False Memory Syndrome Foundation - Vol 03 No 06 - 1994 june

Magazine Overview

Title: FMS Foundation Newsletter
Issue: Vol 3 No.6
Date: June 3, 1994
Publisher: FMS Foundation
Country: USA

This issue of the FMS Foundation Newsletter focuses heavily on the controversies and criticisms surrounding recovered memory therapy (RMT), child abuse allegations, and the accountability of therapists. It presents a strong stance against RMT, highlighting potential dangers and questioning its scientific validity.

Editorial and Cover Story

The cover story features a quote from a father in Michigan stating, "Our children have been used as human guinea pigs," expressing concern that recovered memory therapy is not scientifically proven to be safe or effective and may be experimental, especially if patients have not given informed consent. The article asserts that RMT primarily harms women and criticizes professional organizations and licensing boards for failing to protect the public.

The Extent of Recovered Memory Therapy

An article titled "HOW WIDESPREAD IS THIS PHENOMENON?" by Debra Poole and Stephen Lindsay presents findings from a study of licensed doctoral therapists. The study indicates that a significant percentage of therapists use memory recovery techniques, believe it's important for clients to remember abuse, and sometimes form opinions about abuse history based on limited interaction. The results suggest that over 90,000 clients may have received psychotherapy from therapists with an emphasis on memory recovery.

Critiques of Recovered Memory Therapy

Several sections delve into the criticisms of RMT. One piece by August Piper, Jr., M.D., discusses the "strange world of multiple personality disorder (MPD)" and notes a shift in an authority's views, now acknowledging that memories unearthed via hypnosis or Amytal should not be considered accurate without corroboration. The author criticizes the overdiagnosis of MPD and the potential for hypnosis to create more alter personalities. Another section defines "abreaction" as an emotional release after recalling a repressed experience, questioning the validity of claims of repression and amnesia, which jurists have historically been skeptical of.

The "Sybil" Case and its Implications

A reprint from Esquire, "Sybil by John Taylor," examines the case of Sybil, a woman diagnosed with MPD. The article details the alleged abuse described in Sybil's recovered memories and the role of psychoanalyst Dr. Cornelia Wilbur and author Flora Rheta Schreiber. Herbert Spiegel, a psychiatrist who treated Sybil, expresses skepticism about the MPD diagnosis and the subsequent book, suggesting that the "Sybil" narrative may have been influenced by commercial interests and a lack of rigorous diagnostic standards.

Satanic Ritual Abuse and FMSF Critics

An article reports on a British government inquiry that found no evidence for claims of satanic abuse in 84 investigated cases. The report defined "satanic abuse" as rites involving torture and sexual abuse of children for a magical or religious objective, but found no evidence of such acts in the cases studied. The newsletter also addresses criticisms from "The Journal of Psychohistory," refuting accusations against the founder and affiliated researchers of the False Memory Syndrome Foundation (FMSF), particularly regarding pedophilia and guilt by association tactics.

Legal Corner and Ramona Decision Analysis

Jim Simons, J.D., provides an analysis of the "Ramona Decision" in California, which is expected to influence legal reasoning nationwide regarding parents' rights to sue therapists. The analysis outlines the four elements required for a negligence claim (duty of care, breach, causation, injury) and how they apply to professional negligence. A key challenge is establishing the therapist's duty of care to a non-patient parent, which is crucial for standing to sue.

Advice for Parents and Retractors

The newsletter offers guidance for parents considering meeting with their child's therapist, emphasizing realistic expectations and strategic preparation. It suggests that communication between therapists might be beneficial. For those who have experienced RMT, the newsletter suggests that retractors can gain benefit by educating themselves about "mind control" and "thought reform" techniques, referencing Robert Lifton's work.

Book Review

Allen Feld reviews "True and False Memories of Childhood Sexual Trauma: Suggestions of Abuse" by Michael D. Yapko. Feld describes the book as accessible and important for therapists and families. He notes Yapko's research on therapist suggestibility, human memory, and hypnosis, and his emphasis on the need for therapists to understand these issues to avoid causing harm.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes throughout this issue are the critique of recovered memory therapy, the potential for therapists to implant false memories, the lack of scientific rigor in certain therapeutic practices, and the need for greater accountability from mental health professionals. The FMS Foundation's stance is clearly critical of RMT, advocating for caution, rigorous testing, and protection of individuals and families from potentially harmful therapeutic interventions. The newsletter also highlights the importance of legal recourse and informed consent in therapeutic settings.

