FMSF NEWSLETTER ARCHIVE - June 7, 1997 - Vol. 6, No. 6, HTML version

Return to FMSF Home Page

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

This address and the phone numbers have changed as of July 15, 2000
                 Phone 215-387-1865, Fax 215-387-1917
  FMS News
      Make a Difference
        Legal Corner
          Focus on Science
            Book Reviews
              From Our Readers
                Bulletin Board

Dear Friends,

  This month we report a breakthrough in legislation.

      A mental health provider shall inform each patient of the mental
         health provider about:

      1) the mental health provider's training and credentials;

      2) the reasonably foreseeable risks and relative benefits of
         proposed treatments and alternative treatments; and 

      3) the patient's right to withdraw consent for treatment at any

  With these words, Indiana has become the first state to pass a law
requiring mental health providers to inform patients about the risks
and benefits of treatments. This law represents a critical step in the
institutional reforms that are needed to stop FMS and to prevent an
outbreak of a similar problem. It is difficult to understand why many
professionals have fought the passage of this law that moves
psychotherapy from a fad-driven exercise toward professional practice
grounded in scientific theory.
  Under the Indiana law a professional cannot plead ignorance for
providing inaccurate information:

  "Professional incompetence...includes the undertaking of
  professional activities that the practitioner is not qualified by
  training or experience to undertake...and failure to keep abreast
  of current professional theory or practice."

  Christopher Barden, a psychologist, lawyer and President of the
National Association for Consumer Protection in Mental Health
Practices said, "The mental health system will never be the same
again...This is a stunning victory for our efforts to produce badly
needed reforms in the psychotherapy industry."
  If therapists had informed our children about the scientific
findings regarding memory, the dangers inherent in memory-recovery
techniques and the fact that they would probably become estranged from
their families, would our distressed children have embarked on their
tragic course? It seems likely that the passage of this "informed
consent" law in Indiana will energize citizens in other states to work
to ensure that psychotherapy is safe and effective -- if not in time
for their own children, then as a legacy for their grandchildren.
  The Indiana legislation is an indication of dramatic change at the
broadest social level. Unfortunately, that does not translate to
immediate relief for affected families. FMS is a social phenomenon
founded on a belief system that includes erroneous notions of memory,
sexual abuse, society and therapeutic practice. By educating the
media, professional organizations, judicial system and legislative
bodies, we help expose the flaws in that belief system so that they
can be addressed. As change occurs, it raises the probability that our
children will start to use their critical thinking skills again.
  Positive news on the legal front is that Violet and Cheryl Amirault
have been told that they are entitled to another trial. The legal
issue underlying the Amirault appeal was their right to face their
accusers. This is the same ground on which Ray and Shirley Souza's
appeal is based. The right to face accusers is the reason why FMS
families are so disturbed by the cutting off behavior of their
children. Most FMS families were never afforded the right to defend
themselves in the presence of their accusers in a forum with
respectful discussion.
  Respectful discussion is vital -- at the level of families and at
the level of the professional arguments about memory. As Schacter has

  "the emotional stakes for all involved are incalculably
  high...Parents are faced with a personal -- and sometimes legal --
  nightmare. People who come to accept memories of abuse that never
  occurred may needlessly endure the trauma that results from
  believing that one has been betrayed by parents or other trusted
  caregivers. Others who recover genuine memories of sexual abuse are
  likely to encounter doubts about the validity of their
  recollections, thereby further intensifying the pain of an already
  difficult experience. And professionals on both sides of the debate
  may find their competence, motives and even integrity called into
  question. These are some of the reasons why the recovered memories
  debate has been consistently characterized by strong emotions and
  often by outright acrimony." [1]

  Intense emotion makes respectful discussion more difficult and charges of
"extremism" have been heard on both sides of the debate. One psychologist
and memory researcher who has been trying to reduce the emotional noise is
Stephen Lindsay. In this issue, we have printed a letter he sent to us in
which he notes that some "who might be powerful and effective allies...
perceive the FMSF and similar organizations as claiming that all or
virtually all recovered-memory experiences are illusory." He suggests that
we reiterate our oft-repeated statement about memory: "Some memories are
true, some a mixture of fact and fiction and some are false -- whether the
memories are continuous or remembered after a period of being forgotten."
Lindsay urges caution to both families and trauma-oriented therapists to
avoid all or nothing claims about recovered memory experiences because he
feels that they "exacerbate polarization." Lindsay also argues that it is
possible to have a middle ground in the repressed/recovered memory debate.
But is it? Some say that there is no middle ground in science.

  "Science is not in the middle-of-the-road. It's not a tribute to a
  scientist to walk where the data are not." [2]
                         Stephen Ceci, in Spectral Evidence, p. 227

  Laird Wilcox argues that "...extremism is more an issue of style
than of content." He states that "The extremist style...hampers our
understanding of important issues, muddies the waters of discourse
with invective, defamation, self-righteousness, fanaticism, and
hatred, and impairs our ability to make intelligent, well-informed
choices," a point with which most of us probably agree. [3] He
observes that,

  "the extremist style is not only found at the fringes of the
  political or religious spectrum, but sometimes in the "middle" as
  well. An individual who is uncompromisingly, intolerantly,
  "centrist" may be far more dogmatic and prejudiced than someone who
  adopts more radical views but does so in an open and tolerant
  manner. Consequently, a guarded middle-of-the-road position doesn't
  necessarily provide a solution to extremism, and in some cases may
  only serve as a mask to conceal it. In fact, it could be argued that
  those may only serve as a mask to conceal it. In fact, it could be
  argued that those beliefs that are accorded legitimacy by consensus,
  which is to say that everyone unthinkingly accepts them, may be even
  more prone to appear on the extremist agenda and more difficult to
  challenge or effectively debate."

  It behooves us all to avoid an extremist style. What are the
characteristics of extremist style? Included in Wilcox's list are:
Character assassination by questioning motives, qualifications, past
associations and mental health rather than dealing with the facts or
issues raised; Name calling and labeling that diverts attention from
arguments; Irresponsible sweeping generalizations; Inadequate proof
for assertions; Advocacy of double standards; Tendency to view
opponents and critics as essentially evil; Tendency to see world in
terms of absolutes of good and evil; Tendency to identify themselves
in terms of who their enemies are; Tendency to use argument by
intimidation; and Emphasis on emotional responses and,
correspondingly, a de-emphasis on reasoning and logical analysis.

  "What is objectionable, what is dangerous about extremists is not
  that they are extreme, but that they are intolerant. The evil is not
  what they say about their cause, but what they say about their
                   Robert F. Kennedy in American Extremists, p. 56

  Respectful dialogue in families and between professionals is surely
the direction in which we should move. But how can that happen if
children and their therapists and some professional leaders refuse to
meet with those whom they have accused?
  1. Schacter, L., Norman, K. & Koutstaal, W. (1997) The recovered
memories debate: A cognitive neuroscience perspective. In M. Conway
(Ed.) Recovered Memories and False Memories., Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
  2. Johnston, M.Spectral Evidence: The Ramona Case: Incest, Memory,
and Truth on Trial in the Napa Valley. New York: Houghton Mifflin Co.,
1997 3. Wilcox, L. (1996) What is extremism? Style and tactics matter
more than goals. In J. George & L Wilcox (Eds.) American Extremists:
Militias, Supremacists, Klansmen, Communists and Others. New York:
Prometheus Books.

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

                         MORE ON CUTTING OFF
                              FMSF Staff

  Of all the techniques supported by some recovered memory therapists,
the one that is most disturbing to families is "cutting-off." It is
unlikely that the FMS Foundation would have formed if parents had been
able to have reasonable dialogue with their children and their
therapists. Parents have continued to ask the Foundation whether
"cutting off" is accepted therapeutic practice. In turn, we suggest
asking the professional organizations if or under what conditions
detaching or cutting off or isolation is considered acceptable.
  Families express tremendous difficulty in understanding why their
children cut off and will not speak to them. Reading "survivor"
literature is one way to learn. One organization that made
"detachment" central to its therapy program was Genesis, a
Pennsylvania group that was portrayed in the Frontline documentary
"Divided Memories" and whose leaders have since had their licenses
suspended. The Genesis approach, according to their statements,
attempts to parallel the Alcoholics Anonymous model: [1]

  "It has long been accepted in Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) that an
  individual will likely not stay sober while being around addictive,
  unhealthy 'persons, places and things.' As a parallel philosophy, we
  firmly believe that while a client is working through ACOA issues in
  therapy and making the transition from dysfunctional to healthy, it
  is necessary to detach from the dysfunctional environment."

Cutting off is not a matter of choice it is required:

  "Detachment is never easy, but it must be done to accomplish two of
  the goals of therapy: to reparent the child within and to mourn a
  lost childhood...we require our clients to detach from their
  caregivers of origin during the therapeutic process..."

  Psychologist Susan Forward [2] tells readers that they must be
"prepared to significantly change your relationship with your parents,
or even sacrifice it." (p 294)
  Beverly Engle [3] warns readers that "permanent separation is
usually the only possible resolution if either parent...either
directly or indirectly brings you only pain when you get together."
Engle provides explicit instructions on how to divorce your parents:

  "You may decide to divorce your parents in person. In this case,
  refer to the confrontation preparation exercise described earlier.
  If you have been able to successfully complete this exercise, you
  are probably ready for a real face-to-face good-bye. As you did in
  the exercise, choose a safe place for your meeting. Know what you
  are going to say ahead of time, and make sure you say everything you
  want to say. There is no need for discussion; just say your good-
  byes, and leave." (page 166)

  This exemplifies the therapeutic cultural milieu or environment that
greeted many of our children when they sought professional help for
their problems. To most parents "cutting off" seems better designed
for creating a cult than for therapy.
  1. Mansmann, P. & Neuhausel, P. (1993) "Detachment: Applying a
well-known concept to ACOA issues." Professional Counselor Health
Communication. October.
  2. Forward, S. (1990) Toxic Parents: Overcoming Their Hurtful Legacy
and Reclaiming Your Life. New York: Bantam Books.
  3. Engle, B. (1989) The Right to Innocence: Healing the Trauma of
Childhood Sexual Abuse. New York: Ivy Books.

