FMS Foundation Newsletter

Vol 6 No. 2, February 1, 1997


**********************************************************************
ISSN #1069-0484.          Copyright (c) 1997  by  the  FMSF Foundation
**********************************************************************
    The FMSF Newsletter is published 10 times a year by the  False
    Memory  Syndrome  Foundation.  A hard-copy subscription is in-
    cluded in membership fees (to join, see last page). Others may
    subscribe  by  sending  a  check  or  money  order, payable to 
    FMS Foundation, to the address below. 1994 subscription rates:
    USA: 1 year $30,  Student $15;  Canada: $35 (in U.S. dollars);
    Foreign: $40;  Foreign  student  $20;  Single issue price: $3. 
    3401  Market  Street  suite  130,  Philadelphia, PA 19104-3315

This address and the phone numbers have changed as of July 15, 2000
                 Phone 215-387-1865, Fax 215-387-1917
**********************************************************************
INSIDE:
    Make a Difference
      Focus on Science by Pope
        Book Review, Bodkin on Young
          Legal Corner
            Ethical Complaints
              From Our Readers
**********************************************************************

  "The greatest crime of all in a civilized society is an unjust
  conviction." (1)

  "It is better that ten guilty persons escape than one innocent
  suffer." (2)

Dear Friends,

  Why do some people feel so passionately about the injustice of false
accusations? Of course a false accusation or conviction is terrible
for the wrongly accused, but the issue goes beyond individuals.
Societies function because their members find ways to work together
and willingly follow a multitude of conventions and rules. We stop at
red lights, for example, and we expect that those who fail to stop at
red lights will receive a ticket. It's easy to see how our traffic
system would fall apart if no one stopped for red lights. But what
would happen if lots of people who did stop for red lights were given
tickets too? If people who follow the rules are punished, there is apt
to be a loss of trust in the society that binds us. Social conventions
fail when rules are not enforced, but they just as surely fail when
rules are wrongly enforced. That point is frequently forgotten by
those who see increased enforcement as the way to correct a
wrong. Justice is a fine balance between the enforcement of rules and
their fair application.
  On January 14, 1997 approximately 200 people came together in Salem
to mark the 300th Anniversary of the Day of Contrition. On that day in
1697, five years after the famous "witchcraft trials," the entire
community for His Majesty's Province of the Massachusetts Bay, in
obedience to a proclamation, took part in a day of fasting and
remorse, an acknowledgment of the hysteria and judicial errors that
led to 19 people being put to death. Sponsored by the San Diego-based
Justice Committee, the 1997 event included video presentations by
prize-winning authors Arthur Miller and William Styron.
  Participants had the opportunity to apologize in person to wrongly
imprisoned people such as Kelly Michaels, Bobby Fijnje, Brenda and
Scott Kniffen, Jenny Wilcox, Rev. Nathaniel Grady, Cheryl and Violet
Amirault, Peggy Ann and Ray Buckey, Pastor Roby and Connie Roberson
and also to the children and wives and mothers and fathers whose loved
ones are still in prison. For this writer, it was deeply moving to
look into the eyes of these people, especially those who were
themselves almost children when they were put in prison, and to
realize what we have taken from them. Led by Carol Hopkins, the
executive director of the Justice Committee, a group of participants
made a visit to Ray and Shirley Souza who are still under house arrest
-- a token to those who may still be wrongly imprisoned.
  Presentations covered a variety of topics: concern for the
protection of children, historical analogies to Salem, examples of
overzealous prosecution both for child abuse and for the mentally
handicapped, an example of careful prosecution, the role of the media,
and the search for ways to bring our system into better balance.
  Sadly, a few chose to ignore the theme of the day: apology for
injustices. Instead, some members of the Psychology of Women internet
group, for example, mounted an attack on the Day of Contrition urging
people to send e-mail and faxes of protest. (The Day of Contrition
must be bad, they reasoned, because there was an announcement of the
conference on the FMS-News list.) The International Society for the
Study of Dissociation prepared a document in which they really did
write, "...this conference seems to focus on pursuing a political and
legal agenda to silence all persons who recall abuse and those who
treat them." To paraphrase a statement from the craze that led Arthur
Miller to write The Crucible: "Have they no decency?"
  While most of the media coverage of this event was positive, the
Boston Globe reprinted one of the trite mantras of our critics,
"Witches aren't real; child molesters are,"(1/15/97, McNamara). To see
how silly this is, imagine it is 1953 when Arthur Miller's play The
Crucible opened and try the following: "Witches aren't real;
Communists are." Indeed, substitute any other group that has ever been
the target of zealotry. That the Day of Contrition was memorialized
shows that more people are unafraid of the worn-out attacks of
overzealous critics. We are reminded of the final statement that
appears on the screen in Miller's 1997 screenplay for The Crucible:
"After nineteen executions the Salem witch-hunt was brought to an end,
as more and more accused people refused to save themselves by giving
false confession."
  The fact that more people are now willing to identify themselves
publicly as advocates both for children and for justice is reason for
optimism. There is also reason for optimism that such an occasion
could be held with the presence of so many people whose wrongful
convictions had been overturned.
  At the Salem meeting, the Massachusetts Civil Liberties Union
announced that the national office of the ACLU is filing an amicus
brief that supports the position that there is no scientific evidence
for the theory of "repression" (for the New Hampshire v Hungerford
appeal). This demonstrates the wide range of organizations that are
concerned about appropriate justice in the courts. Justice is a
balance between enforcement of rules and their fair application. The
change in the legal situation represents a move toward better
application of the rules in terms of standards of evidence. Standards
of evidence should not be dropped just because a cause seems morally
right or is a political "hot potato" as is the issue of "recovered
repressed memories."
  Data from the FMSF Legal Survey provide more reason for optimism.
The graph on the below shows the filing date of 517 lawsuits in the
United States that were based on "repressed memory" evidence. It
represents both criminal (15%) and civil ( 85%) cases. Note the great
growth in 1992 and the sharp drop in filings since 1994.
  At the Memory and Reality conference in March, we will present data
that indicate many more repressed memory cases of which the Foundation
is aware are being dismissed or dropped now than they were in 1992
when the Foundation was formed. We will also present data on cases
from Canada; on cases like the Souza's in which a child claimed
"recovered memories" but the lawsuit was filed on the accusation of a
grandchild; on cases at the appeal level, and on the growing number of
cases brought against mental health workers. The FMSF Legal Survey is
a concrete barometer of the stages of the recovered memory phenomenon
as it passes through our culture.
  Another change is taking place. Enforcement of therapy standards as
they relate to FMS is increasing. In this issue we describe not only
the results of several more legal actions against therapists but also
the circumstances in which three therapists have had their licenses
taken from them. One of the major differences between the anti-
Communist frenzy in the 1950s and this frenzy is that in the 1990s
families expect to hold those who have done harm accountable for their
actions.
  Does all this mean that the work of the FMSF is finished? No. It
means that we can now see the system moving into better balance, but
the work of the Foundation will not be done until the problem of the
alienated children and missing grandchildren is resolved. It will not
be complete until the accusing adults enter into respectful dialogue
with their parents whom they so cruelly accused. We expect the help
of all FMSF families and of all mental health professionals in solving
this last link in the tragic FMS phenomenon.
                                                          PAMELA

  (1) July 1992 ruling freeing Alberto Ramos. Quoted in LA Times,
  1/5/97,"For Wrongly Accused Day-Care Workers, Freedom Is No Panacea"
  (2) Blackstone, 1770.

WHEN WERE REPRESSED MEMORY SUITS FILED?                        n = 517

           120|
              |
              |                           [] []
           100|                        [] [] [] []
              |                        [] [] [] []
              |                        [] [] [] []
            80|                        [] [] [] []
              |                        [] [] [] []
              |                        [] [] [] []
            60|                        [] [] [] [] []
              |                        [] [] [] [] []
              |                        [] [] [] [] []
            40|                     [] [] [] [] [] []
              |                     [] [] [] [] [] [] 
              |                     [] [] [] [] [] [] 
            20|                     [] [] [] [] [] [] 
              |                  [] [] [] [] [] [] [] 
              |               [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] []
             0|[]_[]_[]_[]_[]_[]_[]_[]_[]_[]_[]_[]_[]_[]
               83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96
                                years

**********************************************************************
             ROUNDTABLES  FOR  CONFERENCE  TAKING  SHAPE

  Roundtables, a popular feature of the first two Memory and Reality
conferences, are being planned for the FMSF family conference
scheduled for March 22 and 23, 1997 in Baltimore. These semi-
structured small groups give Foundation members the opportunity to
discuss among themselves subjects that are of interest to them. Topics
are recommended by members and are meant to reflect their interest.
The opinions of the roundtable leaders or the participants do not
necessarily represent Foundation policy. Roundtables will be led by
both family members and professionals who have registered for the
conference. The number of seats for each Roundtable is limited and
allotted on a first-come first-served basis. Roundtable registration
will take place on Friday from 7:30 - 9:00 PM and Saturday from
8:00-9:00 AM.
  Some of the tentative topics include: Family Mediation: What It Is,
What It is Not and How to Use It; It Has Been a Long Time: Dare We Let
Go?; Siblings Caught in the Middle; Meeting with your Child's
Therapist; Reaching Churches about "Christian Therapy" and the Danger
of FMS; A Returner in your Midst; Getting your Story out to the Media;
Legal Remedies for Parents; Professionals Falsely Accused; Separating
Good Science from Junk Science; What does the MPD/DID Diagnosis Really
Mean?; Dealing with Licensing Boards; Coming out of the FMS Closet;
Retractors Talking Together.
  Some of the Roundtable Leaders are Chris Barden, Ph.D., J.D., John
and Nancy Bell, Merci Federici, Janet Fetkewicz, Eleanor Goldstein,
John Hochman, M.D., Anita Lipton, M.A., Bob and Janet McKelvey, Mark
Pendergrast, August Piper, M.D., Harrison Pope, M.D., Susan Robbins,
Ph.D., Paul Simpson, Ed.D., Ellen Starer, M.S.W., and Holida
Wakefield, M.A..

