False Memory Syndrome Foundation - Vol 05 No 03 - 1996 mar

Magazine Overview

This issue of the FMS Foundation Newsletter, dated March 1, 1996, is the third issue of Volume 5. The newsletter's primary focus is on the ongoing debate surrounding "false memory syndrome" and recovered memory therapy, presenting research findings, legal case updates, and critiques of media coverage.

Editorial Stance and Key Themes

The FMS Foundation positions itself as a corrective force in the mental health field, emphasizing that child abuse is unconscionable and that false accusations cause real harm. The newsletter consistently highlights research that challenges the concept of repressed memories and supports the idea that memory is a constructive, rather than a perfect, recording process. Key themes include the unreliability of recovered memories, the potential for therapeutic techniques like hypnosis to implant false memories, and the legal ramifications of such practices.

Research and Scientific Findings

The newsletter presents research findings that support the FMS Foundation's perspective. It states that memory is a constructive process, not a videotape recorder, and that memories can be true, mixed, or false. External corroboration is presented as the only sure way to verify a memory. The newsletter explicitly states that research does *not* support the idea that traumatic stress leads to dissociative or repressive processes causing amnesia, nor that children engaging in defensive amnesia due to repeated trauma, nor that digging for memories is crucial for recovery. It also notes that historical events cannot be inferred solely from mental phenomena like images, dreams, or bodily sensations.

A paper presented at the American Psychological Association Annual Meeting in 1995 is discussed, which claims false memory syndrome is uncommon. However, the newsletter's analysis points out potential methodological flaws, including "selection bias" and "information bias," suggesting the authors are biased against the false memory hypothesis. The study's generalization from a self-selected sample is questioned.

Legal Cases and Malpractice

A significant portion of the newsletter is dedicated to legal developments. The "Legal Corner" and "FMSF Legal Survey Report" sections detail several cases:

• Carlson v. Humenansky: A psychiatrist was found negligent in a malpractice suit for implanting false memories of childhood sexual abuse and satanic cult participation through hypnosis, misinformation, coercion, threats, and suggestions. The plaintiff was awarded over $2.5 million.
• Tennessee Court of Appeals: Declined to apply the "discovery rule" to toll the statute of limitations in repressed memory cases, determining that the legislature is the appropriate forum due to the lack of scientific consensus on repressed memory.
• State v. Hungerford (New Hampshire), Barrett v. Hyldburg (North Carolina), and Engstrom v. Engstrom (California): These cases ruled "repressed memory" testimony inadmissible due to insufficient scientific evidence and lack of general acceptance in the scientific community.
• Molestation conviction overturned (Canada): The Ontario Court of Appeal quashed convictions based on a child's testimony, citing lack of evidence and inconsistencies.
• Canadian Supreme Court Overturns Convictions: The court threw out convictions of a man found guilty of sexually abusing his girlfriend's children, citing the children's inability to separate fact from fiction.
• California Court: Held that a state statute does not extend the statute of limitations for a negligent supervision claim related to childhood sexual abuse.
• GLF & KJF v. R & KF: Two adult daughters sued their parents, claiming repressed memories of child sexual abuse, but the case was dismissed with prejudice after the plaintiffs sought to drop it.
• FMSF Brief Bank Index: An update is provided on the availability of legal documents related to repressed memory and malpractice cases.

Media Critiques and Smear Tactics

The newsletter strongly criticizes "The Toronto Star" for publishing "sleazy ad hominem attacks" and "smear tactics" against FMSF advisors, accusing the newspaper of printing misinformation and innuendo. It details how a misleading column about Elizabeth Loftus was spread via the internet, leading to rumors and misrepresentations. The FMSF expresses disappointment that the Star did not print a correction.

Other News and Events

• News Briefs: Includes a report on the suspension of a psychologist's license in Pennsylvania and an expose on the Texas Board of Examiners of Psychologists.
• Focus on Science: Analyzes a paper claiming false memory syndrome is uncommon, highlighting methodological concerns.
• Events: Announces upcoming seminars sponsored by the FMS Foundation and Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions on "Basic Standards of Care in Diagnostic and Therapeutic Practices with Memory and the Process of Family Reconciliation."
• Numerology: A brief mention of a seminar on numerology as a counseling tool.
• Diagnosis by Portrait: A psychiatrist's study of Elizabeth I's portrait suggests childhood abuse.
• ATM Phobia: A brief note on phobias being linked to other deep-seated fears.
• Multiple Personalities: A case where a suspect with multiple personalities requested separate counsel for each personality.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The FMS Foundation Newsletter consistently advocates for a critical examination of recovered memory claims, emphasizing the scientific unreliability of such testimony and the potential for iatrogenic harm caused by certain therapeutic practices. The publication aims to educate professionals and the public about the complexities of memory, trauma, and abuse, often contrasting its evidence-based approach with what it perceives as sensationalism or unscientific methodologies in the popular press and some segments of the mental health community. The editorial stance is one of defending individuals and families falsely accused due to recovered memory claims and promoting a more rigorous, evidence-based understanding of memory and psychological distress.

This issue of the FMS Foundation Newsletter, dated March 1996, focuses on the contentious topic of recovered memories and the misinterpretation of research in this field. The newsletter, published by the False Memory Syndrome Foundation, aims to provide a platform for families, retractors, and professionals to discuss issues related to alleged child abuse, recovered memories, and therapeutic practices.

Legal Cases

The issue begins by reporting on two legal cases. In Maine, James Wright was found not guilty of sexual assault charges brought by his daughter, who accused him of abuse from age 11. In Tennessee, the Supreme Court reversed a negligence claim against a mother for failing to prevent her daughter's abuse, citing the state's parental immunity doctrine.