To express your concerns about cutting off please write:
  Harold Eist, M.D., President
  American Psychiatric Association
  1400 K Street NW
  Washington, DC 20005

 /                                                                  \ 
 | "Memory is such a shape shifter of a thing, so influenced by old |
 | photographs and old letters, self-image and self-doubt; there's  |
 | even a cottage industry among academics who believe it can be    |
 | constructed from the ground up, resulting in false memories of   |
 | horrible abuse dropped into the brainpan whole, just as though   |
 | they were true".                                                 |
 |                                                  Anna Quindlen   |
 |                                     How Stormy? I Can't Recall   |
 |                       New York Times Book Review, May 11, 1997   |

                           F M S    N E W S 
           National Academy of Science Symposium on Memory
The 134th annual meeting of the National Academy of Science was the
site of a Symposium that brought together five preeminent memory
Endel Tulving of the University of Toronto moderated a panel that
included: Henry L. Roediger III, Washington University in St. Louis:
Memory: Explicit and Implicit; Stephen J. Ceci, Cornell University:
Memory: Reproductive, Reconstructive & Constructive; Larry R. Squire,
University of California at San Diego: Memory and Brain Systems;
Daniel L. Schacter, Harvard University: Neuro-imaging of Memory and
  Dr. Tulving described the focus of the panel as reviewing the most
recent memory research from a dual perspective -- the "mind side" and
the "brain side." He also said the panel would address the question
"[Why people are] remembering things that didn't happen." The panel
lived up to that promise. The audience, which was largely composed of
members of the Academy, who are among the nation's most respected
scientists, reacted with great interest to the research. The relative
ease that leads some to remember "things that didn't happen" was
apparent in the presentations and presented in an objective
fashion. The rapidly expanding knowledge being gleamed from brain
imaging underscored the potential to increase the understanding of how
the brain develops memory and retrieves it both accurately and
inaccurately. Yet, it was also clear that this research is relatively
in its infancy. The material presented can (and will be) found in
major refereed professional journals.
 Elizabeth Loftus elected President of American Psychological Society
The 16,000 members of the American Psychological Society (APS) have
elected Elizabeth Loftus, Ph.D. as president. Dr. Loftus is a member
of the FMSF Scientific Advisory Board. She will assume office in 1998
after a one-year term as President-elect. The APS is a research-
oriented organization.
  Deletion of Word in Welfare Bill Opens Foster Care to Big Business
                New York Times, 5/4/97, Nina Bernstein
A change in legislation "opened the way for for-profit orphanages to
compete for the billions of dollars that the Government spends each
year to support poor children who are taken away from homes judged
unfit...Historically, only foster families or non-profit institutions,
mostly charity-based, were eligible for this money..."  "Companies in
the running for the new stream of money include the successors of the
for-profit psychiatric chains that ballooned in the 1980's, then
crashed after scandals and lawsuits."
             Locked wards open door to booming business.
       Along the way, some patients are interned for no reason.
                        Boston Globe, 5/11/97
"Researchers have a phrase to describe what's going on with publicly
funded psychiatric care: Gaming the system. To play in the Medicare
reimbursement league, the aim is to get around payment caps...that the
federal government imposes on medical and surgical care, but not on
psychiatric care provided in psychiatric hospitals or locked wards at
general hospitals." According to Celeste G. Simpkins, a Vanderbilt
University researcher, "psych inpatient care is the fastest growing
part of Medicare's hospital budget..."
  "Patient complaints are part of the fallout from a little-noticed
but dramatic shift this decade, in which hospitals have gravitated to
a new patient base of the poor, disabled and elderly, and have been
paid as much as $1,000 a day per patient from Medicare and Medicaid
...As private insurers have curtailed mental health coverage,
psychiatric and general hospitals have rushed to the only freewheeling
game left in town -- federal- and state-funded psychiatric care. And
the hospitals have become increasingly dependent on beds being filled
by a captive clientele, patients who are locked up in a process
initiated by doctors, nurses, even police, without outside review for
at least 10 days."
  This article describes some complaints by patients brought against
Westwood Lodge and Pembroke Hospital that are owned by the private,
for-profit Charter Behavioral Health Systems in Atlanta. In 1995, 70
percent of the 4,000 admissions to these two hospitals were
             Fugitive psychiatrist is arrested in London
                Houston Chronicle, 5/9/97, Mark Smith
Dr. Robert Hadley Gross was arrested on criminal charges arising from
an investigation of insurance fraud at mental hospitals. Dr. Gross was
indicted on fraud charges alleging kickbacks for referring patients to
Psychiatric Institute of Fort Worth and Bedford Meadows, both owned at
the time by National Medical Enterprises. Gross maintains that he was
an unwitting accomplice in patient recruitment efforts and billing
fraud. Gross was also ordered to pay $40 million in civil settlements
for "assaulting three teen-age patients. The young women were pinned
to the ground while health care workers ground their fists into the
patients' ribs and stomach as part of a therapy known as 'rage
reduction.' The psychiatrist told his patients that the therapy was
designed to allow patients to release their anger."
  National Medical Enterprises (NME) sold more than 70 of its
hospitals in 1994 as part of a plea bargain. NME has changed its name
to Tenet Healthcare.
              Psychiatrist accused of fleecing insurers
             Kansas City Star, April 3, 1997, John Dauner
Psychiatrist David E. Sternberg was accused of filing 2,000 false
claims, inflating the number and length of appointments, and allegedly
paying kickbacks to a psychologist for referring patients to him. He
is charged with demanding payment of $250,000 and the referral of 25
new patients from Charter Hospital in return for agreeing to refer
patients to the hospital. The money was never paid. Sternberg
practiced at Charter Hospital, Shawnee Mission Medical Center, Two
Rivers Psychiatric Hospital and Kansas Institute.
              HHS Anti-Fraud Effort Retrieving Millions
                       NASW News, January, 1997
Operation Restore Trust was begun as a pilot program in five states in
May 1995 by the Health and Human Services Department to reduce
Medicare and Medicaid fraud. Fraud occurs when a provider knowingly
and willfully lies to get paid. The operation recovered $ 43.3 million
in its first year. The states involved are New York, Florida,
Illinois, Texas and California. More than one-third of all Medicare
and Medicaid beneficiaries live in those states.
                    Hospitals seek patients abroad
             Philadelphia Inquirer, 5/5/97, Marian Uhlman
"Faced with slumping profits and a saturated market, Philadelphia-area
hospitals are going global. They want to export their medical
expertise and import patients from abroad."
               Patients now are checking up on doctors
               USA Today, May 14, 1997, Steven Findlay
Six months ago Massachusetts began a program to allow consumers to
access background information on doctors, including malpractice
histories. Since that time other states are following. Similar bills
are pending in California, Connecticut, Illinois, Maine, Maryland,
Rhode Island, Texas and Vermont. The Florida legislature has already
passed a bill and if signed by the governor will be effective by July,
1999. According to the director of the Massachusetts registration
board, "The response has really been overwhelming." Massachusetts
consumer groups are working to add patient complaints to the profiles.
                         Dysfunction Junction
                The New Republic, 4/14/97, Ruth Shalit
All recovery, all the time! On April 23, a new cable channel called
the Recovery Network will begin 24-hour-a-day stories about addiction
and recovery. A video promo explains that topics go "from alcohol to
drugs, to depression, sex, obsession, eating disorders, family
violence, compulsive gambling and sexual abuse." The Recovery Network
hopes to create a new class in the TV culture, one in which
"victimhood" is celebrated. While one of the advisors to this channel,
Dr. Joseph Pursch the psychiatrist who treated Betty Ford and Billy
Carter, says that the network must not become a platform for recovered
memory buffs and self-proclaimed survivors of satanic ritual
abuse. But Donald Masters, chairman of the Recovery Network states,
"I've run into people who've lived through satanic ritual abuse. I've
seen some horrible things..." While Dr. Pursch notes that there is a
danger of excessive reliance on a small clique of recovery celebrities
and is quoted as saying, "I'm thrilled that they are avoiding John
Bradshaw," the programming schedule indicates that in the first week
one show will feature "John Bradshaw." To date advertisers seem to be
organizations such as Hazelden, Camp Recovery or Annacapa by the Sea,
but the corporate prospectus explains that revenue will also come from
merchandising such items as twelve-step T-shirts, books, and
inspirational videotapes.
                   Victims of Abuse that Never Was
                       The Daily Telegraph (UK)
                    Margaret Jervis and Celia Hall
"Thousands of people may suffer delusions of child sex abuse as a
result of counseling, according to a report by the British Association
of Counseling. It is issuing guidance to its 14,000 members,
cautioning against recovered memory techniques and says that the
creation of false memories is a problem of unknown proportions.  The
Reverend Alex McGuire, chairman of the association's research and
evaluation committee, said he thought the number of people with
recovered memories which proved false was low. 'But having said that,
we don't know what 'low' means. It could be tens, hundreds or even
thousands. There is no doubt that it is a genuine hazard.'"

/                                                                    \ 
|                         Available in July                          |
|                       LAUGHING THROUGH TEARS                       |
|                 Pamela Freyd and Eleanor Goldstein                 |
|                            Upton Books                             |
|                                                                    |
| A collection of cartoons that have helped us to understand the     |
| social movements contributing to the false memory phenomenon. The  |
| next issue of the newsletter will be the combined July-August      |
| summer issue. It will feature a "Festival of Books," a listing of  |
| many of the fine books that have been published that have help to  |
| move the repressed memory/ false memory controversy towards its    |
| inevitable conclusion.                                             |

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

ILLINOIS - A father wrote to the local PBS station to complain about
John Bradshaw. "Dr. Bradshaw does have credentials and some people
have found him to be helpful," was the reply. The father suggested
that the station rerun the Frontline documentary "Divided Memories,"
and that the station should consider the outcome of the type of
therapy he espouses when they mention Bradshaw's credentials. The
father sent the station a copy of the Washington State Crime Victim's
Compensation study.

COLORADO - A video of the Rutherford family is available from Pastor
Ed Bulkey. Tom Rutherford was an Assemblies of God minister who was
fired from his job as a result of his daughter's accusations. The
daughter has since retracted and the Rutherford's received a $1
million settlement from the church. One family in a similar
circumstance ordered the tape so that they can make it available to
their own church to educate both the clergy and the members. (for
information 303-451-5433)

"WHAT CAN I DO TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE?" Have you considered giving your
library a subscription to the FMSF Newsletter? Libraries around the
world have back issues and current subscriptions. Does your library?

  Send your ideas to Katie Spanuello c/o FMSF.