 ______________________________SIDEBAR_______________________________
/                                                                    \ 
|                    Two Upcoming Conferences                        |
|                                                                    |
|                                                                    |
|                  Continuing Education Program                      |
|                                                                    |
|   W H A T ' S   N E W   I N   T H E  M E M O R Y   W A R S ?       |
|                                                                    |
|                     Friday, March 21, 1997                         |
|   For more information please call Johns Hopkins directly at       |
|            (410) 955-2959 or fax at (410) 955-0807                 |
|                                                                    |
|                                                                    |
|                     FMSF Family Conference                         |
|                                                                    |
|   M E M O R Y   A N D   R E A L I T Y:   N E X T   S T E P S       |
|                                                                    |
|             Saturday & Sunday March 22 & 23, 1997                  |
| For more information please refer to the registration form at      |
|                 the end of this e-mail edition                     |
|                                                                    |
|        HELP US CELEBRATE THE FIFTH ANNIVERSARY OF FMSF.            |
\____________________________________________________________________/

**********************************************************************
                CALOF  DEFENSE  FUND  and  CHUCK  NOAH

  Both Chuck Noah and David Calof are licensed counselors in Seattle,
Washington. Neither graduated from college. There the similarity ends.
David Calof has had a clinical practice for many years. He has
published a journal called Treating Abuse Today. He is a trauma
therapist who has spoken of his belief in intergenerational satanic
ritual abuse conspiracy. Chuck Noah lost a child to FMS and is a
retired construction worker who obtained a counselor license to point
out how little such a license means in Washington. He decided that he
would picket to try to free Paul Ingram. He went to Boston to picket
for the Souzas. He also pickets therapists whom he believes contribute
to the FMS problem.
  Clash. Chuck Noah picketed a number of therapists briefly, but most
of his efforts have been directed at David Calof, whom he believes
published articles in his journal that were not truthful. Calof filed
a lawsuit against Noah, who has insisted on his first-amendment right
to picket. Calof has incorrectly implied that the FMS Foundation
encouraged the picketing against him.
  To date, Noah has been taken to court several times, has been
subjected to restraining orders and is now represented by the Seattle
branch of the ACLU. Noah neither solicits nor accepts contributions
and represented himself in court for two years because he could not
afford a lawyer. On the other hand a defense fund has been formed for
David Calof who has been unable to publish his journal for a year. In
a letter to friends, The Courage to Heal authors Ellen Bass and Laura
Davis wrote, "We're truly facing a well-organized, well-funded group
that's extremely accomplished at destruction," but they don't bother
to substantiate the claim which we believe to be false.
  Some of the other 14 supporters listed on an appeal letter for the
defense fund are familiar names; Lloyd deMause, publisher of The
Journal of Psychohistory that frequently publishes satanic conspiracy
articles; Marjorie Orr, who uses astrology to diagnose abuse; and
Gloria Steinem who was shown honoring Bennett Braun in the Frontline
documentary Search for Satan.
  The appeal closed as follows: "If you're part of an organization or
group that publishes a newsletter, we would also be thankful if you
would include a notice about the David Calof Legal Defense Fund in
your next issue."
  OK.

    +------------------------------------------------------------+
    |                       SPECIAL THANKS                       |
    |                                                            |
    |       We extend a very special "Thank you" to all of       |
    |      the people who help prepare the FMSF Newsletter.      |  
    |                                                            |
    |   EDITORIAL SUPPORT: Toby Feld, Allen Feld,                |
    |          Howard Fishman, Peter Freyd, P.T.                 |
    |   RESEARCH: Merci Federici, Michele Gregg, Anita Lipton    |
    |   NOTICES and PRODCUTION: Danielle Taylor                  |
    |   COLUMNISTS: Katie Spanuello and                          |
    |       members of the FMSF Scientific Advisory Board        |
    |   LETTERS and INFORMATION: Our Readers                     |
    +------------------------------------------------------------+
**********************************************************************
                          INFORMED  CONSENT:
                  AMERICAN  PSYCHIATRIC  ASSOCIATION

  In June of 1996, the American Psychiatric Association released
"Principles of Informed Consent in Psychiatry" prepared by the APA's
Council on Psychiatry and Law and approved by the Board of Trustees in
June of 1996 as a resource to the APA's District Branches. It does not
represent APA policy.
  We think that FMSF Newsletter readers will be well-satisfied with
this document. Following is Section 7 (page 6):

  "Psychotherapy: Informed consent developed in the context of
  invasive procedures and has since been extended to treatment with
  medication. There has always been uncertainty as to the extent to
  which the doctrine of informed consent is applicable to
  psychotherapy. Although discussions about treatment may fit poorly
  into some psychotherapeutic approaches, recent changes in practice
  that emphasize short-term, problem-focussed therapies are more
  accommodating (or even encouraging) of such interactions. Whether or
  not required by the law, it seems reasonable to encourage
  psychiatrists to discuss with their patients the nature of
  psychotherapy, likely benefits and risks (where applicable) and
  alternative approaches (both psychotherapeutic and
  non-psychotherapeutic) to their problems."

**********************************************************************
             FMS  AND  THE  HEALTH  OF  ACCUSED  PARENTS

  Editor's note: FMS families live with the dual stress of losing a
  child and coping with false accusations. How is their health
  affected? Terry Collins, a member of the Vancouver Support Group,
  decided to do a survey to explore this. The results must be viewed
  with caution because the responses are subjective and because we do
  not have a comparison group. Perhaps Terry's results will encourage
  a more rigorous study. This is Terry's report:

  A questionnaire was sent to the 63 families of the Vancouver Support
Group. More than 50% of the families responded. With the help of a
university professor, I developed a system that provided anonymity.
  Question 1: Have you, or any members of your immediate family, been
accused of incest, pedophilia and/or Satanic ritual abuse (including
torture and murder)?
  91% said yes.
  Question 2: Has the accused person's physical health deteriorated
since he/she was made aware of the false accusations?
  68% reported that someone within their family showed signs of
deterioration that varied from greater frequency of catching
communicable diseases (such as colds or flu), through increases in
attacks of arthritis and allergies, to repetitive cardiovascular heat
attacks and cancer.
  Question 3: Has the sense of emotional "well-being" of the accused
deteriorated?
  89% reported that someone within the family suffered from emotional
health disability/disease/deterioration following the false
accusation. There were a wide variety of effects centering around high
levels of stress, fear, loss of self-confidence, anger, depression,
withdrawal and thoughts of suicide.
  Question 4: Has the accused or any member of the immediate family
died?
  14% of the sample reported deaths within the family following the
false accusation, including one recanter who died before being fully
reconciled.
  What does this information tell us? For six years I have worked
within the prison system in Canada and with sex offenders who have
admitted to their wrongs. I have never seen the kind of physical
deterioration in that group of people that I have seen take place
among our families.

 ______________________________SIDEBAR_______________________________
/                                                                    \ 
|               Martin Luther King on Forgiveness                    |
|                                                                    |
| "Forgiveness does not mean ignoring what has been done or putting  |
| a false label on an evil act. It means, rather that the evil act   |
| no longer remains as a barrier to the relationship."               |
\____________________________________________________________________/

**********************************************************************
                  M A K E   A   D I F F E R E N C E

  This is a column that will let you know what people are doing to
  counteract the harm done by FMS. Remember that five years ago, FMSF
  didn't exist. A group of 50 or so people found each other and today
  more than 18,000 have reported similar experiences. Together we
  have made a difference. How did this happen?

 +-------------------------------------------------------------------+
 |   When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will   |
 | fall one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle |
 |                                                      Edmund Burke |
 |   Thoughts on the Cause of the Present Discontent Vol. i. p. 526. | 
 +-------------------------------------------------------------------+

  CALIFORNIA - A Mom wrote to tell me that she had called her local
newspaper and interested a reporter in FMS by telling her story and
tying it to the movie, "The Crucible." The movie is based on Arthur
Miller's play of the same name about the Salem Witch Hunts. When
Miller wrote the play it was especially relevant because of the
infamous McCarthy Hearings. Forty years later it is especially
pertinent because of FMS.
  ILLINOIS - At a Christmas party a falsely accused mother was talking
to a young woman who was a freshman at DePaul, a large Catholic
university in Chicago. The FMS mother inquired as to the student's
major. The student told her that her major was German with a minor in
journalism and she volunteered that her roommate was in Women's
Studies. The FMS mother then confided that she had lost her daughter
seven years earlier to FMS because of a women's studies program at the
University of Wisconsin. The young woman was astounded! She related
how she had witnessed her friend changing before her eyes. She had
become rigid, narrow and self centered. She said that she and her
roommate had started having arguments over women's issues. Her
roommate would not tolerate any opinion that didn't agree with hers.
  The mother has sent material on FMS and plans are in progress for an
article in the student newspaper. A further effort is being made to
involve the departments of psychology, women's studies and journalism
in an educational presentation about FMS issues.

  Send your ideas to Katie Spanuello c/o FMSF.

**********************************************************************
                   F O C U S   O N   S C I E N C E

  From time to time, various scientific articles appear which discuss
  issues of childhood sexual abuse, memory, and responses to trauma.
  Since such studies are often widely cited in the scientific and
  popular press, it is critical to recognize their methodological
  limits. It is particularly important to understand what conclusions
  can and cannot legitimately be drawn from these studies on the basis
  of the data presented. As a result, we periodically present analyses
  of recent well-known studies, prepared with help from members of our
  Scientific Advisory Committee.

                      *       *       *       *

                    THE CHILDREN OF WISH-TON-WISH
                         Harrison Pope, M.D.

  To some people, it seems perfectly natural that memories can be
"repressed." If one experiences a tragedy too terrible to contemplate,
is it not only reasonable that the mind would try to expel the memory
from consciousness?
  Actually, from a Darwinian point of view, repression is anything but
reasonable. If, for example, one did not vividly remember being
attacked by a lion, but instead "repressed" the memory, then one would
be liable to wander in front of other lions in the future -- with
inauspicious consequences both for one's own survival and one's
chances of perpetuating the species. Surely it would seem more logical
that Mother Nature would have designed us to remember traumatic events
vividly, so that we could avoid a repetition of them in the
future. And for most of us, this has been our personal experience:
horrible things that have happened to us are still ingrained in our
minds years after they occurred.
  In a recent study, for example, members of our research group
interviewed 53 victims of a freak tornado which struck the town of
Great Barrington, Massachusetts, in the Spring of 1995. One woman was
trapped in her car when the storm hit; a tree fell across the road
immediately in front of her, and live power lines collapsed onto the
pavement behind. The car shook; the walls of a neighboring garage blew
away like playing cards. In the back seat, her children were
screaming.
  "Did you have any loss of memory for that experience?" we asked.
She looked at us in disbelief and said, "are you kidding?"
  As this woman and many others can attest, terrifying experiences
leave indelible memories. Therefore, where and when did the idea arise
that the opposite could happen -- that a traumatic memory could be
completely banished from consciousness?
  One way to examine this question is to look at world literature. As
we look at stories, poems, and dramas written throughout the ages in
different places and different cultures, where do we find characters
who "repressed" and then perhaps later "recovered" memories of
traumatic events?
  We have put this question to a number of experts in literature. Such
a survey, admittedly, is hardly a formal scientific study, but it is
nevertheless revealing. Throughout most of history, it appears, no one
in any story in the world's literature appears to have developed
amnesia for a seemingly unforgettable traumatic event and later
recovered the memory into consciousness. No one in the Bible, for
example, seems to have repressed and then recovered a memory. Nor in
Shakespeare -- a veritable catalog of the possible permutations of the
human psyche -- do we find a clear instance of repression. No one has
been able to show us a clear case of repression in classical Greek or
Roman literature, in Islamic literature, or anywhere else in Western
literature until well into the l9th century. Then, and only then, does
repression begin to crop up (1).
  As best as we can tell, one of the first cases of repression and
recovery of memory appears in James Fenimore Cooper's 1829 novel, The
Wept of Wish-Ton-Wish (2). In this tale, set in the mid-seventeenth
century, Indians attack the little settlement of Wish-Ton-Wish in
Connecticut and abduct two children. One is a teenager named Whittal
Ring, and the other is a little girl named Ruth Heathcote. Years
later, Rueben Ring comes upon his lost brother Whittal in the woods.
Whittal is now dressed as an Indian; he is wearing war paint and calls
himself Nipset. He has complete amnesia for his past as a White
man. His sister, Faith, recognizes her brother, but is unable to
persuade him of his former identity, even when he looks at his own
white skin.
  Later, Ruth is also found. She, too, has become an Indian and goes
by the name of Narra-mattah. Her memories of childhood are also
completely repressed, but she has recurring images of her mother in
dreams:
  "Narra-mattah has forgotten all ... But she sees one that the
wives of the Narragansetts do not see. She sees a woman with white
skin; her eyes look softly on her child ..."
  Ruth's mother tries to help her child recover her lost memories, but
in vain. Then, at the very end of the novel, the child falls ill and
lies dying. And there, in the lush romantic prose of Cooper, we
witness what just might be literature's first case of a repressed
memory. The mother of the dying child speaks to her:

    "Look on thy friends, long-mourned and much suffering daughter!
  'Tis she who sorrowed over thy infant afflictions, who rejoiced in
  thy childish happiness, and who hath so bitterly wept thy loss, that
  craveth the boon. In this awful moment, recall the lessons of
  youth. Surely, surely, the God that bestowed thee in mercy, though
  he hath led thee on a wonderful and inscrutable path, will not
  desert thee at the end! Think of thy early instruction, child of my
  love; feeble of spirit as thou art, the seed may yet quicken, though
  it hath been cast where the glory of the promise hath so long been
  hid."
    "Mother!" said a low struggling voice in reply. The word reached
  every ear, and it caused a general and breathless attention. The
  sound was soft and low, perhaps infantile, but it was uttered
  without accent, and clearly. "Mother -- why are we in the forest?"
  continued the speaker. "Have any robbed us of our home, that we
  dwell beneath the trees?" Ruth raised a hand imploringly, for none
  to interrupt the illusion.
    "Nature hath revived the recollections of her youth," she
  whispered. "Let the spirit depart, if such be his holy will, in the
  blessedness of infant innocence!"

