The Church vs. False Memories of Sexual Abuse

Church must accept reality of false memories of childhood sexual abuse
The notion that therapists can help people to 'recover' memories of sexual abuse causes serious harm to patients and their families, writes psychologist Chris French

Contrary to popular belief, the brain does not record memories like a tape recorder. False memories of sexual abuse can seem perfectly real.

Last April, I wrote a column on the topic of false memories of childhood sexual abuse and the misery that such memories, typically "recovered" during therapy, can cause.

On Friday, in my role as a member of the scientific and professional advisory board of the British False Memory Society (BFMS), I was more than happy to be a signatory to a letter to the archbishop of Canterbury concerning the views expressed by the Rev Pearl Luxon, safeguarding adviser to the Church of England, who is responsible for child protection issues. Luxon apparently accepts her advisers' assertion that "there is no such thing as 'false memory'" and that, "It is quite common when people have suffered severe trauma for memory to be patchy and disjointed."

These are dangerous and uninformed views for someone in such an influential position.

The letter to the Rowan Williams, which I would urge you to read in full for a more informed perspective on the subject of false memories and the truth about memory for traumatic events, concludes by asking how Luxon might have come to adopt such views in the first place.

The sad truth is that such views about the nature of memory are still surprisingly common among people in all walks of life, despite well over a century of scientific research into the way memory works. Luxon asserts that "there is no such thing as 'false memory'. It is either a memory or it is not."

I can only assume that such a view must be based upon the erroneous notion that memory in some sense works like a tape recorder or a video camera, accurately recording all that happens around us. According to this view, 'real' memories would always be 100% accurate replays of previous events as we originally experienced them. Anything that is not 100% accurate is therefore not really a memory at all, and therefore false memories cannot exist.

A survey last year of more than 600 undergraduates at a Midwestern university in the USA revealed that about 27% believed that memory does indeed operate like a tape recorder. Other surveys show that 36% of us believe that our brains retain perfect records of everything we've ever experienced, a mistaken view that, worryingly, is shared by some psychotherapists.

The truth is that memory is always a reconstructive process, not a reproductive one. What we think we recall about events, with degrees of confidence ranging from uncertainty to absolute conviction, is actually a construction based upon a mixture of accurate recollections and gaps filled in upon the basis of our general knowledge and beliefs about what is plausible, our expectations, fragments of recollections of other similar events, and even input from dreams, fantasies and imagination.

Importantly, our confidence in the memory is not a reliable guide to its accuracy.

Let me illustrate this point with a couple of everyday examples. We've all seen clocks and watches with Roman numerals on them, probably many thousands of times across our lifespan. So you will know how the number four is represented on such timepieces. Is it "IV" – or is it "IIII"?

I know from using this example in countless classroom demonstrations that most people reading this article will be confident that it is "IV". You are wrong. On the vast majority of clocks and watches, the four is represented as "IIII" and not in the more usual form of "IV". (Note to pedants: I know that the clock upon what is commonly referred to as Big Ben is an exception to this rule. I also know that strictly speaking the clock is not Big Ben, the bell is!)

When I asked you to recall an image from memory of a timepiece bearing Roman numerals, most of you will have conjured up an image of what you think you must have seen when you usually look at such objects rather than what you actually have seen. Memory is a reconstructive process.

Now think back to a recent holiday. Think of a specific incident – a memorable meal or a walk on the beach – and try to conjure up a detailed and accurate mental image of that scene. Can you see yourself in the image? Many people (not all) report that they can – in which case, this clearly is not a replay of what was experienced at the time, as it is being "seen" from a different perspective. Once again, memory is shown to be a reconstructive process.

It follows that not only can memories of events that we actually did witness become distorted but the mind is even capable of generating apparent memories for entire episodes that never took place at all. These are what is referred to in the scientific literature as "false memories". Such memories can range from everyday, harmless examples (Did I lock the back door or just think about locking the back door?) through to extremely damaging examples of "recovered" memories of childhood abuse or even ritualised Satanic abuse, taking in along the way bizarre false memories of alien abduction and past lives.

Why are such mistaken notions of how memory works - clearly shared by Luxon - dangerous? A belief that everything we ever experience is accurately recorded somewhere within our brains leads inevitably to the idea that it might be possible to recover memories of everything we have ever experienced if only the right techniques are employed.