  /                                                                \ 
  | Rather than attempt to justify irresponsible therapy,          |
  | psychiatrists, psychologists, social workers and professional  |      
  | counselors ought to universally step forward and say that they |
  | will not allow this kind of therapy to continue in their       |
  | professions. If the witch-hunts do not end by self-discipline  |
  | in these professions, then they must end in the courtroom.     |
  |                                               William Smoler   |
  |                                        Letter, April 4, 1997   |
  |                                   Milwaukee Journal Sentinel   |

                 L E G I S L A T I V E   U P D A T E
           Informed Consent Bill Signed into Law in Indiana
In April, 1995, families in Indiana decided that they would approach
the legislature with regard to sponsoring an "informed consent"1 bill
in an effort to correct the problem of repressed memory therapy.
Representative John S. Keeler agreed to sponsor the bill but had heard
that there was already an informed consent bill (Senate Bill No 210)
prepared to address the problem. SB 210 had been introduced by Senator
Patricia Miller in response to numerous complaints from her
constituency. It was soon learned, however, that the informed consent
bill sought to be introduced contained language which would have
effectively legitimized "Uncovering Psychotherapy" and hypnotic
techniques used to conduct such therapy (including, "hypnotic age
regression" and "hypnotic memory enhancement"). Indiana families set
about to educate the legislators about the serious problems with these
techniques, and the language was deleted from SB 210. Due to the
controversy surrounding the legislation, it was agreed that SB 210
would serve as a temporary bill pending the findings of Mental Health
Practice Study Committee (see FMSF Newsletter, May 1996). The
committee held four hearings in which senators and representatives
heard from both mental health professionals and families devastated by
the effects of repressed memory therapy.
  On April 17, 1997, Indiana Governor Frank O'Bannon signed into law
Senate Bill No. 309 which contains recommendations of the Mental
Health Practice Study Committee formed last May under Senate Bill No
210. The Indiana Code now requires that mental health providers obtain
consent from their patients before providing mental health services.
Section 6, Indiana Code 16-36-1.5-10 has been added to the Indiana
Code as a new Section to read: "Sec 10.

  A mental health provider shall inform each patient of the mental
     health provider about:

  1) the mental health provider's training and credentials;

  2) the reasonably foreseeable risks and relative benefits of
     proposed treatments and alternative treatments; and 

  3) the patient's right to withdraw consent for treatment at any

  The Indiana Code also contains provisions for disciplinary sanctions
if standards established by the board regulating the profession in
question are not met. For example,

  the practitioner may be subject to sanctions under amended Section
  7. IC 25-1-9-4 if:

  4) a practitioner has continued to practice although the
  practitioner has become unfit to practice due to:

  A) professional incompetence that: I) includes the undertaking of
  professional activities that the practitioner is not qualified by
  training or experience to undertake,...B) failure to keep abreast 
  of current professional theory or practice."

  Mental health providers are defined as registered or licensed
practical nurses, clinical social workers, marriage and family
therapists, psychologists, school psychologists and any individual who
claims to be a mental health provider. SB 309 also states that a
physician (therefore, psychiatrist) must obtain consent from each
patient as provided in Indiana Code 27-12-12. The new law becomes
effective July 1, 1997.
  Christopher Barden, a psychologist, lawyer and President of the
National Association for Consumer Protection in Mental Health
Practices said, "The mental health system will never be the same
again. Consumers will now have to be told that psychotherapists who
want to talk about the patient's childhood are offering them what is
at best an experimental and quite possibly a harmful procedure. We did
not expect to see passage of portions of this Act (Truth and
Responsibility in Mental Health Practices Act) for years. This is a
stunning victory for our efforts to produce badly needed reforms in
the psychotherapy industry...[t]he Indiana law is a major step in the
right direction."
  1. See Faden, R.R. and T. L Beauchamp, A History and Theory of
Informed Consent (1986), New York: Oxford University Press (discusses
origin and nature of the concept of "informed consent").
                A Lawmaker's Brush with False Memories
        Fulton County Daily Report, March 6, 1997 by T. Renaud
Rep. Theo Titus, II, R-Thomasville, Georgia, a sponsor of House Bill
No 440 which would allow relatives of patients to sue therapists for
creating or suggesting false memories of childhood abuse, testified
personally in support of the bill before the Senate Judiciary
subcommittee on March 5, 1997. Rep. Titus disclosed that his daughter,
following therapy sessions with a clinical social worker, had falsely
accused him and a brother of molestation and rape when she was a
child. The daughter has since recanted her charges and is back in the
family. Rep. Titus told the subcommittee members that damage to
families from such false accusations is rampant. The subcommittee also
heard testimony from Atlanta lawyer Robert B. Remar, speaking for the
Georgia Psychological Association. Mr. Remar said that psychologists
oppose the bill because it would disrupt the ability of patients to
receive mental health services and would create an unprecedented duty
of a health care provider to a third party. Subcommittee chairman
Rep. Roy E. Barnes, D-Mableton, expressed concerns about the bill and
recommended that the subcommittee meet to discuss it further after some
research and thought.
       Move to enlarge window on child sex-abuse charges fails
        Chicago Daily Law Bulletin, May 8, 1997, D. Heckelman
On May 8, 1997, the Illinois House Judiciary II - Criminal Law
Committee failed to adopt Rep. Mary K. O'Brien's proposed amendment to
Senate Bill 172, which would have amended the Criminal Code to extend
the statute of limitations to 15 years on prosecutions for criminal
sexual assault against victims under 18 years of age. Rep. O'Brien had
previously sponsored H.B. 2257 which would have removed the
limitations provisions entirely. She said victims who have reached the
age of 21 still may be living with their abusers and therefore may be
subject to intimidation preventing their reporting of the abuse.
Rep. Thomas L. Johnson, R-West Chicago said he was reluctant to extend
the statute of limitations to 15 years, expressing concern over the
issue of "reconstructed memory" in relation to allegations of child
abuse. A witness testifying in opposition to the proposed amendment,
Cook County Assistant Public Defender Gregory O'Reilly, echoed
Johnson's concerns, stating, "There is a huge controversy over the
validity of recovered memory." And Rep. James Durkin, R-Westchester,
agreed stating, "By extending the statute of limitations for 15 years,
we're getting into a very dangerous area," referring to the
difficulties of proof after such a long period.
                    False Reporting of Child Abuse
During 1996 and 1997 a growing number of state legislatures have
recognized the problem of false reports of child abuse, particularly
related to divorce cases. Connecticut set down penalties for filing a
false report of child abuse following a much publicized case in which
anonymous allegations of child abuse were made against a mother five
times over a two-year period. Her children were examined each time but
no evidence of abuse was found.
  Several states have made willful false reporting a misdemeanor crime
punishable by fines or imprisonment or both: Arizona, Arkansas,
Connecticut, Florida, Idaho, Indiana, Louisiana, Michigan, Missouri,
North Dakota, Ohio, Rhode Island and Virginia. Some states have
recently increased the penalty for false reporting. Evidently several
states (e.g. Indiana, Virginia) have noted that some individuals
repeatedly make false allegations and have provided for more serious
penalties in those cases.
  In Tennessee, "any person who either verbally or by written or
printed communication knowingly and maliciously reports, or causes,
encourages, aids, counsels or procures another to report a false
accusation of child sexual abuse commits a Class E felony." In
Michigan, the person who intentionally makes a false report of child
abuse or neglect is guilty of a misdemeanor if the crime alleged would
be a misdemeanor. If the crime falsely alleged were a felony crime,
the person making the false allegation is guilty of a felony and is
subject to imprisonment for not more than 4 years or a fine of not
more than $2,000, or both.
  Some states, including Florida and Louisiana, grant immunity from
liability for reporting made in "good faith" but do not extend that
immunity to a person who makes a report known to be false or with
reckless disregard for the truth of the report.
  Indiana statute entitles a falsely accused person to access to
relevant reports if the original report is determined to be
unsubstantiated and intentionally made. North Dakota statutes
specifically provide that a person willfully making a false report in
addition to misdemeanor charges may also be liable for civil damages
suffered by the accused person.
  For text of the statutes, see FMSF Working Paper, "False Reporting
of Child Abuse." Below is a summary of the most recent legislation to
pass our desk.
         Arkansas enacts two new laws related to child abuse
On April 14, 1997, Arkansas Act 1351 of 1997 was enacted to increase
penalties for willfully making false allegations of child abuse.
Arkansas Code Section 12-12-504 has been amended to read: "Penalties
...1) Any person, official or institution willfully making false
notification pursuant to this subchapter, knowing such allegations to
be false, shall be guilty of a Class A misdemeanor. 3) Any person,
official or institution willfully making false notification pursuant
to this subchapter, knowing such allegations to be false, and who has
been previously convicted of making willful false allegations shall be
guilty of a Class D felony." The new law is effective July 31, 1997.
  In addition, on April 14, 1997, Governor Huckabee signed into law
Act 1240 authorizing the formation of a family protection unit within
the Arkansas State Police to conduct child abuse investigations. The
Act states that the transfer of responsibility for child abuse
investigations from the Division of Children and Family Services to a
separate unit of the police department is due to the difficulty of
DCFS caseworkers' ability to "separate their dual roles as
investigators and service providers; that many studies show that child
abuse investigations are compromised when these very different
functions are not separated." The Act also calls for an oversight
system to review the administration of the child abuse hotline and
conduct of child abuse investigations.

/                                                                    \ 
|                  What's New in the "Memory Wars":                  |
|             Implications for Clinical Practice (Audio)             |
|                                                                    |
| A program jointly sponsored by Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, |
|          Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences          |
|                                and                                 |
|                           FMS Foundation                           |
|                           March 21, 1997                           |
|                                                                    |
| TAPES A310 set of seven                                            |
| Presentations by the following:                                    |
| Jason Brandt, Ph.D. (Paper presented by Jonathan Folstein)         |
| Philip M. Coons, M.D.                                              |   
| Pamela P. Freyd, Ph.D.                                             |
| Richard Green, M.D., J.D., M.R.C.Psych.                            |
| Elizabeth F. Loftus, Ph.D.                                         |
| Paul McHugh, M.D.                                                  |
| Kevin Murphy, J.D.                                                 |
| Godfey D. Pearlson, M.D.                                           |
| August T. Piper, Jr., M.D.                                         |
| Alan Young, Ph.D.                                                  |
|                                                                    |
| COST sold as sets only                                             |
| (US dollars. Price includes US shipping.                           |
| International shipping add $ 5.00)                                 |
| These audiotapes are offered for sale without editing              |
| Members         $20.00 per set                                     |
| Non-Members     $25.00 per set                                     |
|                                                                    |
| Make checks payable to FMS Foundation.                             |
| Mail your order to: FMS Video                                      |
|                  Rt. 1, Box 510                                    |
|                  Burkeville, TX 75932                              |
| Please allow two to three weeks for delivery. If you have any      |
| questions about your order call Benton 409-565-4480.               |