  Another possible case of repression arises in 1859, in Charles
Dicken's novel, Tale of Two Cities. Dr. Manette, after 18-years
imprisonment in the Bastille, has developed amnesia for long intervals
of his past, including the period surrounding his release (3). He
describes his amnesia in courtroom testimony:

  "Has it been your misfortune to undergo a long imprisonment, without
  trial, or even accusation, in your native country, Doctor Manette?"
    "He answered in a tone that went to every heart, "A long
  imprisonment."
    "Were you newly released on the occasion in question?"
    "They tell me so."
    "Have you no remembrance of the occasion?"
    "None. My mind is a blank, for some time-I cannot even say what
  time-when I employed myself, in my captivity, in making shoes, to
  the time when I found myself living in London with my dear daughter
  here. She had become familiar to me, when a gracious God restored my
  faculties; but, I am unable even to say how she had become
  familiar. I have no remembrance of the process."

  And a few years later, in approximately 1862, Emily Dickinson in a
poem implies more specifically that an event could breed amnesia
simply because it is too traumatic to contemplate (4).

  There is a pain - so utter
  It swallows substance up
  Then covers the Abyss with Trance
  So Memory can step
  Around - across - upon it
  As one within a Swoon
   Goes safely - where an open eye
  Would drop Him - Bone by Bone.

  By the end of the century, we find that "repression" and "recovery"
of memory have entered romantic fiction in full-blown form. A typical
case appears in the 1896 children's novel, Captains Courageous, by a
Nobel prize winner, Rudyard Kipling (5). One of the characters in the
novel is a former preacher, Penn, who had long ago lost his entire
family before his eyes in a tragic flood. After the flood, Penn has
completely repressed the memory of the entire trauma, and has even
forgotten that he ever was a preacher or had a family. We find him
instead working for Captain Disko as a fisherman on a Grand Banks
schooner, oblivious to his past. One day, a passing ocean liner carves
a neighboring fishing schooner in two, killing its hands, including
the captain's son. The surviving captain is rescued by Disko's crew
and brought aboard. At this moment, Penn abruptly undergoes a
transformation. He suddenly recovers the memory of the loss of his own
family, and his voice transforms from his usual "pitiful little
titter" to the authoritative tones of a preacher. He consoles the
grieving captain, prays for him, and shares with him the memory of the
tragic loss of his own loved ones years ago. And then, within hours,
Penn "re-represses" the memory. He again forgets his past, reverts to
a simple fisherman, and asks for his customary game of checkers.
  With the coming of modern times, repression has found a new and even
more fertile soil in that uniquely 20th century art form, film. From
the thrillers of Alfred Hitchcock to the childhood trauma of Batman,
characters in the movies regularly experience amnesia for traumatic
events, and then, at some dramatic moment, recover the memory. Indeed,
repression is the perfect device for Hollywood. Many a celluloid hero
is seen having a "flashback" -- a fleeting, freeze-frame image,
perhaps slightly out of focus -- of a long-forgotten event. What is
the dark secret from the past? Perhaps, if the hero could make sense
of this recurring image, recover the repressed memory, all would be
explained. By the end of the movie, this is usually just what has
happened.
  In short, for all of us who have grown up in the 20th century,
repression seems like a natural phenomenon; we have read of it in
novels and seen it in the movies all our lives. Perhaps this is why so
many people accept the concept without bothering to question it. But
we must stop to remember that repression actually appears to be a
parochial notion, seemingly restricted only to recent times and only
to Western European culture. And we must also remember that repression
was not a scientific hypothesis first proposed by Sigmund Freud or
Pierre Janet. Rather, it seems to have arisen as a romantic notion in
the Victorian era, somewhere in the middle of the 19th century. It had
entered poetry and prose well before Freud and Janet were even
born. It has continued to flourish in literature and cinema throughout
the 20th century. It is a powerful dramatic device that makes for good
fiction.
  But does it make for good science?

  References.
  1. The notion of repression also began to evolve in the writings of
19th century philosophers such as Schopenhauer and Nietzsche. For a
detailed discussion of these beginnings, see Ellenberger, H. The
Discovery of the Unconscious. New York: Basic Books, 1970.
  2. Cooper JF. (1829) The Wept of Wish-Ton-Wish..
  3. Dickens C. (1859) A Tale of Two Cities. New York: Dodd, Mead &
Co., 1942. See Book the Second, Chapter 3.
  4. Johnson TH (ed.) The Complete Poems of Emily Dickinson . Boston:
Little, Brown & Co., Boston, 1960, page 294, No. 599. I am indebted to
Dr. Gail S. Goodman and her colleagues for having discovered this
poem. See Goodman GS, Quas JA, Batterman Faunce JM, Riddlesberger MM,
Kuhn J. Predictors of accurate and inaccurate memories of traumatic
events experienced in childhood. Consciousness and Cognition
4:269-274, 1994.
  5. Kipling R. (1896) Captains Courageous: A Story of the Grand
Banks. New York: Doubleday, Page & Co., New York,. 1925, See chapters
3 and 7.

  This column appears as a chapter in the forthcoming book, Junk
  Psychology: Fallacies in Studies of 'Repression' and Childhood
  Trauma, by Harrison G. Pope, Jr. M.D., ^Ó Social Issues Resources
  Series, 1996. Copies of this book will be available in March 1997
  and may be obtained by writing to Social Issues Resources Series at
  1100 Holland Drive, Boca Raton, Florida, 33427, or by calling
  1-800-232-7477.

 ______________________________SIDEBAR_______________________________
/                                                                    \ 
|       What Accounts for the Resilience of So Many Families?        |
|                                                                    |
| Some families cope by using humor. The following newsclipping was  |
| sent to us by A Dad:                                               |
|                                                                    |
|    "...The main concerns that arise with aging parents are:        |
|    (1.) Does the parent have the capacity to understand and        |
|    appreciate the consequences of the situation?                   |
|    (2.) Is the parent being unduly influenced by another           |
|    person?..."                                                     |
|            from a Geriatric Psychiatrist in letter to "Dear Abby", |
|                                                                    |
| This is the comment that the dad enclosed with the news clipping:  |
|   "I enjoyed the Dear Abby column in today's paper. The writer's   |
| professional judgment of the main concerns in mental problems in   |
| the elderly makes me wonder if all of our accusing children are    |
| not preceding us into dementia. I guess he does not recognize      |
| undue influence as a problem if it originates in a psychiatrist.   |
| If you substituted the word 'child' where he uses 'parent' it      |
| would apply directly to the problem of our accusing children."     |
\____________________________________________________________________/

**********************************************************************
                        B O O K   R E V I E W
  __________________________________________________________________
  The Harmony of Illusions: Inventing Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder
                             Allan Young
              (Princeton University Press, 327 pgs.,$35)
                 Reviewer: J. Alexander Bodkin, M.D.

