New book about false memory syndrome

CDfm

avidreader wrote: »

The problem with the arguments that repressed memories are not accurate, are rare or do not exist crumble when the evidence from the web pages I have previously posted are read. The web pages below clearly show that many recovered memories have been corroborated.

I don't know, but to borrow from Homer Simpson "repressed memories are the cause of and the solution to all lifes problems" well, I don't buy into that.

I have no doubt that on any large statistical sample you will find cases that are corraborated. In those cases, the theory worked as the abuse was real but we are talking about when the abuse is not real.

I have presented several sources showing that Kelley is questionable as an accurate source of information.

And Oprah has helped support many victims of child abuse.

Oprah is an entertainer and TV personality.

She is judged versus her ratings. She puts on a show. Thats entertainment. She is a brand and the products she endorses make lots of money

http://www.cnbc.com/id/29961298/

http://images.businessweek.com/ss/06/08/oprah/index_01.htm

Some people are cynical about the benefits of the Oprah effect

This blog discusses Oprahs contraversial views on medicine and science -check out the link to the Jenny McCarthy Body Count.

http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2009/05/combatting_the_oprah_effect.php

In May, Winfrey, whose contract for "The Oprah Winfrey Show" expires in 2011, struck a deal with actress, author and Chicago native Jenny McCarthy, who emerged as an autism activist after her son was diagnosed with the disorder. The deal with McCarthy, who has been a guest on Winfrey's show several times, calls for McCarthy to develop a variety of projects with Harpo, one of which could be a syndicated talk show.

And

Asked if Oprah or her show endorses McCarthy's views, a representative for Oprah's program said, "We don't take positions on the opinions of our guests. Rather, we offer a platform for guests to share their first-person stories in an effort to inform the audience and put a human face on topics relevant to them." When McCarthy's views have been discussed on the air, statements from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the American Academy of Pediatrics saying that there's no scientific evidence of a vaccine-autism link have been read.

Kelley is a tabloid headline grabbing style biographer.Now "I wouldn't take her word as the Lords Prayer"

"Pot & kettle"

The book "The Courage to Heal" has helped thousands and possible millions of child abuse survivors. .

I really do not know how effective it is with child abuse survivors or when it is used in that context,but, it has been used outside that context with some disasterous affects.

What critics say is it promotes a generic single diagnosis for problems "you have problems ergo you were sexually abused".

Child abuse is not a product which should be sold like that IMHO.

avidreader

I have presented enough research to show fairly high corroboration rates for recovered memories. I believe that much of the research on "false" memories is misapplied (non-traumatic memory to traumatic memory) or a very small subset being incorrectly extended to many more cases than they actually apply to. Maran does this. She claims her story applies to many others, without providing solid evidence this is true.

It is understandable that any nationally televised TV broadcast is going to promotes its ideas to many. In terms of stopping child abuse, I believe this is a good thing.


In reply to the blog critique, remember that anyone can post on a blog and that this is only the opinion of one person. Also, the Oprah show stated "We don't take positions on the opinions of our guests." The blog writer admits the show tried to balance the presentations, though this was not enough for the blog writer.


Those that critique "The Courage to Heal" pull a few small parts out of the book to attack a book that has helped many people. It appears they ignore almost all of the book in an attempt to discredit it. The awareness the book brought to society to help stop child abuse and help survivors of child abuse was very important.

Lists of symptoms can help diagnosis problems, but of course should not be used for a complete diagnosis.

CDfm

avidreader wrote: »

I have presented enough research to show fairly high corroboration rates for recovered memories. I believe that much of the research on "false" memories is misapplied (non-traumatic memory to traumatic memory) or a very small subset being incorrectly extended to many more cases than they actually apply to.

Actually no you havent.

You have supplied details of small samples of what happened to people in particular groups.I have never doubted that amnesia or post traumatic stress exists.

I do not know but what the anti false recovered memory psychologists say is that it does not translate to the general population and that memory is fallible and slippery and open to suggestion and can be illusory.

The techniques are very controvercial.

Maran does this. She claims her story applies to many others, without providing solid evidence this is true.

This is a book. Maran is a writer who sells books and she has a powerful message in that it happened to her. She bought into the idea. Yes, she recounts her experiences which she says are typical and really I do not know if they are typical but she says they are.

It is understandable that any nationally televised TV broadcast is going to promotes its ideas to many. In terms of stopping child abuse, I believe this is a good thing.

I don't think any sensible and right minded person would argue against the idea that child abuse is wrong and where it exists should be reported.

n reply to the blog critique, remember that anyone can post on a blog and that this is only the opinion of one person. Also, the Oprah show stated "We don't take positions on the opinions of our guests." The blog writer admits the show tried to balance the presentations, though this was not enough for the blog writer.

Actually, the point of posting it was to hilight the Jenny McCarthy's business relationship with Oprah/Harpo and the statements being the "smallprint".

How can a company who enters into a business relationship with the person promoting the idea not have a position.

Winfrey,Maran, McCarthy & Kelly are all selling stuff here and make their living via the media.

I am under no illusion that they all are trying to shift product and twist a buck.

Those that critique "The Courage to Heal" pull a few small parts out of the book to attack a book that has helped many people. It appears they ignore almost all of the book in an attempt to discredit it. The awareness the book brought to society to help stop child abuse and help survivors of child abuse was very important.

Lists of symptoms can help diagnosis problems, but of course should not be used for a complete diagnosis.

I think the criticism is that this was mass marketed and applied to people in the general population.

It became a movement with practionerers springing up all over the USA and the ideas and techniques were not verified in laboratory conditions.

In addition to this -the authors have no qualifications in psychology.

So there is a lot of doubt about it and it is controvercial.

avidreader

Avidreader:
I have presented enough research to show fairly high corroboration rates for recovered memories.

"Actually no you havent. You have supplied details of small samples of what happened to people in particular groups.I have never doubted that amnesia or post traumatic stress exists."

Avidreader:
Actually, yes I have. I have cited many studies showing fairly high corroboration rates for recovered memories. These peer reviewed studies show this. This is the best data we have available.

http://dynamic.uoregon.edu/~jjf/suggestedrefs.html
Chu JA, Frey LM, Ganzel BL, Matthews JA. (1999). Memories of childhood abuse: Dissociation, amnesia, and corroboration. Am J Psychiatry 156(5):749-755.
Childhood abuse, particularly chronic abuse beginning at early ages, is related to the development of high levels of dissociative symptoms including amnesia for abuse memories. This study strongly suggests that psychotherapy usually is not associated with memory recovery and that independent corroboration of recovered memories of abuse is often present.

Feldman-Summers, S., & Pope, K. S. (1994). The experience of forgetting childhood abuse: A national survey of psychologists. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 62, 636-639.
Summary: 330 psychologists. 24% physical and 22% sexual abuse. Of those abused, 40% did not remember at some time. 47% had corroboration.

Van der Kolk, BA, & Fisler, R. (1995). Dissociation and the fragmentary nature of traumatic memories: Overview and exploratory study. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 8, 505-525.
Summary: 46 adults with in depth interviews. Of the 36 with childhood trauma, 42% suffered significant or total amnesia at some time. Corroborative evidence was available for 75%.


Williams, L. M. (1995, October). Recovered memories of abuse in women with documented child sexual victimization histories. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 8(4).
Abstract: This study provides evidence that some adults who claim to have recovered memories of sexual abuse recall actual events that occurred in childhood. One hundred twenty-nine women with documented histories of sexual victimization in childhood were interviewed and asked about abuse history. Seventeen years following the initial report of the abuse, 80 of the women recalled the victimization. One in 10 women (16% of those who recalled the abuse) reported that at some time in the past they had forgotten about the abuse.



-

"I do not know but what the anti false recovered memory psychologists say is that it does not translate to the general population and that memory is fallible and slippery and open to suggestion and can be illusory."


Avidreader:

There is no evidence that any of these studies do not apply to the general population. The studies I have presented cover various parts of the general population.


-

"How can a company who enters into a business relationship with the person promoting the idea not have a position."


Avidreader:

Businesses and the media do this all the time. A store manager may not believe in the product and still sell it. A TV show may interview someone and not agree with their position.



-

Avidreader:

Those that critique "The Courage to Heal" pull a few small parts out of the book to attack a book that has helped many people. It appears they ignore almost all of the book in an attempt to discredit it. The awareness the book brought to society to help stop child abuse and help survivors of child abuse was very important.

"It became a movement with practionerers springing up all over the USA."

Avidreader:

This is a unproven myth. There are no scientific studies to back this up.


-
"In addition to this -the authors have no qualifications in psychology."

Avidreader:
Many authors write self help books without having degrees in the field they write about.

CDfm

avidreader wrote: »

Avidreader:
Actually, yes I have. I have cited many studies showing fairly high corroboration rates for recovered memories. These peer reviewed studies show this. This is the best data we have available.

But the Royal College of Psychiatrists in Britain have banned their members from using recovered memory therapies. I am not a psychiatrist but there must be a reason why they have done that.

Avidreader:

There is no evidence that any of these studies do not apply to the general population. The studies I have presented cover various parts of the general population.

I do not know but studies of these nature need to be carried out in laboratory conditions and the methodology is important.

So if the experts like Psychiatrists have not been convinced then Avidreader - I defer to their greater expertise in the area.




-

"How can a company who enters into a business relationship with the person promoting the idea not have a position."


Avidreader:

Businesses and the media do this all the time. A store manager may not believe in the product and still sell it. A TV show may interview someone and not agree with their position.