                       L E G A L   C O R N E R
   Therapist Acted Unprofessionally, Washington State Panel Alleges 
              The Seattle Times, 4/23/97 by Carol Ostrom
  State of Washington, Dept. of Health, In the Matter of the License 
            to Practice Medicine of John W. Laughlin, PA. 
                  No. 95-05-0053PA, filed 4/7/97 [1]
A state disciplinary board has accused a mental-health therapist of
unprofessional conduct for allegedly inducing false memories of sexual
abuse and satanic ritual involvement in a client. The charges against
therapist John W. Laughlin, PA, state that over a period of 2 1/2
years, he used methods including hypnosis, "attempting to break
through what he described as 'victim denial' by his patient." Laughlin
"repeatedly told his patient that she had to be very careful because
'cult members' might be watching her," and that if she terminated
therapy she would be in great danger. He offered to perform an
exorcism because "evil had been programmed into her."
  The Statement of Charges noted that "subsequent therapy by other
health-care providers cast doubts on [Laughlin's] treatment and the
reliability of the information obtained by means of hypnosis." It also
states that Laughlin was practicing at the time without adequate
oversight or supervision and that the treatment provided was below the
standard of care.
  The Washington State Department of Health, Medical Quality Assurance
Commission brought these charges two years after Laughlin settled out
of court with the former client for an undisclosed sum. Another
lawsuit was recently filed by another patient who has alleged similar
  Maryella Jansen, program manager for the state board, said if
Laughlin is found guilty, he could lose his license or face lesser
sanctions. However, it has been learned that soon after these charges
were filed, the State granted a renewal of Laughlin's license to
  1. See FMSF Brief Bank # 142.
          Arizona Appeals Court Rejects Decade-Delayed Claim
          Nolde v. Frankie, 1997 Ariz. App. LEXIS 69, 5/1/97
In a succinct majority opinion, a Court of Appeals of Arizona affirmed
summary judgment of a lawsuit against a track coach by three former
students. The three women claimed sex abuse, threats and intimidation
by the coach during the 1970s and 1980s. The plaintiffs offer several
reasons for their delay in filing, which they argue should have tolled
the statute of limitations. The claim they were unable to understand
the causal connection between their injuries and the defendant's
conduct until they entered therapy. They also presented expert
testimony that each plaintiff experienced emotional problems due to
sexual abuse such as psychological blocking, internalized shame,
guilt, self-blame, confusion, denial, repression and dissociation.
Thus it was impossible for plaintiffs to take any practical action to
redress their grievances. Plaintiffs also argued that a special
tolling rule should be adopted for cases involving the abuse of a
child by an adult in a position of trust.
  The Appellate Court rejected plaintiff's arguments based on a recent
Arizona Supreme Court ruling, Florez v. Sargeant, 185 Ariz. 521, 917
P.2d 250 (1996). [2] It summarized, "The supreme court concluded that
in each case, the statute of limitations barred the action. The court
rejected every argument concerning psychological pressure, repressed
memory, post-traumatic stress disorder, duress, fraud and equity that
Plaintiffs in the case now before us have raised. The supreme court
held that the touchstone of whether an unsound mind will toll the
statute is whether the plaintiff is able to manage his or her ordinary
daily affairs, something that all of the Plaintiffs in the case before
us have indisputably been able to do. Florez governs this case, and we
are required to follow it."
  A lengthy concurring opinion echoed that the court is bound by
Florez and expressed the hope that either the state supreme court or
legislature would give more consideration to the issue.
  2. See FMSF Newsletter, July 1996.
           Texas Appellate Court Considers Malpractice Suit
      Halbrooks v. Moore, 1997 Tex. App. LEXIS 2153, 4/24/97 [3]
A Texas Court of Appeals affirmed a trial court judgment in a
therapeutic malpractice case. In March 1995, a jury awarded Diana
Halbrooks $90,865 for past medical expenses and pain and suffering and
her husband $15,000 for loss of consortium. The jury attributed 60%
negligence to the therapist and 40% to the patient. Prior to trial,
Halbrooks settled with Bedford Meadows Hospital for $50,000. Halbrooks
appealed the trial court rulings, asserting that the damage awards
were inadequate and that there was insufficient evidence to support
the jury's contributory negligence finding. The appellate court
reviewed the testimony and stated that "we cannot conclude that the
jury verdict was so contrary to the overwhelming weight of the
evidence as to be clearly wrong and unjust." It also held that some of
the points of error were not adequately preserved for appeal.
  In 1985, Diana, then 36, began group counseling sessions with Moore,
a licensed professional counselor and ordained minister. She sought
treatment for recurring depression and familial conflicts. Diana
alleged that she was not treated for her presenting problem but that
as a result of the counseling, Moore caused her to have false memories
such as being a victim of sexual abuse by several family members.
Moore convinced her that she suffered multiple personality disorder.
She alleged that Moore exerted an ever-increasing control over her and
caused her to dissociate from her family and have an unnatural and
unhealthy dependence upon him.
  3. See also FMSF Brief Bank #73.
            Violet and Cheryl Amirault Granted a New Trial
             Summary taken from articles by Tom Mashberg,
                   The Boston Herald, May 10, 1997
Violet Amirault and Cheryl Amirault LeFave have been granted their
freedom and a new trial based on a rarely successful constitutional
appeal. The ruling by Superior Court Judge Isaac Borenstein came on
May 9 after a week of fast-breaking developments.
  The decision marks the second time in 22 months that a Middlesex
Superior Court judge has erased the Amirault women's convictions [4]
on constitutional grounds. The women were released on bail in 1995 by
Judge Robert A. Barton, who ruled their criminal trial
unconstitutional because they were prevented from facing their
accusers in court. The trial verdict was then reinstated by the
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) on March 17, after the
state's top court declared that whatever its constitutional flaws
might have been, the case merited "finality."
  Then on May 5th, Judge Barton was asked by County D.A. Thomas Reilly
to revoke the women's bail based on that SJC decision. But Judge
Barton recused himself from the case in dramatic fashion, saying he
was "no longer impartial" because he felt "justice has not been done."
"I maintain that whether a death sentence or one-day deprivation of
liberty is imposed, the judicial process itself must be
constitutionally correct," Judge Barton intoned in a sonorous
baritone. "Though I was not affirmed by the SJC, I believe that I am
right: These women did not receive a fair trial, and justice was not
  The Amiraults' attorney, James L. Sultan commented, "When the story
of this case is written, Judge Barton will be seen as a hero of
justice." Sultan went on to say , "We are not going to give up. The
SJC may think the case is over, but it is not over."
  Judge Borenstein was then handed the Amirault docket, and prosecutor
Reilly predicted that any further appeals or retrial motions would be
ruled "frivolous or absurd," and that the women would be back in jail
by the end of the week.
  In his decision on May 9, Judge Borenstein accepted the defense
assertion that the women's first legal team had been "ineffective" in
handling the case. Under both the 6th and 14th Amendments to the
Constitution and Article 12 of the Massachusetts Declaration of
Rights, criminal defendants are entitled to the best legal defense
possible. Appeals on this issue, however, are rarely successful
because most lawyers' mistakes do not amount to gross error.
  Defense attorney Sultan said the Amiraults' previous lawyers were
"ineffective" two times: First in 1987 when as trial attorneys they
failed adequately to contest the lack of face-to-face confrontation in
court. And then in 1991, when as appellate lawyers, they neglected to
raise the seating issue at a previous appeal to the SJC. Sultan said
the Amiraults' previous attorneys were incompetent if they did not
recognize that the issue was legal grounds for an appeal and more so
if they did recognize it was an important legal issue and chose not to
raise the matter.
  Judge Borenstein ruled that if the unconstitutional nature of the
seating had been argued at the 1991 SJC appeal, "the likely result
would have been a reversal and new trial." Because the seating issue
was not brought up in 1991, "I find it was ineffective assistance of
counsel," he said. He then ordered a new trial and let the women
remain free on bail.
  The Amiraults' previous attorneys are well-respected but filed
affidavits saying they had badly erred by failing to make a vigorous
constitutional challenge.
  As of May 10, according to The Boston Herald, prosecutors say they
intend to appeal Judge Borenstein's ruling. On the other hand, the
Amiraults' lawyers say they will quickly seek a similar ruling in
Gerald Amirault's case. It is, however, likely that Judge Dolan will
preside at Gerald's next hearing, and she may well decide differently
than Borenstein. In that case, Gerald would remain in jail -- at least
until the DA's office appeals the Borenstein ruling to the SJC. If the
high court backs Borenstein, Gerald Amirault could also go free,
because the argument against his conviction is identical to that of
Violet and Cheryl. But if the SJC rejects Borenstein, as it rejected
Barton, the women would again face prison. By that time the Amiraults'
lawyers would have exhausted their appeals in state court and likely
take the case to the federal system. If a federal court accepts the
case, the women could seek bail pending a ruling, but bail would not
be guaranteed. The 13-year-long Fells Acres Day School child abuse
saga appears to be far from over.
  4. Violet, 74, and Cheryl, 39, Amirault had been tried in 1987 and
convicted of molesting five youths at the Fells Acres Day School in
Massachusetts. They have served eight of the 20 years they received.
Violet's son, Gerald, 43, was convicted in 1986 of abusing nine
children and is serving a 40-year prison sentence. The children had
alleged rape by a clown, being tied naked to a tree and being forced
to watch animals slaughtered at the day car. All three defendents have
consistently denied that any abuse took place.

 |                    FROM THE BUSINESS OFFICE                      |
 | The following tips will help minimize confusion and assure the   |
 | speedy processing of your orders, memberships, and donations.    |
 | Please note the information on either the appropriate form (if   |
 | available) or a separate piece of paper: name, address, daytime  |
 | telephone number, and what the money is for: membership dues;    |
 | article order; donation, etc....                                 |
 |                                                                  |
 |                       CREDIT CARD PAYMENTS                       |
 | Please indicate Visa or MasterCard (we only accept Visa and      |
 | MasterCard) and the following: card number, expiration date, and |
 | the total amount to charge.                                      |
 |                                                                  |
 |                 GIFT SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS                   |
 | If you want to give someone a gift subscription or membership we |
 | will send the gift recipient a letter informing them of the gift |
 | and who gave it to them.                                         |
 |                                                                  |
 |                         ADDRESS CHANGES                          |
 | The newsletter is not forwarded by the post office. Therefore it |
 | is important you let us know one month before you move to begin  |
 | receiving it at the new address.  Be sure to include the old     |
 | address information when sending us the new one.                 |