  Professor Allan Young's 1995 book, The Harmony of Illusions:
Inventing Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, is an impressive piece of
scholarship in the history of medicine, a fascinating report of
Dr. Young's extensive fieldwork in the anthropology of psychiatry, and
the most penetrating critique yet published of Post-Traumatic Stress
Disorder (PTSD).
  For readers who are not familiar with PTSD, it is a psychiatric
diagnosis that was introduced in 1980 to account for often late-
developing psychiatric morbidity seen in some combat veterans, though
more recently many practitioners have come to diagnose most of their
patients with it. PTSD refers to psychological symptoms that are
presumed to arise as a direct consequence of specific traumatic
experiences which may have occurred years before the onset of illness.
  Sometimes, no memory of the alleged trauma is available to the
patient prior to psychotherapy. The patient is then said to have
"repressed" or "dissociated" the traumatic memory. In other cases,
patients do not initially attribute their psychiatric symptoms to a
specific event because, prior to treatment, the traumatic nature of
that event was not appreciated.
  Sometimes such a patient is said to have been "in denial." PTSD has
come into increasingly common use by psychotherapists in recent years,
as it seems to cry out for long-term exploratory psychotherapy instead
of the medication and brief behaviorally-oriented treatment that other
anxiety and depressive disorders increasingly receive.
  Other than its purported traumatic basis, the symptomatology of PTSD
is indistinguishable from that of a variety of long-established mood
and anxiety disorders, with different terms used to describe the
symptoms. Most of the time -- if not all of the time -- it is simply a
matter of professional preference whether a given patient will be
diagnosed with PTSD or, for example, major depression with panic
attacks, or some related disorder. The practical difference is that,
if one considers the condition to be an instance of PTSD, it is
conceptualized as a natural reaction to an overwhelming trauma and
receives exploratory psychotherapy to identify and delineate the
trauma. The patient is then urged to "work through" the feelings
associated with the trauma.
  This process may take years before there is recovery -- generally
mirroring the natural time course of the untreated disorder. If such a
condition is instead called, for instance, major depression with panic
attacks, then the illness will be conceptualized as a neurobiological
dysfunction and the primary treatment will be antidepressant
medication. This regime usually brings about remission in a few
months, often with the help of adjunctive psychotherapy focussed on
functional adaptation.
  Of importance to this readership, PTSD is the diagnosis usually
given to women suffering from mood and anxiety symptoms when it is
believed that the cause of their suffering is forgotten childhood
sexual abuse. Occasionally the diagnosis will be Multiple Personality
Disorder (MPD), but this is only in more severe cases where the
alternative might be schizophrenia or borderline personality disorder.
When the illness is milder, the usual diagnostic choice is PTSD.
  In The Harmony of Illusions: Inventing Post-Traumatic Stress
Disorder, Professor Young, an anthropologist who has been studying the
disorder for many years, first provides the reader with a
comprehensive review of the historical roots of the concept of
traumatic memory, and the mental pathogen (toxic agent) supposed to
underlie PTSD (and its various historical predecessors). The concept
first emerged in the late 19th century, most prominently in the works
of Charcot, Freud and Janet, only to drop into obscurity until World
War I, when it reemerged in the work of the British military
psychiatrist W.H.R. Rivers. Rivers is generally credited with shifting
the understanding of war-related mental illness from a manifestation
of brain injury to the consequence of traumatic memories. Later, just
prior to America's entry into World War II, the American psychoanalyst
Abram Kardiner wrote The Traumatic Neuroses of War. It provided the
clinical descriptions and symptom lists that were imported many years
later into the DSM-III diagnosis of PTSD. Underlying Kardiner's
descriptions of disturbed soldiers and war veterans was an assumption
that their problems were caused by specific traumatic memories of
wartime experiences.
  There follows an illuminating discussion of the origins of the
DSM-III, psychiatry's first authoritative diagnostic manual, published
in 1980. This manual marked the beginning of the modern attempt to
place psychiatry on a scientific footing, making wide use of the
methodological advances long standard in the rest of medicine. Unlike
the earlier editions, DSM-I (1952) and DSM-II (1968), DSM-III
rigorously excluded from psychiatric diagnosis the various competing
theories of etiology (the medical term for the causative agent of an
illness) that until then had confused discussion and impeded empirical
research into psychiatric disorders. Now, for the first time, whether
a given patient had a given disorder could be determined by whether a
specified set of observable behaviors were present. Diagnosis was no
longer a matter of endless controversy and interpretation; any
adequately trained investigators or clinicians could now apply the
standard criteria and agree.
  Professor Young describes the events preceding the acceptance of
PTSD into the new diagnostic manual. He notes that there was
resistance by some scientifically-oriented psychiatrists about
introducing a diagnosis that carried with it a ready-made theory of
etiology. Unlike all the other major diagnoses in this manual, PTSD
was conceived from the outset as having a predetermined etiology -- a
traumatic event -- as the cause of the set of symptoms that were
observed. Other disorders were only described in the DSM-III, and it
was left to future scientific research to determine what their
explanations might be. However, the authors of the DSM-III decided to
make an exception in this single case, because of intense political
pressure to provide a diagnosis for the many veterans of the war in
Viet Nam who were winding up in VA hospitals with mental illnesses.
Some clinicians, including those sitting on the relevant DSM-III
committee, intuitively felt symptoms were due to the terrible
experiences the veterans had encountered in the war. Thus PTSD was
born, the lone survivor of an otherwise rigorous exclusion of unproven
theories of etiology from descriptive diagnosis in psychiatry.
  Professor Young then discusses some of the peculiar scientific
problems that have dogged research into PTSD since its inception. One
of the most striking problems has been that investigators cannot agree
on how prevalent (or, widespread in the community) PTSD is, simply
because they cannot agree in most cases whether or not it is present.
This is because investigators differ in their determination of whether
there has been a relevant traumatic event, this being an intrinsically
murky question. Thus attempts to determine how common PTSD is both
among war veterans and in the general population have all come to
wildly different conclusions. This shows that researchers -- let alone
treating clinicians -- cannot even tell when PTSD is present, let
alone what causes or cures it.
  Another telling finding of research into PTSD is that the severity
of the identified trauma has not been shown to predict the occurrence
or severity of subsequent illness. Rather it is the prior fragility of
the victim of trauma that determines whether and to what degree
illness results. These findings raise the question of whether the
symptoms of PTSD are "due to" a specific trauma, or are only
precipitated by it, just as a heart attack may be precipitated by
nonspecific stressors such as an alarming piece of news or a vigorous
walk after dinner.
  The author moves next to a presentation of his medico-
anthropological field work at The National Center for the Treatment of
War Related PTSD. He presents vignettes of patients and treaters, and
he describes the social processes both parties were engaged in.
Indoctrination and coercion are described as central aspects of the
experience at the Center, beginning with the medical director and
filtering through the hierarchy of clinicians down to the patients.
The similarity of this process to the spiritual indoctrination of
members of a charismatic religious cult is striking to the reader,
though the author does not state this explicitly.
  Young spells out the powerful psychological benefits to all members
of the Center's community resulting from this indoctrination. The
clinician gains a compelling sense of what his or her professional
task is, and learns to take credit for improvement in those patients
who do well and to accept the deterioration of other patients as a
necessary part of the treatment process. The patient is taught to
believe that "he is sick but not psychotic, that he has a reversible,
psychogenic disorder and not a mental disease," and that he will be
cured by the center's therapeutic techniques, which require disclosure
of his trauma and acceptance of the theory that his psyche had been
split by the trauma into an aggressive and a loving part. However,
"this impression tends to fade over time, and many patients eventually
conclude that the center does not possess an effective cure..." (p
212), because the patients did not generally recover as promised.
  There was a powerful additional incentive for patients to accept and
maintain the diagnosis of PTSD: it brought with it $12,600 per year in
disability income from the VA in 1986 ( it is substantially higher
now). In addition there are often back payments of up to $60,000 to
cover the years of disability before the diagnosis was made. As the
reader can easily imagine, with such a practical impetus PTSD became a
robustly self-perpetuating diagnosis.
  In the next section, the author critically discusses some very
inconclusive biological research into PTSD at considerable length. But
he does not address one recent and highly publicized trend in PTSD
research. These are the brain imaging studies which purport to show
the specific physical brain changes that are caused by trauma in PTSD
patients. This work often conveys the misleading impression that,
because brain abnormalities are seen in association with PTSD
symptoms, these abnormalities must be caused by trauma.
  A critical reader will instantly see that it may just as easily be
the case that these brain abnormalities are themselves the cause of
the symptoms. These may be nothing more than the brain abnormalities
of abnormally fragile people who do poorly when faced with stress,
because of a tendency toward mood and anxiety disorders. It would be
easy to resolve this question, but none of these researchers have
tried to. Not one of these studies has compared the brain structure of
PTSD patients to that of equally symptomatic anxious depressives who
are not believed to have PTSD, or to family members of people with the
diagnosis of PTSD, or to any other appropriate comparison group.
Perhaps this oversight is a reflection of the fact that these
researchers are in no hurry to weaken their case.
  Finally, in his conclusion, Professor Young discusses the recent
change the diagnosis of PTSD has undergone. When it was introduced in
1980, it required that a patient must (1) have undergone a traumatic
experience outside of the range of normal human experience and that
(2) would have been distressful to almost anyone who experienced it.
However, clinical practice has consistently ignored those requirements
over the intervening years, and the diagnosis has been made whenever
it was perceived that something "bad" happened or may have happened.
  Apparently in response to this (though without frankly acknowledging
it), the authors of the latest edition (called DSM-IV) have revised
the operational criteria of trauma to include virtually any experience
that was severely frightening to the patient. Given the nature of life
on earth, almost every human being will at some point have encountered
such an experience. Since it is not required that the symptoms of PTSD
follow closely upon the identified trauma in time, or even that the
trauma can be recalled, it has become officially possible now to
diagnose virtually anyone who suffers from a mood or anxiety disorder
with PTSD if a clinician wishes to do so.
  This has led to the development of a kind of parallel professional
universe that employs unproven treatment methods and which features
the speculative attribution of commonplace psychiatric symptoms to the
memory of past trauma. These alleged pathogenic memories are often
inaccessible to consciousness and often fatalistically odious in
character; frequently a resented relative is cast as the villain. The
seriousness of this problem should be immediately clear to readers of
this newsletter.
  In summary, I strongly urge serious readers with an interest in the
false memory phenomenon to read this book. It is a genuine
masterpiece, and it shines a scorching searchlight on the tenebrous
diagnosis of PTSD. If it is widely read, it may open many eyes and
begin to change current practices. If not, at least it expresses
truths that up to now have been kept disgracefully hidden. The
author's curious manner of not revealing his point of view may be a
bit irritating to some readers, but at least you will feel that it is
your own opinion you hold at the end of this book. And you will be far
more knowledgeable about PTSD than all but a few of the legions of
psychotherapists who diagnose and claim to treat it.

  J. Alexander Bodkin, M.D. is a member of the Department of
  Psychiatry at the Harvard Medical School. He is a Staff Psychiatrist
  at McLean Hospital, Belmont, MA.

 ______________________________SIDEBAR_______________________________
/                                                                    \ 
|                        "Indigestible Lumps"                        |
|                   Understanding traumatic memory                   |
|                                                                    |
|   But yet again Marjorie Orr sounds a warning. "You can't take     |
| work done on people memorising shopping lists in labs and then     |
| apply it to people who have been persistently raped for nine       |
| years," she says. "Traumatic memory works very differently. It's   |
| stored in indigestible lumps encoded in a different way than       |
| ordinary memory. And it comes back in a different way, in bits and |
| pieces, starting with a smell, a sound, a panic attack."           |
|                         Vallely, The Independent November 16, 1996 |
\____________________________________________________________________/

