FMSF NEWSLETTER ARCHIVE - July/August 1, 1995 - Vol. 4, No. 7, HTML version

Return to FMSF Home Page

3401 Market Street suite 130,  Philadelphia, PA 19104,  (215-387-1865)

This address and the phone numbers have changed as of July 15, 2000
    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. Others may subscribe by  sending  a
    check  or  money  order, payable to FMS Foundation, to the ad-
    dress above. 1994  subscription  rates: USA: 1 year $30,  Stu-
    dent $10; Canada: $35 (in U.S. dollars); Foreign: $40; Foreign 
    student $20; Single issue price: $3. ISSN #1069-0484
       International Conference
         Legal Corner
           From Our Readers

Dear Friends,


  The British Psychological Society (BPS) conducted a survey of its
membership in conjunction with its report, "Recovered Memories: Report
of the Working Party of the BPS" issued in January, 1995. The survey,
"BPS Questionnaire on Memories of Early Sexual Abuse," was sent to all
4005 clinical members of the BPS in February, 1994. There were 1083
returns and the results were based on 810 members who indicated they
had clients claiming child sexual abuse. The results of that survey
have only recently been published ("The recovery of memories in
clinical practice: Experiences and beliefs of British Psychological
Society practitioners," The Psychologist, May 1995, 109-214). Two
pieces of bad news:

  #14 To what extent do you think that recovered memories of CSA
  [childhood sexual abuse] events from total amnesia can be taken as
  essentially accurate?_

       never 3%,  sometimes 53%,  usually 38%,  always 6%

  #17 To what extent do you think that clients' reports of having
  experienced satanistic ritual abuse can be taken as essentially

       never 3%,  sometimes 54%,  usually 38%,  always 5%

But the really bad news is the way that the BPS Working Party chose to
treat this information in its January report. Question #14 led to the
following remarkable conclusion (page 29):

  * There are high levels of belief in the essential accuracy of
  recovered memories of child sexual abuse among qualified
  psychologists. These beliefs appear to be fuelled by high levels of
  experience of recovered memories both for CSA and for non-CSA
  traumatic events. The non-doctrinaire nature of these beliefs is
  indicated by the high level of acceptance of the possibility of
  false memories.

One would naturally expect a similar conclusion based on #17, about
high levels of belief in the essential accuracy of recovered memories
of satanistic ritual abuse.

  There was no such paragraph. Indeed, the January report made no
mention at all of the extent of belief in satanic ritual abuse. The
distribution of responses to #17 were not mentioned. THE VERY

THAT's the really bad news.

Actually there's even more. Two other results from the survey (page

  # 5 Do you ever use hypnotic regression to uncover traumatic
                                            y = 10%

  #9 Of these [clients who had reported history of child sexual
  abuse], have any experienced remembering CSA from total amnesia --
  i.e. no conscious knowledge of the occurrence of the event while in
  therapy with you?
                                            y = 23%

  How were these results reported five months earlier in the report?
They were not reported. Instead, the BPS Working Party stated in its
Executive summary of the report (page 3):

  * ...There is no reliable evidence at present that this is a
  widespread phenomenon in the UK.

Bad news indeed.

  (The members of the BPS Working Party are listed as: Bernice Andrews,
John Morton, Debra A. Bekerian , Chris R. Brewin, Graham M. Davies, and
Phil Mollon.)


  "The American Psychiatric Association believes that past life
  regression therapy is pure quackery. As in other areas of medicine,
  psychiatric diagnosis and treatment today is based on objective
  scientific evidence.  There is no accepted scientific evidence to
  support the existence of past lives let alone the validity of past
  life regression therapy." 
                                                     Mel Sabshin, MD
            Medical Director of the American Psychiatric Association 
                                    _Chicago Tribune,_ June 21, 1995

  It seems incredible that such a statement needed to be made. But it
was desperately needed. On the very day that we received Sabshin's
statement, it was sent to families whose children have cut off all
contact because they believe that they had been sexually abused in a
past life. Would these people have entered past life therapy if they
had known that the American Psychiatric Association considered it
"pure quackery?"
  The assumptions and practices of "regression" therapies have been
central to the critiques made by the False Memory Syndrome Foundation.
We have asked for evidence for the validity of any regression
therapies. No evidence has been provided. On the contrary, evidence
has been presented that indicates the humiliating absurdity of its
use. What more is needed than the visual image from "Divided Memories"
(Frontline, April 4, 1995) of the woman crawling on the floor
reenacting her belief that she had been stuck in a fallopian tube?
  The public deserves access to therapy that is safe and effective. We
expect nothing less from other branches of medicine, from our water
supply or from any needed services. The public should accept nothing
less from therapy.

  We don't seem to have a summer lull in the office. First-time
telephone calls from people who tell us they have been falsely accused
have averaged between 25 and 30 a week for many months. News of
retractions and returners has been steady but has not yet reached the
rate of calls from accused families. Telephone calls from
professionals who want information range between 20 and 50 a week. In
addition, calls from lawyers, legal researchers, families and former
patients concerned with legal ramifications of repressed memories take
approximately 60 hours of staff time a week. It takes two people at
least an hour each day to open and sort the mail.
  We have recently completed the annual external audit and will
include Foundation financial information in the September newsletter.
We have established a Speakers Bureau and are developing programs for
continuing education. FMSF staff have completed articles, book
chapters, briefs and presentations.
  Media coverage has been steady and indicates that the predicted
shift to a legal focus of the recovered memory controversy is well
underway. The survey and method of reporting of the British
Psychological Society show why the this shift is taking place. It is
because of the inability or unwillingness of some of the professional
organizations to accept responsibility and to address the needs of
families and clients devastated by recovered memory therapy.  

/                                                                    \
|                    Commenting on the BPS Report                    |
| "I am immensely proud of my profession when it opens up new        |
| research inroads and gathers empirical evidence with analytical    |
| criteria for a range of basic and applied psychological issues.    |
| But I despair when it indulges in issuing dogmatic assertions,     |
| barren of evidence, with an undeserved air of authority, all too   |
| easily judged to be self-serving. This helps neither the public    |
| nor the profession."                                               |
|                                    Larry Weiskrantz                |
|                                   _The Times_, April 11, 1995      |

                           LEGISLATIVE NEWS
                Therapy critic hears practice concerns
                        APA Monitor, July 1995
                       Russ Newman, Ph.D., J.D.

  In this column, Dr. Newman describes meeting with Christopher
Barden, Ph.D., J.D. to discuss the legislative initiatives started by
Dr. Barden's group, the National Association for Consumer Protection
in Mental Health Practice. Model legislation was introduced this past
year in New Hampshire, Illinois and Missouri based on Barden's
efforts. In New Hampshire the bill was put on hold until the next
legislative session. In Missouri, the bill was delayed pending
completion of work by a task force and in Illinois, the bill was
defeated in committee.
  The APA had been concerned that the legislation would include a
requirement for audio or video recording of informed consent sessions.
This requirement was not included in any of the three bills. The
Barden proposals cover three main areas: courtroom testimony by mental
health experts, informed-consent procedures, and the identification of
safe and effective treatment interventions. According to Dr. Newman,
there is room for the American Psychological Association to negotiate
with Barden in each of these areas.
  Dr. Newman expressed concern that the APA's Council of
Representatives allocation of $750,000 in 1996 had been
inappropriately confused with the $18,000 allocated to monitor FMS
advocates. He stated that the $750,000 funds were to better inform
consumers about the many services psychologists provide, the training
and the expertise they bring with these services, and the value of
psychological interventions.  (Editor's comment: Given the results of
several surveys (e.g., the BPS Questionnaire on Memories of Early
Sexual Abuse, 1995, Poole, 1995, Yapko, 1994) relative to
widespread beliefs and practices of therapists regard of repress
memories, given the increase in lawsuits against therapists where
repressed memories are an issue, perhaps the APA should allocate funds
to educate its members and then worry about educating the public.)

                    Netherlands, June 28-30, 1995

  Professionals and families from the following countries attended the
conference: Australia, Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Finland,
Hungary, Ireland, Luxembourg, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway,
Sweden, United Kingdom, United States.  The concerns of participants
were in three areas: custody rights, situations in which children were
removed from their families without proper investigation and false
memory syndrome.  There were approximately 80 participants including
judges, lawyers, therapists, research psychologists, sociologists,
writers, child protective workers, and parents. The aim of the
conference was to begin to look for solutions to the problems that
exist and to find ways to share information in what looks more and
more like a world health problem.
  Talks were given on a wide variety of issues. From the FMSF Advisory
Board, Richard Ofshe spoke about the abdication of responsibility on
the part of health care professionals, Jeffrey Victor provided several
guiding principles that may help to break the jam of closed system
thinking and Hollida Wakefield spoke about the new research on
interviewing children and on suggestibility.
  The similarity of the problems in all countries seemed at first
shocking.  Besides the well-known problems of misuse of interviewing
techniques and the substitution of validation for investigation, a
major problem in all countries is obtaining adequate and accurate
statistics about child abuse and treatment. As the meeting progressed
it became clear that the spread of some of the problems could be
traced in large part to professional-training conferences.
Unfortunately, new ideas and techniques seem to have been introduced
at training meetings by professionals who had not adequately
researched the consequences of the use of their ideas and techniques.
In the United States, the spread of satanic ritual abuse beliefs has
been documented by Victor, 1993 and the spread of multiple personality
disorder has been described by Mulhern, 1991. The spread of satanic
ritual abuse beliefs in United Kingdom can be traced to the visits of
some American therapists. Conference participants described the spread
of the use of 'anatomically correct dolls' in the Scandinavian
countries one particular lecturer from England.
  Horror stories of young children held hostage by overzealous child
protective workers emerged. From Norway a television documentary
showed interviews with a four-year old (Nikko) who was removed from
his family. Not only was Nikko at one time kept for hours with only
naked 'anatomically correct' dolls for play, in another segment he
could be heard begging to go to sleep as an interviewer kept badgering
him. To this writer such treatment seems more accurately described as
human rights violations than child protection. Astrid Holgerson,
forensic psychologist from Sweden, presented examples of interviews in
cases in Sweden in which she has been consulted. For example:

  Professional: Now I shall put these "if-questions," you know.
  Child:  -- Yes
  Pr: -- So, I say: "If you should have been in Per's home" -- what do
      you think it would have looked like in his home?
  Child: -- (Cannot answer but says that she has seen one of his rooms
      on television.)
  Pr: -- But IF YOU SHOULD GUESS what it...or what you think it might
      have looked like in Per's home -- If you had been there. Do you
      remember that?
  Child:  --  I HAVEN'T BEEN THERE, you know that.
  Pr:  -- Yes, but WHAT DO YOU THINK?
  Child:  -- It must have been a kitchen and a room, anyway.

