by Lady Lee 40 Replies latest watchtower medical
Your post was excellent waiting
Yeah I get tired of repeating it over nad over.
I know Mizpah probably hasn't read it before - maybe I'm just tired - sorry Miz - my frustration isn't at you - it is the attention false memory gets all the time - it takes over preventing any decent discussion of memory repressed or otherwise from taking place
This was posted by Lady Lee in a thread I started on repressed memories.
The false memory syndrome phenomenon was started by two parents who were accused of abuse by their daughter!!! The parents had a vested interest in destroying her credibility. And a lot of other perpetrators have jumped on the bandwagon.
WARNING the 3rd quote makes me ill
If you can get your hands on a copy of Betrayal Trauma: The logic of forgetting childhood abuse by Jennifer J. Freyd
on Page 198 she states
In my own case I lost the ability to choose privacy. Approximately eight months after I first presented betrayal trauma theory, my parents, in conjuction with Ralph Underwager and others, formed the False Memory Syndrome Foundation (FMSF). Before the organization was formed, my mother, Pamela Freyd, had published an article presenting her version of family history under the name "Jane Doe" (Doe, 1991).
| Quote: |
Certainly it is responsible. What I have been struck by as I have come to know more about and understand people who choose paedophilia is that they let themselves be too much defined by other people. That is usally an essentially negative definition. Paedophiles spend a lot of time and energy defending their choice. I don't think a paedophile needs to do that. _Paedophiles can boldly and courageously affirm what they choose. They can say that what they want is to find the best way to love. I am also a theologian and as a theologian I believe it is God's will that there be closeness and intimacy, unity of the flesh, between people. A paedophile can say: "This closeness is possible for me whithin the choices I have made."
| Quote: |
"It would be nice if someone could get some kind of big research grant to do a longitudinal study of, let's say, a hundred twelve-year-old boys in relationships with loving paedophiles. Whoever was doing the study would have to follow them at five-year intervals for twenty years.
| Quote: |
It is interesting that at least the survivors who've posted here & on other threads are so careful to consider the birth of the False Memory Foundation - and the teaching of false memory (which wasn't even in any medical books before the Foundation founded it - and they aren't medical professionals.)
The people who caution us politely and carefully usually haven't done near the consideration of background for their cautions. But I thank them for the politeness.
One time when I was new to the net - I read where psych student was wanting experiences of sexual abuse for his term paper. I responded - stating that most memories were remembered after I became an adult. He immediately dismissed me saying that all repressed memories were false - and all professionals knew this.
That was it. I had no validity.
Actually, it was quite cruel of him. But I learned to be more careful......and I continued to read all kinds of literature on memory.
waiting
Why do think that is waiting? Why do you think so many people easily buy into the False Memory Syndrome but have so many problems buying into the possibility of repressed memories?
I'm thinking that most people don't want to believe children are treated so hideously. (I answered my question -- just like a man) If they acknowledge, then they must also acknowledge the totality of the experience, as well as the incredible number of women and men who went through the meat grinder.
No memory is 100% accurate because the purpose of memory is to build a world-view rather than to provide accurate facts. So, in order to remember anything, we have to weave it into our current understanding of the world. In the ed biz this is known as assimilation (we use new information/experience to strengthen, broaden, or deepen our current understanding. What we absolutely HATE to do is what's known as accommodate--change how we understand the world to accommodate new information/experience. That's where a lot of denial comes in, as Lady Lee points out. If I am to believe that a grandfather could rape a 3 or 4 year old child, I have to change what I believe about human experience and that is much too hard. So I deny your experience. I look for ways to bolster what I already believe. Much better to hurt you than to have to completely re-think how I view humans! I so wish people were better, don't you? -kgkingperson (or close to that)
From your memory thread currently active. I think that's a great way to explain it for the most part. But there HAS been false accounts - and that's been proven. Kids and adults DO get even with others - even if no sexual abuse is involved. Kids DO lie. I'm not talking about little kids (serious, detailed accounts) - I'm talking about kids under 18 years old - still kids. So it's easier to use those accounts and dismiss all accounts of memory. Better safe (total dismissal) than be sorry (wrong). And better not to read too much about both sides of the argument. Names escape me now - but I've read the book by the psychologist who is predominately used by the False Memory Foundation. She is quoted in the psychology book I used in college last year. In supporting her view, the psych book gave the picture of an auto accident and how the witnesses to the accident can give different accounts of the accident by the wording of police - variances in the speed of the cars before the accident. Thus, somehow, proving that false memories occur. The professor & I took issue. I concurred that distortion of fact can - and does - occur........but the accident still happened. It was NOT a false memory, it just could/could not be accurate. The professor wasn't impressed. Go figure. Very complicated subject - memory.
Loftus is the person you are referring to that supports FMS.
