Customer Reviews

The Myth of Repressed Memory: False Memories and Allegations of Sexual Abuse

5 star:		(11)
4 star:		(5)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(6)

 

 

When I read this book, the chapter about Lynn, I began to shake and then to cry. The author described my experience with a therapist from 1994 to 1999. For the past couple of years, I have been trying to put my life together and explain to myself what happened so I could try to explain it to my family. These kind and brave women gave me the words. These ladies are not shaming or cruel to sexual abuse victims at all. I thought they might be at first by reading the book jacket. They also helped me to understand why 5 years of my life went by in a fog where somehow I went from a fairly normal woman to a paranoid woman on 7 psycho-active drugs who couldn't function. I thought that "remembering" my memories would make me feel better. What I have learned since the hellish time is that what we focus on is what grows in our lives. Focusing on every detail of your trauma over and over again every single day will make that trauma the part of your life that grows so that you can't see much beyond it. I wish I could give this book to anyone who is even contemplating seeing a therapist or buying the book Courage To Heal. There are good therapists out there. I had one to help me climb out of my nightmare. If your therapist suggests that you try to remember things that you don't even know happened, please! please read this book first. If you were abused as a child, grieve it for a time. If you keep on going over and over it each day though, your abuser has not only hurt you as a child, but he is hurting you as an adult. After you feel sad for awhile, you have to pick yourself up and move on to create a happy life for yourself. You cannot change your past, and dwelling on it can only bring pain and shame. All I can say is that this book, not the Courage To Heal, has helped me to heal and to get my family back. May God bless the authors and the publishers for making their work available to me and others like me.

Loftus was the first to make such a public declaration of skepticism about the theory of repressed and recovered memory, and considering the climate in which this book was written her bravery is commendable. At the time--and still perhaps today--some therapists diagnosed a history of incest within minutes of the intake session, spurious evidence was routinely admissible in the courts, and Multiple Personality Disorder was apparently as common as the flu. Things have changed, and there are more than a few red-faced recovered memory enthusiasts around these days.

One of the things that becomes obvious in this book is the fact that, while the debate was a raging one, few people who took part in it understood what it was really about. The recovered/false memory debate is not about whether the sexual abuse of children is a lie, or that the family is the seat of all evil. It is an essentially scientific debate about the operations of memory and the clinical applications of such knowledge. Loftus navigates through the cultural and rhetorical detritus of the debate to this core issue, and we benefit from her position as an expert researcher.

The book is clearly written for lay people, or for clinicians wanting a very quick summary of the issues. More clinically pertinent summaries of the research findings and theories are available elsewhere. If you're a therapist or researcher looking for professional information, you'll find the journalistic style slow going. However, if you're a lay person, the book is an excellent introduction to the debate.

The core debate that Loftus addresses is not whether or not sexual abuse exists. Rather, what she wisely chose to target was the essential issues of defining "repression" and its validity as a concept, how memory storage and retrieval operate, and what the relationship between psychological trauma and memory impairment is. She demonstrates that the concept of repression is a dubious though not necessarily invalid one, but that far too much assumption and clinical arrogance were invested in the recovered memory mania of the 80s and 90s.

This book was obviously controversial, but despite its lay orientation and stylistic flaws I believe it will endure as an important work in the history of psychotherapy. The legion of detractors demonstrated the truth of Loftus' thesis by construing the book as an attempt to disprove the existence of incest. And, because Loftus is a woman, she was a complicated target and therefore subjected to more condescending and intense attacks. Her accomplishment in this book was not to settle any questions, but to take the risk of attacking cherished, widely held, and richly funded clinical errors that were derailing public mental health and the reputation of psychotherapy. Highly recommended.