Book Review: 'Remembering, Repeating and Working Through Childhood Trauma'

A significant portion of the newsletter is dedicated to a review of Lawrence E. Hedges' book, 'Remembering, Repeating and Working Through Childhood Trauma: The Psychodynamics of Recovered Memories, Multiple Personality, Abuse, Incest, Molest, and Abduction.' Reviewed by John D. Carter, the book is described as presenting a psychoanalytic approach to recovered memories. Hedges argues that verbally cognized abuse memories are metaphorical expressions of early, non-verbally cognized traumas of infancy. He posits that while real abuse is acknowledged, these recovered memories should be taken seriously and considered psychodynamically, rather than being accepted literally. The review highlights Hedges' four key areas: taking recovered memories seriously, multiple personality reconsidered, the dual relationship in psychotherapy, and psychotic anxieties. Hedges emphasizes that recovered memories are contextually dependent on the therapeutic relationship, transference, and the client's developmental level. The review notes that Hedges' work is complex and sophisticated, likely of more interest to clinicians than the general public, and represents a potential revolution in the approach to recovered memories.

Flaws of Memory and Therapeutic Abuses

Michael Simpson, M.D., contributes an article titled 'Flaws of Memory,' reflecting on the fallibility of human memory, citing Primo Levi's observations. Simpson discusses how books that assume the validity of recovered memory techniques sometimes overlook these flaws. He references C. Frederick Phillips' book, 'Healing the Divided Self,' which quotes Glannon's view of FMS as a 'sociopolitical issue.' Phillips also expresses concern that the FMS movement might overshadow contemporary consciousness of child abuse. Simpson draws a parallel to other forms of trauma where scientific methods have been more rigorously applied without similar resistance. He highlights a section in Phillips' book that admits to serious abuses in eliciting traumatic memory experiences and managing uncovered material, noting that some therapists' countertransference bias can lead to premature access to memory material, distortion, and even suggestion or pressure on patients to fabricate memories.

Letters and Commentary

The newsletter features a significant open letter from Paula M. Tyroler, Ph.D., to Dr. Linda Meyer Williams, Ph.D. Tyroler, a scientist and mother of a recovered memory therapy victim, expresses dismay at the 'nonsense' presented by proponents of the recovered-and-recovered-memory movement. She argues that Williams' research, often cited as evidence for repression, actually shows that people forget and may recall events later, which is a common experience and not evidence of repression as defined by the movement. Tyroler urges Williams to publicly clarify the limits of her findings to prevent their misinterpretation and the promotion of pseudoscience. She invokes ethical principles regarding belief on insufficient evidence.

Dr. Bonnie Green, Ph.D., editor of the Journal of Traumatic Stress (JTS), replies to Tyroler, stating that while the interpretation of research is important, she does not believe Williams has an obligation to respond to misinterpretations beyond her professional settings. Green declines to publish Tyroler's letter in JTS, finding it inappropriate as it doesn't directly challenge Williams' research or JTS article.

Dr. Linda Williams, Ph.D., also responds, stating that her research has carefully discussed the limits of its conclusions. She objects to the implication that she has shirked her moral duty or been influenced by popularity. Williams asserts that her study did not explore the specific mechanisms for forgetting and suggests that the claim of 'millions of people' suffering from 'unsupported beliefs' about recovered memory would not withstand scientific scrutiny. She encourages researchers to submit their work to critical review and advises interested parties to consult original journal articles rather than relying on popular press or internet interpretations.

Reader Contributions and Personal Stories

Several reader contributions offer personal perspectives. One reader, identified as 'J,' shares a powerful account of being a victim of incest and the profound impact of recovered memory therapy, which he views as misguided and potentially evil, leading to the destruction of families. He contrasts the 'recovered memory' narrative with his own experience of remembering, emphasizing the importance of evidence and the need for therapists to fulfill their professional responsibilities.

Another reader, a mother, shares a 'fairy tale' written by her daughter as a therapy assignment, illustrating how false memories might be created through suggestive questioning by a therapist. The story depicts a 'Fairy Godmother' leading a young woman named Karen to 'remember' a 'Big, Ugly Monster' doing a bad thing to her, highlighting the 'cookie cutter' aspect of such therapy.

A father writes about his daughters accusing him and his wife of mental abuse after therapy, and how they eventually recanted their accusations. He notes that his daughters, after changing therapists, have improved and are seeking reconciliation, but stipulated that the past allegations should not be discussed further.

A mother expresses her anger that her daughter would rather believe they are 'criminal monsters' than question her beliefs, even after recovering from false allegations. She questions whether an apology will ever be received.

FMSF Activities and Resources

The newsletter includes a section on 'Make a Difference,' encouraging readers to get involved in FMSF activities. It provides updates on state meetings, contact information for local chapters across the United States and Canada, and international contacts. Information is also provided on how to make donations and subscribe to the newsletter. A notice about free library displays available through SIRS Publishers is also included, promoting books on false memories.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue are the controversy surrounding recovered memories, the critical examination of therapeutic practices, the potential for misinterpretation of scientific research, and the devastating impact on families. The FMS Foundation Newsletter consistently adopts a critical stance towards the recovered memory movement, advocating for scientific rigor, ethical therapeutic practices, and the protection of individuals and families from potentially harmful or unsubstantiated claims. The editorial stance emphasizes the importance of evidence-based understanding and responsible discourse in addressing issues of trauma and memory.