Actually, consumers do have rights and Oprah as a brand endorses and sells product and in that way is not impartial.

And no, media does not always do it and there are controls on product placement.

Whenever you sell a product, you make a contract with the buyer. Under this contract, you agree to provide certain goods to the consumer at a certain price, and the goods should be:

• Of "merchantable quality" - that means that they must be of a reasonable standard taking into account their price and what they are meant to do
• Fit for the purpose they were bought for - they must do what they are reasonably expected to do
• As described. In other words, you must not make false or exaggerated claims about them. The description can be something written on the package, for example, or something said by a sales assistant to the customer, or claimed in an advertisement

http://www.nca.ie/eng/Business_Zone/Guides/Full%20List/Sale%20of%20Goods.html

And no with Jenny McCarthy they do not publicize the connection concerning their joint business venture so maybe Oprah is not impartial but has a vested interest..

-

Avidreader:

Those that critique "The Courage to Heal" pull a few small parts out of the book to attack a book that has helped many people. It appears they ignore almost all of the book in an attempt to discredit it. The awareness the book brought to society to help stop child abuse and help survivors of child abuse was very important.

"It became a movement with practionerers springing up all over the USA."

Avidreader:

This is a unproven myth. There are no scientific studies to back this up.

Again I do not know but am only repeating what I have picked up in the media and lots of professional organisations worldwide have issued warnings about recovered memory techniques and which all say to approach with extreme caution like this one from Canada

The Canadian Psychological Association has issued guidelines for psychologists addressing recovered memories.[32] Psychologists are urged to be aware of their limitations in knowledge and training regarding memory, trauma and development and "that there is no constellation of symptoms which is diagnostic of child sexual abuse". The guidelines also urge caution and awareness of the benefits and limitations of "relaxation, hypnosis, guided imagery, free associations, inner child exercises, age regression, body memory interpretation, body massage, dream interpretation, and the use of projective techniques" and special caution regarding any legal involvement of memories, abuse and therapy. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recovered_memory_therapy

-
"In addition to this -the authors have no qualifications in psychology."

Avidreader:
Many authors write self help books without having degrees in the field they write about

I was just making the point that they are not qualified to make the assertions they make or bound by codes of professional standards or guidelines.

So I am not dismissing what you are saying just reiterating what others have said is that it needs to be approached with extreme caution.

CDfm

I think we are getting bogged down in a polarised discussion here and thats not why I started the thread.

I just thought that people would be interested in seeing a bit more detail around what was discussed on the radio on it.

I have come accross a very good article that discusses this type of journalism and I think it probably is evident on both sides of the debate.

I love the phrase "moral entrepeneur" as its a very "nail on head" for what we are seeing here.

The Media: Constructing an “Us versus Them” Climate of Fear
Part of the moral panic induced by the media is that issues are represented as extremes of Good and Evil. Autonomous thought is decapitated by being reduced to a Schmittian concept of the political, gravitating towards friend-enemy dichotomies. As Jean Baudrillard observed, the world of the media is “sworn to extremes, not to equilibrium,” to “radical antagonism, not to reconciliation or synthesis.”
Professor Kevin MacDonald has drawn attention to Jewish aggressiveness, psychological intensity and powerful influence in the media. These qualities and traits — lubricated with the “Puritan moral intensity” of previously dominant intellectual elites in America — may well have inspired or set off a chain reaction leaving a lasting mark on the style and noise level of journalism; e.g. in the widespread journalistic righteousness and hectic aggressiveness, the "prophetic journalism" of passion, polemic, and moral opinion — sometimes resembling the rule-bound sanctimony of the Pharisees. As Doug Underwood has noted:
Many elements of the prophetic tradition — the spirit of righteousness, the indignant moralism, the effort to maintain purity of values, the call for spiritual and ethical renewal, the fierce sense of corruption abounding everywhere — are as typically found in today’s best investigative reporters or crusading editors as they were in the prophetic voices who tried to keep alive Jewish faith and morality during the Israelite empire and the Jewish exile in Babylon. The image of the investigative reporter as the heir of the prophetic tradition is exemplified by I. F. Stone, the son of Russian Jewish immigrants, who spent almost twenty years mining federal government documents for examples of waste and duplicity that he published in his widely circulated newsletter. Described as a ‘cheerfully angry man’, Stone impressed people with his ‘permanent sense of outrage’, as the Washington Post reporter Peter Osnos put it.
Underwood describes the way in which “the prophets of the Bible loom behind the writing that today we would call advocacy or adversarial journalism.” Although the religious overtones may not always be evident in contemporary journalism, the prophecy of moral indignation rings loudly. According to Underwood, the elements of Jewish prophetic expression are most clearly evident in the “journalism of outrage,” as modern investigative journalism has been described. This strong tendency to claim the moral high ground has been one of the key features of Jewish intellectual and political movements, and a hallmark of moral panic:
URL="http://www.amazon.ca/Moral-panic-Biopolitics-John-Fekete/dp/1895854091"][B]Moral panic[/B][/URL][B is not about pluralism but about virtue. It is not about doing the right thing, but doing the righteous thing. It is not about public policy, but about setting affairs in order. It is about cleansing, rectification. It is about holy war. [/B]
The intense ingroup morality of activism makes the population susceptible to vigilant campaigns, endless processes of excommunication and never-ending cycles of censorship initiatives from political claims-makers, moral entrepreneurs and inquisition-style agencies of indoctrination and intimidation. Moral crusades and ‘stigma contests’ are continually launched by the use of highly emotive and rhetorical language, reflecting, as John Fekete observes, “shifting or collapsing boundaries in the meanings, values, codes, and institutions that make up our cultural world.”

The Complete Article is

Signs of the Times, Part I: Postmodern Moral Panics and the Manufacture of Virtue


http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/authors/Knutsson-SignsI.html

This puts it a lot better than I can.

avidreader

"But the Royal College of Psychiatrists in Britain have banned their members from using recovered memory therapies."

Avidreader:
At their website, I was unable to find any statements that back this.
I did find this: "that complete or partial memory loss is a frequently reported consequence of experiencing certain kinds of psychological traumas, including childhood sexual abuse."

They do state that some recovered memories may not be accurate, but I found no statistics as to the level of frequency of this. The research I have presented does show a fairly high rate of corroboration for recovered memories.

"do not know but studies of these nature need to be carried out in laboratory conditions and the methodology is important."

Avidreader:
It is impossible to carry out studies like these in a laboratory for ethical reasons. It would be unethical to traumatize a child and then ask them later if they remember and then wait until years later to see if they remember the memory. The research I have presented is the best available, from peer reviewed journals.

"Whenever you sell a product, you make a contract with the buyer. Under this contract, you agree to provide certain goods to the consumer at a certain price, and the goods should be..."

Avidreader:
But the media presents different sides of an argument and different opinions. And if you examine any type of media, there will always be controversial items they present to the public.

"The Canadian Psychological Association has issued guidelines for psychologists addressing recovered memories."

Avidreader:
Their guidelines make good sense. All techniques should be used with caution and for the benefit of the client. This does not mean that certain techniques should not be used, only that they should be used by those trained to use the techniques in appropriate situations.

BTW, Wikipedia is not a good source of information. It is an open source, edited by anonymous people with unknown qualifications and biases.

It appears to have been financially founded at least in part by money from
hard core pornography.
http://www.childlaw.us/2010/04/congress-reacts-to-wikipedia-f.html

There have been allegations that Wikimedia has contained child pornography.
http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/04/27/wikipedia-child-porn-larry-sanger-fbi/
http://www.childlaw.us/2010/04/wikipedophilia.html
http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/05/14/exclusive-shake-wikipedia-porn-pressure/

http://www.wikisposure.com/Wikipedia_Campaign
"Pedophiles have long sought to use Wikipedia to justify and promote their agenda."

Wikipedia at times has serious accuracy problems.
http://www.emeraldinsight.com/journals.htm?articleid=1674221&show=abstract
"The study did reveal inaccuracies in eight of the nine entries and exposed major flaws in at least two of the nine Wikipedia articles. Overall, Wikipedia's accuracy rate was 80 percent compared with 95-96 percent accuracy within the other sources. This study does support the claim that Wikipedia is less reliable than other reference resources."

In Wikipedia's General Disclaimer, it is written:
"Please be advised that nothing found here has necessarily been reviewed by people with the expertise required to provide you with complete, accurate or reliable information."

"Wikipedia is not uniformly peer reviewed; while readers may correct errors or engage in casual peer review, they have no legal duty to do so and thus all information read here is without any implied warranty of fitness for any purpose or use whatsoever."

Other articles questioning Wikipedia's accuracy include:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/01/22/wikipedia_vandalism_crackdown/
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17740041/
"Popular online encyclopedia, plagued by errors, troubles educators."


from Wikipedia's founder:
"I would agree with your teachers that that isn’t the right way to use Wikipedia. The site is a wonderful starting point for research. But it’s only a starting point because there’s always a chance that there’s something wrong, and you should check your sources if you are writing a paper."
http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,1601491,00.html

http://www.wikipedia-watch.org/

http://www.pcworld.com/article/170874/the_15_biggest_wikipedia_blunders.html
"These false facts, according to widely published accounts, all appeared on the Wikipedia site at some point."


Any type of discourse may turn into a media construct of an idea that goes beyond this discourse into a public promotion. Maran's book appears to do this. She makes sweeping statements without evidence or without strong research as part of her attack.

CDfm

Wow avidreader thats a bit of an attack on Wikipedia and I wouldn't rely on it without checking its source.

