee 942-0531
HJ 755-3816 Rosemary 439-2459
Paul & Betty (707) 761-3364
Rick & Renee (412) 563-5616
Wayne (includes So. Jersey)
Jim & Joanne (610) 783-0396
No further meetings until March,1995
Nancy & Jim (512) 478-8395
Lee & Jean (214) 279-0250
Jo or Beverly (713) 464-8970
Wednesday, November 2, 7:30 pm
Speaker: Eleanor Goldstein
VERMONT & UPSTATE NEW YORK
Elaine (518) 399-5749
Katie & Leo (414) 476-0285
Vancouver & Mainland
Ruth (604) 925-1539
Last Saturday (MO) 1:00-4:00 pm
Victoria & Vancouver Island
John (604) 721-3219
3rd Tuesday (MO) 7:30 pm
Muriel (204) 261-0212
1st Sunday (MO)
Eileen (613) 592-4714
Pat (416) 444-9078
Saturday, November 26 (Bi-MO)
Ken & June, P O Box 363, Unley, SA 5061
Task Force False Memory Syndrome of
"Ouders voor Kinderen"
Mrs. Anna de Jong, (0) 20-693 5629
Mrs. Colleen Waugh, (09) 416-7443
The British False Memory Society
Roger Scotford (0225) 868-682
Deadline for JANUARY 1995 Issue: Friday, December 16
RATE INCREASE - Nov 1. '94 The FMSF Newsletter is published 10 times a
year by the False Memory Syndrome Foundation. A subscription is inclu-
ded in membership fees. Others may subscribe by sending a check or
money order, payable to FMS Foundation, to the address below. 1995
subscription rates: USA: 1 year $30, Student $10; Canada: 1 year $35;
(in U.S. dollars); Foreign: 1 year $40. (Single issue price: $3 plus
What if, parents who are facing lawsuits and want legal information
about FMS cases, had to be told, "I'm sorry, there isn't any such
What if, your son or daughter began to doubt his or her memories and
called FMSF only to get a recording, "This number is no longer in
What if, a journalist asks you where to get information about the
FMS phenomenon, and you had to answer, "Sorry, I don't know?"
What if, you want to ask a question that only an expert, familiar
with FMS can answer, and find out that FMSF can no longer provide that
information? Where would you turn?
What if the False Memory Syndrome Foundation did not exist? A
frightening thought, isn't it?
Please support our Foundation. We cannot survive without your
Reprinted from the August 1994 PFA (MI) Newsletter
YEARLY FMSF MEMBERSHIP INFORMATION
Professional - Includes Newsletter $125______
Family - Includes Newsletter $100______
Additional Contribution: _____________
__Visa: Card # & expiration date:____________________
__Mastercard:: Card # & expiration date:____________________
__Check or Money Order: Payable to FMS Foundation in U.S. dollars
Please include: Name, address, state, country, phone, fax
| Do you have access to e-mail? Send a message to |
| firstname.lastname@example.org |
| if you wish to receive electronic versions of this newsletter and |
| notices of radio and television broadcasts about FMS. All the |
| message need say is "add to the FMS list". It would be useful, but |
| not necessary, if you add your full name (all addresses and names |
| will remain strictly confidential). |
The False Memory Syndrome Foundation is a qualified 501(c)3 corpora-
tion with its principal offices in Philadelphia and governed by its
Board of Directors. While it encourages participation by its members
in its activities, it must be understood that the Foundation has no
affiliates and that no other organization or person is authorized to
speak for the Foundation without the prior written approval of the Ex-
ecutive Director. All membership dues and contributions to the Founda-
tion must be forwarded to the Foundation for its disposition.
3401 Market Street suite 130, Philadelphia, PA 19104, (215-387-1865)
Pamela Freyd, Ph.D., Executive Director
FMSF Scientific and Professional Advisory Board, November 1, 1994:
TERENCE W. CAMPBELL, Ph.D., Clinical and Forensic Psychology,
Sterling Heights, MI; ROSALIND CARTWRIGHT, Rush Presbyterian St. Lukes
Medical Center, Chicago, IL; JEAN CHAPMAN, Ph.D., University of
Wisconsin, Madison, WI; LOREN CHAPMAN, Ph.D., University of Wisconsin,
Madison, WI; ROBYN M. DAWES, Ph.D., Carnegie Mellon University,
Pittsburgh, PA; DAVID F. DINGES, Ph.D., University of Pennsylvania,
The Institute of Pennsylvania Hospital, Philadelphia, PA; FRED
FRANKEL, M.B.Ch.B., D.P.M., Beth Israel Hospital, Harvard Medical
School, Boston, MA; GEORGE K. GANAWAY, M.D., Emory University of
Medicine, Atlanta, GA; MARTIN GARDNER, Author, Hendersonville, NC;
ROCHEL GELMAN, Ph.D., University of California, Los Angeles, CA; HENRY
GLEITMAN, Ph.D., University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA; LILA
GLEITMAN, Ph.D., University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA; RICHARD
GREEN, M.D., J.D., Charing Cross Hospital, London; DAVID A. HALPERIN,
M.D., Mount Sinai School of Medicine, New York, NY; ERNEST HILGARD,
Ph.D., Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA; JOHN HOCHMAN, M.D., UCLA
Medical School, Los Angeles, CA; DAVID S. HOLMES, Ph.D., University
of Kansas, Lawrence, KS; PHILIP S. HOLZMAN, Ph.D., Harvard
University, Cambridge, MA; JOHN KIHLSTROM, Ph.D., Yale University, New
Haven, CT; HAROLD LIEF, M.D., University of Pennsylvania,
Philadelphia, PA; ELIZABETH LOFTUS, Ph.D., University of Washington,
Seattle, WA; PAUL McHUGH, M.D., Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore,
MD; HAROLD MERSKEY, D.M., University of Western Ontario, London,
Canada; ULRIC NEISSER, Ph.D., Emory University, Atlanta, GA; RICHARD
OFSHE, Ph.D., University of California, Berkeley, CA; MARTIN ORNE,
M.D., Ph.D., University of Pennsylvania, The Institute of Pennsylvania
Hospital, Philadelphia, PA; LOREN PANKRATZ, Ph.D., Oregon Health
Sciences University, Portland, OR; CAMPBELL PERRY, Ph.D., Concordia
University, Montreal, Canada; MICHAEL A. PERSINGER, Ph.D., Laurentian
University, Ontario, Canada; AUGUST T. PIPER, Jr., M.D., Seattle, WA;
HARRISON POPE, Jr., M.D., Harvard Medical School, Cambridge, MA; JAMES
RANDI, Author and Magician, Plantation, FL; CAROLYN SAARI, Ph.D.,
Loyola University, Chicago, IL; THEODORE SARBIN, Ph.D., University of
California, Santa Cruz, CA; THOMAS A. SEBEOK, Ph.D., Indiana
Univeristy, Bloomington, IN; LOUISE SHOEMAKER, Ph.D., University of
Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA; MARGARET SINGER, Ph.D., University of
California, Berkeley, CA; RALPH SLOVENKO, J.D., Ph.D., Wayne State
University Law School, Detroit, MI; DONALD SPENCE, Ph.D., Robert Wood
Johnson Medical Center, Piscataway, NJ; JEFFREY VICTOR, Ph.D.,
Jamestown Community College, Jamestown, NY; HOLLIDA WAKEFIELD, M.A.,
Institute of Psychological Therapies, Northfield, MN; LOUIS JOLYON
WEST, M.D., UCLA School of Medicine, Los Angeles, CA.
E-Mail Fredric L. Rice / The Skeptic Tank