Many psychotherapists are convinced that severe trauma, such as childhood sexual abuse, can lead to repression. Repression is the psychoanalytic notion that under such overwhelming emotional circumstances the mind automatically and involuntarily banishes the resulting memories to the unconscious regions of the mind, from where they have a toxic effect upon psychological well-being, despite being inaccessible to consciousness.

Therapists also claim that the only way to become psychologically healthy is to "recover" these memories and work through them with a psychotherapist, using techniques such as hypnotic regression and guided imagery. Because there is no 'buried memory' to recover, the search for repressed memories can itself lead to the mental construction of completely false scenarios.

Indeed, none of the claims upon which this therapeutic approach is based is supported by any convincing scientific evidence. Yet the damage that can be done to patients and their families by such psychotherapists is well documented.

For most people, a little reflection on their own personal experiences of memory is enough to convince them that memory does not work like a tape recorder and that false memories do occur. Research into memory, and in particular the processes underlying the formation of false memories, has proved this beyond all reasonable doubt.

The fact that the Church of England official responsible for child protection appears not to have familiarised herself with the evidence on a topic that is central to her role is deeply worrying.

Chris French is a professor of psychology at Goldsmiths where he heads the Anomalistic Psychology Research Unit. He edits The Skeptic

Source

I think that this is a great article dealing with something that has potential relevance to many issues discussed on ATS. False memories form a large portion of the body of "evidence" used to support paranormal beliefs. NDEs proving the afterlife, alien abductions, past life memories, and Satanic ritual abuse are all supported in many cases by false memories brought on through hypnosis. I think this article gives a pretty clear explanation of false memories and how they can influence public perception.


Please read the article before responding. No one is minimizing the real victims of sexual abuse, or vindicating the perpetrators of such abuses.

For me, the issue of the church in this article is secondary to the phenomenon of false memories. I posted this in order to call attention to that phenomenon.

Additional reading:
www.skepdic.com...

en.wikipedia.org...

discovermagazine.com...

blogs.discovermagazine.com...

www.scientificamerican.com...

reply to post by OnceReturned


Great post. I have always been wary of "evidence" gained from hypnosis or other forms of regression. It's true that in these states people are susceptible to even the most subtle suggestions.

reply to post by Xcalibur254


Thanks. It is appropriate to be wary of such evidence. The more we learn about false memories the more easily it seems that they form.

This position is a powerful one for skeptics to take, and a difficult one for believers to dismiss. If we know for a fact that many "memories" recovered during hyponosis/regressive therapy are false, and that these false memories are formed easily, then how can one make a strong case that any individual memory is valid? The entire body of recovered memories must now be called into question, because we know many of them are no good. How can we tell the true from the false? The answer is that it is almost impossible to identify true recovered memories without corroborating physical evidence, or at the very least corroborating witness testimony.

This insight deals a serious blow to paranormal claims supported almost exclusively by these recovered memories. Individual testamony from memory was never very good evidence, but now we know that when it is "recovered" it is even less reliable than we thought. Hopefully this will cause us to be more demanding of the evidence supporting extraordinary claims.

I read the article and have read a little bit about them previously.

False Memory Societies...hmm..., I don't necessarily doubt that manipulative or otherwise suggestive 'hypnotists', or therapists could somehow implant a memory. But as for the need for a "Society" to be formed to combat this apparently menacing threat, I was completely unaware.

Surely, this organization wouldn't have been created primarily for assisting in the continued cover-up of pedophilic activities and child-exploitation criminal enterprises that seem to exist in our world.

Now we're going down the road of discrediting individual memories, which I could see leading to the discrediting of individual testimony:

"I object, your Honor"

"On what grounds?"

"False Memory, Your Honor"

"Objection Sustained"

Really, I just think it's a mechanism to assist with a cover-up that could lead to a further erosion of one's "legal" individual rights.

Hope I'm wrong.

reply to post by FewWorldOrder


I have to agree that there exists the potential to abuse this idea, but that potential exists for virtually everything. This is what the false memory society has to say for themselves:

False memory is the phenomenon in which a person is convinced a memory is true when it is not. It was first postulated and diagnosed more than 100 years ago. More recently, clinical evidence suggests it is more widespread than had previously been appreciated.