This book was the first book I read that provided clarity around repressed memories and their impact on families. It presents the slippery slope initiated by well-meaning people (therapists, psychiatrists, other survivors)trying to help a person recover from a painful childhood experience that leaves the person unable to effectively cope in their everyday world, separating them from family and friends. I was particularly appreciative of two chapters: Loose Spirits and Lost in a Shopping Mall. It provided grounding for me in "how" the pattern of paranoid behaviors and hallucinations could be triggered. It also points out the necessity of finding a therapist who is willing to challenge what seems to be "real memories". It provides hope that recovery truly is possible, if the right help can be found. Thank you Dr. Loftus and Ms. Ketcham.

I am a family member of a person suffering from this debilitating phenomena. Watching the degeneration of a loved one is painful for everyone but particularly painful when "others" reinforce the unreal memories and put the family in a position of no longer being able to help someone they care about. I wish my sister would find a "good therapist" who would allow her to retrieve her soul and her life the way the women are doing in the Loose Spirits chapter.

This book is a much-needed cry for sanity, much like Sagan's _The Demon-Haunted World_. The author, Elizabeth Loftus, is a well-known and well-respected psychologist who specializes in eyewitness memory; anybody who has taken a Gen Psych course should recognize her name.

As a budding psychologist, I found Loftus's comments on the therapeutic community both insightful and well-directed. Her arguments are powerful and difficult to deny; she convinced me shortly after the first few chapters.

Sexual abuse is a problem. A big one. But attempting to root out totally unconfirmed instances of sexual abuse is, as well. Loftus tries to walk a line between compassion for people who have truly been abused and those who believe they have, and scientific accuracy.

Her sharpest knives are reserved for the therapists. The tools of therapy used to "recover" abuse memories which have no corroborating evidence are the same as those used to "uncover" reports of alien abduction, past lives, infant memories, and ritual cult torture. All the above are truly unlikely, so why would memories recovered using this method about abuse be any more accurate than memories about big-eyed aliens?

All in all, this book does a marvelous job in presenting its points and should be a must-read for any serious student of psychology. It shows what a fragile thing memory really is; a lesson we all need to learn.

Loftus is an expert on memory, a research psychologist who has spent a lifetime studying memory and how it works. She has often appeared as an expert witness in repressed memory cases including the George Franklin case in San Mateo County in 1990. The main point she and co-author Ketcham make in this calm and reasoned book is that so-called repressed memory is a fraud and its use by clinicians and the courts to imprison people is a tragedy and a disgrace.

Needless to say the repressed memory industry was not pleased with this finding. Because she told the truth, they tried to brand Dr. Loftus as a traitor to the feminist cause. Industry members who had been making a nice living conjuring up repressed memories went on the attack, but she held her ground. What is amazing in this book is how well the authors maintain a balanced and fair attitude in the midst of such attacks. Loftus even met with Ellen Bass, co-author of the infamous The Courage To Heal (rightly dubbed The Courage to Hate by its victims) and managed to keep an even keel and a civil tongue.

Loftus makes it clear that human memories are reconstructions. They are not accurate in a scientific sense, nor meant to be. Memories are reconstructions because what the tribal mind wants is conformity to what is believed by the tribe now. So human memories are intermittently reconstructed to conform to the "truth" as the individual under the influence of the tribe sees it at present. What happened years ago is important to the tribe only as it connects to the present, and it is usually the political present that is important. Therefore memories need not be factually accurate; it is far more important that they be politically correct. To make them politically correct they must be malleable since the political wisdom changes over time.

The idea of "repressed" memories fits into this scenario wonderfully. The memory is said to be "repressed" until such time as it is politically necessary to retrieve it and then it is voodooed up and molded to fit the current power politics. It's like the rewriting of history in Orwell's 1984, or medieval trials by fire or water. Through the suggestive and coercive power of therapists (quasi-priests), memories are rewritten to suit the needs of the therapists, and alas, sometimes the needs of a district attorney bent on furthering his or her career at any price. (Janet Reno in her Dade County days is a case in point.)