Here is an article from the British Medical Journal from 1998 reporting on the particular press release.

Recovered memories of childhood sexual abuse: The Royal College of Psychiatrists issues important precautions

British Medical Journal, Feb 14, 1998 by Harrison G. Pope, Jr.




The Royal College of Psychiatrists has just issued a set of recommendations for good practice in treating patients with "recovered memories" of childhood sexual abuse.[1] The college advises strongly against persuasive or suggestive psychotherapeutic techniques designed to unearth sexual abuse of which the patient has no memory and encourages psychiatrists to voice any doubts which they may have about the historical accuracy of patients' recovered memories. These recommendations will figure strongly in the widely publicised current debate on "recovered memory therapy" and the possibility that such therapy may encourage so-called false memories. When false memories occur patients may become convinced that they were victims of long repressed childhood sexual abuse, often at the hands of their parents or other trusted figures. These memories may become a raison d'etre for certain patients, diverting them from any other therapies, alienating them from their families, and often producing devastating aftershocks in the courtroom. In a recent American case, for example, a young woman in psychotherapy recovered the memory that at the age of 13 she was raped by her schoolteacher, became pregnant, and underwent an abortion. No corroborating evidence existed. In fact, she apparently did not reach menarche until the age of 15, so the pregnancy would have been medically impossible. Nevertheless, she filed criminal charges against the teacher, who was forced to spend his life savings in a legal defence that spanned several years. His case terminated only when the New Hampshire supreme court finally ruled that repressed and recovered memory lacked sufficient scientific foundation to be admissible.[2]
In another recent case a woman and her two young children were admitted to hospital in Illinois with diagnoses of multiple personality disorder. The woman recovered memories of having been a high priestess in a satanic cult and of having engaged in cannibalism, bestiality, and numerous bizarre sexual acts. After years of treatment, and millions of dollars in medical bills, she retracted all of her memories and sued the therapists and hospital for malpractice. The case has recently been settled for 10.6 million dollars.[3]
The recovered memory debate reduces to a central question: can someone endure a seemingly unforgettable traumatic experience, such as repeated rape, and then expel the memory completely from conscious awareness for many years? This process, variously termed repression, dissociative amnesia, or psychogenic amnesia, is sometimes discussed without question, as if everyone knew it to be true. But is it? Our forebears did not seem to think so. I have not found any clear cases of repressed memory in classical literature, Shakespeare, or any literature before the romantic writings of the nineteenth century. Only then, in the novels of James Fenimore Cooper, in Charles Dickens's Dr Manette, and in the poetry of Emily Dickinson, does repression begin to appear.[4] And it was still several decades more until Freud[5] and Janet[6] "discovered" the concept. One must ask therefore whether repression is a scientifically established phenomenon, or whether it is simply a romantic notion that has infiltrated our cultural belief system.
And indeed, on critical examination, the scientific evidence for repression crumbles. Admittedly, various published case reports and retrospective studies exist, describing individuals who currently remembered an alleged traumatic experience but reportedly had forgotten it during a previous period of their lives.[7] But asking individuals if they "remember whether they forgot" is of dubious validity.[4 8] Furthermore, in most retrospective studies corroboration of the traumatic event was either absent or fell below reasonable scientific standards.[9] The only convincing test of the repression hypothesis would be a prospective study, in which victims of a documented trauma were systematically followed up and asked whether they remembered the event.
We have recently reviewed the available prospective studies of this type.[10] Throughout these studies, when subjects were asked directly about traumatic experiences, all reported memories. Non-reporting occurred only in those studies where subjects were never asked directly about the event, leaving open the possibility that these individuals simply did not disclose events even though they did remember them. This problem, together with several other methodological limitations, effectively invalidates the few remaining prospective studies purporting to show evidence of repression (especially the oft cited study of Williams[11])--leaving no prospective data of adequate methodology to show that individuals can actually repress memories of traumatic experiences.
Of course, some might still argue that we have not disproved the possibility that repressed memories might occur. But this objection turns logic on its head: in the 500 years since William of Ockham first propounded his principles of parsimony, scientists have acknowledged that the burden of proof rests with whomever proposes a novel theory of causation, and not the reverse. Repression may be the stuff of Victorian novels and Hollywood movies, the darling of television dramas, and an object of widespread popular belief. But popular belief in repression does not spare investigators the burden of providing a rigorous, methodologically convincing demonstration of its existence. Until such a demonstration is provided, the recommendations of the royal college seem only prudent


http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0999/is_n7130_v316/ai_20399919/?tag=content;col1


http://www.bmj.com/content/316/7130/488?cited-by=yes&legid=bmj;316/7130/488

I am with the British College of Psychiatrists on this and the reasons cited make common sense.It gives us a better idea of the reasons for their reservations.

I don't see how the two unqualified writers of "The Courage to Heal" are better qualified to judge then the British College of Psychiatrists.

Consumer products are a whole lot different then selling "child abuse" remedies to vulnerable people. Its a completely different ballgame. Its messing with peoples heads and mental health -no matter how well intentioned -it is dangerous. Doing it for profit is well wrong.Moral entrpeneurs !!!!

I don't know anything much about Maran and if she is telling the truth, though like with Oprah, I hope she is. A poacher turned gamekeeper, but unfortunately, what she is saying seems to stack up..................

...Furthermore, in most retrospective studies corroboration of the traumatic event was either absent or fell below reasonable scientific standards.

avidreader

"thats a bit of an attack on Wikipedia and I wouldn't rely on it without checking its source."

Avidreader:
I provided eleven sources. From journal studies to media articles. Anyone can go to the links and read them. They are reliable.

Pope is known for having a skeptical opinion on recovered memory.

Here are several critiques of Pope's work:

Evidence of Dissociative Amnesia in Science and Literature: Culture-Bound Approaches to Trauma in Pope, Poliakoff, Parker, Boynes, and Hudson (2007) Authors: Rachel E. Goldsmith; Ross E. Cheit; Mary E. Wood

Abstract
The current culture of traumatic stress studies includes research that identifies the ways in which stress and trauma impair learning and memory in both humans and animals. Yet it also contains health professionals who argue that individuals cannot forget traumatic events. Many accounts present differences among these positions as a legitimate debate despite the substantial forensic, survey, and neurological evidence that both demonstrates the capacity for people to exhibit impaired memory for trauma and highlights specific mechanisms. In a recent article, H. G. Pope, M. B. Poliakoff, M. P. Parker, M. Boynes, and J. I. Hudson (2007) hypothesized that if individuals could forget trauma, the phenomenon would appear in world literature prior to 1800. They conducted a contest to generate submissions of examples and determined that dissociative amnesia is a culture-bound syndrome. Their report fails to provide a thorough account of all submissions and the process through which they were all rejected, offers highly questionable literary analyses, and includes several misrepresentations of the state of the science regarding memory for trauma. This response addresses methodological problems with the contest, explores examples of forgetting trauma from literature written before 1800, examines social and historical aspects of the issue, and summarizes the extensive cognitive and neurological data that Pope et al. did not consider. The present article conceptualizes the premise of the contest and the authors' conclusion as symptomatic of a culture affected by biases that include the denial of trauma and its effects.
http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/content~db=all~content=a912962184~frm=abslink


Brown Professor Continues Debate Over Recovered Memory July 7, 2009
In the current Journal of Trauma & Dissociation article, Cheit calls Pope’s entire contest “a sham,” accusing Pope’s team of failing to provide a thorough account of all submissions and the process by which they were rejected, offering highly questionable literary analysis, and including several misrepresentations of the state of the science regarding memory for trauma. Cheit and his team offer additional literary examples and summarize some data that Pope and his team did not consider.

They conclude, “Literature can provide important information about human experience, but it cannot prove or disprove traumatic amnesia any more than it can prove or disprove the existence of bacteria or dragons. Literary passages and modern scientific data do reveal descriptions and data, respectively, that depict dissociative amnesia as a naturally occurring traumatic sequela.”
http://news.brown.edu/pressreleases/2009/07/memory

Debate Over Repressed Memories – ScienceDaily (July 8, 2009) – Fueling the debate over the controversial psychiatric disorder known as dissociative amnesia, or repressed memory, Brown University political scientist Ross Cheit is challenging claims by two Harvard University psychiatrists. At issue is how to prove whether the memories of trauma, such as childhood sexual abuse, can be repressed and then resurface later in life. Cheit’s paper, co-authored by Rachel E. Goldsmith of Reed College and Mary E. Wood of University of Oregon, appears in the current issue of Journal of Trauma & Dissociation. Cheit is disputing a 2006 contest by Harvard University psychiatrists Harrison G. Pope and James Hudson, both well-known skeptics of repressed memory….Cheit said he repeatedly contacted Pope and the journal editors shortly after the article was published, requesting the data from Pope and raising questions about the contest methodology. Several months later, Pope and his team acknowledged on their Web site that the submitted example of Nina, a 1786 opera by the French composer Nicolas Dalayrac, fulfilled the contest criteria and that the $1,000 prize had been awarded. However, Cheit said, they never published a correction, addendum, or retraction of their original article and its conclusions….In the current Journal of Trauma & Dissociation article, Cheit calls Pope’s entire contest “a sham,” accusing Pope’s team of failing to provide a thorough account of all submissions and the process by which they were rejected, offering highly questionable literary analysis, and including several misrepresentations of the state of the science regarding memory for trauma. Cheit and his team offer additional literary examples and summarize some data that Pope and his team did not consider.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/07/090707170958.htm

Pope appears to cite only a few examples, appearing to ignoring the other studies in the field I have cited.