This issue of the FMS Foundation Newsletter, dated June 1994, focuses heavily on the complex topic of false memories, exploring its scientific underpinnings, legal ramifications, and psychological implications. The cover story, "Miscoding is Seen as the Root of False Memories" by Daniel Goleman, highlights the growing consensus among neurologists and cognitive scientists that 'source amnesia'—the inability to recall the origin of a memory—is a key factor in the creation of false memories.

Scientific Basis of False Memories

The newsletter details how the brain encodes memories by distributing sensory information across different parts of the neocortex, with the limbic system binding these together. However, the frontal lobes are identified as crucial for 'source memory,' and damage to these areas can lead to confabulation, where individuals create stories to make sense of fragmented memories. Scientists like Dr. Morris Moscovitch and Dr. Daniel Schacter explain that source memory defects are a major cause of distorted memories, often leading people to confuse what they heard, imagined, or what actually happened.

Source amnesia is described as common and usually benign, such as recognizing a face but not remembering where or when it was first seen. However, it can become problematic when it leads to the fabrication of entire events. The article notes that memory is not like a video camera but is a 'fragile reconstruction.' Dr. Marsel Mesulam emphasizes that memories are constantly reshuffled and decayed, with the context of a memory (time and place) being the quickest to fade, as supported by the work of Dr. Charles Brainerd.

Furthermore, memories can be contaminated by 'leakage' from related information, leading individuals to infer details and then confuse these inferences with actual events. Dr. Schacter warns that vividness does not equate to accuracy. The newsletter also references studies where false memories have been experimentally implanted, demonstrating the vulnerability of memory to suggestion.

Children's Susceptibility

Children are particularly susceptible to false memories, as reported by Dr. Stephen Ceci. Studies show that repeated questioning can lead children to believe that events they only imagined or were suggested to them actually occurred. These false memories can be so elaborate that even child abuse specialists struggle to distinguish them from true memories. Dr. Ceci's research indicates that about 58% of children in one study fabricated false accounts for suggested events, and a quarter concocted stories for most of the phony events.

The Role of Therapy and Suggestion

Dr. Ceci suggests that encouraging a person to create a mental image can make it more familiar, leading them to perceive it as an actual memory. He notes that even after explaining how false memories can be implanted, some children remain convinced of their reality. The newsletter also discusses how methods like hypnosis, which heighten suggestibility, can lead patients to become 'honest liars,' convinced of the truth of a false memory. Dr. David Spiegel's research shows that hypnosis can create an inflated conviction of accuracy without improving actual accuracy, a phenomenon that can also occur with highly suggestible patients being pressured by therapists.

Legal Ramifications: Bystander vs. Direct Victim

The newsletter extensively covers the legal evolution of claims for negligent infliction of emotional distress, particularly focusing on the distinction between 'bystander' and 'direct' victims in California law.

The Dillon Case and its Refinements

The 'bystander' theory, initially permitted in cases where a plaintiff suffered emotional distress from witnessing the injury of a third person (like a mother witnessing her child's injury), was refined. The case of *Ochoa v. Superior Court* (1985) expanded this by allowing recovery even without a sudden, brief occurrence, provided the plaintiff observed both the defendant's conduct and the resultant injury, and was aware the conduct was causing the injury.

The Molien Case and Direct Victim Theory

*Molien v. Kaiser Foundation Hospitals* (1988) introduced a crucial distinction. In this case, a doctor's misdiagnosis of a wife as having a sexually transmitted disease led to the husband suffering emotional distress. The court held the doctor owed a duty directly to the husband because his conduct was directed at the husband as well as the wife, establishing the 'direct victim' analysis.

Marlene F. v. Affiliated Clinic and Thing v. La Chuysa

*Marlene F. v. Affiliated Clinic, Inc.* (1989) further revised the third-party plaintiff test. In a case involving a therapist who molested sons, causing mothers emotional distress, the court found the mothers were direct victims because the therapy addressed family dynamics, not just individual issues. However, *Thing v. La Chuysa* (1989) significantly restricted bystander recovery, stating it is only allowed under strictly limited circumstances: close relationship to the victim, presence at the scene, awareness of the injury-producing event, and resulting serious emotional distress. This case reinforced that the new restrictions did not apply to those who could claim to be 'direct' victims.