However, the reason the repressed memory of sexual abuse scenario became such a wide spread phenomenon in this country was not simply because it gave feminists power. That alone would not have done it. The hysteria was empowered by financial gain. Laws in many states were rewritten to restart the statute of limitations to begin at the time the "repressed memories" were conjured up, not when the alleged crimes took place (pp. 173-74). Now people could go after their parents many years after the fact, after the parents had made their retirement egg, and get some of it! This potential gain brought in the lawyers. For the therapists it meant that the therapeutic sessions on the couch and the group indoctrination sessions could be dragged on and on until the insurance money ran out. (The literature shows just how fast therapists typically dumped their clients when they could no longer pay.) Carol Tavris is quoted by the authors on page 220: "The problem is...their effort to create victims-to expand the market that can then be treated with therapy and self-help books."

What backfired on the male-hating feminists was the realization from their more astute sisters that this repressed memory/sex crime/satanic abuse scenario just made victims and incest survivors out of women and effectively continued their subjugation to the patriarchy. As Tavris puts it: women were encouraged "to incorporate the language of victimhood and survival into the sole organizing narrative of their identity...." (p. 221)

Another fraudulent aspect of the repressed memory business was the faddish diagnosis of Multiple Personality Disorder that often went along with the phony memories, an affliction heretofore almost as rare as hen's teeth. Therapists cozied up to this once esoteric disorder because it fit in so well with their theory about why no concrete evidence of satanic ritual abuse was ever found; i.e., the satanic cults had so thoroughly programmed their victims that the personalities that experienced the horrors of abuse were repressed. Naturally it would take a therapist many hours at lucrative compensation to conjure up the repressed personalities and all the horrific "memories" of abuse. To make sure they got paid, the therapists got the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders "updated" to make the diagnosis of multiple personality disorder "real" so the insurance companies keyed to the Manual would have to pay for treatment.

This is a courageous book that bends over backwards to be fair, yet is uncompromised in its expression of the truth.

Are you sure you were not sexually abused in your childhood? Dr. Elizabeth Loftus and Katherine Ketcham, in their CSI-like book, The Myth Of Repressed Memory: False Memories And Allegations Of Sexual Abuse, address the issue of repressed memories of sexual abuse that arise in contemporary psychotherapy. Their stance on the issue: "Many tortured individuals live for years with the dark secret of their abusive past and only find the courage to discuss their childhood traumas in the supportive and empathic environment of therapy. We are not disputing those memories. We are only questioning the memories commonly referred to as "repressed"--memories that did not exist until someone went looking for them" (p. 141).

Loftus and Ketcham primarily question repression's role in therapy, which is influenced by therapists who rely heavily on this method. They reference Judith Lewis Herman's view that "therapists sometimes fall prey to the desire for certainty" (p. 266). Moreover, "if the therapist becomes overly fascinated, asking specific, suggestive questions...then the patient might feel pressured to authenticate the memory" (p. 90). Loftus and Ketcham assert that therapists play a substantial role in the repression process. Therapists' tone of voice, gestures, and questions all influence a patient who could be highly suggestible and vulnerable. Freud, they claim, would be disappointed with repression's overemphasis and intrusive therapeutic methods: "It seemed...that what Freud intended as a free-ranging metaphor had been captured and literalized...Freud would never have used such crude bulldozing techniques to dig up the lost material" (p. 52; 254).

Loftus and Ketcham's writing style is concise and factual. However, the material reads like a murder mystery novel because there is an enticing, emotional component that makes it difficult to put down the book. This book appeals to people who are familiar with psychological topics like repression and memory as well as people who are not. The narration switches between first and third person. The switches in point of view allow the writing to become more personal and interesting. Loftus and Ketcham frequently insert dialogue between family members from court cases, personal interviews with scholarly repression advocates, and academic material from other authors. By including other sources and points of view, the authors present dynamic information that is never dull.