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

  This is the last in a 4-part series examining the question of
  whether childhood sexual abuse causes psychiatric disorders in
  adulthood. The series is not intended to "forgive" or exonerate the
  morally repugnant phenomenon of child sexual abuse in any way but
  simply to examine the methodology of scientific studies claiming
  that child sexual abuse causes adult psychiatric disorders.
       Alcohol Consumption, Lung Cancer and Higher Mathematics
                         Harrison Pope, M.D.
As illustrated by the experiences of our apocryphal investigators in
the previous three issues of this column, the problems of selection
bias, information bias, and confounding seriously compromise the
conclusions of virtually all published studies examining the
relationship between childhood sexual abuse and adult psychiatric
disorders. As these flaws are more widely acknowledged, newer and more
sophisticated studies are attempting to address the question of
causality. Are these newer efforts helping us to reach a more definite
  Consider one recent study in the prestigious American Journal of
Public Health [1](AJPH). The authors examined survey responses from
1099 randomly selected American women regarding their experiences of
childhood sexual abuse and history of bulimic behaviors. The
methodology was careful and sophisticated. The women were administered
face-to-face structured interviews in which they were asked detailed
questions. Specified operational diagnostic criteria were used both
for the diagnosis of bulimic behaviors and for childhood sexual
abuse. These strategies would be expected to minimize the problems of
selection bias and information bias, discussed in our previous
columns. When the investigators analyzed the results of the study,
they found that, even with these biases controlled, a clear
association between bulimic behaviors and childhood sexual abuse still
remained. In fact, binge-eating was twice as common among abused
respondents as compared to non-abused respondents, and a full bulimic
syndrome (binge-eating, overconcern about body weight, and a history
of vomiting, laxative abuse, or similar measures) was three times as
common in abused as opposed to non-abused women.
  So much for association. But is the association causal? Or are
bulimic behaviors and sexual abuse mutually caused by confounding
variables? To deal with this question, the authors used a
sophisticated mathematical technique called regression analysis, in
which they calculated the "population attributable risk," or ARc,
             ARc = (x-y)/x

and where y, in turn, is defined by the formula

               y = Sigma n I *
                     j    j j

  Without stopping to explain all of these symbols (they are all
defined in the paper), suffice it to say that even after
mathematically controlling for the effects of age, ethnic group, and
parents' educational level, the authors found bulimic behavior was
still associated with childhood sexual abuse. Specifically, the
authors suggest that among the women with the full bulimic syndrome
just described, as many as 34% of the cases would not have occurred in
the absence of childhood sexual abuse.
  Certainly this analysis represents an elegant mathematical
treatment, far more sophisticated than the simplistic designs of
Doctors Harrison and James in the previous columns. Do these findings
now finally allow us to conclude that childhood sexual abuse causes
bulimic behaviors, at least in some cases?
  Absolutely not. Consider again an example from medicine. Suppose
that we surveyed 10,000 patients for their history of alcohol
consumption and their history of lung cancer, using the same survey
and interviewing techniques described in the bulimia study. We would
find an association between alcohol and lung cancer. But is this a
causal association? As it turns out, it is not. Alcohol in itself has
little or no role in causing lung cancer. But people who drink alcohol
also smoke more cigarettes, and cigarettes really do cause lung
cancer. The confounding variable, in other words, is tobacco
  Now suppose that we do a logistic regression analysis, just as in
the bulimia study described earlier, and calculate "adjusted odds
ratios" to measure the contribution of alcohol to lung cancer. As with
the above bulimia study, we control for numerous variables, such as
age, ethnic group, and parents' level of education. We even go further
and control for additional variables: the respondents' height, weight,
and blood pressure, their religious affiliation, political persuasion,
and even their favorite brand of breakfast cereal. But we still forget
to control for their consumption of cigarettes. What happens? We have
used a lot more computer time, and our mathematics looks even fancier,
but our findings continue to give the erroneous impression that
alcohol is the culprit. We have still missed the real cause of lung
  Now it may still be correct, in a certain technical sense, to say
that alcohol is a "risk factor" for lung cancer, because people who
drink do show a higher rate of lung cancer. And we could blur the
whole issue a bit by arguing that alcohol is part of a "multifactorial
group of interacting etiological factors" in lung cancer or that it is
part of an "integrated causal model" for lung cancer. All of this
would sound very impressive if we did not know the simple truth.
Alcohol doesn't cause lung cancer; cigarettes do.
  Returning then, to the bulimia study reviewed here, we must
acknowledge that its methods represent a considerable advance over
most of the studies previously published in this area. But despite its
sophistication, it still ultimately founders on the issue of
confounding variables. Perhaps childhood sexual abuse is one of
several related factors in the cause of bulimia nervosa, but these
results still do not permit us to conclude that it necessarily has any
causal role at all.
  1. Wonderlich, S.A., Wilsnack, R.W., Wilshack, S.C., Harris, T.R.:
Childhood sexual abuse and bulimic behavior in a nationally representative
sample. Am J. Public Health 86: 1082-1086, 1996.

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

/                                                                    \ 
|                    Research Participants Wanted                    |
|                                                                    |
| Psychologists and psychiatrists at the Johns Hopkins University    |
| School of Medicine are conducting a research study on "Memory for  |
| Facts and Contexts" and are seeking volunteer participants. They   |
| are seeking adults (age 18 +) who have ever claimed to have first  |
| forgotten and then remembered childhood physical or sexual abuse,  |
| regardless of whether they now believe those memories to be true   |
| or false.                                                          |
|                                                                    |
| The study involves being taught obscure facts and trying to recall |
| them at a later time. It also involves taking several tests of     |
| memory, problem-solving, and personality. The study will require   |
| spending the better part of one day at the Johns Hopkins School of |
| Medicine in Baltimore. All participants will be reimbursed $100    |
| for their time and expenses.                                       |
|                                                                    |
| This study has been reviewed and approved by the Joint Committee   |
| on Clinical Investigation of the Johns Hopkins University School   |
| of Medicine and by the Ad Hoc Research Review Committee of the FMS |
| Foundation.                                                        |
|                                                                    |
| To volunteer for this study, or for more information, contact the  |
| FMS Foundation at 800-568-8882. Leave your name, telephone number  |
| and the best time to reach you. One of the Johns Hopkins           |
| investigators will call you.                                       |

                       B O O K   R E V I E W S
                          Spectral Evidence:
The Ramona Case: Incest, Memory, and Truth on Trial in the Napa Valley
                          by Moira Johnston
                 New York: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1997
                Reviewer: Harrison G. Pope, Jr., M.D.
Spectral Evidence chronicles what may someday be considered one of the
most influential legal cases in the history of psychiatry. In Ramona v
Isabella et al., a father, Gary Ramona, successfully sued two
therapists and a hospital on the charge of implanting false memories
of childhood sexual abuse in the mind of his daughter, Holly. From the
outset of her book, Moira Johnston catches the seismic implications of
the trial:

  "The rare act of granting a third party-not a patient-the right to
  sue a therapist was a chilling warning to the entire profession of
  psychotherapy. If Gary Ramona won, it would be a surgical strike to
  the heart of the international recovered memory movement; it would
  open the floodgates to lawsuits and force public scrutiny of, and
  perhaps wrenching change in, one of the most potent forces in
  American culture, the "talking cure." The ghosts of Freud and the
  founding fathers of psychoanalysis would also sit on the defendants'
  bench." (p. 1)

  But whatever its historic significance, Ramona was also the story of
a prominent family shattered by the effects of "recovered memories."
Gary had been a wealthy and successful business man, stably married
for more than 20 years, with three apparently happy daughters. Then
the eldest, Holly, began to develop bulimia nervosa (the syndrome of
binge eating and vomiting) in high school. After Holly was in college,
she started to see a Master's level therapist and, within months, she
began to have "flashbacks" of her father sexually abusing her. She
entered the hospital for an Amytal interview, mistakenly believing
that Amytal was a "truth serum" that would help to confirm the truth
of her "memories." And then, in a family meeting organized by her
therapist, she confronted her unsuspecting father with the allegation
that he had raped her.
  The next three years saw high legal drama and mounting human
tragedy, as the most intimate details of the Ramona family were bared
in legal depositions, court appearances, and the media. Stephanie
Ramona, convinced that her daughter's "memories" must be true,
promptly served divorce papers on her husband. Holly brought a lawsuit
against her father for the alleged sexual abuse. As time went by, she
even recovered new "memories" that her father had orally, anally, and
vaginally raped her up to the age of 16, and had even forced her to
have sex with Prince, the family dog. All of these memories, she
believed, had been repressed from her consciousness for years before
she started psychotherapy.
  Meanwhile, Gary made numerous efforts to talk with Holly and with
her therapists. He tried to arrange for family meetings. He even
offered to take Amytal himself to show that he was telling the
truth. But all of his attempts failed. Finally, after many long
discussions, he decided to sue the therapists for malpractice, as the
only way to clear his name.
  I remember those discussions, because I served as an advisor to
Gary, and subsequently to his legal team. Having been a player in the
case, I obviously cannot pretend to be a completely dispassionate
reviewer of Spectral Evidence. But on the other hand, I witnessed
firsthand many of the scenes that Johnston brings to life in her
book. And even I had forgotten the full measure of human tragedy that
she so vividly portrays, as the case worked its way through
innumerable legal wranglings, into the courtroom, into the newspapers,
and eventually onto the major television networks and even the BBC
World News.
  Johnston takes pains, I believe, to tell the story in a neutral
fashion, never passing judgment on the truth or falsehood of a given
observer's version of the story. Typically, she lets a "single eye
describe the scene:"

  "When the story arrives at an event that has high significance for
  Stephanie, I let her tell it. I let Gary tell his most powerful
  moments....What emerges for the reader, then, is the story like
  the one the jury heard, seven weeks of opposing truths, half of
  which had to be untrue or only partly true." (p. 401)

  Nevertheless, as Johnston draws the parallel between Ramona and the
Salem witch trials, where "spectral evidence" justified the hanging of
innocent people, one cannot miss her skepticism about the validity of
"recovered memories" as evidence for legal accusations. And on the
question of whether a third party should be allowed to sue a therapist
-- a question hotly debated since the Ramona victory -- Johnston's
sympathies seem to favor the rights of accused fathers like Gary
  In any event, whether or not one agrees with these positions,
Spectral Evidence is mandatory reading for anyone, lay or
professional, who has been touched by the "memory wars." You cannot
hear this story without being moved by the private tragedy of this
family and the public implications of a case that will continue to
reverberate in legal and scientific debates for years to come.