A more parsimonious explanation for the high rate of corroboration of recovered memories would be that they exist and are caused by traumatic events.


"I don't know anything much about Maran and if she is telling the truth, though like with Oprah, I hope she is. A poacher turned gamekeeper, but unfortunately, what she is saying seems to stack up."

Avidreader:
I disagree. Maran does not prove her point nor does she back her statements with adequate evidence. Overgeneralizing the reality of her memories is in my opinion morally irresponsible. And we have no evidence that she wasn't abused, only her word.


I recommend this book as a source on the recovered memory debate:

Misinformation Concerning Child Sexual Abuse and Adult Survivors
http://books.google.com/books?id=CZmPet1s07AC&printsec=frontcover&dq=Misinformation+Concerning+Child+Sexual+Abuse+and+Adult+Survivors

and this article:

The "False Memory" Defense:
Using Disinformation and Junk Science in and out of Court
http://web.archive.org/web/20070914163211/http://childabuse.georgiacenter.uga.edu/both/whitfield/whitfield1.phtml
"A problem with the "false memory" defense was that these theories were not based on careful clinical observation or solid research. Rather, they were based mostly on speculation, usually made by non-clinicians, some of whom were themselves accused of unethical behavior or had a personal or financial interest in the accused being innocent (Brown, Scheflin, & Hammond, 1997; Crook & Dean, 1999a, 1999b; Freid, 1994; Pope, 1995; Stanton, 1997; Whitfield, 1995b).

The "false memory" defense is one of the most sophisticated ones to appear in the history of the denial and minimization of the existence and effects of child abuse, especially CSA, and it manifests as a peculiar but not surprising socio-cultural-political-legal phenomenon of the 1990s. It may present itself as any of a number of kinds of disinformation which the accused, the convicted, and their advocates used regularly (Brown, et al, 1999; Dallam, this issue; Cheit, this issue; Emrick, 1994, 1996; Roys, 1995; Scheflin & Brown, 1996; Stanton, 1997; Whitfield, 1995b)."

CDfm

Avidreader - Pope may be a skeptic but he wrote an article based on the Royal College of Psychiatry's Press Release.

First you criticised the wilipedia article and then you attack the author based on his article.

Doubts Cast on Validity of Recovered Memory Therapy

Press Release
The Royal College of Psychiatrists, 17 Belgrave Square, London SW1X 8PG Telephone 0171 235 2351, Fax 0171 245 1231

A comprehensive review of the literature on recovered memories of childhood sexual abuse has concluded that when 'memories' are recovered after long periods of amnesia, particularly when questionable techniques were used to recover them, there is a high probability that the memories are false. Published in the April 1998 issue of the British Journal of Psychiatry, the review article by Professor Sydney Brandon and colleagues presents the conclusions of an overview of recovered memories and the techniques used to illicit (sic) them. This follows last year's publication of consensus recommendations for good practice (Royal College of Psychiatrists Working Group on Reported Recovered Memories of Child Sexual Abuse, 1997).
A recovered memory, in the context of this paper, is the emergence of an apparent recollection of childhood sexual abuse of which the individual had no previous knowledge. A false memory is the recollection of an event which did not occur, but which the individual subsequently strongly believes.
The paper distinguishes different types of memory, namely episodic, autobiographical and implicit. Numerous studies in children and adults have found that psychologically traumatic events often result in an inability to forget, rather than a complete expulsion from awareness. Amnesia for prolonged recurrent abuse is rare. Adult patients suffering from amnesia are well aware of the gap in their memory. It has not been possible to demonstrate any clear link between clinical accounts of trauma and the neurobiology of memory.
Memory changes overtime and is subject to error and distortion
A growing body of research indicates that memory is fallible and vulnerable to suggestion; and that suggestibility and confabulation increase with the length of time between the events and later attempts to recall it.
The authors conclude that individual autobiographical memory is unreliable, and that people are often unable to remember considerable parts of their past experiences. Expectations and beliefs can colour people's recollections, and gaps in memory will be filled to create a "life story" which they find satisfying.
Confidence in one's memory does not correlate with the accuracy of the memory. No autobiographical memory can be relied on without some external corroboration, but the frequent denial, even by proven abusers, and the secrecy surrounding child abuse often make such corroboration difficult to obtain.
Memory enhancement techniques questioned
Therapists may use a number of techniques, some of which are regularly employed in orthodox therapy but are questionable when used as 'memory recovery' procedures. These include:
Check Lists: there is no evidence that any check lists, syndromes, symptoms or signs indicate with any degree of reliability that an individual has been sexually abused in the remote past.
Drug-induced abreaction: it is inappropriate to use repeated abreaction to 'trawl' for traumatic events. There is considerable anecdotal clinical evidence that in repeated session patients will eventually generate material which is a product of fantasy. Even in a single session of abreaction great caution is required.
Hypnosis: this technique has been shown to be unreliable as a means of eliciting memories of past events, and such 'memories' are no longer admitted as legal testimony.
Age regression: there is no evidence for the efficacy of this technique, nor can it be shown that the subject's 'memories' actually do regress to the target age.
Dream interpretation: there is no evidence that dreams are a 'royal road' to historical accuracy; and interpretations usually reflect the training and personal convictions of the therapist.
Imagistic and 'feelings' work and art therapy: although many of these techniques are applications of accepted clinical practice, they can be powerfully suggestive and induce trance-like states. The beliefs of the therapist are the determining factor in how a patient's production are shaped.
Survivors' groups: whilst these can be supportive, the practice of mixing those who clearly remember abuse with those who are suspected by the therapist of having repressed their memories has been strongly criticised because of the risk of suggestion and contagion among group members.
The authors conclude that memory enhancement techniques do not actually enhance memory, and that there is evidence that they can be powerful and dangerous methods of persuasion. Many of the memories 'recovered' by these measures refer to events in the early months and years of life, which fall within the period of infantile amnesia, and must be regarded as implausible for that reason. The evidence suggests that all the techniques outlined above can create entirely new and false memories, not only experimentally but also in clinical practice.
Can repeated, severe childhood abuse be forgotten?
There is no evidence that memories can be 'blocked out' by the mind, either by repression or by dissociation. Given the prevalence of childhood sexual abuse, even if only a small proportion of memories are repressed and only some of them subsequently recovered, there should be a significant number of corroborated cases recovered through psychotherapy in the literature. In fact, there is none.
Distortion of memory may occur in any therapeutic situation, and psychiatrists need to be aware of the techniques employed by other members of their teams, such as community psychiatric nurses, psychologists and social workers.
The review paper ends with a series of guidelines to help psychiatrists to avoid the pitfalls of memory recovery. The issue of false or recovered memories should not, the authors emphasize, be allowed to confuse the recognition and treatment of sexually abused children. However, it is also essential to minimise the risk of creating false memories of abuse which will cause the patient and family further suffering.
More research is needed into the reported associations between childhood sexual abuse and later adult psychopathology. The authors conclude that at present there is no specific post-sexual abuse syndrome.
For press copies of the paper or further information contact Deborah Hart or Vanessa Harries on Tel: 00 44 171 235 2351 ext 127 or 154 e-mail: dhart@rcpsych.ac.uk or vharries@rcpsych.ac.uk

http://www.rickross.com/reference/false_memories/fsm2.html

Harrison G Pope jr is a Professor of Psychiatry at Harvard and if he writes an article and if the Royal College of Psychiatry issues a press release questioning techniques well I will run with it as their warnings are commonsense.

http://www.mclean.harvard.edu/about/bios/detail.php?username=hpope

They question the methodology and science as being not proven scientifically. It is the job of scientific peer review to be skeptic and of those postulating theories to prove them. Thats the way science works.

Sidney Brandons review

http://apt.rcpsych.org/cgi/reprint/4/6/343.pdf

Now I am not an expert in the area but I have to accept for now that these are the peers doing the reviewing and I feel better that it is being reviewed this way.

You are a believer in it and are entitled to your belief but like it or not others are entitled to be skeptical.

EDIT - here is another articlr by Professor Brandon.

http://pb.rcpsych.org/cgi/reprint/22/5/278.pdf

He says that sectors of the feminist movement latched onto it and also makes the point that an Alien Abduction book wa also a bestseller.

Now back to Davis & Bass they were creative writting teachers. They have no psychology or medical qualifications.

Because skeptics want things scientifically proven you make sound like a bad thing and legal standards of proof and scientific standards of proof are safeguards.

Here is a link to the actual guidelines issued by the Royal College under the title Reported recovered memories ofchild sexual abuseRecommendations for good practice and implications for
training, continuing professional development and research

http://pb.rcpsych.org/cgi/reprint/21/10/663.pdf

Back to Maran

Avidreader:
I disagree. Maran does not prove her point nor does she back her statements with adequate evidence. Overgeneralizing the reality of her memories is in my opinion morally irresponsible. And we have no evidence that she wasn't abused, only her word.

We only have her word on it and also we only have Oprah Winfreys word on her abuse.

Maran is a writer and thats how she makes her money. She had no evidence of abuse to start with.

One would hope that on their respective stories they are telling the truth.

avidreader

"First you criticised the wilipedia article and then you attack the author based on his article."

Avidreader:
I presented articles and evidence that questions the reliability of both as sources.

The Royal College of Psychiatrists makes several statements that make one question the validity of their work.

Statement 1: "A comprehensive review of the literature on recovered memories of childhood sexual abuse has concluded that when 'memories' are recovered after long periods of amnesia, particularly when questionable techniques were used to recover them, there is a high probability that the memories are false."