**********************************************************************
                       L E G A L   C O R N E R
                              FMSF Staff
        ______________________________________________________
        Psychiatrist settles with former patient for $650,000, 
 Tinker v. Tesson, in the Circuit Court of the 19th Judicial Circuit,
        in and for Martin County, Florida, Case No. 95-444-CA
  In December, 1996, Sue Tinker agreed to a $650,000 settlement in a
civil suit against psychiatrist Dr. Alan Tesson of Stuart, Florida.
Tinker alleged that Tesson used hypnosis over a period of 2 1/2 years
to retrieve "repressed memories" of satanic ritual abuse and had an
affair with Tinker while treating her.
  Among numerous allegations of negligence in the treatment of
Ms. Tinker, the complaint included allegations that defendant failed
to obtain informed consent of the risks of his chosen treatment
techniques and misdiagnosed the plaintiff. According to plaintiff's
attorney, Don Russo, Tesson diagnosed Ms. Tinker as suffering from
Multiple Personality Disorder (over 200 personalities) as a result of
Satanic Ritual Abuse (SRA). Dr. Tesson originally denied introducing
the topic of SRA and SRA mind control, claiming these memories were
brought up by Ms. Tinker herself in therapy. However, with the use of
videotapes from therapy sessions during depositions, plaintiff's
counsel was able to show that Dr. Tesson implanted false memories of
SRA. Attorney Russo described Tesson as someone who was preoccupied
with satanic ritual abuse.
  Attorney Russo was also able to show that Dr. Tesson frequently
consulted with self-proclaimed experts in satanic ritual abuse (Cory
Hammond, Catherine Gould and Judianne Denson Gerber) on the subject of
SRA mind control. For example, Catherine Gould testified that she
consulted with Tesson on Tinker's case to teach Tesson how to detoxify
the mind control in his patient for a fee of $5,000. And, court
records show that Tesson attended a lecture for hypnotherapists, in
which Hammond told the group a satanic cult had been introduced to the
United States by Nazi scientists who devised a mind-control system to
induce cult members to commit murder, ritual sacrifices and child
pornography.
  Attorney Russo commented that "as a trained medical negligence
lawyer, I've never seen a case where the science got so far away from
anything remotely connected to good medical sense and science. The
same is true, in my personal view, of the experts that testified about
repressed memory theory.... The deposition testimony of the defense
experts show that there is no basis for saying repressed memory theory
is in any way based on sound science."
  Defendant's attorney said that Tesson was opposed to the settlement
but that it was a compromise due to the concern that "perhaps a court
ruling may have a serious impact on the physician."
        _____________________________________________________
        Malpractice Suit against California Therapist Settles
                      Out of Court, January 1997
  A malpractice suit originally filed in 1993 in Long Beach,
California has been settled at long last. Melody Gavigan had sued her
former therapists and a hospital for medical malpractice and
negligence. Her complaint (1) states that she entered therapy for
treatment of mild depression but that the defendants failed to
ascertain the true cause of her condition. Instead, as a result of
their misconduct and misdiagnosis and at their suggestion and
encouragement, she falsely accused her father of child abuse.
  The hospital settled out of court approximately a year ago. The
treating therapist settled prior to trial rather than continuing with
an appeal.
  According to Melody's attorney, Donald A. Eisner, Ph.D., J.D., "One
of the most disturbing aspects of the case was the intrusiveness into
Melody's personal affairs, including who she associated with and wrote
to. This case demonstrates that if you persevere, you will be
victorious." Melody has been more public about her experience than are
many other former patients in her position. She was the editor of her
own publication, The Retractor, and has written a chapter on her life
in a book entitled True Stories of False Memories. In court documents,
Melody was made out to be a conspirator in collusion with the False
Memory Syndrome Foundation seeking to bring meritless cases against
psychotherapists. Eisner reports that E-mail, letters, articles,
diaries and even phone company records were requested by the defense.
Depositions were taken of persons who had even remote contact with
Melody. Eisner notes that this defense tactic is unlikely to continue
because of the expense involved and because it is becoming more
apparent that it is below the standard of care for therapists to
suggest that a patient can reliably retrieve a repressed memory-
especially of Satanic ritual abuse. Melody currently lives in Nevada
and plans to return to work in a few months.
  (1) See FMSF Brief Bank #31
      _________________________________________________________
      A Second California Malpractice Case Settles Out of Court
  On January 9, 1997, Lori Roberts settled out of court with the final
defendant in a malpractice suit filed in 1994 in Long Beach,
California. (2) She had previously settled with a treating
psychotherapist and a hospital. (Interestingly, both Lori and Melody
were treated at the same hospital, a hospital whose owners were later
implicated in insurance fraud.)
  Lori had suffered from an actual trauma several years before she was
hospitalized for depression. According to Lori's attorney, Donald A.
Eisner, Ph.D., J.D., it is doubtful that her depression was serious
enough to warrant several months of inpatient treatment. During the
initial phases of both outpatient and inpatient treatment it was
suggested that perhaps the cause of her "depression" was due to some
other trauma. The staff recommended sodium amytal to unlock her
repressed memories. In December 1991, after Lori had written out some
of her own questions, she was given sodium amytal intravenously.
During the session, she "saw" her father molest her while she was
wearing a blue nightgown. In fact, she never owned a blue nightgown.
The staff had Lori meet and confront her parents with this new-found
information. For the next year or so, she believed in the validity of
the so-called retrieved memories.
  Attorney Eisner states that the case was scheduled to go to binding
arbitration. Dr. August Piper was chosen as expert and had been
deposed and had prepared testimony. The day before the arbitration was
scheduled, the insurance adjustor for the defendant called and offered
to settle for a nominal amount without admitting liability. Eisner
informed the adjustor that he would not settle for less than a certain
amount and not to call back unless she could meet the demand. About
two hours before the start of the arbitration, the adjustor acceded to
the demand. Currently, Lori is attending Los Angeles Harbor College.
  (2) See FMSF Brief Bank #22
                   ________________________________
                   Minnesota Court of Appeals Rules
                Public Policy Precludes Discovery Rule
   Cheryl D. v. Estate of Robert D.B., Wisconsin Court of Appeals, 
     District Two, December 18, 1996. Slip Copy. 1996 WL 725692.
  Cheryl D., a 46-year-old woman, sued her father's estate for damages
for an incident of incest alleged to have occurred between 1975 and
1976. The issue before the Court of Appeals was whether the discovery
rule and public policy reasoning enunciated in Pritzlaff v.
Archdiocese of Milwaukee, 194 Wis.2d 302, 533 N.W.2d 780 (1995), would
apply to an adult incest case (3). The court concluded that Pritzlaff
was applicable, holding that the statute of limitations was not tolled
by the discovery rule. The court also ruled that public policy
(against the interest of the public and in consideration of fairness),
as outlined in Pritzlaff, further precluded the discovery rule from
saving a claim under the facts of the case.
  Cheryl D. maintained that the trauma of the alleged abuse prevented
her from discovering the cause of her psychological injuries until she
disclosed it to her therapist in 1993 (Judge P.J. Anderson notes in
his decision that the allegations were not brought until after Cheryl
learned that she was expressly disinherited from her father's estate).
The Court of Appeals ruled that to apply the discovery rule would
cause unfairness to the defendant's estate which would be forced to
attempt to defend a suit for alleged emotional and psychological
injuries where the alleged conduct took place twenty years ago, and
where the defendant is deceased and unable to deny or verify the
claim. Judge Anderson affirmed the trial court's ruling that to allow
this action to go forward, "is clearly violative of public policy."
  Judge Anderson further concluded that the threat of stale or
fraudulent actions outweighs allowing claims of this nature, quoting
Pritzlaff that "this court has frequently been dismayed by the
examination of trial court records which showed a marked propensity of
those who purport to have psychiatric expertise to tailor their
testimony to the particular client whom they represent, fraud becomes
a distinct possibility." Id. at 322-23, 533 N.W.2d 788.
  (3) The court noted that this is the first application of Pritzlaff v.
Archdiocese of Milwaukee, 194 Wis.2d 302, 533 N.W.2d 780 (1995), to an
adult incest case.
                   _______________________________
                   Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals 
  Overturns Child Sexual Abuse Convictions of Four Native Americans
  A panel of the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals in the U.S. v Rouse, 100
F.3d 560 (8th Cir. 1996), overturned the conviction of four Native
American men who had been convicted and sentenced collectively to more
than 120 years after a jury trial for aggravated sexual abuse of
children under 12 years of age. Because the acts allegedly occurred at
the family residences on a South Dakota Indian Reservation, the
charges were brought in federal court.
  The Sioux Tribe's Department of Social Services removed 13 children
from their homes following allegations of child sexual abuse by a
young Native American girl, R.R., following a single interview which
was neither audio nor video taped. The court's opinion details how the
children's accusations expanded "fantastically" while in custody of
the Social Services Department as the untaped interviews with law
enforcement and social workers continued.
  Prior to trial, the district court denied independent medical and
psychological examinations of the children. In addition, during trial,
the defendants were denied the opportunity to present expert testimony
that the investigation and interrogation of the children constituted a
"practice of suggestibility." On appeal, these two issues served as
the basis for the court's reversal of the defendants' convictions.
  A reading of the decision reveals that the court was highly critical
of the trial judge's handling of the case. In concluding that the
expert testimony on suggestibility should have been admitted, the
appellate court went into a well-reasoned Daubert analysis and quoted
extensively from Stephen J. Ceci and Maggie Bruck's "Suggestibility
of Child Witnesses: A Historical Review and Synthesis," 113
Psychological Bulletin 403-409 (1993). The court also wrote that in
light of the manner in which the prosecution, state agencies and
others have proceeded in the investigation, it was an abuse of the
trial court's discretion not to have afforded a fair opportunity to
determine by independent psychological examination whether the
children had been improperly influenced. The result of the appellate
decision was to remand the case for new trial.
  Since the decision, the FMSF Legal Staff has contacted the attorneys
who represented the defendants both at trial and throughout the
appellate process. These attorneys were informed that the government
has requested a reconsideration of the Court of Appeal's decision and
made a suggestion that the matter be reconsidered, en banc, that is,
by the entire court, not just the 3-judge panel which decided the
case.
                  __________________________________
                  Cleared of Child Abuse Five Times,
            Woman Sues Connecticut for Name of her Accuser
        The New York Times, January 6, 1997, William Glaberson
  In response to at least five anonymous calls, investigations by
Connecticut Social Services over the past two years have yielded no
evidence that Susan Leventhal of Berlin, Connecticut, was abusing her
four children. Ms. Leventhal has filed suit against the Connecticut
Department of Children and Families claiming a constitutional right to
confront her accusers is as important as the state's interest in
encouraging child abuse complaints. If she gets the names,
Ms. Leventhal intends to sue for harassment.
  Connecticut guarantees anonymity in order to encourage members of
the public to make such reports. In recent years, legislatures across
the country, including Connecticut, have made falsely reporting child
abuse a crime. However, the law enacted in Connecticut on October 1,
1996, may not apply retroactively to Ms. Leventhal's complaints.
  An editorial which appeared in The New York Times on January 10,
1997, calls for "crack down" on false and malicious reports, noting
that while anonymous reporting is an important tool against child
abuse and should be preserved, the system clearly needs "fine-tuning."
     ___________________________________________________________
     Canada Lets Defendants Turn the Tables on their Prosecutors
                      Christian Science Monitor
                 by Mark Clayton and Brian Humphreys
                           November 8, 1996
  During the past year, several Canadian Appeals courts have broadened
the criteria for proof of misconduct by which prosecutors and police
may be measured in cases alleging prosecution despite knowledge of a
defendant's innocence (see, e.g., Milgaard v. Mackie, 118 D.L.R.4th
653 (1994); Milgaard v. Kujawa, 28 C.P.C.3d 137 (1994)).
  Criminal law professor at Osgood Hall Law School at York University
in Toronto, Alan Young, says the impact of these action is now
rippling across Canada. "Every provincial attorney general's office is
unhappy and very uncomfortable about the wider potential exposure to
being sued," he said. "They felt they could live with the 'malicious'
prosecution rule, knowing how difficult that is to prove in court. But
'negligent' prosecution is much easier to prove and will potentially
expand their accountability."

**********************************************************************
                 E T H I C A L   C O M P L A I N T S
                        Loren Pankratz, Ph.D.

  I recently discovered a letter that I wrote in 1976 to the Oregon
Psychological Association Board when I was chair of the Ethics
Committee. The letter said that no complaints were filed against
psychologists that year. In 1988 I rejoined the Ethics Committee for a
six-year stint. The second time around I discovered a different world.
  In 1976 there were about 300 licensed psychologists in Oregon, and
few were in private practice. There are now about 800 licensed
psychologists in Oregon. About 400 psychiatrists are licensed, but
there are about 1,200 Counselors and Marriage & Family Therapists and
an additional 1,900 Clinical Social Workers. Consumers obviously have
options in this state with a population somewhere over two million
people.
  Recently I gathered information about complaints from the Ethics
Committee of the Oregon Psychological Association and the state
licensing board for psychologists. I concluded that perhaps one
complaint is registered for each 20 psychologists each year, although
multiple complaints against some individuals may skew that figure.
Information from the state of Washington suggested a comparable rate.
  What accounts for this appalling figure? I don't know. But the
variety of complaints that I saw during my tenure on the committee
prompted me to write a brief article for our state newsletter about
the vulnerabilities that therapists face over the stages of their
professional career. I particularly stressed the need for a commitment
to a scientific approach against the temptation of psychological fads.
  In my opinion, the American Psychological Association Ethical
Principles of Psychologists are more demanding than those of other
professions. As readers know, the ethical standards prevent
psychologists from discussing their clients without a specific
release. This blocks third parties from making ethical complaints
because therapists will not be able to discuss the case, even with an
ethics committee. I recommended, therefore, that persons concerned
about the therapy of others provide them a copy of these standards
with the section highlighted that says therapy should be terminated if
the client is not benefiting or if service is harmful.
  A complaint against a psychologist may be lodged by a consumer
either through the ethics committee of the state association (if the
person is a member) or through the state licensing board. It is
possible to file a complaint with the American Psychological
Association as well, but in our experience they want local
organizations to resolve complaints. The local ethics committee can,
in the worst case, recommend to its professional board that a
psychologist be removed from membership. Therefore, our committee
often suggested, and sometimes insisted, that complaints with the
potential for serious consequences be presented directly to the state
board. The board has the power to impose sanctions, including the
removal of a license. We tried to educate those considering a
complaint about their options.
  Because the ethics committee has a limited oversight, we viewed our
role as one of mediation and education, which I believe was
appropriate. Most psychologists were completely cooperative with the
committee. However, I suspect that some people who used our services
were not very satisfied. The reason for the dissatisfaction probably
resulted from being excluded from the process. There is little
feedback about the work done behind the scenes, which might leave the
impression that it is not being taken seriously. And the extended time
it takes to resolve an issue might lead some to believe that nothing
is being done about the complaint.
  An ethics review is not a legal process. Thus, we refused to
interact with any attorney who stepped into the process. In one case
it was clear than an attorney was guiding a psychologist through our
investigation process, which was certainly appropriate. However, that
attorney eventually wrote us a letter with an innuendo of legal action
against the committee. We were a volunteer group with doubts about our
liability coverage in this situation. Therefore, we precipitously
passed the complaint to our parent American Psychological Association.
  The committee took each complaint seriously, sometimes throwing out
parts of a complaint but sometimes adding issues that became apparent.
Sometimes I was disappointed with individuals on the committee who
would not let go of the mediation role. I never viewed this as an
attempt to protect our profession, as an outsider might suspect.
Rather, it was my opinion that some members could not give up their
traditional role of talking out a solution when direct action was
needed, especially with an uncooperative professional.
  For example, in one case a psychologist violated some principles in
a complex and unusual way. Our committee discussed this over several
of our monthly meetings until we exceeded the time limits demanded by
our Standard Operating Procedures. When we consulted our attorney, he
thought that we had lost our standing in the case. Thus, we were
forced to settle this case by default with a letter that could be
ignored. The wisdom of a committee can become folly while working
toward consensus.
  To avoid ethical complaints with the committee, many psychologists
give a copy of the ethical standards to their clients at the beginning
of treatment. For both psychologist and client, it is best to resolve
questions before they become conflicts.