  Important research was presented by David Thorep and Corinne Wattan,
both from the Applied Social Sciences at Lancaster University, UK.
They have studied the child protection services in communities in
Western Australia and in Wales over a 5-year period. Two important
findings have emerged. In the Australian study, there was a 300%
increase in numbers of children referred for child protection
investigation during the five years -- probably as a result of
mandatory reporting. Yet the number of children deemed seriously
harmed or neglected remained the same throughout the period. In other
words, a huge number of children were put through child protective
investigations but no greater number of children received help.  The
second finding focused on how child protective workers determine
whether cases are "founded" or "unfounded."  While a number of obvious
factors enter into founded cases such as age, alleged harm and
disclosure, the most influential single factor in determining whether
a child came into care was maternal response -- whether she was judged
to have the ability to protect. As Steven Ceci and Maggie Bruck's work
has opened up the window on individual child interviewing, so the work
of Thorep and Wattan seem to provide important insights into the
working of the systems that must be corrected if child welfare is to
get back on track.
  Participants at this conference have determined to remain in contact
and to continue to work to bring the greatest help possible to
children and families.  

                       Charles Whitfield, M.D. 
            writes the truth for therapists and survivors.

"It was clear that Isabella, Rose and the others were not heard and
judged by a jury of their peers. These 12 were not therapists, and
none of them was known to be in recovery, so they probably would not
have known much about the recovery process. Even if the jury had been
peers, how many would have had expertise in trauma psychology and
recovery? The jury selection process was supposed to have screened out
anyone who had a personal or family history of sexual abuse. But it
was later revealed that three of them did have a family history of
sexual abuse, and two of these voted strongly against the therapists.
One of these two had even refused to deliberate, since she had already
made up her mind at the start of the trial. And what about any of the
jury who were abused as children and were not yet aware of it?"
                                                  Charles Whifield, MD
                           _Truth about Abuse_ Vol 1 No 4 (newsletter) 
                                A memory based suit against therapists 
                    (from _Memory and Abuse_, 1995, Charles Whitfield)

                      GUIDELINES FOR THERAPISTS
      On what grounds are former RMT patients bringing lawsuits?

  We have received several queries in the past month asking about the
grounds on which former recovered memory therapy (RMT) patients are
bringing lawsuits. We now know that there were more than 200 lawsuits
filed against professionals on the basis of repressed memories in 1994
and that this number is expected to rise dramatically in the next few
years. We know that these cases may cost as much as $700,000 to defend.
(National Psychologist, Vol 4 #3, May/June 1995). We have learned that
the awards or settlements seem to range from about $80,000 to 5-million
  These queries have come at a time when therapists and clients alike
have been discussing the need for improved guidelines, yet the
lawsuits indicate that even basic "standards of care" are not being
met. The problem appears to be that in the past decade, professionals
and professional organizations have abdicated their responsibility for
monitoring as some practitioners have drifted away from the
established guidelines of practice.
  As we have read the specific charges in suits filed against
therapists, we have found that they seem to fall into broader issues
that have come up over and over during the recovered memory
discussion. Following are the major issues that we see and some
specific examples for each.

1. Responsibility of a professional to provide an appropriate diagnosis.

* Defendant negligently failed to follow appropriate guidelines for
  evaluating and treating patients with symptoms such as those
  manifested by the Plaintiff.
* Defendant failed to take a proper history from the Plaintiff.
* Defendant failed to perform appropriate examinations and diagnostic
* Defendant failed to recognize Plaintiff's underlying psychiatric

2. Responsibility of a professional to provide appropriate treatment. 

* Defendant breached standard of reasonable care expected because of
  profession and claimed expertise.
* Defendant negligently failed to properly monitor Plaintiff's ongoing
  symptoms and the degeneration of her/his mental condition.
* Defendant negligently failed to consult with other professionals
  regarding the appropriate diagnosis, evaluation, treatment and care
  of Plaintiff.

3.  Responsibility to use techniques appropriately and for
    understanding their limitations.

* Defendant negligently misused hypnosis techniques on Plaintiff.
* Defendant misused drugs, medications, hypnosis and/or sodium amytal
  which would be expected to increase Plaintiff's responsiveness to
* Defendant uncritically accepted the existence of "repressed"
  memories of child sexual abuse in Plaintiff without making any
  effort to obtain independent verification for the truth or falsity
  of such "memories."
* Defendant misapplied the concepts of "denial" and "resistance" in
  the treatment of Plaintiff.
* Defendant failed to explore and/or recognize the effects of his/her
  own beliefs on Plaintiff.

4. Responsibility not to extend therapy unnecessarily.

* Defendant negligently undertook and sustained a course of treatment
  which improperly and inappropriately extended the length of the
  course of Plaintiff's treatment.
* Defendant failed to discharge Plaintiff from the hospital when it
  was apparent that conditions did not require inpatient treatment.

5. Responsibility to obtain informed consent from patients.

* Defendant negligently and carelessly failed to inform the Plaintiff
  of the risks of his/her chosen treatment techniques.
* Defendant failed to warn Plaintiff of the possibility of an adverse
  psychiatric condition.
* Defendant failed to advise Plaintiff that the techniques utilized
  had the capacity to produce false memories of events which never
  occurred but which nevertheless may seem real to the patient.
* Defendant failed to adequately advise Plaintiff of experimental
  nature of drug regime and of possible side-effects of the use of
  prescribed psychotropic drugs in combination with others.
* Defendant failed to advise Plaintiff that the diagnosis of multiple
  personality disorder is controversial and that there are disputes
  within the mental health community as to its existence.
* Defendant failed to advise Plaintiff that a person can be taught to
  display behaviors of "multiple personality disorder" through the use
  of psychotherapy (iotrogenesis).
* Defendant dissuaded Plaintiff from seeking services from other
  mental health professionals or from seeking a second opinion.

6. Responsibility of hospital, clinic or other entity to adequately
   supervise the activities of mental health care workers they employ.

  The complaints in the cases brought by former RMT patients generally
are very basic and simple and point to a failure at the level of
diagnosis or a failure at monitoring a patient's progress. The
following malpractice case was reported recently in California.

/                                                                    \
|                           BEFORE THERAPY                           |
|                                                                    |
| To Her Dad:                                                        |
|  "I could not have expressed my feelings more accurately that this |
| card: So thanks for being just the way you are...You'll never know |
| how much it means to have a father just like you."                 |
|                                                                    |
| To Her Mom:                                                        |
|  "You have always encouraged me and have been proud of me as a     |
| person -- I love you for that and I hope I have done the same for  |
| you because I love you very very much."                            |
|                                                                    |
|                           AFTER THERAPY                            |
|                                                                    |
|  "Remembering that I was sexually abused has caused me to question |
| everything and everyone in my life. Although I loved and cared     |
| about you two at one time, now I have only anger and mistrust...   |
| Until I get a clearer picture of who did this to me, I wish to     |
| have no contact with either of you...About the only thing that I   |
| want from you now is money. ..Because of this crime against my     |
| soul, my recovery will probably take two or three years."          |

  Dr. Roderick D. Ponath of Santa Ana treated a patient 12 years for 
'hysterical neurosis.' An eye exam helped detect her muscle disorder.
                  _Los Angeles Times_, July 2, 1995 
                              Lee Romney

  In 1978, Bonnie Burke was diagnosed as having a 'hysterical
neurosis' disorder. Her symptoms included having her legs fail her or
not being able to raise her arm to brush her teeth. Sometimes she was
too weak to make the office visit and she was treated mostly by
telephone. Burke stated that she would feel like, "There must be
something in my mind somewhere that I'm not dealing with." According
to the article, "she blamed herself and searched her past for the
repressed anger that Ponath said was destroying her life."
  Dr. Ponath testified that Burke confirmed his diagnosis over the
years by raising issues from her childhood that she thought could be
linked to her physical weakness.  Ponath never referred Bonnie to
another psychiatrist or neurologist for a second opinion, nor did he
ever consult with another doctor to confirm his diagnosis. According
to Burke's lawyer, when Bonnie asked why she was not improving, he
would tell her that she was not trying hard enough, that she had to
believe in him and have confidence in his therapy or else her
condition would not improve.
  During her 12 years of treatment from ages 27 to 39, she came to
believe that the problem lay within her and that she simply wasn't
trying hard enough to overcome her hidden anger. She is said to have
kept detailed diaries in the hope of discovering some childhood
  During a routine visit to have her eyes checked in 1990, the
opthalmologist noticed she could not keep up her eyelids. She was
tested and found to have myasthenia gravis, a muscle disorder. She
began restoring muscle strength within 20 minutes of receiving

                         INTERESTING READING
         The dark truth about the "Dark Tunnels of McMartin"
       _Issues in Child Abuse Accusations _Vol 7, No 2, 76-131
                              John Earl

  "If the McMartin tunnels really existed, the theory goes, the
alleged child victims may have told the truth about everything else.
That in turn, reflects well upon the credibility of alleged child
victims and adult survivors of other ritual abuse cases." (page 93)

  The "Dark Tunnels of McMartin" in the title refers to an article by
Roland Summit, MD, in _The Journal of Psychohistory,_ 21 (4), Spring
1994, 397-416. Roland Summit, creator of the child abuse accommodation
syndrome, holds a special place of respect among child abuse
professionals around the world. He has continued to make public and
written statements on the existence of the tunnels in spite of a lack
of evidence. In "Dark Tunnels," Summit refers to "Hard-won
documentation of physical evidence."  The reference is to research by
Gary Stickel that alleges the tunnels exist.  Earl's article
critically examines Stickel and his claims. Stickel and the tunnel
theory are both discredited.
         Spectral Evidence -- Fear and Ignorance in the Court 
                _The Therapist_, Spring 1995 pp 13-15
                           Margaret Jervis

  "In 1693 the Salem witch-hunt withered away not because the hysteria
had run its course, but because a type of evidence, known as
'spectral' was declared inadmissible by the courts...The modern
secular equivalent of spectral evidence is recovered repressed
memories of sexual abuse. Such evidence is usually, but not
necessarily, therapeutically excavated. Its power resides in the
obscene nature of its content.  It is vivid, emotive, and convincingly
articulated with clear details to convey the picture in the listener's
mind of obscene sexual acts....[readers] may be unaware that they have
been swept along by the force of the imagination, because, stunned by
the power of the image, they experience a minor form of secondary
                         How to Spot a Witch
                  _Civilization,_ March/April, 1995
                            Adam Goodheart

  This one page article about witch-hunting describes the _Malleus
Maleficarum (Hammer of Witches_) a comprehensive witch-hunting guide
published in 1486.  The existence of _Malleus Maleficarum _is an ever
constant reminder that even though a tidy set of directions has been
devised to identify something, it does not mean that the "something"
actually exists. The author notes how asking the right questions can
guarantee finding a witch. Such questions are of the "How long have
you been a witch?" variety.
  To FMSF Newsletter readers these techniques seem not very 
different from the current belief that a sign of an abuser is that he
or she denies it.  "Oh, you deny that you sexually abused your child.
You must be guilty!"
               Resolved: Multiple Personality Disorder
           Is an Individually and Socially Created Artifact
                  Affirmative: Paul R. McHugh, M.D.
                   Negative: Frank W. Putnam, M.D.
          _J. Am Acad. Child & Adolescent Psychiatry_, 34:7, 
                       July 1995 pages 957-963

  The debate format of this article furthers our understanding of the
central issues of the MPD controversy within the mental health
profession.  Dr. McHugh's position is that MPD is an artifact created
in the therapy setting.  Dr. Putnam cites the MPD literature as claims
to its validity.
  (See critiques of the MPD literature by Merskey, Piper and Simpson
in _Dissociative Identity Disorder _(1995) Edited by Cohen, Berzott &
                     Letter to "Nature Medicine"
                        Vol 1 No 6, June 1995
                         David Spiegel, M.D.