  Harrison G. Pope, Jr., M.D., is Associate Professor of Psychiatry at
  Harvard Medical School and a member of the Professional Advisory
  Board of the False Memory Syndrome Foundation. A consultant to Gary
  Ramona's legal team, Dr. Pope has written a scientific article on
  the case ("Recovered memory" therapy for eating disorders:
  implications of the Ramona verdict, co-authored with James Hudson,
  M.D., International Journal of Eating Disorders, 19: 139-145, 3Y?~1996).
                          Talk of the Devil:
           Repressed memory and the ritual abuse witch-hunt
                          Richard Guilliatt
 (Melbourne, Australia: The Text Publishing Company, 171 LaTrobe St.,
  Melbourne, Victoria 3000, Australia (1996), 296 pages,  US$13.20)
                   Reviewer: Campbell Perry, Ph.D..
This outstanding book, written by Richard Guilliatt, a feature writer
with the Sydney Morning Herald (one of Australia's oldest newspapers
of record) is built around a two-month legal case involving multiple
allegations of SRA which commenced at Bunbury, Western Australia in
October, 1994. The accused man, Clive Moore (a pseudonym), aged 65,
was originally charged with 130 offenses; they were reduced to 42
charges by the time that the case came to trial before the Western
Australia Supreme Court. The charges were brought by two of his
daughters; a third daughter, his two sons, and his wife stood by
Mr. Moore throughout, and testified on his behalf.
  Clive Moore was not the most likely candidate for an accusation of
SRA. He is a devout Baptist, belonging to the Bretheren, which
Guilliatt characterizes as a "somewhat insular and enigmatic faith"
(p. 56); their places of worship are rarely listed in telephone books,
they have no central office, their beliefs are not codified in a
formal creed, and most of their pastors are laypeople. He was a
schoolteacher who became a headmaster for many years, until he retired
from the State Education Department after 36 unblemished years in
  Since, however, the leader of Bunbury's Anglican Church youth group
had been revealed by police as a pedophile a year earlier, when
hundreds of photographs of naked boys were found in his house, Moore's
innocence could not be assumed.
  To make matters worse for Clive Moore, his response to police
questioning raised suspicion. Like Paul Ingram (Ofshe, 1992), he
responded to the charges by saying that he did not remember any of the
alleged offenses, and acknowledged that he might have committed them,
but that he did not remember them. He said (p. 16): "It's possible,
anything's possible really." Nor, when asked, could he give an
assurance that the alleged transgressions had not happened.
  More damning was that the daughters' allegations appeared to
independently corroborate each other. Not merely were their stories
similar, but each had been seeing a different therapist, and they
insisted that they had never discussed the accusations with each
  It strains credulity to think that two sisters, "recovering" often
bizarre "memories" of SRA would not have compared notes, but it was up
to the defense lawyers to prove that, despite their denials, such
contamination had occurred. They performed a remarkable feat of
investigative leg-work; they subpoenaed the daughters' diaries and
hospital records, and were able to establish that, in fact, one
therapist had treated the daughters together (along with a third
daughter, who did not "recover" any SRA memories) on a number of
  In the end, the jury cleared Moore of 15 charges, and deadlocked on
the remaining 27. He could have been retried on these remaining
charges, but fortunately for him (and, I suspect, the credibility of
the Western Australia legal system) the Director of Public
Prosecutions declined to proceed further. It cost Clive Moore
$A250,000 (around $US 150,000) to defend himself.
  These are but the bare bones of an absorbing account of the Bunbury
trial, which takes up approximately one half of the book. Had
Guilliatt confined himself to an account of the trial of Clive Moore,
he would have performed a valuable service. But the book offers much
more. For one thing, it provides capsule accounts of some 20 legal
cases involving repressed memory or SRA issues, for which legal
documentation was available.
  In addition, the book traces the origins of FMS in Australia.
Interestingly, a part of its origin was the Sixth International
Congress on Child Abuse and Neglect, held in Sydney in August,
1986. Four of the keynote speakers, Roland Summit, Kee MacFarlane,
Astrid Heger and David Finkelhor, shared the (soon to become ) dubious
distinction of being involved in the McMartin Day Care pedophile
scandal. In 1986, however, McMartin appeared to be a credible
cautionary tale of sexual abuse by pedophiles.
  But for some years prior to this event, American clinicians had been
reporting cases of sexually abused patients who harbored putative
repressed or dissociated memories of their abuse, with some of them
appearing to manifest their traumatic memories through MPD. Such
reports were filtering into Australia, and in 1985, a year before the
Congress, the New South Wales Child Protection Council (CPC) began its
operations with a mandate to focus entirely upon childhood sexual
abuse, even though data indicated that, at the time, child beating and
neglect was almost three times more prevalent than sexual abuse of
  Guilliatt is able to show, also, that the CPC employs many
professionals who believe in the reality of SRA. He presents
convincing evidence that they have successfully discredited their
critics from within by the time -- honored Public Service technique of
a negative written performance report.
  In addition, with financing from the NSW State Government, CPC
produced a 26 page booklet entitled, "Ritual Abuse Information for
Health and Welfare Professionals," which drew heavily from Satanist
conspiracy theories in the United States and Australia. It also made
claims for the ubiquity of SRA practices at all levels of Australian
society. It advised sexual assault counselors that "allegations which
sound like fantasies might have been caused by the drugs and hypnotism
administered to victims as children" (p. 112).
  No formal link is provided between these developments in New South
Wales, which was the launching pad for SRA conspiracy theories in
Australia, and the events at Bunbury. It is a loose end that the book
does not tie up but, in fairness, the underlying process may be
unknowable. The webs of association and influence among like-minded
professionals cannot always be documented.
  Another possible shortcoming is that the book could have been
strengthened by some research data on memory, and the effect of
hypnosis on it. But given all that the book gives to a reader, these
are minor blemishes and the FMS story is ongoing.
  Overall, in terms of Olympic criteria for evaluating such
qualitatively adjudicated performances as diving, figure skating, and
gymnastics, the book rates, at the very minimum, a 9.5. It is that
  1. Ofshe, R. (1992) Inadvertent hypnosis during interrogation: False
confessions due to dissociative state; misidentified multiple
personality and the Satanic cult hypothesis International Journal of
Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 40, 125-156.

  Campbell Perry , Ph.D. has retired as a professor of psychology at
  Concordia University in Montreal. A member of the FMSF Advisory
  Board, Dr. Perry has published widely in the area of hypnosis,
  including a recent article "The False Memory Syndrome and
  'Disguised' Hypnosis" (FMSF Article Order # 580)

|                             Correction                             |
|                                                                    |
| In the May newsletter (p. 14) it was incorrectly stated that       |
| reviewer Robert McKelvey worked for the Cleveland Plain  Dealer.   |
| The correct information is as follows: during his 44-year career   |
| as a newspaperman, Mr. McKelvey worked for the Detroit Free Press, |
| the Detroit News, the Toledo Blade, the Ft. Wayne Journal-Gazette, |
| the South Bend Tribune, the Chicago Sun-Times, the New York Daily  |
| News, the Indiana Daily Student and the Rochester (IN)             |
| News-Sentinel.                                                     |