  Loren Pankratz, Ph.D. is a Consultation Psychologist and Clinical
  Professor, Oregon Health Sciences University in Portland, Oregon. He
  is a member of the FMSF Advisory Board.
        _____________________________________________________
        Colorado Board of Medical Examiners (Hearing Panel B) 
     Revokes License to Practice Medicine for Spencer K. Anneberg
                  (Case No. ME 96-08) Nov. 15, 1996
  Until his license was suspended, Spencer K. Anneberg practiced as a
psychiatrist in Greeley, Colorado. A third-party action was made
possible by an unfortunate set of circumstances that provided the
opportunity for a diagnosis of the patient by someone other than
Dr. Anneberg. The Board of Examiners based their ruling on evidence
presented in three complaints against Anneberg: Two by former patients
and a third-party complaint filed by the parents of one of Anneberg's
patients. In this summary, we focus only on the third-party complaint.
  The third-party complaint was initiated by the parents of a young
woman who went to Dr. Anneberg for help after a failed romance. The
young woman's mental status deteriorated with extensive psychotherapy
for her alleged repressed traumas of child abuse until she was
hospitalized. She left the hospital against medical advice and was
later found suffering from hypothermia. Hospitalized a second time,
she again left against medical advice, stole a truck and attempted to
hurt or kill herself. After a head injury was treated, she was
transferred to another psychiatric facility where she was diagnosed
and treated by Dr. Steven Dubovsky, Professor of Psychiatry and Vice
Chairman of the Psychiatry Department of the University of Colorado
Health Sciences Center. Dr. Dubovsky identified several major
diagnostic possibilities.
  The Medical Examiners made the following comments about Dr. Anneberg's
treatment of this patient:
  * Respondent failed to perform a careful psychiatric examination of
patient. He did not obtain a detailed history or conduct a careful
mental status examination.
  (The patient history is often the single most important source of
data available to a psychiatrist to assess the patient's current
condition. A careful mental status examination assesses the patient's
mood, the kind of thinking the patient is using, and issues of memory
and attention. By failing to perform a careful psychiatric examination
of the patient, Respondent failed to meet these generally accepted
standards of practice.)
  * Respondent ignored the patient's presenting symptoms which suggest
she was suffering from depression and mourning in relation to the
rupture of her significant romantic relationship.
  (By failing to address the patient's serious mood disorder,
Respondent failed to meet generally accepted standard of practice.)
  * Respondent diagnosed the patient as suffering from repressed prior
trauma...The basis for Respondent's diagnosis of repressed prior
trauma was flimsy at best.
  (Generally accepted standards of practice require that a
psychiatrist have an adequate clinical basis for his diagnosis.)
  * Based on his diagnosis, Respondent embarked on intense,
insight-oriented treatment in which he assumed that the patient's
problems arose from deeply rooted experiences in the past which needed
to be dug out. The patient began a downhill course and was no longer
able to function at her previous level. Respondent recognized the
deterioration of the patient's mental health but did nothing to
reevaluate or reorient his treatment plan.
  (Generally accepted standards of practice require a psychiatrist to
employ treatment calculated to address the patient's diagnosis and
then evaluate the effect of the treatment in order to reassess the
treatment plan. By choosing and continuing insight-oriented therapy,
particularly in light of the deleterious effect it had on the patient,
Respondent failed to meet these generally accepted standards of
practice...Generally accepted standards of practice require a
psychiatrist to consider the use of psychotropic drugs for a patient
with a significant mood disorder.)
  How were generally accepted standards of practice defined?
  "A psychiatrist's compliance with 'generally accepted standards of
practice' requires him to exercise the same degree of knowledge,
skill, and care as exercised by other psychiatrists in the community
during the time period in question. State Board of Medical Examiners
v. McCroskey, 880 P.2d 1188, 1194(Colo. 1994); Kibler v. State, 719
P.2d 1198 (Colo. App. 1989); Melville v. Southward, 791 P .2d 383, 387
(Colo. 1990). The Board, through its expert witness, provided evidence
of repeated violations by Respondent of generally accepted standards
of practice. Based on this undisputed evidence, the judge found
multiple violations of Section 12-36-117(1)(p)."
  Editorial Comment: The issue of "generally accepted standards of
  practice" is one that has been of great interest to members of the
  FMS Foundation. Skip Simpson, a lawyer in Dallas, has used an
  analogy that may be helpful to our understanding: consider the
  situation in which the speed limit on a highway is 55 mph and a
  policeman stops a driver for doing 65. The driver may say that lots
  of other cars around him were also doing 65. The policeman, however,
  will be unimpressed and note that the speed limit is 55 mph. The
  driver will receive a ticket.
    In a similar way, some recovered memory therapists appear to have
  cut themselves off from the mainstream thinking of the medical
  establishment. Like a driver who says that everyone else was
  speeding, some therapist seem to be in a closed sub-system. Within
  this system, a reason is found to discount any idea or anyone who
  presents alternative explanations. The danger for closed systems is
  that sooner or later they will collide with the mainstream.
  __________________________________________________________________
  In the Matter of the Medical License of Diane B. Humenansky, M.D.,
           Before the Minnesota Board of Medical Practice, 
                    OAH Docket No 12-0903-10686-2, 
           Findings of Fact, Conclusions, and Final Order.
  At a November 1, 1996 hearing before Administrative Law Judge Steve
Mihalchick, psychiatrist Diane Humenansky entered a plea of no contest
to the allegations against her. She does not admit to the allegations,
but by virtue of her entry of a plea of no contest, they are deemed to
be proven true. Since 1992, when the Board initiated its
investigation, the Board received 20 complaints against Humenansky
which allege multiple violations of the Medical Practice Act. (A
discussion of the grounds for action by the Board of Medical Practice
was included in the FMSF Newsletter, Nov./Dec. 1996, p. 6.)
  The Board concluded that Humenansky's conduct would constitute
engaging in medical practice which is professionally incompetent,
engaging in unprofessional conduct and an inability to practice
medicine with reasonable skill and safety to patients. In reaching
this conclusion, the Board summarized the results of previous
fact-finding hearings. It noted that numerous complaints had been
filed, a Board-ordered mental evaluation had determined probable
inability to practice medicine due to a mental condition, two juries
had found Humenansky negligent in failing to meet the recognized
medical standards in the diagnosis, care and treatment of patients,
Humenansky's own insurance company had agreed to out of court
settlements with four former patients who had accused her of planting
false memories of abuse, and four more false memory lawsuits remain
pending against her.
  The Board ordered Humenansky's license be suspended for an
indefinite period of time during which she may not practice medicine
in Minnesota. After three years she may petition for removal of the
suspension, but only after submitting to a mental health evaluation,
participating in individual psychotherapy, and reimbursing the Board
for a portion of its costs incurred by the investigation and
proceedings.
  _________________________________________________________________
  State accuses therapist of abuse: License surrendered: Board says
  Portola Valley psychologist, who denies claims, dominated patients
San Jose Mercury News, California, December 24, 1996 by Daniel Vasquez
  Douglas Detrick, a Portola Valley psychologist who specialized in
treating patients for multiple personality disorder surrendered his
license to the California Board of Psychology under threat that the
license would be revoked. Following a nine month investigation, the
California State Attorney General's Office filed a complaint against
Detrick accusing him of 16 acts of gross negligence in the treatment
of three women patients from 1987 to 1991.
  The first woman, "K.W.", was treated for nearly three years for
multiple personality disorder allegedly brought on by a history of
satanic ritual abuse, sexual abuse and torture. A second woman,
"L.B.", alleged Detrick's heavy use of "abreaction" or reliving of
past abuses, left her in a deteriorated mental state culminating in a
second suicide attempt. The third woman, "M.M.", had been treated up
to two hours a day, five days a week, for nearly two years. Detrick
had her relive satanic ritual abuse allegedly suffered as a
child. "M.M." committed suicide in September 1991.
  Detrick denied the allegations stating, "It's a case of false memory
involving these patients, all of whom are very unstable people....
These people cannot tell the difference between fantasy and reality,
between the past and the present. This class of patients is very
dangerous to treat because of (potential) accusations like these."
  Detrick cannot be criminally prosecuted because the statute of
limitations has expired.
  Editor's note: The San Jose Mercury News article does not seem to
  question the SRA allegations, but is instead written from the
  perspective that the therapist mistreated the three women patients
  because of the methods used to dominate and control them. The author
  notes that the therapist did not provide therapeutic counseling
  after having them relive painful childhood memories, stating, "[T]he
  accusations against Detrick, who has been practicing psychotherapy
  for 19 years, reads like a patient's worst nightmare: Place one's
  trust in a therapist who is supposed to help process and heal the
  horrors of child abuse, only to be mistreated and denied proper
  psychological treatment."