Schwartz and Martin Cases

The *Schwartz v. Regents of University of California* (1990) case held that for negligent misdiagnosis, individuals whose interests are foreseeable and directly affected by the communication of the misdiagnosis have standing as direct victims. However, for negligent treatment, only those receiving treatment have standing, as the 'end and aim' of treatment is directed solely at the patient. The *Martin v. by and through Martin* (1991) case affirmed this, stating that when negligence occurs during medical treatment, the defendant's conduct is directed solely at the child/patient, not the parent who enters into the contract as a surrogate.

Burgess v. Superior Court

In *Burgess v. Superior Court* (1992), the California Supreme Court held that a mother was a 'direct' victim in a negligent infliction of emotional distress claim arising from injury to her child during delivery. The court clarified that bystander liability applies when the defendant had no preexisting relationship with the plaintiff and had not assumed a duty of care beyond that owed to the public. In contrast, the 'direct' victim label applies when damages for emotional distress result from a breach of duty assumed by the defendant, imposed by law, or arising from a relationship between the two.

Reader Contributions and Foundation Information

The newsletter includes several personal accounts from readers. One 'Mom' shares her joy at reconnecting with her daughter after three years of estrangement, attributing her relief partly to the FMS Foundation. Another 'Mom' expresses bewilderment over her daughter's apparent happiness five years after a significant estrangement, questioning whether to address it. A 'Daughter' writes a tribute to her mother, seeking to clear her deceased father's name from accusations of abuse, which she attributes to 'therapy.' Another 'Mom' expresses gratitude for new friends made through FMSF and shares how she facilitated a family reunion for her mother.

There is also a personal ad seeking individuals involved in 'Reevaluation counseling.'

Upcoming Events and Resources

The newsletter announces a major conference, "Memory and Reality: Reconciliation: Scientific, Clinical and Legal Issues of FMS," scheduled for December 8-11, 1994, in Baltimore, Maryland. It provides hotel accommodations at the Stouffer Harborplace Hotel and travel arrangements through UNIGLOBE Travel, Inc., with a special discount from USAIR. Information is also provided for the Baltimore Area Visitors Center.

The tentative schedule for the conference includes panels on the overview of phenomena, scientific issues (dissociation, repression, imagination, suggestibility, narrative), clinical issues (standard of care, family reconciliation), and legal issues (credible evidence, guilty vs. not guilty, rights of individuals, patients, families, rights of society). Numerous speakers are listed, including prominent researchers and professionals in the field.

A registration form for the conference is included, detailing fees for FMS Foundation members and nonmembers, with advance, on-site, and one-day options. It directs participants to mail registration forms and fees to Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions and membership dues to the FMS Foundation in Philadelphia.

Family Survey Update

A 'Family Survey Update' reveals that out of 492 coded replies, 85% of accusations involved the father, 40% the mother, 13% 'other,' 12% grandparents, and 9% siblings. Of the 81 respondents who did not know if Satanic ritual abuse was included, 17% of the rest reported it was. The survey also asked about diagnoses, with MPD (Multiple Personality Disorder) being the most frequently reported diagnosis (80 'Yes' responses), followed by Depression (198 'Yes' responses), PTSD (66 'Yes' responses), Eating Disorder (94 'Yes' responses), Schizophrenia (11 'Yes' responses), Epilepsy (11 'Yes' responses), and Bipolar (18 'Yes' responses).

Foundation Information

The False Memory Syndrome Foundation is described as a qualified 501(c)3 corporation with offices in Philadelphia, governed by a Board of Directors. It emphasizes that no other organization or person is authorized to speak for the Foundation without prior written approval. Subscription rates for the FMSF Newsletter are provided: $20 for a one-year subscription in the USA, $10 for students, $25 for Canada, and $35 for foreign subscriptions. Single issues cost $3.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The newsletter consistently promotes the idea that false memories are a significant issue, often stemming from therapeutic interventions or misinterpretations of memory. The editorial stance appears to be one of advocacy for individuals accused of abuse based on recovered memories, highlighting the potential for memory to be unreliable and suggestible. The FMS Foundation positions itself as a resource for those affected by false memory syndrome, offering support, information, and a platform for discussion. The emphasis on legal cases and scientific research underscores the seriousness with which the Foundation views the problem. The inclusion of reader testimonials, particularly those of retraction or reconciliation, serves to validate the Foundation's mission and encourage others to seek support or share their experiences.