|
|
16 of 31 people found the following review helpful:
2.0 out of 5 stars
Afterthoughts on Second Thoughts, November 18, 2001
Paul Simpson is a psychologist who claims to have been deeply involved in what he calls "regression therapy," facilitating clients to recover forgotten "memories" through an induced hypnotic state. Eventually he came to question the validity of this method of therapy and the accuracy of the "memories" which were "resurrected" by it. This led to his contacting the False Memory Syndrome Foundation, whose tenets he now vociferously proclaims. He has become a strong advocate for accused parents and is involved in Project Middle Ground, serving as a supposedly unbiased mediator between accused parents and their accusing child (p. 119). While some of Simpson's observations and concerns are quite valid, he unfortunately loses significant credibility through the manner in which he argues them. Generally he creates a worst case scenario and portrays it as a seemingly universal representation of all therapists and clients who believe in the concept of recovering dissociated, traumatic memories (e.g. pp. 3-6, 62, 115-17, 133, 137-38, 151-57, 166, 186-87). He also erroneously lumps all such therapists together and labels them as "regressionists" when in reality this term should only be applied to those who deliberately age-regress their clients through hypnotic techniques for the purpose of recovering "forgotten memories." He ignorantly considers "dissociation" to be merely a renaming of "regression theory" (pp. 63, 203). If his book were truly about the small group of true "regressionists" (frankly a term I've not heard before), it might have more validity, but I do not believe that this narrow focus is his intent. Nevertheless, using this term cleverly gives him a seemingly more legitimate platform to stand on as he wages his war against those he perceives as charlatans and witch hunters. He engages in a similar type of "word gymnastics" when he attempts to convince his readers that any attempt to recover "forgotten" traumatic memories is not only unscriptural but in essence an unrecognized error of following the doctrine of demons. In these arguments he mockingly calls the process a "spiritual gift" (p. 184), a "doctrine" (p. 184), a "philosophy" (p. 188), a "new gospel" (p. 191), and a "miraculous event" (p. 192) just so he can falsely apply scriptures using these words to the phenomenon. He then paints a rather unsettling picture. Instead of believing in the existence of a covert web of multi-generational Satanists, which many "regressionists" claim, Simpson seems convinced that the therapists facilitating the recovery of these memories are the ones whom Satan is using to accomplish his agenda in the world (pp. 190-94). In another place he twists psychological information to support his argument in a manner that less informed readers probably would not catch. After presenting good material on the characteristics of fantasy prone and easily hypnotized individuals, he quotes from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM-IV) that individuals with DID "tend to be highly hypnotizable." In questioning why this is so, he claims to have found the "secret of the False Memory Crisis." He says, "It's not that MPDs and repressed memory victims accidentally happen to be hypnotic virtuosos. It's the other way around." Highly hypnotizable people are particularly vulnerable when falling into the hands of "regressionist" therapists to imagine themselves into a false diagnosis of MPD [DID] (pp. 165-66). His error is in failing to acknowledge that dissociability and hypnotizability are virtually synonymous terms (referring to a high propensity for entering an altered state of consciousness), meaning that dissociative individuals are indeed by their very nature "hypnotic virtuosos." The two are inseparable. Another concern within the book is Simpson's inconsistent documentation. While his book is prolifically footnoted, some of his key technical points lack any footnotes at all(e.g. pp. 56-62; 121, 123, 134, 136, 161). He also fails on at least one occasion to list critical information regarding a study supporting his view(p. 45). He claims there is little corroborating evidence to legitimize recovered memories (p. 11). While acknowledging the reality of true child abuse, Simpson seemingly only believes reports of such abuse if the person has "free standing" memories. Making no allowance at all for dissociated traumatic memories, he also seems to question the existence of Dissociative Identity Disorder (pp. 24-25) even though this is fully recognized and described in the official diagnostic manual of psychologists (DSM-IV). On the other hand, he gives a lengthy description of "False Memory Syndrome" (pp. 105, 108, 121), which has never been professionally recognized or included in any diagnostic manual. Furthermore, after shooting down the definitive nature of symptoms lists others have established for suspecting buried childhood trauma (pp. 31; 94-102), he seemingly has no compunctions about creating his own list of symptoms which he says indicate a person is believing in false memories (pp 121-22). Simpson's call for some sort of external corroboration of abuse memories and the witness of at least two individuals before making accusations of presumed perpetrators is both valid and biblical. Sprinkled through his chapters are other valid points regarding the potential influence of predisposing belief systems, mind contamination, suggestibility, and group dynamics in possibly creating "false memories," particularly in fantasy prone individuals. If he had presented these dynamics in a more balanced manner, allowing for the reality of true recovered memories as well, his book would make a more valuable contribution to the subject. Simpson concludes his book by referring to the "mountains of research findings that contradict regressionism" (p. 224). Somehow I missed seeing these "mountains." The best I can say is that he presented material to cast a "reasonable doubt" on the validity of memories evoked under hypnotic conditions through the suggestions of therapists. However, the fervency with which he tries to cast this description on all therapists who believe in accessing dissociated, traumatic memories, his total rejection of any legitimate "recovered memories," his seeming manipulation of terminology and Scripture, and his selective documentation leave me wondering why.
|