  In the most recent _Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM-IV)_, the
name and description of MPD have been revised.  For the layperson this
is extremely confusing. A letter from David Spiegel in Nature Medicine
1 (6) June 1995, written in response to an article by Paul McHugh, MD
, (Nature Medicine 1(2), Feb, 1995, "Witches, multiple personalities
and other psychiatric artifacts") is a succinct explanation of the

  "The new and correct term for the disorder [Multiple Personality
Disorder] is Dissociative Identity Disorder. As chair of the work
group which made the change in name and which exhaustively reviewed
the literature, I can report that we concluded that this fragmentation
of identity and consciousness does occur without any 'therapeutic'
coercion. This may happen, but there is no evidence that it accounts
for the majority, or even many of the cases observed. The disorder is
seen around the world. Such individuals suffer not from having more
than one personality, but from having less than one, being unable to
integrate anger and sadness, memories of victimization with an ability
to carry on in everyday life."
  "Dissociative identity disorder has been understood as a long-term
sequela of childhood abuse, induced in part as a psychological defense
against the feelings associated with victimization..."

  To readers of the FMSF Newsletter who are still coming to grips with
the claim by Richard Kluft, M.D. in 1988 in _Dissociation_ Vol 1 No 4
that he had a patient with more than 4,500 alters and another with
more than 4,000, the changes in name and description of MPD are not
helpful. In fact they very confusing. We hope that the profession will
soon explain the significant difference in layman's terms between
4,500 alters and 4,500 unintegrated fragments.
         _British Journal of Psychiatry _(1995), 166, 281-283
                            Harold Merskey

  As legal decisions mount, a number of professionals have begun to
reflect on the role of repression in psychiatry. The following excerpt
is from an editorial that is highly critical of MPD.

  "Allegations which rely upon repressed memories have led to a closer
examination of the idea of repression. It transpires that the
psychological literature is unable to provide scientific evidence that
repression occurs as a mental mechanism -- although it has been looked
at very closely (Holmes, 1990). This brings the practising
psychiatrist who wishes to believe in repression face to face with a
considerable dilemma. It has been all right to treat patients on the
basis of dynamic notions of repression so long as the concept was only
one which was exchanged between therapist and patient and merely
served to revise, in a positive fashion, the patient's view of himself
or herself in the world. Using repression as an idea which works to
the detriment of other people, disrupts families, wipes out the life
savings of parents, abolishes their contact with children and
grandchildren, and embroils some in painful legal battles, is another
matter altogether and not compatible with the old principle "first do
not harm." This forces psychiatry into re-thinking what is meant by
repression, how much we can rely upon it, and how much we can observe
or encourage a belief in the classical Freudian defence mechanisms.
Clinical experience may be cited to the effect that repression does
occur in the face of traumatic experiences with grave impact. If so,
the time has come for a critical examination of that evidence which at
present remains unsystematic and anecdotal. At the moment it appears
to this writer that we should still retain the concept of repression
for conditions of acute or chronic conflict, but that it is not
tenable as an explanation for the sustained loss of memory, and it is
probably no longer useful as a concept dealing with past experience.

  Dr. Merskey is a Professor of Psychiatry at the University of
  Western Ontario and he is a member of the FMSF Scientific Advisory
                     The Naive Therapist Syndrome
            _BC Medical Journal _Vol 36 (9) September 1994
                         Thomas P. Millar, MD

  "Psychoanalytic therapy derives its rationale from what
psychoanalysis perceives to be the cause of neurosis, to wit, that a
conflict in infancy, arising out of some frustration of the child's
psychosexual development, is repressed -- that is, forced our of
awareness, where it continues to affect the individual by generating
psychological symptoms. Therapy therefore consists of recovering this
repressed experience and allowing the original frustration to be
expressed (abreacted). The key to this formulation is repression, but
what if there is no such thing as repression?..."
  "If the conflict-repression model of neurosis is no longer credible,
then there is a need for a new theory of neurosis... Suffice it to say
that, so long as the childhood-conflict-and-repression notion of the
neurosis dominates the clinical scene, we will be plagued with naive
therapists seeing every psychological symptom as evidence for
childhood incest and, like Freud before them, hammering out of their
patients the memories they need to sustain their therapeutic
/                                                                    \
|                        MODERN-DAY WITCHES?                         |
|        Violet Amirault -- 71 years old in prison since 1986        |
|                          Fells Acre Case                           |
|                                                                    |
| Parole Board of Massachusetts Parole denied. Vigorously denies the |
| offense(s). Until such time as she is able to take responsibility  |
| for her crimes, and engages in long-term therapy to address the    |
| causative factors, she will remain at risk to the community if     |
| released.                                                          |
|                            (Reprinted in _Wall Street Journal_     |
|                           March 14, 1995 by Dorothy Rabinowitz)    |

                              Allen Feld

  As a client and therapist engage in therapy, what unfolds is a
narrative, and since therapy is an interactive process, this can
accurately be identified as a Client/Therapist Narrative.  However,
sound therapy suggests that this collaborative narrative, which is
often referred to as _narrative truth_, should be approached with a
skepticism similar to that applied in the scientific method.  While
the client (and/or therapist) may believe the narrative, its truth can
rarely be discovered in the clinician's office.  Including the word
_truth_ in devising a term to describe this important clinical
activity is much more of problem than a misuse of the English
language, and nowhere is this more evident than when issues around
"recovered memories" of incest are discussed.  Incest is an act -- a
behavior -- and therefore has the potential of being verified.  There is
another significant aspect which seems to often be overlooked in
dealing with adult clients who may be questioning their memories about
early childhood incest or other events from their distant past.  These
clients typically enter therapy with a variety of symptoms and may
frequently be questioning their own mental health.  _Recognizing
reality is a sign of positive mental health_.  When therapists and
clients synthesize the clients' past with metaphoric memories and
therapists make no effort to test these for reality, it is difficult
to understand how they can claim to be helping their clients.  For
therapists who believe that decade- delayed recalled memories of
incest need not be verified or that "narratives" equate to the
client's reality and that is good enough, the burden of proof is
theirs.  It is their professional obligation to publish in refereed
journals the research and outcome studies that demonstrate that, by
ignoring any effort to help their clients search for reality, these
clients are actually being helped.

  Allen Feld is an assistant professor of Social Work at Marywood
  College in Pennsylvania and is active in continuing education.

/                                                                    \
|                        ARE YOU A SNOW BIRD?                        |
|                                                                    |
| If you change your residence during the summer or winter, it is    |
| necessary for you to notify Nadine each time your address changes. |
| Please mail or Fax (215-387-1917) your address change one month in |
| advance to allow time for her to make the change.                  |

                          SALEM JURY'S RULE

  January 14, 1997 will mark the 300th anniversary of the
Massachusetts Day of Repentances. The following statement was signed
by the jury in Salem after the craze died down. The jurors believed
that they had shed innocent blood, a sin which they believed would not
be forgiven. This is known as "The Salem Jury's Rule" and may be
instructive even today:

  "We whose names are underwritten, being in the year 1692 called to
serve as jurors in court at Salem, on trial of many who were by some
suspected guilty of doing acts of Witchcraft upon the bodies of sundry

  "We confess that we ourselves were not capable to understand nor
able to withstand the mysterious delusions of the Powers of Darkness
and Prince of the Air, but were for want of knowledge in ourselves and
better information from others, prevailed with to take up with such
evidence against the accused as on further consideration and better
information we justly fear was insufficient for touching the lives of
any (Deuteronomy, 17.6), whereby we fear we have been instrumental
with others, though ignorantly and unwittingly, to bring upon
ourselves and this People of the Lord the guilt of innocent blood,
which sin the Lord saith in Scripture he would not pardon (2 Kings,
24.4), that is, we suppose, in regard of this temporal judgement.
   "We do therefore hereby signify to all in general (and to the
surviving sufferers in especial) our deep sense of and sorrow for our
errors in acting on such evidence to the condemning of any person, and
do hereby declare that we justly fear we were sadly deluded and
mistaken, for which we are much disquieted and distressed in our
minds, and do therefore humbly beg forgiveness, first of God for
Christ's sake for this our error, and pray that god would not impute
the guilt of it to ourselves not others. And we also pray that we may
be considered candidly and aright by the living sufferers as being
then under the power of a strong and general delusion, utterly
unacquainted with and not experienced in matters of that nature.
  "We do heartily ask forgiveness of you all, whom we have justly
offended, and do declare according to our present minds, we would non
of us do such things again on such grounds for the whole world praying
you to accept of this in way of satisfaction for our offence, and that
you would bless the inheritance of the Lord that He may be entreated
for the Land."
/                                                                    \
| Editor's Note: The Salem witch trials ended when "spectral"        |
| evidence was no longer accepted. Spectral evidence consisted of    |
| dreams, visions and hallucinations. 300 years later the issue of   |
| repressed memory cases in the courts is also focused on evidence.  |
| 300 years after Salem, people have once again claimed that dreams  |
| represent reality and that visions (flashbacks) are evidence for   |
| the reality of events.  300 years after Salem, the courts seem     |
| again to be deciding not to admit "spectral" evidence.             |
|                                                                    |
| Will those who have brought and prosecuted the current repressed   |
| memory charges also have the grace to apologize to the wrongfully  |
| accused  as did those responsible 300 years ago for the tragedy of |
| Salem?                                                             |

                             LEGAL CORNER
                              FMSF Staff
                   Reflections on Recent Decisions

   Three Court decisions rendered within the past month have raised
important challenges to repressed memory claims on two fronts:
  1. whether repressed memory and expert testimony derived therefrom
fall under the "Frye test" or the "Daubert analysis" for scientific
evidence, and if so, whether repressed memories have been shown to be
sufficiently valid to be relied on;
  2. whether the discovery exception to the statute of limitations may
be properly applied where there is no assurance that objective
evidence is available with which the court may reliably verify the
facts of the original wrongful act and the resulting physical injury.
     Reliability of Repressed Memories under Frye and Daubert