There is no research showing this to be true. I have presented several studies to rebut this.

Statement 2: "It has not been possible to demonstrate any clear link between clinical accounts of trauma and the neurobiology of memory."

This article shows a neurobiological connection of trauma and memory
http://www.trauma-pages.com/a/vanderk2.php

Statement 3:
"Can repeated, severe childhood abuse be forgotten?
There is no evidence that memories can be 'blocked out' by the mind, either by repression or by dissociation. Given the prevalence of childhood sexual abuse, even if only a small proportion of memories are repressed and only some of them subsequently recovered, there should be a significant number of corroborated cases recovered through psychotherapy in the literature. In fact, there is none."

Avidreader:
This statement is probably the most problematic of all. The Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders: DSM-IV-TR. By American Psychiatric Association clearly states that Dissociative Amnesia exists as a legitimate phenomenon and diagnosis. The Royal College of Psychiatrists makes statements at variance with the entire field of psychiatry, even disagreeing with the APA.

http://books.google.com/books?id=w_HajjMnjxwC&pg=PA520&lpg=PA520&dq=Diagnostic+and+statistical+manual+of+mental+disorders:+DSM-IV-TR+dissociative+amnesia&source=bl&ots=i6TWdlcL0J&sig=ltCMbCWRGBMsiSltXuvfDyNmc8g&hl=en&ei=QInETJqXMIKs8Aauk83vBg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=9&ved=0CDoQ6AEwCA#v=onepage&q&f=false



http://www.psychiatryonline.com/content.aspx?aID=9708

The statement that there are no corroborated clinical cases of recovered memories is also false.

25 Clinical Accounts and Other Cases in Scientific and Academic Publications
http://www.brown.edu/Departments/Taubman_Center/Recovmem/arch_clinical.html

The Royal College of Psychiatrists credibility is significantly reduced by its extreme positions on the above statements.


"Because skeptics want things scientifically proven you make sound like a bad thing and legal standards of proof and scientific standards of proof are safeguards."

Avidreader:
Skeptics in this field at times appear to ignore all evidence contrary to their opinions and make sweeping statements (as above) with little or no evidence. I am skeptical about their skepticism and believe they should examine their own beliefs as strongly as they do those contrary to their beliefs.

Oprah's story appears to have some corroboration, in part due to her history.

Maran's has little corroboration.

CDfm

Avidreader - I know you diasgree with Marans book.

You post an awful lot of links and I find it confusing. I am an ordinary punter and not a researcher.

The Royal College have set out therapies that they have concerns about and methods they have concerns about which seem very reasonable to me. Do you have any concerns about the methods they exclude or have concerns about the standards they advocate and why?

I mean what I read out of it is the psychiatrists are saying is that the authors of "the Courage to Heal" took a whole bunch of therapies and packaged them as self help and that these were picked up by unqualified or alternative therapists or groups who used them indiscriminately with no safeguards & some "patients got worse". This was also a theme in the radio interview I heard by Maran and the reviews of her book.


You cite a competition with a prize of 1,000 dollars and I can see that as being a bit of fun too, cos if he had been absolutely sure he would have made the prize 1,000,000 dollars.


You also have concerns here about the methodology used by psychiatrists/medical community for peer reviewing studies ? Scientific studies based on empirical research and methodology take time.

We see peer review conducted and criticised on drug tests etc all the time and drugs tests and side effects and drugs being subject to licencing and being the subject of litagation.

As I see it, and reading just the main articles by Pope et al - they are doing a holistic review of the methods used and advocated which their critics feel is a hatchet job and you are getting selective bits of research on part of the issue but not covering the whole issue.

Maybe they are cherrypicking -I do not know but thats what peer review does build up a body of knowledge and tests hypotheses. Thats why you test hypotheses because you do not know. I think what has happened a bit here is that the "repressed memory people" are criticising the methodology of the peer review system & you also have non medical people disagreeing with medical people.

Maybe they are too polite to say outright that unqualified and alternative therapists are dangerous but thats the feeling I get.

Oprah's colloration is Oprah's biography written by Oprah who has a well controlled media image and I would expect that. Maran's claims are colloborated by her parents and brother. I do not know how Maran's claims can be seen any different to Oprah's here. I just can't see it.

When we see this popular science issue translated into physical medicine with the Jenny McCarthy Anti Vaccine /Autism campaign its quantifiable like with the Jenny McCarthy Body Count Website

http://www.jennymccarthybodycount.com/Jenny_McCarthy_Body_Count/Home.html

( I don't know if Oprah gets a mention on the site but Jenny McCarthy is part of the Harpo organisation owned by Oprah)

What this shows us that popular beliefs are not and cannot be clinically sound no matter what level of conviction its advocates have -it does not make it trueI can also see where certain statistics and research not accepted by psychiatrists could be used to promote alternative therapies.If popularity was the only issue here then clinical standards would get thrown away and that cannot be right.

avidreader

"The Royal College have set out therapies that they have concerns about and methods they have concerns about which seem very reasonable to me."

Avidreader:
I have pointed out several problems with their statements that in my opinion
weakens their credibility as a source of information.

"took a whole bunch of therapies and packaged them as self help and that these were picked up by unqualified or alternative therapists or groups who used them indiscriminately with no safeguards & some "patients got worse"."

Avidreader:
I have seen no research showing this to be true.

"Scientific studies based on empirical research and methodology take time."

Avidreader:
I have presented some of the best studies I could find on the topic. These back the statement that recovered memories have fairly high corroboration rates.

"Pope et al - they are doing a holistic review of the methods used and advocated which their critics feel is a hatchet job and you are getting selective bits of research on part of the issue but not covering the whole issue."

Avidreader:
I would disagree with this. Some skeptics ignore the research and data that does not fit their opinions. Some of the webpages I cite have looked at a great deal of the research on the topic.

"criticising the methodology of the peer review system"

Avidreader:
Though not perfect, peer reviewed journal articles are probably the best we can get for accuracy on various topics.

"unqualified and alternative therapists are dangerous"

Avidreader:
Any professional should be licensed and using field accepted techniques.
A technique may be "alternative" but yet acceptable if the person is trained and the technique has been tested.

"What this shows us that popular beliefs are not and cannot be clinically sound no matter what level of conviction its advocates have"

Avidreader:
This depends on the belief. Some popular beliefs are clinically sound and have been tested.

CDfm

avidreader wrote: »

Avidreader:
I have seen no research showing this to be true.

Actually, the basis of the Royal Colleges assertions and reviews have been prudence and good practice more than anything else.

Professor Brandon's article is here that summaries the positions

http://pb.rcpsych.org/cgi/reprint/22/5/278.pdf

And while you may not like Howard Pope he does come accross as being sensible.They are doctors in the mental health field and if they find recovered memory theory and practice a bit out there -well maybe they have a point.

Avidreader:
I have presented some of the best studies I could find on the topic. These back the statement that recovered memories have fairly high corroboration rates.

Avidreader:
I would disagree with this. Some skeptics ignore the research and data that does not fit their opinions. Some of the webpages I cite have looked at a great deal of the research on the topic.

Avidreader:
Though not perfect, peer reviewed journal articles are probably the best we can get for accuracy on various topics.

One of the examples given by Brandon was a book on alien abduction investigation.

It isn't a good enough standard to say "ho hum -this is the best I could come up with".

The fundamental issue here is whether based on the available information is whether the RCP are advocating good standards and practices for patients - I think the answer is yes.

I do not want psychiatrists experimenting with dubious or experimental treatments.

Where you have studies on going into new therapy's etc that is a different ballgame.

It seems to me that the practices, untested and experimental methods were launched on an unsuspecting world.

They should not be launched on the fly like this has been.

So maybe there is something to it - I do not know - but what it seems to me is that the way it has happened is not best practice. Some of the writers do point out that what was a side issue came to dominate and take centre stage disproportionately.

It seems to me that advocates of recovered memory only see things one way.

Avidreader:
Any professional should be licensed and using field accepted techniques.
A technique may be "alternative" but yet acceptable if the person is trained and the technique has been tested.

You seem to have a problem with the fact that the Royal College of Psychiatrists won't accept it.

I was blissfully unaware that this was going on for 20 years and reading up the articles by the RCP for the first time -I can understand what they are on about.

I started as a cynic but now I am definately a convinced skeptic.

Avidreader:
This depends on the belief. Some popular beliefs are clinically sound and have been tested.

Earlier you attacked Wiki as being funded by porno revenue etc, brought up some other group as having paedophile support and picked one persons biography over another.

Maran's book is kind of courageous and her story is a bit on the "whoa there Neddy side" but she does have a story to tell.

One of the things I like about it is that it was written by a lesbian /bi sexual writer and is being reviewed in the mainstream. It also has a happy ending.

I think it is an important little book and while by now means earth shattering - she is one of a number of writers on gender from the US & Canada in recent years from the gay & lesbian community that challenge myths and stereotypes and have tended to get overlooked.

You are saying people should be open minded yet you are not when it comes to Maran's book. That comes accross as cherrypicking to me.I think her book and articles are refreshing and I think she comes accross as human fallable and likeable.

avidreader

"the basis of the Royal Colleges assertions and reviews have been prudence and good practice"

Avidreader:
I have shown major problems with several of their assertions. I believe that the Royal College of Psychiatrists makes statements at variance with much of the field of psychiatry.

"And while you may not like Howard Pope he does come accross as being sensible."