                   F R O M   O U R   R E A D E R S
                             Dear Editor:
I am a cognitive psychologist whose research focuses on human memory.
Over the course of the last three years, my colleagues and I have
published several journal articles and book chapters that have
attempted to convince psychotherapists of the risks of suggestive
forms of "memory work" (i.e., searches for suspected hidden memories
of childhood sexual abuse). I believe that suggestive "memory work"
has led substantial numbers of non-abused clients to develop illusory
memories and/or false beliefs of being sexually abused as children. I
also believe that it is important to make clear that criticisms of
suggestive memory work should not be misconstrued as implying that all
recovered-memory experiences are false.
  Let me begin by defining some terms. I will use the phrase
"recovered-memory experience" to refer to the subjective experience of
remembering a previously non-remembered instance of childhood sexual
abuse (CSA). Note that the phrase "recovered-memory experience" as
used here is agnostic with regard to whether or not the remembered
event actually occurred and, if the event did occur, with regard to
the mechanism by which it was forgotten prior to the recovered-memory
experience. Thus the phrase "recovered-memory experience" entails only
the subjective experience of remembering CSA that the person feels was
not previously remembered.
  All parties to the controversy agree that in the last decade
substantial numbers of people have reported recovered-memory
experiences; the controversy has to do with explanations of this
phenomenon. "Ordinary forgetting" refers here to mechanisms that
account for the fact that people often cannot recollect particular
past autobiographical events (e.g., poor attention during the event,
decay, interference, context- and state-dependency effects, lack of
rehearsal, etc.). Finally, "massive repression" refers here to a
hypothesized mechanism whereby individuals suppress memories of
traumatic experiences that [presumably] could not be forgotten via
ordinary mechanisms of forgetting.
  In my opinion, existing scientific evidence does not provide
compelling support for a special massive repression mechanism by which
people can forget entire histories of extreme trauma. But suppose that
future scientific research conclusively demonstrated that there really
is a special mechanism by which people can suppress memories of years
of horrific abuse in such a way that they could later recover those
memories. Would that mean that all recovered-memory experiences are
essentially accurate? If science showed that people really are capable
of suppressing and then recovering memories of years of violent abuse,
would that mean that all parents who have been accused on the basis of
recovered memories are guilty as charged? No, it would not. Regardless
of whether or not there is a special massive repression mechanism,
exposing people to suggestive forms of memory work might lead them to
develop illusory memories or false beliefs.
  Conversely, suppose that future scientific research led to the
definitive conclusion that there is no special massive repression
mechanism. Would that mean that all recovered-memory experiences are
essentially false? No, it would not, because ordinary forgetting
might lay the ground work for essentially accurate recovered-memory
experiences. It is well established that people often fail to
recollect past experiences, even quite dramatic ones. For example,
studies indicate that people sometimes fail to remember automobile
accidents, hospitalizations, robberies, and other dramatic events. If
such forgetting is not due to massive repression, then presumably it
is due to ordinary forgetting. It is also well established that
experiences that are not remembered under some conditions can later be
remembered under other conditions, especially if appropriate cues are
given. That is, there is converging evidence that supports the idea
that people can forget and then later recover memories of childhood
  Although scientific data on the issue are lacking (and would be
difficult to obtain), it seems likely that there are limits on the
sorts of histories that can be forgotten via ordinary forgetting. For
example, it seems unlikely that ordinary forgetting could lead a
person to be unaware of years of violent abuse, such that they would
think they had a loving relationship with a parent who repeatedly
raped and tortured them. Because it seems unlikely that ordinary
forgetting could lead to forgetting of repeated and extreme abuse, and
because the evidence for massive repression is weak, I am very
skeptical of cases in which a person initially appeared to remember no
abuse and then subsequently experienced recovered memories of years of
extreme abuse. My skepticism is further fueled if there is evidence
that the "memories" were recovered via suggestive memory work. On the
other hand-and this is my central point -- I see no reason to doubt
that ordinary forgetting mechanisms can sometimes lead people to
forget isolated instances of CSA, especially if the abuse was not
physically violent. Retrospective self-report studies suggest that the
most common forms of CSA involve one or a few isolated instances of
non-violent abuse. Given what we know about memory and remembering, it
seems likely that some adults who experienced such abuse will fail to
remember it in adulthood, and that some such adults could recover
essentially accurate memories of the abuse if appropriately cued.
  In my view, recovered-memory experiences range along a continuum.
Some are relatively plausible (i.e., the kind of abuse reported is
relatively common and is said to have happened a small number of times
and after the first few years of life; no extensive memory work was
involved in recovering the memories; and there is at least some
evidence in support of the report). Others are relatively implausible
(i.e., the reported abuse is bizarre and extreme and is said to have
happened on numerous occasions over a period of many years; the
reports emerged via extensive memory work; and there is little or no
evidence supporting the report). Examples of cases at both ends of
this continuum can be found in a forthcoming book co-edited by J. Don
Read and myself, based on our NATO-sponsored Advanced Studies
Institute and titled Recollections of Trauma: Scientific Research and
Clinical Practice (to be published by Plenum later in 1997).
  Some people may protest that the term "recovered memories" should be
used solely to refer to "massively-repressed-and-then-recovered
memories of years of extreme abuse." I disagree. First, it is
preferable to use theory-neutral terms to label observable phenomena
that are subjects of ongoing research. In this case, the phenomenon of
interest is that some people report remembering previously non-
remembered CSA, and the controversy concerns explanations of this
phenomenon. Second, when writers use the term "recovered memories,"
too many readers are likely to think they are referring to reports of
remembering previously non-remembered CSA, not only to reports of
massively-repressed-and-then-recovered memories. Third, as noted
above, even if scientific research definitively supported or
definitively refuted the existence of massively-repressed-and-then-
recovered memories, the controversy about the potential role of
suggestive memory work in producing illusory recovered-memory
experiences would remain.
  My belief that people can experience the recovery of essentially
accurate memories of CSA in no way reduces my concerns about
suggestive forms of memory work. I believe that such approaches are
unjustified and that they needlessly put clients and their families at
grave risk of profound harm. My arguments do speak in favor of a
middle ground on the memories controversy. The middle ground
acknowledges the existence of both essentially accurate and
essentially inaccurate recovered-memory experiences (and of
recovered-memory experiences that blend accurate and inaccurate
material), and seeks simultaneously to discourage use of risky forms
of memory work while acknowledging the importance of supporting
victims of actual childhood sexual abuse (including those who did not
report the abuse during childhood and those who report a period of not
remembering the abuse).
  I have submitted this letter for publication in the FMSF Newsletter
because I believe that some competent psychotherapists who do not use
suggestive memory work in their practices, and who might be powerful
and effective allies in discouraging others from using such
techniques, perceive the FMSF and similar organizations as claiming
that all or virtually all recovered-memory experiences are illusory.
Although The FMSF Newsletter has previously published statements
indicating that the Foundation does not claim that all recovered-
memory reports are false, I believe that it is worthwhile to reiterate
and clarify the point. Doing so makes clear the common ground between
trauma-oriented practitioners (who, after all, do not want to foster
false allegations) and the Foundation (which does not want to dismiss
true allegations).
  Some parents accused of abusing their children on the basis of
recovered-memory experiences may be tempted to the extreme position of
claiming that all or virtually all recovered-memory experiences are
illusory. Similarly, some trauma-oriented psychotherapists accused of
leading their clients to develop false memories may be tempted to the
extreme position of claiming that all or virtually all recovered-
memory experiences are accurate. Extreme views are comforting in their
simplicity, and they have a short-term political expediency. In my
view, however, both of these extreme views have two disadvantages:
they exacerbate polarization and they are likely to be proven wrong.

  D. Stephen Lindsay, Ph.D., Unilever Senior Research Fellow Assoc.,
  Prof. of Psychology, U Victoria (on leave).
                         Baltimore Conference
What an extraordinarily fine and well organized conference in
Baltimore! We came away energized by the events that have happened
that spell clearly PROGRESS. The selection of speakers and the order
of speaking was well thought out. We know its success was due to the
grand efforts of the whole office staff and we send big "thank-yous"
to all.
                                                    A Mom and Dad
                              Dear L.M.,
This letter is in response to your column in the FMSF March newsletter
titled "Are there Others?"
  My husband and I have battled this same question since 1992 when our
daughter entered a Chicago clinic for attempting suicide. She spent 28
days in treatment. During this time we were not allowed to see her or
call her since she was 22-years-old and considered an adult. She was
diagnosed as having Multiple Personality Disorder and when she was
released she withdrew all contact with her immediate family and other
  Our daughter stated several times that she did not recover her
memories in therapy. This has been troublesome to us since most of the
FMS literature has been directed toward clinical experiences. When I
look back on her behavior prior to her hospital stay, it was apparent
that something was definitely wrong while she was a student at the
University of Kansas in 1989. She had been seeing a master's level
school counselor who told her that she was anorexic. She transferred
to another college and became a Bible major. During this time I think
that her friend and her friend's mother had a role in our daughter's
recovered memories, perhaps through suggestive books. I believe that
our daughter fell prey to outside influences of society, institutions,
authors and misguided friends.
  Our family has been torn apart. Our daughter has lost as much as we
have-maybe more. The remaining members of our family are very close.
Our daughter did not attend the same university as yours, but I think
there are some similarities. I hope this has helped. I don't know what
I would have done without the support of FMSF and the many others I
have been in contact with through the foundation.
                                                    A Grieving Mom
Another adult daughter has broken loose from the clutches of her
therapist! Let me tell you about it. Her retraction followed a
pattern which we see described frequently in this newsletter. It's
been a slow reversal and her awareness of the truth isn't really clear
  Our forty-year-old daughter sent the accusing letter in May, 1992.
Actually, her therapist had accused her father the previous summer but
we were so confused we believed both she and her therapist were
"working through" memories and would emerge into the truth in time.
However, we did stop financing the therapy at that time. We had spent
thousands of dollars on it. In the summer of 1992, we learned of FMSF
and felt like a lifeline had been tossed to us. We were able to deal
with the pain and misery we felt for the next few years. All of the
family and friends that knew of our problem stood with us. Our poor
daughter was excluded from family affairs -- two funerals, family
reunions, trips and vacations. Her dad underwent heart by-pass surgery
during this time.
  A minimum of contact was maintained. One sister became the liaison
person, and we always knew where she was. We sent birthday and
Christmas cards and a gift when she had surgery but the more generous
gifts and checks ceased. We loved her.
  Life was difficult for her. She went through a divorce, her step-son
broke contact, she had a hysterectomy and her therapist was her only
support -- her "new family." In time, however, she made tentative
advances toward us -- sort of testing a relationship. There were some
setbacks along the way. She did not want to talk about THE PROBLEM.
Our contact increased. She brought her new friend to our house twice
and in February of 1996 she invited us to her wedding.
  A little more than a year ago I put her in touch with a retractor.
At first she didn't like talking to this person, but things warmed
up. I spoke to the retractor who told me that my daughter had some
doubts about her memories but that it would be a long and slow
process. She advised us not to initiate the conversation. Therapy
sessions tapered off.
  Our daughter's therapist came to the wedding. After the ceremony I
had a private talk with him and told him how dangerous and damaging it
is to rip into family relationships without validating any facts. He
appeared not to realize nor accept my disdain for his methods. My
daughter is not likely to see him again because the newlyweds have
moved to another state.
  Last week I opened the conversation with her privately about how she
now feels. It was not a gushing reversal but she said she can't
believe we could have done those horrible things. (I really think she
doesn't quite remember what she wrote in her accusing letter and how
she removed herself from her family.) She said she did not know how to
talk to her dad but that she wanted to do so. And she did! She
recanted with much more conviction and apology. She accepts that her
thinking was similar to cult mentality.
  We will probably never quite recover the lost relationship -- it has
been too painful. But we'll have good times and already are planning a
family rafting trip this summer.
  Likely this pattern is rather classic -- the accusing and recanting.
Some have waited longer, some shorter. Fortunately we were never
unaware of her whereabouts. The door has always been cracked open a
little bit in both directions. It has sustained us to read FMSF
reports and to realize that our case was within the range of thousands
of others. The similarities have given us courage. We hope that many
others will find this joy soon.
                                                   A Mom and Dad
                          Our Group Meeting
I want to share with readers the wide variety of family experiences
expressed at our January meeting. Christine, our leader, had another
program planned but started out by asking for updates. The ensuing
discussion took up the entire meeting. We had not met since before the
holidays which for some is a time of hope and for others a time of
  Grace described how her accusing daughter, who maintains some
communication with her but not with her father, pleaded for help when
she became quite ill and could not take proper care of her infant
child. Grace spent several days and nights there and her daughter
showed great appreciation, but then suddenly turned on Grace whom she
held responsible for messing up her life. We thought this was
possibly an example of the kind of cycle accusers go through or that
there might possibly be some chemical imbalance to cause such a
violent mood swing.
  Jack and Don told of similar experiences in which their daughters
want to maintain contact with their families. We decided they are
"returners," certainly not retractors. Jack actually got a tentative
hug from his daughter that he doesn't know how to deal with. Don is
anxious about meeting soon with his daughter for the first time. We
discussed the pros and cons of such meetings and concluded that it is
a highly personal choice.
  Several parents told of the terrible experience of having gift
packages returned unopened.
  Lee described his experiences of the past four years and they
sounded like a chapter straight out of Courage to Heal including what
we call THE LETTER. Lee feels that there will be no resolution until
his daughter, who lives far away, gets away from her "New Age" type
therapist. Lee feels he is dealing with a child-like mind, even though
his daughter is 45. He tries hard to put himself in her position in
order to understand, but this is difficult. He realizes he must put
aside as much as he can in order to live his own life. Several members
agreed that the constant exchange of letters where there is no change
in position is more destructive than it is worth. Jack said that he
and his daughter had agreed on that point.
  Finally, David and Marie told us that after eight years of no
contact, their daughter called and said she had been mistaken, wants
forgiveness and to regain contact with the family! A full retraction
with no warning or hint. David was one who refused any contact until
this happened. David believes their daughter started thinking and
turned around based on information in the press . So here is an
example of how publicity and public awareness may pay off. We were all
thrilled by his news.
  The wide range of reports gave us both hope and despair. While we
must each deal with our own situation as we see fit, we are also
helped by learning about the similar experiences of others.
                                                            A Mom

|                    WHO HAS CUT OFF ALL CONTACT?                    |
|                                                                    |
| Uptown Publishing Company is considering a book of letters from    |
| parents or other relatives to a family member who is rejecting all |
| contact. You may write a letter or note and include snapshots that |
| is non-threatening but that communicates family feeling and        |
| events. Consider your child before he or she became deluded and    |
| think of what would appeal to that child.                          |
|                                                                    |
|    Send your letter to the False Memory Syndrome Foundation,       |
|     3401 Market Street, Ste. 130, Philadelphia, PA 19104-3315.     |