  When presented with new or novel scientific evidence, or testimony
derived from scientific theory or method, a court may choose to admit
the testimony, determining its credibility during trial through cross-
examination and challenges from other testimony.  Or a court may
review the evidence in pre-trial hearings or at trial on motion.
  In general, in order to be admitted, testimony is to "assist" in
determining the facts. It must therefore be relevant, but not
conclusory.  When offered by an expert, the expert is to be qualified
regarding the issue.  Because a jury may overly rely on an opinion
offered with expert authority, two standards have evolved which courts
may use in formally reviewing evidence which is based on scientific
theory or method: the so-called "Frye test" and the "Daubert
analysis". The "Frye test" is derived from a 1923 U.S. Supreme Court
decision [Footnote: _Frye v United States_, 54 U.S. App. D.C., 293
F.1013 (1923)] which put forward a social definition of admissible
scientific evidence and stipulated that novel scientific testimony is
admissible if generally accepted by the relevant scientific community.
However, the _Frye_ decision had nothing to say about the intrinsic
merits of evidence based on scientific knowledge or methods.
      In 1993, the U.S. Supreme Court [_Daubert v Merrell Dow
Pharmaceuticals_, 113 S.  Ct. 2786, 125 L.Ed.2d 469 (1993)] provided
guidance about judicial use of scientific testimony based on the
Federal Rules of Evidence. It held that, to be admitted, such
testimony must be judicially relevant and scientifically valid or
reliable. In defining validity and reliability, the high court
attempted to establish what science would have standing in a court of
law.  To be admissible a scientific theory should be testable and
falsifiable, capable of meeting peer review and if involving a
methodology or process have a known rate of error. These guidelines
were not, the Supreme Court emphasized, to be viewed as an exclusive,
exhaustive or definitive test for admissibility, but rather are meant
to be flexible.
  To date, few decisions have had occasion to apply either _Frye_ or
_Daubert_ to repressed memory claims. [Footnote: See _Isley v Capuchin
Province_, 1995 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3064 (U.S. Dist. Ct.  Mich., 1995)
for a review of cases applying Daubert's reliability analysis in the
context of expert psychological testimony concerning allegations of
childhood sexual abuse, post-traumatic stress disorder, psychological
and behavioral patterns of persons who had been abused, and traumatic
amnesia.]  Recent trial court decisions have held that both _Frye _and
_Daubert_ are applicable. Two trial level courts, the Maryland Circuit
Court, 5/5/95, and the New Hampshire Superior Court, 5/23/95, both
dismissed repressed memory lawsuits after lengthy pre-trial
evidentiary hearings at which the reliability of repressed memory
claims was considered. The Plaintiffs in both states have appealed the
dismissals.  Among other things, they will argue that too high a
standard was used to restrict the admission of medical testimony.

Decision 1 _State of New Hampshire v. Hungerford, State of New
Hampshire v. Morahan_, Superior Ct., Hillsborough Co., New Hampshire,
No.  94-S-045 thru 047, No. 94-S-1734 thru 1936, 5/23/95
   The New Hampshire Superior Court dismissed repressed memory claims
after a pre-trial hearing after which Presiding Justice William Groff
determined that "the testimony of the victims as to their memory of
the assaults shall not be admitted at trial because the phenomenon of
memory repression, and the process of therapy used in these cases to
recover the memories, have not gained general acceptance in the field
of psychology; and are not scientifically reliable."
   In a 35 page Decree filed on May 23, 1995, Justice Groff addressed
the issues which formed the basis of his decision, namely, (1) the
requirement of scientific acceptance and reliability; (2) the factual
background; (3) the phenomenon of repressed memory; and (4) the
process of psychotherapy.
   The Court first addressed the State's argument that there was no
need for pre-trial hearing as to the reliability, and therefore the
admissibility, of the repressed memory or expert testimony.  The State
claimed that repressed memory was similar to normal remembering and
therefore should be admitted as any recollection would with the jury
to determining the credibility of the parties.
   Drawing a parallel to case law regarding the application of
the_Frye_ test or a general test of scientific reliability to memory
refreshed by hypnosis, Justice Groff rejected this argument and
concluded that "testimony that is dependent upon recovery of repressed
memory through therapy cannot be logically disassociated from the
underlying scientific concept or the technique of recovery."  Whether
the _Frye_ test or the_Daubert_ analysis were applied, the Court held
that the result is the same: in order to prevent the jury from being
misled by unproven and unsound scientific methods, the trial judge
must ensure that any and all scientific testimony or evidence admitted
is not only relevant but reliable. The Court further relied on a
recent New Hampshire Supreme Court decision, _McCollum v. D'Arcy_, 138
N.H. 285, 638 A.2d 797 (N.H. 1994), a case with similar circumstances,
which issued a clear and "inescapable" directive that, "The plaintiff
still carries the burden to substantiate her allegations of abuse and
if challenged, to validate the phenomenon of memory repression itself
and the admissibility of the evidence flowing therefrom." Justice
Groff carefully reviewed the facts of the case, describing the alleged
victims, their psychiatric histories, the circumstances under which
they reportedly "recovered" memories of abuse, and especially the
techniques used by the treating therapists.
  Neither of the accusers had had memories of abuse until they were
treated by the therapists and institutions which admittedly
communicated to their patients their assumptions about a history,
previously unknown, of abuse.
  In his extensive review of the psychological literature regarding
the phenomenon of repressed memory, Justice Groff concluded that many
of the studies have not yet shown a definite relationship between
trauma and memory, that there is no ability, absent independent
corroboration or confirmation, to determine whether a particular
"repressed memory" is false or true, and that there is a "raging or
robust debate" regarding the phenomenon of repressed memory in the
field of psychology today.  The Court, therefore, found that the state
failed to meet its burden of proof under _Frye._ In addition the Court
found that the reliability of the phenomenon of repressed memory has
not been established under _Daubert_.
  This decision is one of the first that deals with the issue of
repressed memory squarely on the merits.  Justice Groff makes it clear
that he did not intend to arbitrate the on-going debate within the
psychiatric community on the issue of repressed memories.  His holding
is based on the existing scientific evidence that the concept of
repressed memory is not generally accepted in the field of psychology
nor is there any way, absent independent corroboration, to determine
the truth or falsity of a repressed memory.  It is not in that sense
scientifically reliable.
  Therefore the Court concluded that "there is no justification for
the introduction of such evidence in a trial today under our system of
criminal justice.

Decision 2 "_Doe and Roe v. Maskell_, Circuit Court, Baltimore
Maryland, No. 94236030/CL185155 (May 23, 1995) -- The Baltimore
Circuit Court dismissed a $40 million suit by two former parochial
school students who said they had been molested by a priest at the
school in the early 1970's.
  In dismissing the suit, Judge Hilary Caplan said he was ruling only
on the statute of limitations issue and not on merits.  The Court
adopted the theories explicitly discussed in the Defendant's Brief.
[Footnote: Defense and Plaintiffs briefs as well as the court ruling
are included in the FMSF Brief Bank.  See Publication #830.]
  After a week-long evidentiary hearing, Judge Caplan rejected
Plaintiff's arguments that the Frye test applied only to hard science,
and did not extend to expert opinion testimony.  The Plaintiff had
argued that the expert testimony was based on standard techniques of
evaluation, diagnosis and testing, none of which were new or novel.
Plaintiff also argued that by submitting expert opinion testimony to
either the _Frye _or the _Daubert _analysis, an unreasonably high
standard for admission was raised -- since experts who disagree with
almost any judgment could always be found.
  Judge Caplan found the rationale of the Maryland Supreme Court
[Footnote: 5._State v. Collins_, 296 MD 670, 464 A.2d 1028 (1983)] to
be particularly persuasive when it extended the _Frye _test to the
hypnotically refreshed memories of a witness to a shooting incident.
That court had held testimony which was hypnotically refreshed to be
inadmissible under _Frye_ because of the problems with memory
retrieval and because even the experts cannot discern whether memories
retrieved by hypnosis are truth, falsehood, or confabulation.
  Judge Caplan concluded that "[t]he _Daubert_ case and especially the
_Reed/Frye_ applicable."  After determining that _Frye
_applied, Judge Caplan noted that at present, there is no consensus
among the community of psychiatrists.  If at some future date, he
wrote, it should achieve the general acceptance of the scientific
community, the door may open and the evidence be admitted."If
_Daubert_ were to be applied in this case to scientific evidence,"
Judge Caplan wrote, "evidentiary reliability must be based on
scientific reliability...The Plaintiffs' case are are shadowed...or
based on evidence not necessarily reliable or valid.  There is no way
to test the validity of those memories....[T]he scientific evidence
that was presented in this case strongly suggests that there are no
empirical studies that verify the existence of repressed memories."

Decision 3 Michigan Supreme Court Overturns _Lemmerman v Fealk and
Williford v. Bieske_ [Footnote: 6.  _Lemmerman v. Fealk, Williford v.
Bieske_, Mich. Supreme Ct., Docket Nos. 97839, 97841, 98365 (July 5,
  On July 5, 1995, the Michigan Supreme Court held that the Michigan
"discovery rule" did not apply to persons claiming insanity related to
memory repression of childhood sexual abuse who brought civil suits.
In so doing, the Supreme Court overturned an earlier ruling in
_Lemmerman v. Fealk_ by the Michigan Appeals Court [Footnote: 7
_Lemmerman v. Fealk_, 201 Mich. App. 544, 507 N.W.2d 226, 1993 Mich.
App. LEXIS 355 (App. Ct. 1993).]  .  The Appeals Court decision had
rejected the requirement of objective corroboration of the alleged
wrongdoing in repressed memory cases in order to toll the statute of
limitations under the discovery exception.
  That court had argued that corroboration is a proof problem to be
determined at trial, not a requirement to be met before courts can
apply the discovery rule and that fairness required allowing claims to
be heard at trial.
  The Michigan Supreme Court rejected this conclusion for several
reasons: "In these cases, both the existence of injury and the
existence and reliability of any evidence of a causal link to the
defendants remain highly disputed, and the outcome must ultimately
turn on one person's word against another.  While the plaintiffs'
allegations may be true, the assurance of a just examination and
decision regarding the relevant issues in such a situation is highly
problematic.  It cannot be concluded with any reasonable degree of
confidence that factfinders could fairly and reliably resolve the
questions before them, given the state of the art regarding repressed
memory and the absence of objective verification."
  The Michigan Supreme Court also reviewed the rationale behind
statutes of limitation, i.e., to encourage plaintiffs to pursue claims
diligently and to protect defendants from having to defend against
stale and fraudulent claims.  Against this tension between these
needs, the court found that placing a plaintiff in a discretionary
position to decide when they recalled events that were allegedly
repressed but for which there is no means of independently verifying
the allegations or allowing the plaintiff to decide the date of onset
or termination of disability so as to toll the statute of limitations,
would effectively invalidate the purpose of the statute of
limitations.  "As a threshold, such risk can only be outweighed when
objective, verifiable evidence of the original wrongful act and the
resulting physical injury is present."  The concurring opinion noted
that "There is no agreement on the viability and reliability of
repressed memory syndrome within the American Medical Association or
the American Psychiatric Association.  In the absence of a consensus
on this still-evolving theory from the appropriate medical experts, it
would be unwise and premature to recognize the repressed memory
syndrome as a basis for applying the discovery rule."  Summary of
opinion is taken from the Syllabus prepared by the Reporter of
              Plaintiff's Judgment Affirmed upon Appeal
                   _Hoult v. Hoult_ 1995 U.S. App.
                        (1st Cir., June 1995)