In particular, it is creating severe problems in the field of alleged sexual abuse. Naturally, the Society acknowledges and abhors the fact that there are many genuine cases of child abuse that may require the application of the criminal law. However, what is happening is that a number of people, usually during psychotherapy or counselling, are recovering 'memories' of having been sexually abused in childhood, even though those accused - usually, but not always, their parents - deny such abuse and there is no corroborating evidence.

Not surprisingly, such memories, if false, have severe consequences both for the person concerned and for his or her family. It is not uncommon for a whole network of family relationships to be destroyed as a result.

The extent of the phenomenon led, in 1993, to the formation of The BFMS and to the establishment of its Scientific and Professional Advisory Board.

Source

I see where you are coming from, but I am certain that the injustices that the society was created to fight are absolutely real. The scenario you described is hypothetical, and of course we should seek to avoid it. However, real injustices occuring today that ruin peoples lives must be given a higher importance than hypothetical abuses of the concept of false memories in the future.

I agree with what the society is doing, and I also agree with you that we have to be wary of how this concept is interpreted in the future. It could indeed be a slippery slope, but we can't let that stop us from addressing the real problems false memories are causing today.

FMS was invented to try to excuse sexual abusers. By sexual abusers.

Yes, memories can be planted: the CIA was busy with this many years ago. But the notion that so many therapists plant or encourage the formation of memories is plain silly.

These are some of the same bright lights that claim there's no such thing as multiple personality disorder (dissociative identity disorder). It's all caused by bad therapy. Yeah, right. I suppose bipolar disorder is caused by bad therapy too.

I, myself lost memories after abuse and only recounted them later, when I felt comfortable thinking, so I know it's real.

reply to post by leftystrat


While I'm not saying DID is not real it is overdiagnosed, at least in the US. And FMS is a very real possibility when dealing with hypnosis. Studies have been done that have shown this. So, to say that it is made up goes against pretty much all research I have seen on the subject.

Originally posted by leftystrat
FMS was invented to try to excuse sexual abusers. By sexual abusers.

Yes, memories can be planted: the CIA was busy with this many years ago. But the notion that so many therapists plant or encourage the formation of memories is plain silly.

These are some of the same bright lights that claim there's no such thing as multiple personality disorder (dissociative identity disorder). It's all caused by bad therapy. Yeah, right. I suppose bipolar disorder is caused by bad therapy too.

This is the kind of backwards thinking that this article was written in response to. False memory syndrome wasn't invented by anyone, it is a natural phenomenon. Read about it:

faculty.washington.edu...

scienceblogs.com...

www.guardian.co.uk...

Those three articles describe actual scientific studies that have been done proving the existance of the phenomenon. Are you suggesting that these university employed scientists are falsifying their data, and that the journals which publish their results are in on the conspiracy? Not only does experimental evidence exist for FMS - it has been brought about in experiments, so we know it exists - but it is predictable given the generally accepted theories of how memories work in the brain.

What reason could you possibly have for rejecting the scientific evidence? Your intuition? I think you're misunderstandin the claim. The theory is not that therapists and hypnotists are intentionally implanting false memories. The claim is that false memories are often an unintentional by product of regressive memory therapies.

Who exactly are "the same bright lights" that claim there's no such thing as dissociative identity disorder? Psychiatrists in general? Who do you think came up with that diagnosis in first place?

...if deep topics were rated from 1 to 10, this would be a 12...

...my first thought when i read "false memory society" was the McMartin daycare sexual abuse trial... it was alleged that some of the children's memories were implanted or suggested by those in charge of interviewing them... i've read those interviews and i dont approve of the methods even a little bit...

...are there false memories?... yep - have had a few very hamless ones myself that i didnt realize until my older sister recalled the same event...

...with the kids in the McMartin case (and theres lots of other similar cases) - it seems they were lead intentionally and quite forcefully... so, its possible that some of what those kids finally testified to were not false memories but implanted preferred versions of what the prosecuting attorney wanted aired in court...

...theres specialists who will manipulate kids into believing lies so someone else's life is ruined over something they didnt do - and - theres specialist who will manipulate kids into believe that a molestation did not happen, that they just imagined it or they're confused...

...just because someone has a PhD attached to their name, doesnt mean they have integrity...

...in the last decade or so, its become very popular with social scientists to project as absolute truth that we mere mortals should never trust our memory because its so faulty... they'll go on and on with multiple antedotal explanations reinforcing the opinion (stated as fact) that we make lousy witnessess... imo, its a very convenient exaggeration...