Additionally, the tone of Loftus and Ketcham's writing is very humble and approachable. There is no feeling of hostility and aggression toward the opposing viewpoint, even when an opinion is expressed. For example, Loftus and Ketcham contend, "asking these questions does not make us enemies of therapy, nor does it mean that we doubt the reality or the horror of childhood sexual abuse. We would only suggest that the `literal' and the `metaphorical' be respected as separate and distinct entities" (p. 265-266).

I am confident that Loftus and Ketcham's book is credible. First, the book contains 14 pages of references broken down within the 13 chapters. Second, both authors often quote other experts or include opposing literature so that readers do not rely only on Loftus and Ketcham's opinions. It is obvious that they desperately wish to be fair in considering the other side. Consider Loftus, as she reads repression literature: "as I read through these popular incest-recovery books, I found it difficult to escape the conclusion that if something feels real, it is real" (p. 54).

Additionally, Loftus and her graduate students at University of Washington even created an experiment to test her theory in this book regarding false memories. They planned to implant the idea in each subject that he/she got lost in a shopping mall at a young age. Although the study received much criticism and revision from the Human Subjects Committee, the fact that Loftus initiated a study for the purposes of better understanding the concept demonstrate her motivation to be scientifically credible.

The most enticing components of this book are the examples Loftus and Ketcham include from real court cases. One can easily sympathize with Doug Nagle, the hard-working lawyer and family man whose daughters accuse him of sexual abuse. Throughout chapter eight, I struggled with Doug as he lost visitation rights with his children and his wife divorced him. Loftus and Ketcham did not need to dramatize the story for their argument or exaggerate the circumstances. They presented the case as is--which testifies to the destruction repression can cause families.

Two things I would suggest to Loftus and Ketcham are to break up the thirteen chapters into smaller chapters as well as to include pictures of the people they discuss in the book. While the book is extremely enticing, readers might become overwhelmed with the 269 pages of information. If the chapters are more concise, they might be able to work through the book more quickly. Also, if the authors included pictures of the families from each court case or their scholarly opponents, it would allow the stories to become even more alive for readers.

To conclude, I highly recommend this book and rate it a five-star experience. This is a must-read especially for college students who are exploring disciplines of law or psychology and wish to be caught up on contemporary issues that they might face in practice. Loftus and Ketcham bravely breach a topic that pulls at many heartstrings and I appreciate their boldness. I respect their intentions within the book and their conclusion that "if therapy chooses to deal with myth and metaphor (and many therapists would argue that meaning can only be discovered in symbol and imagination), it would seem wise and prudent to appreciate the metaphor for what it is--a symbolic representation rather than a literal re-creation." (p. 265-266).

Several months ago a close friend of mine asked me about what I knew on the theory of repression after having been told by a psychotherapist that she might have repressed memories of childhood sexual trauma .

The phenomenon of repressed childhood sexual abuse (and the total repression of memories) was entirely new to me. I was immediately skeptical about this particular definition of the term because, as Ernest Becker describes in The Denial of Death, the idea of repression (or denial) is unfair in intellectual discussion because it acts as a "trump card." It is too easy to argue that someone is simply denying something as true or repressing a memory.

Loftus also points out how different the theory of repression has changed, from Freud's understanding that hypnosis recreates high suggestibility and delusions in patient and repression as the conscious, intentional process of forgetting or distraction from emotions. For Freud repression was much closer to what Loftus calls "motivated forgetting," with the one major difference that Freud believed that through this process feelings and memories could be totally repressed from conscious knowledge. For Becker repression is motivated forgetting but, as Loftus carefully explains in her book, has been perverted to mean something else entirely.

For the supporters of the recovery of repressed memories repression is an unconscious coping mechanism that, by it very nature, can never be proven to exist.

This is point of Loftus' The Myth of Repressed Memory. Her intention is not to divide people but encourage readers toward an open-minded understanding of this problem and phenomenon of "repressed memory." her approach is scientific, rational, and wholly compassionate toward the women who are suffering from these memories but also the family members torn from their loved ones by false accusations.