  The 1st Circuit Court affirmed a jury verdict of $500,000 for the
Plaintiff in a repressed memory case, finding that the circumstances
of the case were not sufficient to justify overturning the jury
decision. The Federal Court decision also held that while a trial
court judge is required to make a preliminary assessment of the
reliability of a psychiatrist's expert opinion testimony under the
Federal Rules of Evidence - even if the defendant does not object to
the testimony - that such an assessment does not have to be "explicit"
and "on the record".
  An early report of the decision, published in The _Massachusetts
Lawyers Weekly,_ 5/39/95, announced the case under the headline: "1st
Circuit says OK under _Daubert_".  In fact, contrary to this report,
The First Circuit court in its ruling (amended June 27, 1995), made it
clear that it does not address the merits of the issue of the
repressed memory nor approve as scientifically reliable, the
introduction in evidence of testimony derived from such allegedly
recovered repressed memories. The court's decision rests on the
technicalities concerning the failure of the defense attorney at trial
to object to any of Plaintiff's proffered "expert" testimony, thereby
not properly preserving issues for appeal, and his failure, for
procedural reasons, to properly pursue an appeal.
  The suit was originally filed in July 1988 in District Court,
Massachusetts.  The Plaintiff claimed that from the time she was 4
until age 16, her father sexually abused and threatened her, but that
she had repressed all memories of the abuse until she began to
recapture them during therapy sessions in October 1985, at age 24.
  At trial, the plaintiff, her treating therapist and an examining
psychiatrist testified. The psychiatrist testified generally with
respect to the psychological dynamics and clinical profiles of victims
of childhood sexual abuse (CSA) and also about the phenomenon of
repressed memories of traumatic events. She concluded that there "was
a lot of correlation" between Plaintiff's "clinical presentation" and
the clinical profile of a CSA victim.
  Defense counsel presented no expert testimony, and did not object
either to the psychiatrist's qualifications or to her testimony in
general, relying instead on defendant's general denial of the charges
and on vigorous cross-examination of the witness.
  Defendant argued on appeal that the trial court erred in allowing
the psychiatrist to testify with respect to the phenomenon repressed
memory in the context of CSA. The court held that, under _Daubert_ ,
and F.R.E.104(a), district courts are to conduct a preliminary
assessment of the reliability of expert testimony even in the absence
of an objection but declined to require that they voluntarily make
"explicit on-the- record rulings regarding the admissibility of expert
testimony." The court reasoned that such evaluations are often
silently performed throughout a trial.
  The court also considered defense contention that the judgment was
void under Rule 60(b)(4) because admission of psychiatrist's testimony
at trial "usurped the function of the jury" and therefore amounted to
a violation of due process.  The court noted that there is a real
danger that jurors will lend too much credence to an expert's
evaluation of the victim's credibility at the expense of their own
independent judgment of credibility. On the other hand, judges
traditionally have had broad discretion in determining whether expert
testimony is reliable and helpful to the jury.  The court concluded,
"We think [the psychiatrist's] testimony may have crossed the line in
commenting upon the Plaintiff's credibility.... She came perilously
close to testifying that this particular victim/witness could be
believed.  If defense had properly objected to this testimony at trial
and appealed a decision admitting the testimony, we would be faced
with a difficult decision." However, because the jury had been
presented with evidence contradicting or calling into question the
psychiatrist's opinion, the psychiatrist testified that she had no way
of knowing whether Plaintiff's allegations were true, the court
expressly instructed jurors that they were free to reject the opinions
offered by the psychiatrist, and the lack of objections at trial, the
court ruled that psychiatrist's testimony did not so plainly usurp the
function of the jury so as to constitute a violation of due process.

/                                                                    \
| Repressed memory theory, highly controversial, has been an         |
| increasingly popular form of evidence in abuse cases, but is       |
| beginning to lose its standing as courts question its validity...  |
|   Most observers agree that the death blow to RMT -- if it comes   | 
| -- will be dealt by insurance companies. Many health maintenance   |
| organizations place caps on the number of psychotherapy visits     |
| they will cover and insurance companies are likely to follow.      |
| Since RMT frequently requires long-term therapy and                |
| hospitalizations, caps will limit its use and availability.        |
| Furthermore, premiums for malpractice are soaring, in part because |
| of the growing numbers of patients suing therapists allegedly      |
| implanting false memories.                                         |
|                                                    Chi Chi Sileo   |
|                                         _Insight_, June 12, 1995   |

                      LEGAL NEWS FROM AUSTRALIA
                           "Dark Memories"
                The Weekend Australian, July 1-2, 1995 
                            Bettina Arndt

  In the past few weeks, three men have been released from Australian
prisons, their "repressed memory" sexual abuse convictions overturned
in separate Supreme Court decisions, two in Melbourne, one in Sydney.
  One man was acquitted on all charges; in the two other cases the
Appeals Court ordered a retrial.
  The article published in _The Weekend Australian_ reports that, "The
juries who convicted were never asked to confront the possibility that
the memories -- which constituted much of the uncorroborated evidence
against the accused -- could be fabricated fantasies.  The controversy
about the validity of repressed memories was never aired in court.
The memories were presented as fact.
  The Supreme Court judges did not rule on the nature of the memories,
instead overturning the convictions on the basis of mishandling of
jury instructions by trial judges in which the jury was not given
sufficient warning about the dangers of convicting on the basis of
uncorroborated evidence of alleged long-passed events.
  In one case, the Supreme Court in Victoria, Australia, ordered a
retrial for a 67-year-old Melbourne man who had been sentenced to a
seven-years-jail term based on a woman's repressed memory claim that
her former music teacher had sexually abused her 25 years earlier.  At
trial, the court was told that the woman first complained of the
alleged abuse following counseling 12 years after the last alleged
incident.  Justice Ashley agreed that the verdict "for the most part"
was "unsafe and unsatisfactory" because the trial judge had not
directed the jury properly.  The jury had been unable to come to a
unanimous decision so the court had accepted a majority verdict.  He
also said that the woman's long delay in reporting the alleged
offenses should have caused the jury to have "reasonable doubt" about
the truth of her allegations and that there was a "serious risk" her
recollection of incidents had been colored by "external influence"
even though she may not have been aware of it.
  "In my view, the complaint's evidence was, at least in part, shown
to have been based upon memory recovery techniques employed by a
person whose qualifications were unknown."
  The article notes that while the law may be tightening in criminal
courts, the risk of jury conviction remains high.  Some of the changes
in standards in Australian courts may be due to the Australian
Psychological Association report (FMSF newsletter, 11/2/94) which
strongly warned that there is no way of determining whether such
memories are real without independent corroboration. Logically, such
evidence alone cannot be used to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt
-- the high level of proof required in a criminal trial.
  The article's author also reviews a repressed memory civil case in
Victoria. The alleged victim, Sharon Arnold, ultimately received
$10,500 compensation (the case is still under appeal because she seeks
many times that amount). The case reportedly is based entirely on
uncorroborated repressed memories whose validity was not questioned at
trial. In addition, Arnold claimed, without challenge, that her
psychological problems -- insomnia, depression, anxiety, alcohol
abuse, eating disorders -- all stem from sexual abuse by the neighbor
in whose home she took shelter as a young girl to escape her violent
alcoholic father. The article's author asks, "How is it possible that
compensation is paid for repressed memories of abuse without any
attempt to assess the effects of a disturbed family history involving
an abusive alcoholic father and a year of parental separation when the
child was 10?"
/                                                                    \
|                                                                    |
|  The FMS Foundation is pleased to announce the establishment of a  |
| SPEAKERS BUREAU. The rapidly growing bureau includes psychiatrists,|
| psychologists, social workers, nurses, attorneys, law enforcement  |
| officials and writers.                                             |
|   The Foundation is currently developing programs suitable for     |
| professional conferences or meetings, professional development/    |
| staff training seminars, mental health programs/panels, and        |
| Continuing Education conferences and workshops, as well as less    |
| formal programs.                                                   |
|   Programs can be arranged in many areas, including but not        |
| limited to memory, False Memory Syndrome, forensic, dissociative   |
| disorders (MPD), hypnosis, therapy issues, interviewing techniques,|
| cults, satanic ritual abuse, retractors, mediation, reconciliation,|
| civil & criminal law, professional malpractice, etc.           |
|                                                                    |
| For more information about Continuing Education or to arrange a    |
| program call 215-387-8663 directly, or 800-568-8882 to leave a     |
| message.                                                           |

           Ex-patient says memory  of sex abuse was planted
             Minneapolis Star Tribune, June 23 & 24, 1995
                          by Conrad DeFiebre

  Dr. Diane Humenansky, a St. Paul psychiatrist accused by her
patients of planting false memories of sexual abuse, defended her
treatment methods and results during the first of six civil
malpractice trials which began during the last week in June, 1995.
"I've never had somebody recover a memory that was wrong," she
testified. "I don't believe in false memories." Among the reports she
credited were stories of satanic cults killing and eating babies and
drinking their blood. Humenansky maintained that as least 90% of her
patients had suffered sexual abuse as children.
  The malpractice suits against Humenansky were filed in 1993 in
Ramsey County District Court, Minnesota and include claims that she
falsely diagnosed multiple personalities, misused psychotropic drugs
and hypnosis on the Plaintiffs, and coerced them into falsely
believing that they had been sexually abused by family members and, in
some cases, by satanic cults.
  Humenansky invoked her right to avoid self-incrimination six times
when asked whether she had treated many of her patients for multiple
personality disorders but listed less controversial diagnoses on
insurance claims. Dr. Humenansky's medical license is under review by
the Minnesota Board of Medical Practice.
                           CASES DISMISSED

    "In the past two years I have represented three accused in civil
  and criminal actions involving repressed memories. Each case has
  been dropped by the Plaintiffs or dismissed by the Court."
                                              Gary M. Jackson, Esq.
                                                   Denver, Colorado

The majority of the cases (nearly 800 suits filed in U.S. alone)
tracked by the FMSF Legal Survey continue to be suits brought by
accusers claiming childhood abuse which was only recently discovered
when they "recovered" so-called "repressed memories." Nearly all of
the Complaints allege no knowledge of the wrongful acts until they
were in therapy. Over the past three years we have learned that
approximately three quarters of these cases are civil actions.
Preliminary results of the 1995 Legal Survey suggest that larger
numbers of repressed memory suits are being dropped by the Plaintiff
or dismissed on motion than in previous years. The financial cost and
the emotional cost of these cases can be enormous to both Plaintiffs
and Defendants.
  Some lawyers advise clients to settle cases because of the great
expense of preparing for trial, or because of factors such as the
health of the defendants. Defending a repressed memory case is often
in the $80,000 to $100,000 range. Settling a case can have
consequences that no one predicted, however. We were recently informed
that as a result of a settlement in a repressed memory case that was
covered by the home owner's insurance (an unusual situation since most
home owner's policies do not cover intentional acts), the accused was
subsequently placed on a high risk category for insurance and has
since been unable to reinsure his home. dollars.