She has dome some research on memory and concluded that all memory is not exactly accurate. The problem is that regular memory and traumatic memory are different. They are encoded into the brain differently. And they are retreived differently. The results of a study on non-tramatic memory as Loftus has done cannot be used to evaluate the veracity of traumatic memory.
Researchers know there is a difference between the two but Loftus alliance with FMS and the media ignore the differences and she puts her research out there and makes no mention of the differences and she should know better.
In traumatic memory details can be captured much more clearly than in regular memory. One of the reasons for this is the hyper sensitivity and focused attention of the person at the time. A couple of examples. The Kennedy assassination and 9-11. Most people went into a state of shock when they heard the news. They tuned in and intently listened to what was happening. These memories are classified "snapshot memories" They recall fine details very clearly. They don't fade or distort. When veterans come back from the war they often will have flashback memories. These too are captured in a state of high focussed attention and when they come back they are a clear and distortion free. No one questions these memories.
Another issue is that if a memory has been repressed then the person hasn't been talking about it with others or mulling it over in their own mind adding or distracting details to it. When it comes back it is as fresh as the day it happened. Time becomes distorted but not the memory. There was no opportunity for other information to get mixed up with it simply because it was repressed.
going for my coffee. stepping off my soapbox
Thanks Lee,
It was late last night - brain dead. Loftus indeed.
A classic study of hers is usually cited to refute all repressed memory. The little boy who is supposedly lost in the mall, if my memory recalls that. Other students purposely told him false information, which he assimilated into his account. It shows how facts can be distorted - and it's true. Her study was directed at how normal memory works. She also stated that this experiment couldn't be repeated with traumatic memories because someone would have to be traumatized - which isn't ethical.
Another point about the current academic teachings on memory: A psychologist (French? quite elderly now) was told as a child that he was kidnapped (with supporting details) - by his nanny? Anyway.............he was told the story so often that he firmly believed it - even had pictures in his mind of the event. He had conjured the memory for himself, with the help of others.
When he was an older, highly educated adult, he found total proof that his memory was absolutely false. Thus providing evidence that "false memories" do exist.
But both of these studies/events do NOT prove that repressed memory does NOT exist.....just that memory isn't infallible, ..................as all of us stated in the beginning.
I think the popular thinking is ................if repressed memories aren't infallible, they doesn't exist - which is ignorant. If we took that line of thinking - then nothing would exist.
And your previous post wasn't on a soapbox - it's called discussion. If someone doesn't want to read this - fine, don't. If they want to enter in - fine, but be prepared to share & discuss.
Thank you very much for your continuing sharing, education and insight for me & others. I know I highly value it.
waiting
Lady Lee:
No, I had not read the other threads regarding this subject. (I'm rather new to this forum.) I was merely trying to show both sides of this issue. I knew of a woman who had accused her father and grandfather of sexual abuse largely because a therapist "recovered" the "repressed memories" of the individual. The father who was still alive at the time was devasted by the accusation. It probably contributed to his early demise. At the time, it was at the height of the "repressed memory" furor. Many therapists were centering all their attention on this possiblity without considering other alternatives. Many families falsely accused were destroyed during this time. I don't blame the patients as much as I do those therapists who seem to be following a psychological fad at that time.
Do I believe in repressed memories? Yes, I do. Trauma can bury true memories that can later be recovered. And sexual abuse is one of the worst traumas a child can experience. But I only wanted to caution the danger when dealing with this issue. Sorry if I offended you in any way. But it is always helpful to be reminded that there are two sides to every issue.
waiting:
My point was that the memory of even true events can be tainted by other factors. A child of six is very impressionable. I think I have a clear memory of those events of December 7th. But there still remains a possibility that I was influenced by the many tales told in our family of that Sunday. We can often "see" through the eyes of others. And in later life, it is difficult to separate the two. That was my only point.
In the cases of the day care workers who were accused of sexual abuse of children, it caused a "feeding frenzy" among the reporters. Strong emotions and feelings took over. It destroyed the lives of the workers. Along with the sexual abuse, the children accused them of ritualistic murders and other fantasies that only adults could conjure up. Some of the workers were tried, found guilty and served sentences. It was only after a sobering assessment of the whole situation that one realized that these accusations lacked real evidence. Eventually, the significance of false memory and conditioning became understood. Most of the workers were exhonerated. But by then, their reputations and lives were ruined.
Tragedy stalks both sides of this issue. Children experience it when they are sexually abused by adults or other children. It leaves them with permenant scars all their lives. But it also follows those who have been falsely accused. Their lives are never the same. Although not guilty, they live with the shame and suspicion the rest of their lives.
sorry mizpah I really wasn't angry with you.
I agree that FMS does exist. But i suspect it is far more rare that the real incidents of abuse.
Memory is complicated. Repressed memory is more complicated. And traumatic memory is different than normal memory.