Avidreader:
I have shown problems with his research from other journal articles.
"In the current Journal of Trauma & Dissociation article, Cheit calls Pope’s entire contest “a sham,” accusing Pope’s team of failing to provide a thorough account of all submissions and the process by which they were rejected, offering highly questionable literary analysis, and including several misrepresentations of the state of the science regarding memory for trauma."

-
"It isn't a good enough standard to say "ho hum -this is the best I could come up with"."

Avidreader:
But I never wrote this or even implied this in any way. I stated that I have presented the best studies available on recovered memory. These show that recovered memories have fairly high corroboration rates.

-
"I do not want psychiatrists experimenting with dubious or experimental treatments."

Avidreader:
IMO, no one would want this. But some researched techniques in the hands of trained clinicians can help their patients.

"I started as a cynic but now I am definately a convinced skeptic."

Avidreader:
People sometimes look for arguments to back their own beliefs and may ignore other ideas. The important thing in a discussion is to look at both sides research to make a good decision.

"Earlier you attacked Wiki as being funded by porno revenue etc"

Avidreader:
It appears that much of their early funding came from Bomis, which in part offered customers access to premium, X-rated pornographic content.

"Maran's book is kind of courageous"

Avidreader:
The problem with it is that she makes statements that are not backed by research. Her story can be misapplied to many other people that were actually abused and remembered they were abused.

It is probably pointless to continue this discussion, as you have your opinion and I have mine. So IMO, it is best to leave it and let the readers decide what they believe. Thank you for the discussion.

CDfm

avidreader wrote: »

"

Avidreader:
But I never wrote this or even implied this in any way. I stated that I have presented the best studies available on recovered memory. These show that recovered memories have fairly high corroboration rates.

But it is up to the originator of any theory to effectively champion it and those who reject it pick holes in it including its methodology.

Thats what Occams Razor and peer review is about. Its advocates have not provided sufficient evidence to convince the RCP -whether it has any merit only time will tell.

For now though, it is not best practice

Avidreader:
IMO, no one would want this. But some researched techniques in the hands of trained clinicians can help their patients.

Actually, it is a doctors/psychiatrists job to monitor this as I understand it.

An argument against this has been that the clinicians are not trained or adequetly trained and as such it is the subject of much controversy.

Avidreader:
It appears that much of their early funding came from Bomis, which in part offered customers access to premium, X-rated pornographic content.

The internet as a media and porno is irrelevant here. You attacked Wiki rather than the argument in the Wiki entry.

Thats like saying the UK Newspaper the Daily Express is a porno publication because its owner the publisher Richard Desmond owned a group that printed adult titles.

How could Wiki control the source of funds that donors gave it.

Avidreader:
The problem with it is that she makes statements that are not backed by research. Her story can be misapplied to many other people that were actually abused and remembered they were abused.

In fact, that is the same argument that is used by critics against The Courage to Heal and that it is being misapplied.

But the book is a biography of her experience and it is nice to see a lesbian/bisexual writer like Maran hit the mainstream as she has a story to tell and we in the mainstream could probably learn a bit. She is not a Guru,

She is not the type of writer that most people would come accross as many lesbian writers are stereotyped and for that reason and, like her or not, she deserves more readers.

It is probably pointless to continue this discussion, as you have your opinion and I have mine. So IMO, it is best to leave it and let the readers decide what they believe. Thank you for the discussion.

Thank you - I have enjoyed it and I like thinking things out.

avidreader

"For now though, it is not best practice"

According to RCP, it is not. But according to many others, including many using the DSM, it is.

"How could Wiki control the source of funds that donors gave it."

One of the founders of WP created Bomis. "Bomis, found in 1996, was founded by Jimmy Wales and Tim Shell....Bomis ran a website called Bomis Premium at premium.bomis.com until 2005, offering customers access to premium, X-rated pornographic content." He used his company to fund WP.

"Thank you - I have enjoyed it and I like thinking things out."

Agreed

CDfm

avidreader wrote: »

"For now though, it is not best practice"

According to RCP, it is not. But according to many others, including many using the DSM, it is.

And who are the DSM

"How could Wiki control the source of funds that donors gave it."

One of the founders of WP created Bomis. "Bomis, found in 1996, was founded by Jimmy Wales and Tim Shell....Bomis ran a website called Bomis Premium at premium.bomis.com until 2005, offering customers access to premium, X-rated pornographic content." He used his company to fund WP.

Thats something I did not know and loooked it up and got this

Mr Cadenhead’s blog also described how "another sore spot for Wales has been Bomis Babes, a now-closed subscription service of his company's Bomis.com search portal that offered nude pictures of women".
The site was described by Wikipedia contributors as "softcore pornography" or "erotica".
But Mr Wales changed a reference to "Bomis Babes softcore pornography section" to "Bomis Babes adult content section". He twice altered references to the nature of the site, replacing "Bomis Babes erotica section" with "Bomis Babes blog based on Slashdcode" and other technically-slanted descriptions. http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/media/article774973.ece

So the guy ran an internet porn portal -big deal.

Now I am not into porn myself but when I see things like the banning of a Hunk Dory Advert - I go wah.

You may have come accross this group feminists for freedom of expression - an American Lobby Group. They point out that women use porn too.

http://www.ffeusa.org/html/statements/statements_pornography.php

I came accross them a while back (via www.jezebel.com which is a cool site on womens site in the USA that is all about celebrity, fashion and sex etc ) when I was in a discussion about domestic violence etc.

Pro porn feminsts are called sex positive women.

So I will read around issues before forming a view.

"Thank you - I have enjoyed it and I like thinking things out."

Agreed

I don't have a doctrinaire view on any of this really.

We have done the we disagree with each other on this but if there are other bits resulting from it you want to continue with fire ahead.

EDIT

Jezebel is good and fairly well balanced and they reference the source articles

On Marans book -the coverage is factual too

http://jezebel.com/5643068/can-false-memories-of-abuse-help-real-victims

Except that it didn't really make sense. Over time, Maran realized her father hadn't really molested her. In an interview, she says that she "had been so steeped in the symptomatology of incest survivors" that she "was actually transposing what I had heard from these little girls into my own psyche." And, she says, she's not alone — when she started writing the book in 2007, she found that "with the exception of my ex-lover, every other person I talked to who had accused her father in the '80s and early '90s now believed she had been wrong."

Maran speaks of a "mass panic" in the eighties and nineties, centering on childhood abuse discovered later through recovered memory. Now that recovered memory has been widely questioned, and Maran and others have recanted, what can we take from their experiences? On the one hand, children who report abuse have so often been silenced and disbelieved over the years that anything that calls abuse claims into question is disturbing. But Maran actually thinks the "panic" she describes may have done more good than harm for victims. She writes,


Read more: http://jezebel.com/5643068/can-false-memories-of-abuse-help-real-victims#ixzz13fGXgUdx

On the Courage to Heal -its discussion is really ballanced

http://jezebel.com/5490993/recovered-memories-of-childhood-abuse-healing-the-victim-healing-the-culture

Recovered Memories Of Childhood Abuse: Healing The Victim, Healing The Culture

[Recovered Memories Of Childhood Abuse: Healing The Victim, Healing The Culture] In a debate reminiscent of the one over false rape claims, sociologist Jo Woodiwiss has taken aim at women's false memories of childhood sexual abuse. But are women or their recollections really the problem?

Specifically, Woodiwiss and psychologist Chris French take issue with the Church of England's support of The Courage to Heal, a self-help book for abuse survivors. Authors Ellen Bass and Laura Davis write that, "Children often cope with abuse by forgetting it ever happened." They add,

You may think you don't have memories, but often as you begin to talk about what you do remember, there emerges a constellation of feelings, reactions, and recollections that add up to substantial information. To say "I was abused," you don't need the kind of proof that would stand up in a court of law.

The book was recommended by the Church's child protection policy, but critics like French say the idea that repressed memories of childhood abuse can be reliably "recovered" in therapy isn't supported by science, and that such therapy can even harm patients. The debate over recovered memory began back in the early nineties, but Woodiwiss gives it a new twist by asking why a book like The Courage to Heal might appeal to struggling women.

Woodiwiss says the book identifies a number of common-sounding problems — such as perfectionism, relationship dissatisfaction, and lack of motivation — as symptoms of sexual abuse. She writes that instead of identifying "the social, economic and material conditions that impinge on women's lives and restrict their opportunities," Bass and Davis encourage women to see themselves as "damaged" by abuse. She continues,

These victim identities are formed in the context of a pervasive therapeutic/self-help culture that places greater and greater emphasis on looking inward (and increasingly to the past) for the possible cause, and solution, for any troubles.

The implication is that those who are unhappy or dissatisfied with at least some aspect of their lives can find solace and the promise of a better, brighter future, if only they can be cured of the effects of their unremembered abuse.

Certainly a number of systemic factors contribute to women's unhappiness, and a culture of self-help that encourages them to "look inward" may allow those factors to persist. But in linking The Courage to Heal and recovered memory therapy with a larger self-help movement, Woodiwiss misses some of the unique and troubling aspects of abuse. Though some allegations of childhood sexual abuse have been called into question, it's also true that some abuse victims suffer doubly when they try to report their abuse, by being dismissed, silenced, or disbelieved. The Church of England itself was recently accused of ignoring or even actively hiding sexual abuse claims. It's perhaps no wonder that people believe children repress their memories of abusive experiences, since those in a position to help children deal with those experiences sometimes fail to do so.