                       HOLDING CHILDREN HOSTAGE

  "I was told that I could not see my grandchildren unless I enrolled
in the Codependency Program at 'S T'," a mother of an accusing child
told us in May at a family meeting in Houston.
  "I was told that unless I left my husband, I would not see my
grandchildren," said another.
  Across the country, a script has been repeated: "Unless you confess
you will not see..." "Unless you enter therapy you will not see..."
"Unless you end your marriage to X, you will not see..." Accusers have
used their own children as hostages in the FMS phenomenon. When did
using children as hostages become part of therapy and thus become
socially sanctioned?  Is it a natural consequence of the therapeutic
position that therapists have no responsibility beyond their
individual client? Is it a natural consequence of the argument that
"truth" is irrelevant to therapy?
  Not all people agree that it is acceptable to hold grandchildren
hostage in this manner. Grandparents especially do not think it is
acceptable.  They are naturally concerned because they have
experienced a profound personal loss.  Some people consider that there
are social and moral reasons to think that children are not the
exclusive property of their parents. Children are born into a cultural
and family environment which it is their heritage to know and
experience. It is abusive to children to deny them their heritage when
there is no real basis for such extreme action.
  Some grandparents have wanted to take legal action to get visitation
rights with their grandchildren. This is a tricky and individual
decision because caring people do not want to put their grandchildren
into a position that causes them conflict with their parents. For that
reason the majority of grandparents have stepped back and avoided
contact in the hope that the accuser would come to his or her senses.
  What will happen when this generation of children grows up, asserts
their rights to know the rest of their family and their heritage.
  Sometimes, however, the delusional system of the accuser is so
extreme (e.g. satanic conspiracy, public slander and libel) that the
grandparents are concerned about the mental well-being of their
grandchildren.  We are aware of one family in which the grandparents
become legal guardians of the accuser because their daughter was found
to be legally incompetent. A number of other families have filed legal
actions in an effort to get visitation rights. The results of these
legal actions to try to get visitation rights to see grandchildren
have not been especially positive. They can be very expensive.
Grandparents have described being humiliated when they entered the
arena of the child welfare system that oversees custody issues. We
received the following note about a hearing for grandparent visitation
that was held in April, 1995.

  "It was a worst case scenario. The mediator read my daughter's
accusations first, assumed me guilty and treated me as such and
refused to read my submitted papers. As a result of legal errors and a
request by my attorney, she has not made her formal recommendation yet
concerning my request for grandparent visitation.  My daughter was
hateful and refused to be even in the same room with is
apparent that many people who deal with the welfare of children, such
as my mediator at Family Court Services, have never heard of false
memory syndrome and are automatically assuming the accused guilty
without further evidence. These people need to be addressed and
educated about FMS."

  The patience of many grandparents has worn thin -- especially as the
window of time they may share with their grandchildren is closing.
While some grandparents have resigned themselves to the loss, others
want to act.
  For those who wish to be proactive, the job is educating those
organizations and government agencies from whom support is needed to
solve the problem. The American Association of Retired People has a
Grandparent Information Center that is funded through a grant from The
Brookdale Foundation Group, but the Grandparent Center is not set up
to handle the problem of grandparents affected by FMS. The Center
provides assistance to grandparents who are raising their
grandchildren. While it is very important to inform AARP of the
problem because it is evident that they do not yet understand the
issues of FMS, it is not realistic to expect any help from them at
this time.

  AARP  Grandparent Information Center
  Social Outreach and Support. 
  601 E. Street, NW
  Washington, DC  20049
  202-434-2296 phone  202-434-6474 fax

  The Grandparents Rights organization has given help and emotional
support to a number of families. They can be contacted at:

  Grandparents Rights
  Ethel Dunn
  137 Larkin St
  Madison, WI  53705

  The problem grandparents face in taking a legal approach to
visitation rights -- in addition to the expense -- is the fact that
the people who are responsible for the decisions in these cases are
not generally aware of the issues of memory and the very real
differences between accusations brought on the basis of "recovered
memories" and other accusations. These are people who are regularly
faced with the all-too-real horrors of child abuse and who must act in
the best interest of child safety.  For those who wish to use the
legal system to obtain visitation rights, a preliminary educational
effort for those who are responsible for making the decisions is an
important first step.

                           FROM OUR READERS
                        Ray and Shirley Souza

"Ray and I have written a note of thanks to all who have been so kind
and generous toward us. It was so helpful to have these extra dollars
to spend for the expenses associated with the appeal process. Since we
would like to thank all personally for their donations, please feel
free to write or to call if we have omitted this very important
courtesy. We would like to hear from you."
                                               Ray and Shirley Souza
                                                        July 5, 1995

  [Background: Ray and Shirley Souza have been under house arrest for
two years. Their motion before Judge Dolan to face their accusers
under Article 12 of the Constitution of Massachusetts was recently
denied. According to Shirley, Judge Dolan said that seeing the
profiles of the children satisfies the law.  The Souzas are still
waiting for the decision on their appeal.
  [Many people who have been following the recovered memory legal
situation have found the Souza case interesting for a number of
reasons. One reason is that Judge Dolan is the same judge that heard
the Amirault day care case back in the mid 1980s.  Several articles in
the _Wall Street Journal_ have described the serious evidence problems
of that case in which 71-year-old Mrs. Amirault is still in prison and
has been denied parole because she won't sign a confession. Another
reason for interest in the Souza case is that it began with a dream by
one of the Souza daughters which was interpreted as evidence of past
sexual abuse.  The case illustrates the kind of family panic that can
result from the interpretation of a dream. Ray and Shirley's
grandchildren were then taken for testing, and after many interviews,
the grandchildren made allegations that included being kept in a cage
in Ray and Shirley's basement and made to drink a green potient. ]
                         Our Special Miracle

  Mine is the all-too-common story of a daughter turned against us.
About a year ago the phone rang one evening. A man's voice said, "This
is Steve." I asked, "Steve who?" He said, "Your grandson." I stammered
and greeted him. He had been a boy when last I heard his voice. He
joyously said, "I'm a man now. I've turned twenty-one. I'm making my
own choices and I want to be in touch with you." In an hour of
long-distance catch-up conversation, we learned that he had spent a
year in England as an exchange student, then put a pack on his back
and a few dollars in his pocket and headed around Europe, Africa and
Asia - eager to see as much of the world as he could. He had then
returned to complete his studies at Washington University in St.
  My grandson sent us copies of letters he had written to his family
and his friends. It read like a book. He called again, this time from
Mt. Rainier National Park. "I have a summer job here," he said. "Why
don't you come to see me?" At the Mt. Rainier Visitors Center a few
weeks later we walked into the arms of a big, blond, and to us
beautiful out-doorsman. He has a job teaching troubled people his
skills of rock-climbing, skiing, rafting, fishing, and wilderness
  Our grandson urged us to write to his 14-year-old sister. I wrote to
her of my own work with the Forest Service and my husband sent her
jewelry he made for her. We have not heard >from her directly but
another family member with whom we are in contact has told us that she
is doing well and active with volunteer
  How did these wonderful young people come out of such a troubled
environment? It is our special miracle.  
                                                 A Grandmother

  It has been close to four years now that we (myself, my husband, our
son, our other daughter and our parents) have had no contact with our
accusing daughter, her husband or her two children.  It breaks our
hearts. There seems to be no way to get her help. Whether her husband
believes all this stuff or just goes along with her to keep peace in
his family we do not know. We just do not know how he could believe
the outlandish things she has accused so many of doing - me, her dad,
our son, her now deceased paternal grandfather, her uncle, her
cousin's husband and the husband of a couple that are very old family
friends. She has "memories" from the time she is one month old until
30 years old. She is now 38 and lives in Eugene, Oregon and says that
the rest of the family is "in denial." She had her son hypnotized when
he was 7 years old.
  Maybe there are others out there as frustrated as we are.  There is
not even a way for us to find out who is the therapist our daughter
has gone to. According to our grandson, our daughter is totally
"afraid" of us and has gotten hysterical when she knew we were in
Eugene. (We had gone to visit a grandson who is in college there.) She
thought we were going to come to her home and she was ready to call
the police.
                                                 A Frustrated Mother
                               A Reason

  My accusing daughter is a social worker. I have thought long and
hard about what might be contributing to her ongoing belief system
that she was abused. Could it be that such a belief system relieves
her of "survivor guilt" and gives her something to share with the
downtrodden? After all, how can she reveal that she was brought up in
a happy home with a loving family and all the amenities of privilege
to someone who owns nothing and is mentally and/or emotionally
impoverished as well?
                                                            A Mother
                           Walking Wounded

  "We are all sort of back together --walking wounded -- and have
taken her back into the fold, as is."
                                                            A Mother
     The following was written by my daughter to her dad in 1986, 
                 4 months before she started therapy.

"You always trusted me -- even when I'd screwed things up royally.
And I know you trusted me because you loved me -- and let me be my own
person and make my own mistakes. I can never thank you for that --
verbally. To sit down with pen and paper is different and I can
actually write thank you Dad for being such a special person in my
life. I love you very, very much. You gave me a wonderful environment
to grow up in -- rich with caring, opportunity and trust.
                                                 Your daughter, "M"

  My daughter underwent "hypno-therapy" from a "Psychic Healer" four
years ago. We haven't seen or talked to her since that time, nor have
we been allowed to see her children. She has been hospitalized for
severe mental illness and suicidal tendencies twice, and for attempted
suicide once in that time period.  So much for the healing power of
hypno-therapy. In Florida hypno-therapists are not licensed nor
governed by any state agency. Anyone can become a "Hypnotherapist"
without training or qualifications.
  Last August my daughter accused my husband of sexual abuse from age
2 to age 16 to the Orlando Police Department. There were 6 specific
charges of abuse. My other children were called before we knew of the
charges, and denied the truth of them. We were called to the police
station to give our statements, a diagram of our residence at that
time, and whatever we could remember from 30+ years ago. We denied all
  The charges were thoroughly investigated. Persons interviewed
included the physician who cared for her at that time, her best friend
from high school, her Godmother, and her ex-husband, as well as a
brother and sister. Her accusations were submitted to the State
Attorney, who refused to prosecute or file charges because:

  1. the physical evidence of the house differed from her memories of
  2. the hypnotic therapy of the alleged victim; and
  3. all members of the family disputed the allegations.

  Right now we are involved in a grandparents' rights suit. That,
along with the legal fees of defending my husband's reputation have
taken all our surplus retirement resources. Our lawyer has warned us
that we must never be alone with the children, but must always have a
witness to our actions to prevent further libelous accusations.
                                                            A Mother
                   Meeting Our Daughter's Therapist

  My accusing daughter wanted to attend my 77th birthday.  Because
meetings with us have been so strained, she asked us to meet with her
therapist. We agreed and made the overnight drive to her city.
  Prior to the meeting with the therapist, our daughter told us that
the session would be recorded and that we would get a copy of the
tape. The meeting started promptly at ten and the therapist started it
with a sort of New Age prayer. She lamented that the tape recorder
wasn't working but we noted that after the session began, she turned
the recorder on. Since we have not received a copy of the tape, we
assume that the recorder works for the therapist but not for us.
  The therapist proceeded to explain that the past was so terrible
that we should not dwell on it but should try instead to build for the
future. At any mention of the accusations, we were reminded that we
were looking to the future. When my wife asked what we should do in
the future about the other siblings who had been told of the
accusations and who thought their accusing sister was crazy, the
therapist said that this was planning too far ahead and we should just
plan for the upcoming birthday celebration.
  Throughout the interview, our daughter hardly spoke. The therapist
spoke for our daughter and our daughter was willing to let her. Before
the session ended, out daughter said that she would never believe that
the abuse did not take place. I contended that my conscience was clear
before God and I could not help why she did nor did not believe. We
parted with hugs.
  Was anything accomplished by this meeting? My wife and I felt
manipulated. We felt that the therapist was anxious to avoid
confrontation but that she felt hostility toward us.
  Our daughter attended the celebration and the party was all
sweetness and light with no mention of past differences. We shall see
what the future brings. We are encouraged that our daughter wants to
attend a family function. We feel, however, that we have had enough of
her "boundaries." We will never meet with her therapist again.
                                                                A Dad
                              A Pattern