...this article goes along with the thread...

The Suggestibility of Children: Evaluation by Social Scientist
www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/mcmartin/suggestibility.html

Well testimony gained through hypnosis is kind of a grey area in the law. Some places allow it and some do not. Where it is accepted it is normally done through a forensic hypnotist. The forensic hypnotist guidelines are pretty strict, they must only ask about stuff directly related to the incident in question. They mus also record video and audio of the session and it must be observed by a third party and they must stay away from leading questions like :"tell me about the time Mr.X raped you".
I do know that it is very easy to install false memories via hypnosis but all the guidelines that must be met to allow such testimony into court make it really hard for that kind of stuff to be allowed in court. In most states a wittness cannot testify about memories gained via hynosis only the recording is allowed.

This could be a very controversial and interesting thread, but I'm afraid it won't, because the type of people who visit memory-recovery 'therapists' tend, I think, to be from a different demographic to that occupied by the average ATS conspiracy theorist. Therapy of this kind, especially in the USA, costs money.

For what it's worth, most ATS members claiming to have been abducted by aliens, suffered satanic ritual abuse or sexual abuse in childhood, etc., are repeating tropes that originally came from stories cooked up by recovered-memory therapists and their patients. These 'hystories' (to use the title of Elaine Showalter's famous book) then percolated outward into academia and finally into popular culture, picking up exponentially larger numbers of adherents as they spread.

The last people of all to hear and adopt these stories (which have long since lost their connection to the recovered-memory movement) are the ones who turn up on ATS to tell their deluded tales of abduction, abuse and so on. They have no idea that what they take for real, personal experiences are in reality well-formed cultural artifacts whose characteristics have been consensually adapted from the confabulations of recovered-memory patients and their therapists. Thus, while the FMS issue is highly pertinent to much of the discussion on ATS, it has no resonance with members.

There exists an excellent play about FMS and the social havoc it can create: Anna Weiss by Mike Cullen, which had its premiere at the 1997 Edinburgh Festival. I don't know if there are any current productions, but I have seen the play and it is both very powerful and very, very cogent.

Memory repression in childhood is a coping mechanism. Children who experience traumatic events are not equipped to rationalise the trauma, make choices and decisions to protect themselves against recurrance and are therefore powerless to deal with the trauma.

These memories do not need outside influence, ie, 'therapists', for the memories to be recovered.

Memory is personal. No two people will have exactly the same recollection of the same event as each person will experience the event in their own way; what is of significance to one person will not necessarily be of importance to another.

Originally posted by OnceReturned

Church must accept reality of false memories of childhood sexual abuse

No, no, no.

The Church must take responsibilities for it's actions. The majority of those high up in churches sexually abuse children. It's simply too well documented. Take this just last week...

Convicted pedophile priest reinstated and reoffends

Outside court, his sister said the Anglican Church had allowed Dennis back into the ministry because they had trusted him.

Yeah. They trusted him alright. Because he kept his mouth shut about all the others!

"False memories of sexual abuse?"

More like Christian propaganda...

[edit on 4/3/10 by NuclearPaul]

reply to post by teapot

Memory repression in childhood is a coping mechanism.

Freud postulated such a mechanism and went on to build a vast and complex psychological theory based on it--one that had a profound influence on Western culture in the twentieth century.

But does this mechanism really exist? Can you point to any scientific studies--apart from psychoanalytic case histories, which are suspect--that indicate it does? Conscious memory suppression certainly exists, but unconscious repression?

Children and adults who have been traumatized obsessively and quite consciously relive the traumatic experience. They have nightmares and psychotic episodes related to it. The memory of the trauma is far from repressed--it is often the most salient and vivid aspect of their mental life. Such observations are universal--so where is the evidence for repression?

This comprehensive evaluation reveals little empirical justification for maintaining the psychoanalytic concept of repression.
-- 'Does repression exist? Memory, pathogenic, unconscious and clinical evidence', Review of General Psychology, Vol 12(1) Abstract

Article on repressed memory at SkepDic

This is an excellent article. I am sure that there are real cases of abuse, but I think "theropy" can be just hypnosis. The patient is made to think and remember something that just isn't there. I totally agree that the memory can be a very faulty thing.