Read more: http://jezebel.com/5490993/recovered-memories-of-childhood-abuse-healing-the-victim-healing-the-culture#ixzz13fCpUvEM

the reader comments are also very interesting and readable

For people interested in the topic of "recovered memories,"* as well as the SRA controversy, I'd recommend The Myth of Repressed Memory: False Memories and Allegations of Sexual Abuse by Elizabeth Loftus and Katherine Ketcham, and Remembering Satan by Lawrence Wright.

Loftus' book debunks the "Courage to Heal" mindset especially effectively, IMHO. What Bass & Davis' argument comes down to is, "If you feel like you were abused, you were." I'd argue that people who feel like they might need to buy a self-help book such as that one definitely have some issues of their own to work out. But they were not necessarily abused, and convincing them that they were is not going to help matters.

*I am using quotation marks to indicate that I'm talking about the scientifically-unsound recovered-memory craze sparked by Ellen Bass & Laura Davis, not to denigrate survivors of actual abuse




Read more: http://jezebel.com/5490993/recovered-memories-of-childhood-abuse-healing-the-victim-healing-the-culture#ixzz13fFmvf7B

So it isnt just Meridith Marran who is criticisng the book - lots of others are too and they are women.

avidreader

"And who are the DSM"

Avidreader:
The DSM-IV-TR is the Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders: DSM-IV-TR written by American Psychiatric Association. It is the best researched and most used psychiatric diagnostic manual in the Western World. It clearly acknowledges the existence of dissociative amnesia, which the RCP in essence denies the existence of. By doing this, the RCP puts itself out of step with the majority of the field and research today.

http://books.google.com/books?id=3SQrtpnHb9MC&printsec=frontcover&dq=dsm&hl=en&ei=aCfKTJZEg4LyBoeswK4B&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CC0Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false

When one looks at a source's data and research, one might want to look at the funding behind the research and data. And their present day connections to the field they are discussing. WP has problematic connections in both areas.

"Jezebel is good and fairly well balanced"

Avidreader:
From the quotes you cite below, I would disagree.

Though interesting at times, I would not consider Jezebel an authoritative source on the science of memory or research in the field.

CDfm

avidreader wrote: »

"And who are the DSM"

Avidreader:
The DSM-IV-TR is the Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders: DSM-IV-TR written by American Psychiatric Association. It is the best researched and most used psychiatric diagnostic manual in the Western World. It clearly acknowledges the existence of dissociative amnesia, which the RCP in essence denies the existence of. By doing this, the RCP puts itself out of step with the majority of the field and research today.

I do not know if the RCP goes that far -what it does do is urge caution as to the use of certain techniques in recoverec memory.

EDIT :Now I dont know the medical jargon or consequences but to me it seems a bit different to treat every patient in a group with having dissociative amnesia.

Critics of the Courage to Heal say that its an unusual phenomena and just because the APA acknowleges it does not mean they endorce its use in the way Recovered Memory advocates do.

Well do they ?

You dissmissed -Harrison G Pope is a psychiatrist and professor at Harvard and he doesnt agree with its use as per the courage to heal. Harvard is like the top medical school for the brightest and the best. He is a mover and shaker. So when he talks others tend to listen.

When one looks at a source's data and research, one might want to look at the funding behind the research and data. And their present day connections to the field they are discussing. WP has problematic connections in both areas.

Wikipedia is not as an organisation involved in the provision of mental health anything. Its an on-line collaborative thingy and can be amended by users. It is as good or as bad as the users.

While I myself am not a porn user,nonetheless others are including women and the use of porn does not indicate anything and there are feminist organisations whose particular moral viewpoint is very much pro porn too.

I do not have a view either way and wikipedia will only have a view on a subject based on what individal authors post.

In that sense, its like a dictionary or even a tabloid. Nothing more or less.

"Jezebel is good and fairly well balanced"

Avidreader:
From the quotes you cite below, I would disagree.

Though interesting at times, I would not consider Jezebel an authoritative source on the science of memory or research in the field.

I am not saying Jezebel is an authorative source on anything -its an e-zine for women.

I quoted from it and put up links to show that the issue is being debated in the "secular" press. It ia always well referenced and covers a wide range of topics in the entertainment industry as well.


Jezebel is a hugely influencial on=line ezine as a fashion/current affairs magazine -something like 10,000,000 hits a noth,

So what is weong with the book "Recovered Memories Of Childhood Abuse: Healing The Victim, Healing The Culture"by Chris French or The Myth of Repressed Memory: False Memories and Allegations of Sexual Abuse by Elizabeth Loftus and Katherine Ketcham, and Remembering Satan by Lawrence Wright.

There is a lot more out there than Marans book.

I hope I am not being harsh in saying you appear not to be addressing the issue of the emerging body of writting ,from mostly women, who challenge the Courage to Heal.

avidreader

Whether one teaches at a large college or if a website has a lot of hits, this does not insure accuracy and it is best to look at other sources for balance.
The Courage to Heal has had overall social acceptance. This is shown in part by its large number of sales.

Here are a few books to balance your list from another perspective:

probably the best (and largest book on memory)
Memory, Trauma Treatment, And the Law Brown, Scheflin and Hammond, 1998, W. W. Norton 0-393-70254-5

Memory and Abuse – Remembering and Healing the Effects of Trauma C. Whitfield M.D. Health Communications, Inc 3201 SW 15th St, Deerfield Beach, FL.33442-8190. http://books.google.ca/books?id=z1LW3u1e04YC&printsec=frontcover&dq=Memory+and+Abuse+%E2%80%93+Remembering+and+Healing+the+Effects+of+Trauma&hl=en&ei=ZGvLTOXmIMH58Aa13tSAAg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCoQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false

Misinformation Concerning Child Sexual Abuse and Adult Survivors New York: Hawthorn Press, Inc. Whitfield, C. L., Silberg, J. Fink, P. J. Eds. (2001)

Forensic Aspects of Dissociative Identity Disorder ‑ Author: Sachs, Adah & Galton, Graeme (Eds). Publisher : Karnac Books, 2008 ISBN 1855755963

Noblitt, JR; Perskin PS (2000). Cult and ritual abuse: its history, anthropology, and recent discovery in contemporary America. New York: Praeger. ISBN 0-275-96665-8. http://books.google.ca/books?id=zJkTTpfyJ-8C&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_summary_r&cad=0


Noblitt, J.R.; Perskin, P. S. (eds) (2008). Ritual Abuse in the Twenty-first Century: Psychological, Forensic, Social and Political Considerations. Bandor, OR: Robert Reed, 552. ISBN 1-934759-12-0.

CDfm

avidreader wrote: »

Whether one teaches at a large college or if a website has a lot of hits, this does not insure accuracy and it is best to look at other sources for balance.

I do not know the point you are making here. We know the Courage to Heal Book is controvercial.

You make it sound like by accepting dissociative amnesia that the American Psychiatric Association accept "the Courage to heal"

They seem mutually exclussive to me.

The Courage to Heal has had overall social acceptance. This is shown in part by its large number of sales.

Here are a few books to balance your list from another perspective:

It isnt my list , it was what was up on Jezebel.com as a comment on a book review. You have used a list of publications to avoid giving an answer.

Abuse victims need support and very unhappy people also need support - but because a person is unhappy that does not make them an abuse victim.

Real victims need support and social acceptence. Pretend victims may just need something else. So even if it has social acceptence is immaterial -it does not make it any less wrong. Lynching young black men was once acceptable in the Southern States in the US. Social acceptence did not make it right.

Your argument is a little bit like horescopes -if I were to say all Gemini's will get the job they want cos Jupiter is in the cusp. If they dont they are an abuse victim.

As regards whether or not dissociative amnesia exists is to technical for me and an argument for doctors and academics to have. Even if it is true -it still does not prove that "the Courage to Heal" method is correct. All it proves is that dissociative amnesia can happen.

What I am saying is its not an argument for keeping score in and the logic behind it is "truthiness".

Word of the Year 2006

As expected, there were a few surprises in store for us as we pored through your submissions for our first Word of the Year online survey. Either the vast majority of you out there in the Merriam-Webster online community are big fans of The Colbert Report, or Time Magazine was right on target when it honored the show's host Stephen Colbert earlier this year as one of the most influential people of 2006. By an overwhelming 5 to 1 majority vote, our visitors have awarded top honors to a word Colbert first introduced on "The Word" segment of his debut broadcast on Comedy Central back in October 2005. Soon after, this word was chosen as the 16th annual Word of the Year by the American Dialect Society, and defined by them as "the quality of preferring concepts or facts one wishes to be true, rather than concepts or facts known to be true."
Merriam-Webster's #1 Word of the Year for 2006:

1. truthiness (noun)
1 : "truth that comes from the gut, not books" (Stephen Colbert, Comedy Central's "The Colbert Report," October 2005)
2 : "the quality of preferring concepts or facts one wishes to be true, rather than concepts or facts known to be true" (American Dialect Society, January 2006)

http://www.merriam-webster.com/info/06words.htm

avidreader

"Courage to Heal Book is controvercial"

Avidreader:
For most people, it is not. A few small sections are extrapolated from it by a vocal minority, some of whom attack the reality of child abuse crimes, in an attempt to discredit the entire book.

"You have used a list of publications to avoid giving an answer."

Avidreader:
No, I listed publications to provide an alternative to the list you provided, several of which rebut the arguments in the books in your list.

"Real victims need support and social acceptence."

Avidreader:
Yes, and attacks on book like "The Courage to Heal" weaken that social acceptance, which overall is an excellent book.

You infer that the numbers of criticisms of the book add up to showing that the book has problems with it. People should look at the content of the criticisms and where they come from.

"As regards whether or not dissociative amnesia exists is to technical for me and an argument for doctors and academics to have."