  From the letters in the FMSF Newsletter, I am beginning to see a
pattern. Most of these letters reveal Christian parents who have a
relationship with God, Church and family that helps sustain them.
  It has been more than three years now since my daughter's
accusations of sexual abuse against her dead father and subsequently 
 against me, her mother, for knowing and condoning and not doing
anything about it.  Her divorced husband told me she probably never
will because that would be like admitting she is crazy, and according
to him, she would never do that. I miss my three grandsons, but hope
that as they grow up and mature, they will be able to differentiate
between what is truth and false.
  My belief is that even under false accusations, if the parent is
innocent with a clear conscience, they can afford to be calm and
considerate. Those parents who have loved their children so well in
the past can still show a charity that suffers long and is kind. I am
almost 75 years old now. I would certainly like this settled before I
die but if that doesn't happen, I'm not going to let it destroy my
faith. I keep busy and have the support of six children and fourteen
grandchildren so I still have a full life. It is better to count the
blessings we have left instead of what we have lost."
                                                     A Widowed Mother
                              A Thought

  We look forward to the newsletters even though our own family
problems have diminished considerably. Just wish we had the energy to
be more active in the work. My husband will be 90 in a few days. I'm a
young 82. Enough said.
                                                             A Mother
                            Still Bizarre

  "I was accused almost 2 years ago. I still cannot get over how
bizarre this all is. If this had not happened to me, and I were to
hear about it happening to someone else, I would probably brush it
aside as another screwball American craze. Since this did happen to
me, my amazement seems to me to be every bit as great as the day it
happened. I still feel as though it would be impossible to accomplish
anything so sinister except with the feeble minded. Having considered
my daughter to be intelligent, I am forced to reconsider."
                                                             A Father
                           Confused Patient

  In the May FMS Foundation Newsletter a letter appeared signed by
  "Confused Patient." It said, in part:

    "When I purchased "Victims of Memory" by Mark Pendergrast a few
  weeks ago, I read in it the name of my doctor...he was portrayed as
  an incompetent clinician, a quack...After reading his name attacked
  in the book in question, I was so distressed that I was in the
  bathroom weeping. For the next month I had recurring crying spells
  and a few related nightmares. It was worse than the molestation I
  experienced as a child.

  One can't help wondering about the nature of the molestation she
experienced as a child. Shouldn't she and her doctor take this
reaction to a suggestion, just a suggestion in a book, as some sort of
warning about the nature of her reactions in general? She does state,
after all, that it was worse than the molestation she experienced as a
                                                    A Concerned Father
                           Getting It Right

  I am a father of a daughter who was diagnosed with Multiple
Personality Disorder (MPD). Recently, I learned they have a new name
for it, "DID" It's about time they finally got it right! It does mean
"Dissociative Iatrogenic Disorder," doesn't it"
                                                                A Dad
                          My Mother's Letter

  My sister through hypnosis, heavy drugs and a young inexperienced
therapist lead out family into an FMS nightmare. The other 7 of us
siblings -- 6 girls, and 1 boy -- strongly and fully supported my
parents through this living hell.  We were willing to work with the
therapist but she basically ignored us. We never knew what hospital
she was in or if she was even alive.  The therapist would tell us
  Now that my mother has gone to be with the Lord, I would like to
share one of her letters to my sister, "M" in the hopes that it could
be of comfort or help to other families going through this. Feel free
to use my name.
                                                          Joan Brown

Dear "M",
  This is just a note to let you know that Dad and I pray for you
constantly.  We love you very much.
  The love I have for you, "M" is not a weak, sentimental love -- but
is a tough kind of love that has withstood your angry false
accusations of the past few years. I realize that these are the result
of your mental illness.
  However, the love I have for you will not allow you to manipulate me
  I had reached a point where life did not seem to hold any happiness
or joy and the future stretched out -- dreary and dark -- your
problems -- illness -- had saturated our life. It was then I decided
that I could help you only in one way -- by praying for you and the
children. That God will have to work in your lives and I committed all
of you completely in his hands. I had to come to the place that I
could say, "If I never see "M" and my grandchildren again I will live
with that. I will grieve for what I have lost but I will enjoy what I
have left. If the relationship and your illness is not cured here --
in heaven you will look in the Savior's face and know the truth and
then there will be reconciliation with the parents who have always
love you with a pure love.
  Although within my heart there will always be a deep sadness, life
is good again. The sun still warms my face in the morning -- the birds
still sing, Dad still reflects his sweet simple faith in Christ and I
still have him by my side.
  Again, I want to say -- we have never been indifferent. I have
experienced deep anger at your untrue words -- inexpressible pain and
deep anguish -- but never indifference. I have great difficulty in
communication to one who feels as you do. It's like the person who
writes these letters and says what you say is someone I don't know.
Not the loving daughter I used to know. Also, I do not know if
contacting you in your fragile state helps your. We have never gotten
any information from any of your doctors or counselors that would be
helpful in our contact with you.
  I wish you would share this letter with your Dr. and counselor. I
must close but I want to paint a word picture that I hope you will
carry in your mind.  Every morning when I go to work I kiss Dad
goodbye. He has had his breakfast and is reading his Bible and praying
for you.
                                                        Love, Mother

                          MAKE A DIFFERENCE

  This is a column that will let you know what people are doing to
counteract the harm done by FMS. Remember that three years ago, FMSF
didn't exist. A group of 50 or so people found each other and today we
are over 16,000. Together we have made a difference. How did this

ILLINOIS: A story that appeared in the Chicago Tribune on July 4
highlights the constructive power that families can have. Diana Delogu
chronicled how a couple in Orland Park successfully challenged the
offering of a course, "Weight Loss through Hypnosis" by the Recreation
Department of the village.  "Hypnosis should be in a clinical setting
with professionals," argued Gerald Mikitka. One of the trustees of the
village said after learning about the issues involved in hypnosis, "I
feel this program should be pulled right now, as long as there is any
danger. I don't think a program like this really has any place in our
recreation program." The instructor for the course received her
training from less than 12 hours of study with the Hypnodyne
Foundation in Clearwater, FL.

  FMSF families and professionals can monitor courses in their own
communities. You can make a difference.

Illinois - Correction
From the September 1 issue:

Last month you wrote about my efforts to have a Orlando Village
sponsored hypnosis class canceled because of the danger that can come
from poorly trained hypnotherapists. The Chicago Tribune article of
July 4 from which you took a quote from me was in error. The correct
quote should be "only eighteen (18) hours of training is required from
the Hypnodyne Foundation in Clearwater, FL to be licensed as a
Certified Clinical Hypnotherapist." As an update, the battle continues.
Although the course in question will be run, there seems to be growing
support against future programs.

NEW YORK: A few families in upper New York state have checked
hospitals and medical centers to find out about permission to put FMS
and other brochures about new FMSF books on bulletin boards. Recently,
we hung brochures at a Medical Center in Albany. We found a new empty
bulletin board in a waiting room, placed some brochures in the middle
and sat down and watched people get up and read them. We have placed
brochures in libraries, bookstores, doctors' offices and banks.

  You can make a difference. Please send me any ideas that you have
had that were or might be successful so that we can tell others. Write
to Katie Spanuello c/o FMSF.

/                                                                    \
| The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men   |
| to do nothing.                                                     |
|                                                      Edmund Burke  |

                        PLEASE NOTE CORRECTION

Garry, M. & Loftus, E.F. (1994). Pseudomemories without hypnosis.
_International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis_, 42,

                     FALSE MEMORY SYNDROME VIDEO
                      A video copyrighted by the
                   False Memory Syndrome Foundation 
                             app. 16 min

Overview of False Memory Syndrome. Images and voices tell the tragic,
yet sometimes hopeful story. Explores the key psychiatric,
psychological and scientific issues through interviews with
researchers and clinicians and family and retractor stories.While the
problem is complex, one important fact remains:
We must work together to assure that our mental health practices are
so good that they both encourage true victims of child abuse to come
forth and discourage false accusations. (Pamela Freyd, Ph.D.)

Here is the perfect opportunity to learn about FMS while lending your
support to the Foundation. The price for each video is just $10.00
(plus $2.50 shipping and handling for each video to a maximum of $7.50
per order to a single address). To order, simply complete the form
below, enclose a check to the order of FALSE MEMORY SYNDROME
FOUNDATION and mail to:

                    3401 Market Street, Suite 130

This address and the phone numbers have changed as of July 15, 2000
                     Philadelphia, PA 19104-3315

I wish to order ______ FMS video(s) @ $10.00 per video (plus $2.50 for
shipping and handling for each video to a maximum of $7.50 per order
to a single address.)

My check for $____________ is enclosed:

Please send my video(s) to:
        (PLEASE PRINT))

Name _________________________________________________________________

Address ______________________________________________________________

City ________________________________ State ________ Zip _____________

Telephone (________)_________________

/                                                                    \
|                          SHRINKIE AWARDS                           |
|                                                                    |
| Shirley Siegel, the director of Stop Abuse by Counselors, has      |
| announced a contest for the Shrinkie award. The Shrinkie award is  |
| named for those mental health professionals who have shrunk from   |
| their duty to "Do no harm."  Selection for this year's award will  |
| be made to the person who can use the term "backlash" the greatest |
| number of times in a 500-word article.                             |
|                        Send submissions to                         |
|                        STOP, PO Box 68292,                         |
|                         Seattle, WA 98192                          |

                       OF PROFESSIONAL INTEREST
                    An effort to bridge the gulf.
   Conference Appropriate for intermediate and advanced clinicians

                          Seattle, July 6-7
                     San Francisco  Aug 31-Sept 1
                         San Diego  Oct 12-13

Talks include:
  Colin Ross, M.D - True and false memories - A call for therapeutic
  Elizabeth Loftus, Ph.D. - What clinicians should know about memory.
  Skip Simpson, J.D. - How to avoid "False Memory" lawsuits
  Gay Fite, M.Ed.  - Cognitive therapy of DID

For information: 1-800-255-3312  Ext 495

                            RETRACTOR NEWS


  Our first retractors newsletter, Building Bridges, will be sent to
all the retractors who are registered with the FMSF. It is being
sponsored by donations from accused family members and the Foundation.
After the first issue you can receive a subscription by simply
requesting one. Your address will be kept completely confidential and
there is no charge for the first newsletter. If you know of a
retractor who is not registered, please request an extra copy for them
as well. We're very excited about the support

Building Bridges will offer to those who have been harmed by memory
retrieval therapies and who are seeking to rebuild their lives. To get
your first issue, write:
    Diana Anderson
    P.O. Box 17864
    Tucson, AZ  85731-7864

If you're a retractor, we would welcome your contributions, questions
or suggestions. Building Bridges is:

  *  A forum for dialogue between retractors.
  *  A way to get answers to your questions.
  *  A means to increase public awareness.
  *  A place to post announcements and "network" with one another.

In addition, there are several things Building Bridges is not: 

  *  It's not one person's newsletter; it's a joint effort by many
  *  It's not affiliated with any religious or political organization.
  *  It's not a recovery group.
  *  It's not for those who want to remain victims.