This address and the phone numbers have changed as of July 15, 2000
|                                                                    |
|               Deadline for submission: June 30, 1997               |

                F M S    B U L L E T I N    B O A R D
  (MO) = monthly; (bi-MO) = bi-monthly; (*) = see State Meetings list

                           *STATE MEETINGS*
             Call persons listed for info & registration
                          June 16 & 17, 1997
                      Speaker: Elizabeth Loftus
                    Bar Ilan University, Ramat Gan
                Prof. Israel Nachshon (972) 3-635-0995
                            S. CALIFORNIA
                    July 1 @ 1pm in Thousand Oaks
             Speakers: Pamela Freyd and Eleanor Goldstein
           Cecilia (310) 545-6064 or Carole (805) 967-80085
            The Rutherfords will be speaking in September.
         Please see next month's issue for more information.
                       NORTHERN MOUNTAIN REGION
                    October 18 in Helena, Montana
           Speakers: Pamela Freyd and the Rutherford family
                      Lee & Avone (406) 443-3189
               "Crisis in the Church: Counseling Abuse"
           November 14 & 15 at Rollins College, Winter Park
    John and Nancy (352) 750-5446 or Bob and Janet (813) 856-7091

Contacts & Meetings:

        Bob (907) 586-2469
       (bi-MO) Barbara (602) 924-0975; 854-0404(fax)
  Little Rock
        Al & Lela (501) 363-4368
  Sacramento - (quarterly)
        Joanne & Gerald (916) 933-3655
        Rudy (916)443-4041
  San Fransico & North Bay - (bi-MO)
        Gideon (415) 389-0254 or
        Charles 984-6626(am); 435-9618(pm)
  East Bay Area - (bi-MO)
        Judy (510) 254-2605
  South Bay Area - Last Sat. (bi-MO)
        Jack & Pat (408) 425-1430
        3rd Sat. (bi-MO) @10am
  Los Angeles County
        Cecilia(310) 545-6064
  Central Coast
        Carole (805) 967-8058
  Central Orange County - 1st Fri. (MO) @ 7pm
        Chris & Alan (714) 733-2925
  Orange County - 3rd Sun. (MO) @6pm
        Jerry & Eileen (714) 494-9704
  Covina Area - 1st Mon. (MO) @7:30pm
        Floyd & Libby (818) 330-2321
  San Diego Area  -
        Dee (619) 941-0630
  Denver  - 4th Sat. (MO) @1pm
        Art (303) 572-0407
  S. New England  - (bi-MO) Sept-May
        Earl (203) 329-8365 or
        Paul (203) 458-9173
        Madeline (305) 966-4FMS
  Boca/Delray  - 2nd & 4th Thurs (MO) @1pm
        Helen (407) 498-8684
  Central Florida  - 4th Sun. (MO) @2:30 pm
        John & Nancy (352) 750-5446
  Tampa Bay Area
        Bob & Janet (813) 856-7091
  Atlanta - (quaterly) May 24
        Wallie & Jill (770) 971-8917
  Chicago & Suburbs  - 3rd Sun. (MO)
        Eileen (847) 985-7693
        Bill & Gayle (815) 467-6041
  Rest of Illinois
        Bryant & Lynn (309) 674-2767
  Indiana Assn. for Responsible Mental Health Practices
        Nickie (317) 471-0922; ((fax) 317) 334-9839
        Pat (219) 482-2847
  Des Moines - 2nd Sat. (MO) @11:30 am Lunch
        Betty & Gayle (515) 270-6976
  Kansas City
        Leslie (913) 235-0602 or
        Pat (913) 738-4840
        Jan (816) 931-1340
        Dixie (606) 356-9309
  Louisville- Last Sun. (MO) @ 2pm
        Bob (502) 957-2378
        Francine (318) 457-2022
        Irvine & Arlene (207) 942-8473
  Freeport -  4th Sun. (MO)
        Carolyn  (207) 364-8891
   Ellicot City Area
        Margie (410) 750-8694
        Ron (508) 250-9756
  Grand Rapids Area-Jenison - 1st Mon. (MO)
        Bill & Marge (616) 383-0382
  Greater Detroit Area - 3rd Sun. (MO)
        Nancy (810) 642-8077
        Terry & Collette (507) 642-3630
        Dan & Joan (612) 631-2247
  Kansas City  -  2nd Sun. (MO)
        Leslie (913) 235-0602 or Pat 738-4840
        Jan (816) 931-1340
  St. Louis Area  -  3rd Sun. (MO)
        Karen (314) 432-8789
        Mae (314) 837-1976
    Retractors group also forming
  Springfield - 4th Sat. (MO) @12:30pm
        Dorothy & Pete (417) 882-1821
        Howard (417) 865-6097
        John (352) 750-5446
        Lee & Avone (406) 443-3189
  See Wayne, PA
  Albuquerque  - 1st  Sat. (MO) @1 pm
  Southwest Room -Presbyterian Hospital
        Maggie (505) 662-7521 (after 6:30 pm)
        or Martha 624-0225
  Westchester, Rockland, etc. - (bi-MO)
        Barbara (914) 761-3627
  Upstate/Albany Area  - (bi-MO)
        Elaine (518) 399-5749
  Western/Rochester Area -  (bi-MO)
        George & Eileen (716) 586-7942
  Oklahoma City
        Len (405) 364-4063
        Dee (405) 942-0531
        HJ (405) 755-3816
        Rosemary (405) 439-2459
        Paul & Betty (717) 691-7660
        Rick & Renee (412) 563-5616
        John (717) 278-2040
  Wayne (includes S. NJ) - 2nd Sat. in June @1pm
               (No meeting in July or August)
        Jim & Jo (610) 783-0396
  Wed. (MO) @1pm
        Kate (615) 665-1160
TEXAS -  Houston
        Jo or Beverly (713) 464-8970
        Keith (801) 467-0669
        (bi-MO) Judith (802) 229-5154
        Sue (703) 273-2343
        Pat (304) 291-6448
        Katie & Leo (414) 476-0285
        Susanne & John (608) 427-3686

  Vancouver & Mainland - Last Sat. (MO) @ 1- 4pm
        Ruth (604) 925-1539
  Victoria & Vancouver Island - 3rd Tues. (MO) @7:30pm
        John (250) 721-3219 (note new area code)
        Joan (204) 284-0118
  London -2nd Sun (bi-MO)
        Adriaan (519) 471-6338
        Eileen (613) 836-3294
  Toronto /N. York
        Pat (416) 444-9078
        Ethel (705) 924-2546
        Ken & Marina (905) 637-6030
        Paula (705) 692-0600
        Alain (514) 335-0863
  St. Andre Est.
        Mavis (514) 537-8187
        Irene (03) 9740 6930
  FMS ASSOCIATION fax-(972) 2-259282 or
  Task Force FMS of Werkgroep Fictieve Herinneringen
        Anna (31) 20-693-5692
        Colleen (09) 416-7443
        Ake Moller FAX (48) 431-217-90
  The British False Memory Society
        Roger Scotford (44) 1225 868-682
          Deadline for the July/August Newsletter is June 16
      Meeting notices MUST be in writing and should be sent no 
     later than TWO MONTHS PRIOR TO MEETING. You must be a State 
      Contact or GroupLeader to post notices in this section.

|          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 research 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 
McGill University, Montreal, Canada (on the occasion of the Barrfest).
  The False Memory Syndrome Foundation is a qualified 501(c)3 corpora-
tion  with  its  principal offices in Philadelphia and governed by its 
Board of Directors.  While it encourages participation by its  members
in  its  activities,  it must be understood that the Foundation has no 
affiliates and that no other organization or person is  authorized  to
speak for the Foundation without the prior written approval of the Ex-
ecutive Director. All membership dues and contributions to the Founda-
tion must be forwarded to the Foundation for its disposition.

Pamela Freyd, Ph.D.,  Executive Director

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

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

Family - Includes Newsletter             $100_______

                       Additional Contribution:_____________


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

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

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



Street Address or P.O.Box

City                                 State         Zip+4

Telephone                           FAX

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

Mail Order To:
  FMSF Video
  Rt. 1 Box 510
  Burkeville, TX 75932

                                   DATE:   /   /

Ordered By:                        Ship to:

Please type or print information:
| QUANT- |  #  |            DESCRIPTION             | UNIT  | AMOUNT |
|  ITY   |     |                                    | PRICE |        |
|        | 222 | Welcome, Making a Difference,      |       |        |
|        |     |  What We Still Need to Know        |       |        |
|        | 223 | The Foundation as Friend of the    |       |        |
|        |     |  Court, Families and Courts, Panel |       |        |
|        | 224 | Helping Families is to Help        |       |        |
|        |     |  Everyone, Family Panel            |       |        |
|        | 225 | Reforming the Mental Health        |       |        |
|        |     |  System, Closing Remarks           |       |        |
|        | Set | Set includes one of                |       |        |
|        |     |   (222, 223, 224, 225)             |       |        |
                                                   SUBTOTAL |        |
                                                            |        |
                                    ADDITIONAL CONTRIBUTION |        |
                                                            |        |
                                                  TOTAL DUE |        |
                                                            |        |

Cost of tapes:
  FMSF Member - Single Tape  $12.00, Set $40.00
   Non-member - Single Tape  $15.00, Set $50.00

    Price includes shipping - allow two to thee weeks for delivery

The video tapes, which were not recorded by FMS Video, have some flaws
that could not be corrected by editing. You may experience problems
such as short periods where their is no sound and the camera is out of
focus or did not tape the speaker. Some of the slides of the presenters
were not available for dubbing.

Made all checks payable to FMS Foundation. If you have any questions
concerning this order, call Benton, 409-565-4480.

The tax deductible portion of your contribution is the excess of goods
and services provided.

                     THANK YOU FOR YOUR INTEREST