**********************************************************************
                   F R O M   O U R   R E A D E R S
                          __________________
                          Restoring a Family
  I want to express appreciation to you, and to those families who
have shared their personal experiences in the Newsletter. I truly
believe that were it not for the guidance given by other parents, our
family situation today would be different and far worse.
  My daughter retracted. However, I am the only person she has told in
the family. And, true to the input in the Newsletter, we don't talk
about it. Her attitude initially, was that if we had problems with
her false memory period, then that was "our" problem. So, none of us
have discussed it with her. We did all go to her home for
Thanksgiving, though none of us felt like it. She felt hurt that none
of us had chosen her home for our holiday and didn't "get it" when I
tentatively tried to point out "perhaps why." Slowly, everything is
coming together again with the cooperation of all -- and with nothing
said. (Just as parents write in the newsletter.)
  I would surely have given in to my anger -- surely have distanced her
-- were it not for the advice in the newsletter. We might have held out
and not gone to her home for Thanksgiving until she
apologized. Instead, we are healing.
  I want you to know how many people you have helped by forming the
organization and bringing the issue public.
                                                              A Mom
                       _______________________
                       Restoring Relationships
  There seems to be some disagreement among FMSF families as to how --
or whether -- to restore the family relationship and bring the errant
daughter back into the fold. At one extreme, there are those who would
welcome back the accusing child with absolutely no qualifications or
conditions whatsoever. These people are willing to re-establish a
relationship without ever mentioning or coming to terms with the false
memory experience, as if to do so would jeopardize a possible
reconciliation. Thus we hear stories of parents whose daughters begin
visiting or telephoning on the condition that the accusations and the
estrangement never be mentioned. These parents are so desperate to
have a reunion with their lost child -- and perhaps their grandchildren
-- that they are willing to accept almost any terms laid down for
resumption of contact. Many will say that unconditional love is the
key to regaining the lost relationship. I do not criticize these
people in any way. Indeed, I sympathize with them and I respect their
values. I can't even say that I disagree with their position, since I
have seen this approach work in several cases where the family has
once again come together as a close and strong unit.
  At the other end of the spectrum are those who are so outraged and
disgusted by the cruel and malicious treatment they have received from
someone who owes them so much, that they find it impossible to
forgive. It is tempting to say that these people are wrong-minded, but
it's really impossible to make such judgments. As the old Indian adage
would have it, you can't really understand a man until you've walked a
mile in his moccasins.
  The fact is that it's really impossible to come up with a solution
to the family reconciliation problem which would work or apply in
every situation, due to the wide disparity of experiences which vary
from case to case. There is a big difference, for example, in a
situation which simply involves an estrangement for a period of time,
and one in which the accusing child has set out on a program of
malicious persecution, resulting in public slander, loss of
reputation, lawsuits, criminal prosecution, and the like. In the
former situation, the parents feel profound loss, grief and worry for
their sick child. In the latter, although one may experience the same
anxieties, he sooner or later must bear down and concern himself with
self-preservation. Often, as the accuser becomes increasingly
narcissistic, strident and dominated by hatred and malice, it becomes
more difficult for the beset parent to be "understanding" and full of
tender concern for his obviously troubled child. It would be a
naďve misassessment of human nature not to expect that some would
succumb to bitterness, disillusionment and resentment as a result of
such an ordeal.
  My own case fits into the latter category, in that I was subjected
to an extreme hate and persecution campaign which finally culminated
in my winning a lawsuit in federal court brought in another state. Not
only did I suffer many a sleepless night during this ordeal (without
mentioning the expenses I incurred in defending myself against the
false charges), but during the pendency of the suit it became apparent
that it was motivated more by hatred and malice than by a desire for
recompense for the imagined wrongs. My accusing daughter is still
estranged, and I do not know whether she will ever return to sanity
and reality, since she seems to take a perverse satisfaction in the
sympathy and attention she has received in her new identity as a
"survivor" of childhood sexual abuse. I have resolved, however, to be
scrupulously fair with her should she ever decide to come to her
senses and renounce this role. I am quite capable of forgiveness, but
I don't suppose I can ever forget.
  Forgiving and forgetting are two quite different things. One is a
moral act which comes from the heart; the other is an intellectual
function over which one has no real control (unless, of course, one is
capable of "repressing" his memories). Restoration of trust, I
recognize, also fits into the latter category. No matter how one might
wish otherwise, trust has to be earned; it can't be forced or
willed. Declarations of trust and confidence unwarranted by experience
are mere exercises in self-delusion and playacting.
  Consequently, one decision which I have made is to insist upon an
acknowledgement of responsibility as a condition of any future
reconciliation. By responsibility, I do not mean blame or fault. I am
talking about a full, open and honest disclosure as to exactly what
happened and why, together with a willingness to mitigate the damage
done by setting things straight with everyone to whom the falsehoods
were repeated. To demand less, in my opinion, would render the entire
experience meaningless.
  Recovered Memory Therapy is, after all, just scapegoating and
responsibility avoidance pushed to their ultimate limits. One has
problems, but instead of looking inward for a solution to them, one
instead looks outward for someone else to blame them on. Failure to
accept responsibility for the consequences of this behavior is almost
certain to bring about a repetition or continuation of it in one form
or another. One should always bear in mind the truism that if one
fails to learn from history, he will be doomed to repeat it.
  My entire point in all this is simply that there is no one,
universal solution to the reconciliation problem. Every case has to
stand upon its own facts. What works in one will not necessarily work
in another. Again, what may be a very satisfactory resolution in one
situation may be entirely inappropriate in another.
                                                            A Father
                         ____________________
                         Our Cup Runneth Over
  We are so happy to be sharing good news with you. Our daughter has
returned!! Last year, she unexpectedly attended our family reunion
which we have every Thanksgiving. It was the first time we had seen
her in three years. Things went well then, and since that time, we
have had lots of communication....
  What seems strange and yet not strange -- is the lack of tension
between us. Our hearts have truly forgiven the hurts -- and we are
happy to pick up and go forward, so we have not talked about the past
-- and I doubt that we even will. It has never been easy for our
daughter to say she was sorry, but we know by her actions that she is
-- and that is sufficient. We truly believe that our family is whole
again and we Thank God for that blessing.
  We cannot express enough Thanks to you and the FMS Foundation and
the Newsletter. Because of the work all of you have done and the
information you have shared, we have made fewer mistakes than we might
have otherwise, and because we felt the support of "kindred souls" and
knew that we were not alone in this dilemma, it was easier to bear.
You have done such a wonderful job of educating the public, that
thinking people now know the truth about repressed memories and how
evil this whole hoax has been. We will continue our financial support
of FMSF so that others will have the same benefits that were available
to us. Indeed, our cup runneth over!
                                                  A Happy Mom and Dad
                              __________
                              CORRECTION 
  We apologize for a misprint in a letter from a retractor in the
  January issue. We have reprinted the letter with the correct
  information upcased:

  To the mother who responded to my letter,
  I do understand your concern about my letter. It was not intended
just to warm hearts; it was written to plead with families not to shut
their doors eternally to their accusing children. Had that happened to
me, I would never be where I am in recovery today.
  I am sorry my letter was so useless to you. Hope has to come from
within you. All I can do is tell you that time is a major factor in
recovery from FMS. If it takes several years for your child to return,
you may or may not be able to receive them. RETRACTION IS TERRIBLY
PAINFUL, FEARFUL, AND DRAINING; MOST OF US CANNOT DO IT QUICKLY. But
those of us who do eventually retract, need to find that crack in the
door. How else can we all start the healing process?
  There is no magic formula on how to break loose. We all do it in our
own individual ways. My story is no model to apply to others. I wish I
could tell you how I broke loose, but right now I can't. I'm not over
the hump yet, but I am better every month. I pray that your child will
walk the retractor's road and that you will be there to receive them
home.
                                                        A Retractor
                             ____________
                             She Believed
                          Michael Steinberg

  She Believed
  that one third or more of all the men and boys she passed in the
     street
  desired and practiced
  penetrating incest
  and the perpetual unending unendurable unspeakable sexual abuse
  of their sisters
  and their daughters
  and their mothers
  and their babies

  She Believed
  that her father
  and her grandfather
  and her great-grandfather
  and her godfather
  and her uncles
  and her brothers
  and her neighbors
  and her pastor
  and her professors
  had raped
  and beaten
  and tortured
  and murdered
  and satanically ritually abused her
  and dozens
  of innocent women and children and babies
  for decades,
  wiping the memory clean,
  freshly, every day
  every month
  every year
  for decades,
  from her consciousness

  She Believed
  the police
  and the newspapers
  and the media
  and the FBI
  and the government itself
  were run
  were influenced
  were penetrated
  by this all powerful
  ancient
  mind controlling
  evil
  obsessive
  and abusive
  inherently patriarchal
  Devil worshipping cult,
  which had existed for centuries
  and had daily erased the memories
  of thousands of helpless victims

  She Believed this now
  because her well respected therapist
  and the founding feminist icon
  role model to millions of young women
  and all her new friends
  and her
  satanic ritual cult survivors extended family,
  and all the books she was now allowed to read
  and her almost daily therapy
  of resurrecting and reliving
  hypnotic and drug induced recovered memories"
  of unspeakable horror,
  and the ever growing number of multiple personalities
  which she and her therapist believed
  inhabited her body
  old her so

  Told her that finally
  after a lifetime
  of denial and abuse
  and unspeakable horror
  that now
  she had recovered,
  the Courage to Heal

**********************************************************************
                        FMSF   M E E T I N G S
  (MO) = monthly; (bi-MO) = bi-monthly; (*) = see State Meetings list

                           *STATE MEETINGS*
             Call persons listed for info & registration
                               _______
                               ONTARIO
                     Saturday, May 10, @ 1:30 pm
                     Speaker: Pamela Freyd, Ph.D.
                          Pat (416) 445-1995
_____________
UNITED STATES

ALASKA
        Bob (907) 586-2469
ARIZONA
       (bi-MO) Barbara (602) 924-0975; 854-0404(fax)
ARKANSAS
Little Rock
        Al & Lela (501) 363-4368
CALIFORNIA
  Sacramento - (quarterly)
        Joanne & Gerald (916) 933-3655
        Rudy (916)443-4041
  San Fransico & North Bay - (bi-MO)
        Gideon (415) 389-0254 or
        Charles 984-6626(am); 435-9618(pm)
  East Bay Area - (bi-MO)
        Judy (510) 254-2605
  South Bay Area - Last Sat. (bi-MO)
        Jack & Pat (408) 425-1430
        3rd Sat. (bi-MO) @10am
        Cecilia(310) 545-6064
  Central Coast
        Carole (805) 967-8058
  Central Orange County - 1st Fri. (MO) @ 7pm
        Chris & Alan (714) 733-2925
  Orange County - 3rd Sun. (MO) @6pm
        Jerry & Eileen (714) 494-9704
  Covina Area - 1st Mon. (MO) @7:30pm
        Floyd & Libby (818) 330-2321
  San Diego Area  -
        Flossie (619) 941-4816
COLORADO
  Denver  - 4th Sat. (MO) @1pm
        Art (303) 572-0407
CONNECTICUT
  S. New England  - (bi-MO) Sept-May
        Earl (203) 329-8365 or
        Paul (203) 458-9173
FLORIDA
  Dade/Broward
        Madeline (305) 966-4FMS
  Boca/Delray  - 2nd & 4th Thurs (MO) @1pm
        Helen (407) 498-8684
  Central Florida  - 4th Sun. (MO) @2:30 pm
        John & Nancy (352) 750-5446
  Tampa Bay Area
        Bob & Janet (813) 856-7091
ILLINOIS
  Chicago & Suburbs  - 3rd Sun. (MO)
        Eileen (847) 985-7693
  Joliet
        Bill & Gayle (815) 467-6041
  Rest of Illinois
        Bryant & Lynn (309) 674-2767
INDIANA
  Indiana Friends of FMS
        Nickie (317) 471-0922; (317) 334-9839 (fax)
        Pat (219) 482-2847
IOWA
  Des Moines - 2nd Sat. (MO) @11:30 am Lunch
        Betty & Gayle (515) 270-6976
KANSAS
  Kansas City
        Leslie (913) 235-0602 or
        Pat (913) 738-4840
        Jan (816) 931-1340
KENTUCKY
  Covington
        Dixie (606) 356-9309
  Louisville- Last Sun. (MO) @ 2pm
        Bob (502) 957-2378
LOUISIANA
        Francine (318) 457-2022
MAINE
  Bangor
        Irvine & Arlene (207) 942-8473
  Freeport -  4th Sun. (MO)
        Carolyn  (207) 364-8891
MARYLAND
  Ellicot City Area
        Margie (410) 750-8694
MASSACHUSETTS/NEW ENGLAND
  Chelmsford
        Ron (508) 250-9756
MICHIGAN
  Grand Rapids Area-Jenison - 1st Mon. (MO)
        Bill & Marge (616) 383-0382
  Greater Detroit Area - 3rd Sun. (MO)
        Nancy (810) 642-8077
MINNESOTA
        Terry & Collette (507) 642-3630
        Dan & Joan (612) 631-2247
MISSOURI
  Kansas City  -  2nd Sun. (MO)
        Leslie (913) 235-0602 or Pat 738-4840
        Jan (816) 931-1340
  St. Louis Area  -  3rd Sun. (MO)
        Karen (314) 432-8789
        Mae (314) 837-1976
  Retractors group also forming
  Springfield - 4th Sat. (MO) @12:30pm
        Dorothy & Pete (417) 882-1821
        Howard (417) 865-6097
        John (352) 750-5446
MONTANA
        Lee & Avone (406) 443-3189
NEW JERSEY (So.)
  See Wayne, PA
NEW MEXICO
  Albuquerque  - 1st  Sat. (MO) @1 pm
Southwest Room -Presbyterian Hospital
        Maggie (505) 662-7521(after 6:30 pm)
        or Martha 624-0225
NEW YORK
  Westchester, Rockland, etc. - (bi-MO)
        Barbara (914) 761-3627
  Upstate/Albany Area  - (bi-MO)
        Elaine (518) 399-5749
  Western/Rochester Area -  (bi-MO)
        George & Eileen (716) 586-7942
OKLAHOMA
  Oklahoma City
        Len (405) 364-4063
        Dee (405) 942-0531
        HJ (405) 755-3816
        Rosemary (405) 439-2459
PENNSYLVANIA
  Harrisburg
        Paul & Betty (717) 691-7660
  Pittsburgh
        Rick & Renee (412) 563-5616
  Montrose
        John (717) 278-2040
  Wayne (includes S. NJ) - 2nd Sat. @1pm
        Jim & Jo (610) 783-0396
TENNESSEE
  Wed. (MO) @1pm
        Kate (615) 665-1160
TEXAS
  Central Texas
        Nancy & Jim (512) 478-8395
  Houston
        Jo or Beverly (713) 464-8970
UTAH
        Keith (801) 467-0669
VERMONT
        (bi-MO) Judith (802) 229-5154
VIRGINIA
        Sue (703) 273-2343
WEST VIRGINIA
        Pat (304) 291-6448
WISCONSIN
        Katie & Leo (414) 476-0285
        Susanne & John (608) 427-3686
_____________
INTERNATIONAL