Avidreader:
Dissociative Amnesia does exist and it is often caused by trauma. This has been clearly proven.

CDfm

avidreader wrote: »

"Courage to Heal Book is controvercial"

Avidreader:
For most people, it is not. A few small sections are extrapolated from it by a vocal minority, some of whom attack the reality of child abuse crimes, in an attempt to discredit the entire book.

Respectfully Avidreader you are cherrypicking.

The Royal College of Psychiatrists and the Professor of Psychiatry in Harvard aren't just any critics they are the experts.

All I am saying is that if it is not good enough for Doctors then it is not good enough -that should be the benchmark.

Avidreader:
No, I listed publications to provide an alternative to the list you provided, several of which rebut the arguments in the books in your list.

I disagree as you havent dealt with the objections yourself . I would like them explained to me.

EDIT - I did not make the list I took the books from an article on www.jezebel.com - a US womens e-zine and I already posted the link.

Avidreader:
Yes, and attacks on book like "The Courage to Heal" weaken that social acceptance, which overall is an excellent book.

The book and the authors make their own bed here. If the book is criticised as pseudo science and incorrect then that does not affect social acceptence that abuse is wrong just that a particular hypotheses is wrong. They are exclusive issues.

As it has happened -the criticism of the book and the techniques it promoted and the movement it spawned has damaged the work others have done and caused the problems with acceptence.

Thats the way I see it. It should not be hush hush.

You infer that the numbers of criticisms of the book add up to showing that the book has problems with it. People should look at the content of the criticisms and where they come from.

Yes they should look at the origans -as medically qualified people are best for setting the benchmark.

Abuse should not be a political issue.

Avidreader:
Dissociative Amnesia does exist and it is often caused by trauma. This has been clearly proven.

I am not saying as a clinical diagnosis it does not exist.

The jury is out however on how widespread it is and that it is automatic-rather it is a much rarer occurance. When it is diagnosed it should be by competant professionals and thats not what has happened. What has been happening here has the whiff of makey upey. The application of this condition has not been tested.


The information coming out is that patients or clients were harmed and that can't be right. We do not know the numbers yet and may never no.

I am sure there is a different approach to the polarisation - but I think there is enough reasonable doubt flying around from a lot of eminent professionals so that a reasonable person would doubt it.

I wonder if it was an untested drug that was being used that you would agree with the lack of controls or professional standards.

EDIT -as I explained here and on boards before a guy who sat behind me at school commited suicide as a result of child abuse by a priest/teacher and I have a personal interest in child abuse therapy being delivered properly.

Thats why I am asking the questions as opposed to attacking the book.

I am not sure the the Courage to Heal is the best way.

I am also not sure about splitting service delivery to victims of abuse by gender is the best service delivery model.

Rabble Rabble

avidreader wrote: »

Oprah was abused as a child and appeared to have a difficult childhood.


The Stop Bad Therapy site states: "The Courage to Heal is the most harmful work of slander, ignorance, and lies since The Protocols of the Elders of Zion and The Malleus Maleficarum.

Dead right.

Whats the evolutionary advantage of repressed memories?

avidreader

"Whats the evolutionary advantage of repressed memories?"

Good question.

See http://dynamic.uoregon.edu/~jjf/defineBT.html

Betrayal trauma theory posits that there is a social utility in remaining unaware of abuse when the perpetrator is a caregiver (Freyd, 1994, 1996). The theory draws on studies of social contracts (e.g., Cosmides, 1989) to explain why and how humans are excellent at detecting betrayals; however, Freyd argues that under some circumstances detecting betrayals may be counter-productive to survival. Specifically, in cases where a victim is dependent on a caregiver, survival may require that she/he remain unaware of the betrayal. In the case of childhood sexual abuse, a child who is aware that her/his parent is being abusive may withdraw from the relationship (e.g., emotionally or in terms of proximity). For a child who depends on a caregiver for basic survival, withdrawing may actually be at odds with ultimate survival goals, particularly when the caregiver responds to withdrawal by further reducing caregiving or increasing violence. In such cases, the child's survival would be better ensured by being blind to the betrayal and isolating the knowledge of the event, thus remaining engaged with the caregiver.


"Avidreader:
Dissociative Amnesia does exist and it is often caused by trauma. This has been clearly proven."
CDfm: I am not saying as a clinical diagnosis it does not exist. The jury is out however on how widespread it is and that it is automatic"

http://www.leadershipcouncil.org/1/tm/amnesia.html
Is dissociation a rare phenomenon? No. Scientific evidence shows that it is not rare for traumatized people to experience amnesia or delayed recall for the trauma. Amnesia has been reported in combat, for crimes, and for concentration camp experiences and torture. Evidence of this process can be found in the early literature on World War I and World War II.

Carlson, E., & Rosser-Hogan, R. (April, 1993). Mental health status of Cambodian refugees ten years after leaving their homes. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 63 (2), 223-231.
Dissociation is also a frequent finding in survivors extreme terror. Between 1975 and 1979, an estimated one to three million of a population of seven million Cambodians were killed or died of starvation. Carlson, E., & Rosser-Hogan selected 50 subjects at random from a list of all refugees (~500) resettled by nonprofit organization between 1983 and 1985. None had any formal education and had lived in the US for a mean of 5 years. 86% met the criteria for PTSD. The mean number of traumatic experiences the refugees endorsed was 14 and "90% reported amnesia for upsetting events." Mean DES score was 37.1 - which is extremely high compared to the mean score for the general population samples in the US - 8.6.



What types of traumas result in dissociative amnesia?
A review of 50 studies revealed that amnesia rates tend to increase with severity of trauma and is particularly high in victims of sex crimes.


--
"I wonder if it was an untested drug that was being used that you would agree with the lack of controls or professional standards."

Avidreader:
I would never agree to any untested technique being used.

--
"The Royal College of Psychiatrists and the Professor of Psychiatry in Harvard aren't just any critics they are the experts."

Avidreader:
They have both been critiqued and I have shown how the RCP makes statements at variance with much of the field of psychiatry.

CDfm

avidreader wrote: »

Avidreader:
They have both been critiqued and I have shown how the RCP makes statements at variance with much of the field of psychiatry.

I will be sticking to the psychiatrists and I don't think you have made your case.

Being critiqued in itself, is not sufficient, I am sure Einsteins Theory of Relativity and Darwins Theory of Evoloution were critiqued before they went into general circulation. You also had guys who said that speeds faster than 25-30 miles an hour could kill and the red flags in front of cars c 1904.

Psychiatry/psychology is an emerging field of science and medicine. Alchemy and modern chemistry are related but we no longer think we can turn base metals into gold.

Edit -I am posting this link on an interview of Richard Feynman the Nobel Physicist that was pm'd to me two years ago when I was arguing the toss on something that I believed in. He is very profound.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IaO69CF5mbY

The use of Occams Razor by scientists is to get past the emotive and to do it with rigour to build a general theory and I would say given the data it is not there yet

http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/occamraz.html

When you read what the Royal College of Psychiatrists wrote in terms of this it is very readable and understandable.

So the problem with the Courage to Heal is that it discounts all other possibilities.

http://science.martinsewell.com/occam/

What I suspect is that the Psychiatrists want to see more evidence as the theory does not satisfactorily explain what is going on relative to the data. Thats what empirical studies do and investigation/research has to be robust. In that way you require qualitative and quantitive studies which a theory like the Courage to Heal does not do. It eliminates other diagnoses and hypotheses rather then add to our understanding it creates a completely different model. There is a problem with its methodology..

That is how I understand it. Now I can only understand this at a very top level basis and I do not even attempt to otherwise when it is applied to this subject matter.

On areas that I know about well it is very useful tool and I imagine that is where the skeptics/academics are looking for data.

avidreader

"I will be sticking to the psychiatrists and I don't think you have made your case."

Avidreader:
The DSM is the gold standard of the field, not the RCP. I have made my case.

-
"the Psychiatrists want to see more evidence as the theory does not satisfactorily explain what is going on relative to the data."

Avidreader:
For some, there will never be enough data. I have presented more than enough data to substantiate the existence of recovered memory and dissociation.

The denial of these phenomenon for some may suggest a larger phenomenon. Denial.

"Denial is one of the most common defense mechanisms that we all use, pretending that an uncomfortable thing did not happen."

CDfm

avidreader wrote: »

Avidreader:
For some, there will never be enough data. I have presented more than enough data to substantiate the existence of recovered memory and dissociation.

The denial of these phenomenon for some may suggest a larger phenomenon. Denial.

"Denial is one of the most common defense mechanisms that we all use, pretending that an uncomfortable thing did not happen."

Who is in denial and why ?

There are standard methods applied accross different disciplines.

For their to be a conspiracy, then there must be a reason for it and those putting forward the theory must be treated differently to others, for example, the methodology of their research should have a different standard applied or the numbers of and sizes of the studies should be different to those applied to others. (This is what the academic critics are saying is that supporters of Recovered Memory are lax about methodology etc and it is why I posted the links)

Is this so? How are they being treated differently??

( I had a discussion on another forum where we applied Occams Razor to Atheism/ Religious belief for fun and it incorporated diverse belief spectrum)

So being a sceptic in this context means adopting methodology to prove the hypothesis.

I am not doubting your commitment to this and am open minded enough to see that it is possible.

We should not get stuck into a pro or anti lobby positions here because we end up arguing other peoples arguments rather than being able to appreciate the developments- when the sceptics are saying it is not conclusive proof which is the scientific standard and then that the diagnosis for a patient may be one of a number available.