Personally, I share Loftus' skepticism and her conviction that her work on the malleability of memory proves the unlikeness of the ability to completely repress memories of sexual trauma. I believe that when a patient is highly sigesstiable and deseprate for an answer they can and will put themselves through intense pain if it results in giving them an answer to all their pain and, or, to even end it.

I am going to offer some points of criticism about this book, but I'd like to emphasize from the start that I mostly agree with the position that the author takes on the issue of "repressed memories," and I respect her and applaud her for having written an important and useful book.

I found the book maybe a little too chatty, a little too autobiographical, a little too stream-of-consciousness. Perhaps these things make it a more enjoyable read for a general audience, but I would have appreciated a more tightly organized, logical presentation. Instead, as I read the book, I felt like, "OK, here's the start of an argument for her thesis that "repressed memories" are a myth, here's a long anecdote about someone falsely accused of child abuse, here's another little piece of the argument, here's some material on how she's been attacked for her views by various zealots, here's another long anecdote about a false accusation, here's another little piece of the argument, here's another autobiographical account of a run-in with one of her critics, here's another little piece of the argument," etc., etc.

Also, in spite of the fact that she mostly takes the position opposing the alleged "repressed memories" phenomenon, at times she's more wishy-washy about it than I would like. She seems intent on painting herself as a "moderate" between the irrational extremes of those who accept the phenomenon dogmatically and those who reject it dogmatically. Mostly she's in the rejectionist camp, and rightly so, but it seems to really pain her to just say so. Her position seems to be "Intellectually, I'm 90% of the way toward the "anti" side of the issue, but, gosh, the people on the "pro" side are mostly so nice and so well-motivated, and I just hate to criticize them and I so want them to like me!" She's desperate to find common ground with the "repressed memory" advocates, desperate to avoid seeming to denounce them or come right out and say that they're just plain wrong, desperate to find some watered down "New Agey" or postmodernist sense in which their claims are true.

If these confused, illogical, witch-hunting zealots denounced me for coming to scientific conclusions that were incompatible with their current politically correct dogma, and if they angrily insisted that that proves I'm anti-feminist, pro-child abuse, etc., I tend to think I'd be considerably less patient and conciliatory with them than is Dr. Loftus.

One question that kept coming back to me is, why in the world is this pseudo-science admissible in court to begin with? The standards for criminal conviction are supposed to be proof beyond a reasonable doubt. On this basis, we exclude things like polygraphs, which tend to be highly reliable, but not quite reliable enough. The likelihood that these "repressed memories" are reliable seems to me to be so miniscule as to make it far, far inferior to polygraph evidence. Unfortunately, the hysteria over child abuse has caused many people in our society and in our criminal justice system to override principles of law, logic, common sense, and decency to ensure as many convictions as possible.

In any case, again I am grateful for Dr. Loftus's valuable contributions on this issue. The "repressed memories" movement appears to be a highly dangerous piece of pseudo-science that has damaged countless lives in recent years, and I commend those who've taken a stand against it on the basis of rationality and science.

This is a very useful and enlightening book for anyone wanting to learn more about the problems of memory and trauma. I write this review because one of the other reviews (the single star) was apparently written by someone who has not read the book. Loftus says none of the things that the reviewer thinks she might say (or "apparently" says). This type of ill-informed and anti-intellectual response is typical of the recovered memory types who believe that memory can be recovered in "true" or pristine form--no informed person believes this, nor is it necessary to believe it as a victim of trauma unless one has an agenda to set forth. Loftus makes all this clear.

Great read, makes the whole repressed memory issue clearer and illustrates the need for more research into trauma and how it is stored and retrieved in the brain.

I still can't see how it would serve us as humans to forget that people have harmed us? I have worked with people who have been abused and have clear memories and feelings about it and in my experience they struggle to forget or let go of it.

Very interesting read for anyone wanting to understand more about how memory can be easily manipulated or influenced by lines of questioning.

It has fueled my interest in learning more about trauma and its effects.