BRITISH COLUMBIA, CANADA
  Vancouver & Mainland - Last Sat. (MO) @ 1- 4pm
        Ruth (604) 925-1539
  Victoria & Vancouver Island - 3rd Tues. (MO) @7:30pm
        John (604) 721-3219
MANITOBA, CANADA
  Winnipeg
        Joan (204) 284-0118
ONTARIO, CANADA (*)
  London -2nd Sun (bi-MO)
        Adriaan (519) 471-6338
  Ottawa
        Eileen (613) 836-3294
  Toronto /N. York
        Pat (416) 444-9078
  Warkworth
        Ethel (705) 924-2546
  Burlington
        Ken & Marina (905) 637-6030
  Sudbury
        Paula (705) 692-0600
QUEBEC, CANADA
  Montreal
        Alain (514) 335-0863
  St. André Est.
        Mavis (514) 537-8187
AUSTRALIA
        Irene (03) 9740 6930
ISRAEL
  FMS ASSOCIATION fax-(972) 2-259282 or
  E-mail-  fms@netvision.net.il
NETHERLANDS
  Task Force FMS of Werkgroep Fictieve Herinneringen
        Anna (31) 20-693-5692
NEW ZEALAND
        Colleen (09) 416-7443
SWEDEN
        Ake Moller FAX (48) 431-217-90
UNITED KINGDOM
  The British False Memory Society
        Roger Scotford (44) 1225 868-682
           ________________________________________________
           Deadline for the March Newsletter is February 13
                 Meeting notices MUST be in  writing. 

**********************************************************************
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
|          Do you have access to e-mail?  Send a message to          |
|                         pjf@cis.upenn.edu                          |
| if  you wish to receive electronic versions of this newsletter and |
| notices of radio and television  broadcasts  about  FMS.  All  the |
| message need say is "add to the FMS-News". You'll also learn about |
| joining  the  FMS-Research list  (it distributes reseach materials |
| such as news stories, court decisions and research  articles).  It |
| would be useful, but not necessary, if you add your full name (all |
| addresses and names will remain strictly confidential).            |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
**********************************************************************
  The False Memory Syndrome Foundation is a qualified 501(c)3 corpora-
tion  with  its  principal offices in Philadelphia and governed by its 
Board of Directors.  While it encourages participation by its  members
in  its  activities,  it must be understood that the Foundation has no 
affiliates and that no other organization or person is  authorized  to
speak for the Foundation without the prior written approval of the Ex-
ecutive Director. All membership dues and contributions to the Founda-
tion must be forwarded to the Foundation for its disposition.
**********************************************************************

Pamela Freyd, Ph.D.,  Executive Director

FMSF Scientific and Professional  Advisory Board,    February 1, 1997:
AARON T. BECK, M.D., D.M.S., University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia,
PA;  TERENCE W.  CAMPBELL,  Ph.D.,  Clinical and Forensic  Psychology,
Sterling Heights,  MI; ROSALIND CARTWRIGHT,  Ph.D., Rush  Presbyterian
St. Lukes Medical Center, Chicago, IL; JEAN CHAPMAN, Ph.D., University
of   Wisconsin, Madison,  WI;    LOREN CHAPMAN,  Ph.D.,  University of
Wisconsin, Madison, WI;    FREDERICK C.  CREWS,   Ph.D., University of
California, Berkeley,   CA; ROBYN M.    DAWES,  Ph.D., Carnegie Mellon
University,  Pittsburgh,  PA; DAVID F.   DINGES,  Ph.D., University of
Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA; HENRY C.   ELLIS, Ph.D., University of
New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM; GEORGE K. GANAWAY, M.D., Emory University
of Medicine, Atlanta,  GA; MARTIN GARDNER, Author,  Hendersonville, NC
ROCHEL GELMAN, Ph.D., University of California, Los Angeles, CA; HENRY
GLEITMAN, Ph.D., University   of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia,  PA; LILA
GLEITMAN, Ph.D., University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA; RICHARD
GREEN, M.D., J.D., Charing Cross  Hospital, London; DAVID A. HALPERIN,
M.D., Mount Sinai School  of Medicine, New  York, NY; ERNEST  HILGARD,
Ph.D., Stanford  University, Palo Alto, CA;   JOHN HOCHMAN, M.D., UCLA
Medical School, Los Angeles, CA; DAVID S. HOLMES, Ph.D., University of
Kansas, Lawrence, KS; PHILIP  S.  HOLZMAN, Ph.D., Harvard  University,
Cambridge,   MA; ROBERT A.  KARLIN,  Ph.D.   , Rutgers University, New
Brunswick,  NJ;   HAROLD  LIEF,  M.D.,  University    of Pennsylvania,
Philadelphia, PA; ELIZABETH  LOFTUS, Ph.D., University  of Washington,
Seattle,   WA; SUSAN L.   McELROY,  M.D.   , University of Cincinnati,
Cincinnati,   OH;  PAUL    McHUGH,  M.D.,   Johns  Hopkins University,
Baltimore, MD;  HAROLD  MERSKEY, D.M., University  of Western Ontario,
London, Canada;  SPENCER  HARRIS  MORFIT, Author, Boxboro,   MA; ULRIC
NEISSER, Ph.D.,  Emory University, Atlanta,  GA; RICHARD OFSHE, Ph.D.,
University  of  California, Berkeley,  CA;   EMILY CAROTA ORNE,  B.A.,
University  of Pennsylvania,   Philadelphia, PA;  MARTIN  ORNE,  M.D.,
Ph.D., University  of Pennsylvania,  Philadelphia, PA; LOREN PANKRATZ,
Ph.D.,   Oregon  Health Sciences  University,  Portland,  OR; CAMPBELL
PERRY,  Ph.D.,  Concordia   University, Montreal,  Canada;  MICHAEL A.
PERSINGER, Ph.D.,  Laurentian University,  Ontario, Canada;  AUGUST T.
PIPER, Jr.,   M.D., Seattle, WA;  HARRISON   POPE, Jr.,  M.D., Harvard
Medical  School,  Boston,  MA;  JAMES   RANDI,  Author and   Magician,
Plantation,   FL; HENRY L.    ROEDIGER,  III, Ph.D.  ,Rice University,
Houston,  TX; CAROLYN  SAARI, Ph.D., Loyola   University, Chicago, IL;
THEODORE   SARBIN, Ph.D., University of    California, Santa Cruz, CA;
THOMAS A.  SEBEOK, Ph.D., Indiana University, Bloomington, IN; MICHAEL
A.    SIMPSON,  M.R.C.S.,   L.R.C.P.,   M.R.C,   D.O.M., Center    for
Psychosocial &   Traumatic Stress,  Pretoria, South   Africa; MARGARET
SINGER, Ph.D., University of California, Berkeley, CA; RALPH SLOVENKO,
J.D.,  Ph.D., Wayne State University   Law School, Detroit, MI; DONALD
SPENCE, Ph.D.,  Robert Wood  Johnson  Medical Center,  Piscataway, NJ;
JEFFREY VICTOR,  Ph.D.,  Jamestown Community  College, Jamestown,  NY;
HOLLIDA   WAKEFIELD,  M.A.,   Institute   of Psychological  Therapies,
Northfield, MN; CHARLES A. WEAVER, III, Ph.D. Baylor University, Waco,
TX.

**********************************************************************
   Y E A R L Y   FMSF   M E M B E R S H I P   I N F O R M A T I O N
				   
Professional - Includes Newsletter       $125_______

Family - Includes Newsletter             $100_______

                       Additional Contribution:_____________

PLEASE FILL OUT ALL INFORMATION

___VISA:  Card: #________-________-________-________ exp. date ___/___

___MASTER CARD: #________-________-________-________ exp. date ___/___

___Check or Money Order: Payable to FMS FOUNDATION IN U.S. DOLLARS.


______________________________________________________________________
Signature


______________________________________________________________________
Name (PLEASE PRINT)


______________________________________________________________________
Street Address or P.O.Box


______________________________________________________________________
City                                 State         Zip+4


(_____)_____________________________(_____)___________________________
Telephone                           FAX

**********************************************************************
**********************************************************************
      M E M O R Y   A N D   R E A L I T Y:   N E X T   S T E P S
          M E E T I N G    R E G I S T R A T I O N   F O R M

PLEASE  COMPLETE  AND MAIL TO: False Memory Syndrome Foundation, 3401
Market, Ste 130, Philadelphia, PA 19104-3315. Include a check payable
to False Memory Syndrome Foundation. FAX: (215) 387-1917 (for  credit
card registrations only)

                       Please print or type


______________________________________________________________________
first name                middle initial              last name/degree


______________________________________________________________________
first name, middle initial and last name (for additional attendees -
   family registration only)


______________________________________________________________________
mailing address


______________________________________________________________________
city                                    state             zip + 4 code

REGISTRATION  FEES
                                          before         after
                                          3/1/97        3/1/97
FMS  FOUNDATION  MEMBERS
Professional/Family                    $100/person   $125/person
Additional family member                $50/person    $60/person

NON-MEMBERS
Professional/Family                    $175/person   $200/person
Student* or additional family members   $50/person    $60/person
(*Attach photocopy of student ID)

For Credit Card Registration       ____VISA           ____MasterCard

Card #__ __ __ __-__ __ __ __-__ __ __ __-__ __ __ __ Exp Date _______

Name _________________________________________________________________
  as it appears on card; please print

Signature ____________________________________Date ___________________

Let us know if you have any special needs.