Building Bridges is a place where retractors can find a united voice
to educate and strengthen ourselves and others, to express opinions,
to make a difference. The newsletter does not promote dependence; our
goal is interdependence, maintaining individuality while allowing for
the valuable giving and receiving that comes from united voices. You
don't have to contribute in writing to be a part of Building Bridges.
Just pick up a copy and read it. If you have questions and would like
to know more, please give me a call through the Foundation.  

                          One Woman's Story 
                Cornerstone  Vol 23, No 106 July, 1995
                             by Jon Trott

   "Dr. Simpson asked me to do something that morning that I had not
done in a year and a half. He asked me to think. For the longest time
my life had been consumed with decisions based on feelings. If I had a
feeling, I automatically made a decision. If the color of the sweater
you were wearing made me uncomfortable, I decided I couldn't be around
you anymore. It didn't matter if it made sense or was even remotely
logical. If you questioned me about something, big or small, and I
felt threatened, I decided you were trying to control me and I
eliminated you from my life."  .

                       RECONCILIATION CHALLENGE

  A retractor stopped by the FMSF office to say "good bye" and to let
us know that she was moving to another part of the country. As we
chatted, we asked how efforts at reconciliation were going in her
  "Things with my parents are moving along well," she announced. "But
my sister still will not talk to me. I know she is very angry. I'm
taking a cue >from the parents and sending her postcards every month
just to tell her that I love her. I hope that someday she will reply."

                      MODERN 'THERAPY' RUN AMOK
                     Toronto Star, July 10, 1995
                          Donna LaFramboise

  This is the world from which many retractors have escaped.

  "Try to visualize this scene: A young woman with freckles and auburn
hair is strapped down to a bed. Thick, belt-like restraints encase her
ankles.  Others are looped around her wrists and secured near her
waist. The woman, whose name is Gretchen, is not struggling."
  This scene is from an HBO video called, "The Search for Deadly
Memories" that was co-narrated by Gloria Steinem who says at the end
of the film that the idea was all hers. The "therapy" took place in
1992 in a psychiatric hospital in Texas.
  "But then Gretchen begins to pull at her restraints. Her face
becomes contorted, her voice hoarse. She is now hysterical. Her
struggles are so violent that the other people in the room have to
grasp her limbs to hold her down."

  Gretchen's mother has tried to contact Gloria Steinem but Gloria has
not responded.

  How does this kind of "therapy" help women?

                    JULY-AUGUST 1995 FMSF MEETINGS


INDIANA - Indianapolis area/area code 317
Sunday, July 30, 1995 - 1:30-4:30 pm
  Speakers: Mark Pendergrast & Eleanor Goldstein
Call for info: Nickie 471-0922 or Fax 334-9839 
            or Gene 861-4720 or 861-5832

Wisconsin FMS Society Meeting
Saturday, September 30, 9:00am to 5:00pm 
                       (lunch included)

_Seminar Speakers_: Brooks Brenneis, Ph.D.  Ethel Dunn, Eleanor
Goldstein, Mark Pendergrast, William Smoler, atty, and Darold A.
Treffert, MD
$30/person; $50/couple - lunch included
For reservations: call Louise (414) 535-1804

Call person listed for meeting time & location.  
key:  (MO) = monthly; (bi-MO) = bi-monthly

  Phoenix Area
    Barbara (602)924-0975
     Saturday, September 23,  10:00 am
  Tucson Area
     Art (502) 299-0636

ARKANSAS - Little Rock
Al & Lela (501) 363-4368

Northern California
 San Francisco & Bay Area  (Bi-MO)
    East Bay Area    
    Judy (510) 254-2605
   San Francisco & North Bay
   Gideon (415) 389-0254
   Charles (415) 984-6626 (day); 435-9618 (eve)
    South Bay Area  
    Jack & Pat (408) 425-1430
    Last Saturday,  (Bi-MO)
Central Coast 
    Carole (805) 967-8058
Southern California  
    Burbank (formerly Valencia)
    Jane & Mark (805) 947-4376  
    4th Saturday (MO)10:00 am 
  Central Orange County
    Chris & Alan (714) 733-2925
  1st Friday (MO) - 7:00 pm
   Orange County (formerly Laguna Beach)
    Jerry & Eileen (714) 494-9704
    3rd Sunday (MO) - 6:00 pm
   Covina  Group (formerly Rancho Cucamonga )  
    Floyd & Libby (818) 330-2321
      1st Monday, (MO) - 7:30 pm
   West Orange County  
    Carole (310) 596-8048
    2nd Saturday (MO)   

COLORADO - Denver  
  Ruth (303) 757-3622
  4th Saturday, (MO)1:00 pm

CONNECTICUT - New Haven/Area code 203  
  Earl   329-8365
  Paul  458-9173

Dade-Broward Area    
  Madeline (305) 966-4FMS  
Delray Beach PRT
  Esther (407) 364-8290
  2nd & 4th Thursday [MO] 1:00 pm 
Tampa Bay Area
  Bob & Janet (813) 856-7091

Chicago metro area (South of the Eisenhower)
  Roger (708) 366-3717 
  2nd Sunday [MO] 2:00 pm

INDIANA - Indianapolis Friends of FMS 
  Nickie (317) 471-0922 -phone; 334-9839-fax
  Gene (317) 861-4720 or 861-5832

IOWA - Des Moines
  Betty & Gayle (515) 270-6976
  2nd Saturday (MO) 11:30 am Lunch
KANSAS  - Kansas City
  Leslie (913)235-0602
  Pat (913) 738-4840 or Jan (816) 931-1340
Lexington - Dixie (606) 356-9309
Louisville - Bob (502) 957-2378     
  Last Sunday (MO) 2:00 pm

MAINE - Area code 207 
Bangor  - Irvine & Arlene 942-8473
Freeport  - Wally 865-4044          
  3rd Sunday (MO)
Yarmouth - Betsy 846-4268          

MARYLAND - Ellicot City area  
  Margie (410) 750-8694  

  Ron (508) 250-9756
MICHIGAN - Grand Rapids Area - Jenison
  Catharine (616) 363-1354
  1st Sunday (MO) -_please note meeting day_

MINNESOTA - Minneapolis Area
  Terry & Collette (507) 642-3630
  Dan & Joan (612) 631-2247

Kansas City
  Pat (913) 738-4840 or Jan (816) 931-1340
  2nd Sunday (MO)
St. Louis area
  Karen (314) 432-8789 or Mae (314) 837-1976
  Retractors support group also meets
Springfield - Area Codes 417 and 501 
  Dorothy & Pete (417) 882-1821
  Howard (417) 865-6097
  4th Sunday [MO] 5:30 pm

NEW JERSEY (So.) See Wayne, PA
Downstate NY - Westchester, Rockland & others 
  Barbara (914) 761-3627 - call for bi-MO mtg info  
Upstate / Albany area
  Elaine (518) 399-5749
  Family group meets bi-monthly, call for info
Western/Rochester Area
  Call George & Eileen (716) 586-7942 [bi-MO] 

OHIO - Cincinnati  
  Bob (513) 541-5272
  2nd Sunday (MO) 2:00-4:30 pm

OKLAHOMA - Area code 405
Oklahoma City
  Len 364-4063   Dee 942-0531
  HJ  755-3816    Rosemary  439-2459

Harrisburg area  
  Paul & Betty (717) 691-7660
  Rick & Renee (412) 563-5616
Wayne (includes So. Jersey)  
  Jim & Joanne (610) 783-0396

TENNESSEE - Middle Tennessee
  Kate (615) 665-1160
  1st  Wedmesday (MO) 1:00 pm

Central Texas  
  Nancy & Jim  (512) 478-8395
Dallas/Ft. Worth  
  Charlie & Jane (214) 221-1705
  Jo or Beverly (713) 464-8970

VERMONT - Burlington Area
  Kim (802) 878-1089

  Katie & Leo (414) 476-0285
   See State Meetings list


Vancouver & Mainland
  Ruth (604) 925-1539
  Last Saturday (MO) 1:00-4:00 pm
Victoria & Vancouver Island
  John (604) 721-3219
  3rd Tuesday (MO) 7:30 pm

  Muriel (204) 261-0212
  Call for meeting information

  Adrian (519) 471-6338
  2nd Sunday: _changed to_ August 13 (Bi-MO)
  Eileen (613) 836-3294
Toronto - North York 
  Pat (416) 444-9078


  Mrs.  Irene Curtis, PO Box 630, Sunbury, 
Victoria 3429, Tel (03) 9740 6930

Task Force False Memory Syndrome of
 "Ouders voor Kinderen"
Mrs. Anna de Jong, 31-20-693 5692

Mrs. Colleen Waugh,  (09) 416-7443

Eva odr Ake Moller
Paron vagen 15,  26262 Angelholm
Tel: 46-431-20571  Fax 46-431-21790 

The British False Memory Society
Roger Scotford  44-1225-868-682

_Deadline for SEPTEMBER 1995  Issue_:
Wednesday, August 23rd
Mark Fax or envelope:
  "Attn: Meeting Notice" & send 2 months before scheduled meeting.

/                                                                    \
|          Do you have access to e-mail?  Send a message to          |
|                                         |
| 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).            |

For  this  e-mail  edition  of  the  FMSF  Newsletter  thanks  to  the
University of Edinburgh (on the  occasion  of  it's  conferring of  an 
honorary degree to Dana Scott.)

  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.

3401 Market Street suite 130,  Philadelphia, PA 19104,  (215-387-1865)

This address and the phone numbers have changed as of July 15, 2000

Pamela Freyd, Ph.D.,  Executive Director

FMSF Scientific and Professional Advisory Board,        July 11, 1995:
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, 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,
The  Institute of Pennsylvania   Hospital, Philadelphia, PA;  HENRY C.
ELLIS, Ph.D., University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM; FRED FRANKEL,
M.B.Ch.B.,  D.P.M.,  Beth Israel  Hospital,  Harvard  Medical  School,
Boston,  MA; 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; JOHN KIHLSTROM, Ph.D., Yale University, New
Haven,  CT;   HAROLD  LIEF,   M.D.,    University of     Pennsylvania,
Philadelphia, PA; ELIZABETH  LOFTUS, Ph.D.,  University of Washington,
Seattle, WA; PAUL  McHUGH, M.D., Johns Hopkins University,  Baltimore,
MD; HAROLD  MERSKEY,  D.M., University  of  Western  Ontario,  London,
Canada; ULRIC NEISSER, Ph.D.,  Emory University, Atlanta,  GA; RICHARD
OFSHE,  Ph.D., University of California, Berkeley,   CA; EMILY K ORNE,
B.A., University   of  Pennsyllvania, The   Institute  of Pennsylvania
Hospital, Philadelphia, PA;  MARTIN  ORNE, M.D., Ph.D., University  of
Pennsylvania,  The Institute  of  Pennsylvania Hospital, 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, Cambridge, 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  Univeristy, Bloomington,
IN; LOUISE SHOEMAKER, Ph.D., University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia,
PA;  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; LOUIS  JOLYON WEST, M.D.,  UCLA School of
Medicine, Los Angeles, CA.