FMSF NEWSLETTER ARCHIVE - October 1, 1997 - Vol. 6, No. 9, 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
     Focus on Science
         Legal Corner
             August Piper
                 From Our Readers
                     Bulletin Board

Dear Friends,

  We have evidence of another major shift in the "memory wars" this
month. The Ramona case is finally and completely over. Gary Ramona's
lawsuit against his daughter's therapist, psychiatrist and hospital
for implanting false memories received a tremendous amount of
publicity in 1994, but the August demise of a lawsuit by Holly Ramona
against her father for alleged childhood abuse received limited
coverage. Yet, the ending of the suit by Ms. Ramona is equally, if not
more, significant. It marks two important changes taking place in the
recovered memory debate: the increasing number of legal opinions that
"recovered memories" lack the scientific support to meet the legal
standards of evidence and the fact that a shift is taking place in
proponents' claims about "recovered/repressed memories."
  The Los Angeles Court of Appeal held a special hearing to determine
the admissibility of Holly Ramona's recovered memory testimony (for a
description see the Legal Corner of this issue). In an effort to avoid
that special hearing about the scientific reliability of recovered
memories, however, Ms. Ramona's lawyer noted in a brief to the court
that Holly did not know if her memories were true or false since all
memories are fallible! This is a 180-degree change in what proponents
of recovered memory had been claiming: until recently they claimed
that there is something special in the way that memories of trauma are
stored that makes them more reliable than ordinary memories.[1] The
FMS Foundation has consistently cited the lack of research that proves
"recovered memories" to be more reliable than any other memories.
  Holly Ramona originally accused her father in 1990 on the basis of
the "truthfulness" of her memories. In 1997 she claims that she
doesn't know if they were true or false. And we, as families and as a
nation, are left with destroyed families and the fact that almost half
of the states changed their statute of limitation laws because they
were told that "recovered repressed memories" were more reliable than
other memories. Indeed, most families who have contacted FMSF report
that their children made similar claims.
  The recovered repressed memory debate is being decided in the legal
arena because of the lawsuits that were filed against parents and
others. This month we report on two more appellate decisions not to
extend the statute of limitations for repressed memories. In both of
these cases the Foundation had filed amicus briefs outlining the
scientific reasons why the courts should not extend them.
  The recovered repressed memory debate is being decided in the legal
arena because of lawsuits that have been filed by former patients
against their therapists. The number of these suits that are reaching
juries is growing -- as are the sizes of the awards. From several
awards of more than $2 million just a year ago to the $5.9 million
award in the Lynn Carl case described in this issue, the message is
clear: therapists who harm their patients by creating false memories
will be held liable for the damage that is done. As legal events race
forward, some critics are not hearing the message and they remain
mired in smear campaigns. Their comments usually ignore what is going
on. A recent ridiculous article appeared in the Columbia Journalism
Review.[2] To capture its flavor readers need look no further than the
caption to a picture stating that the FMS Foundation was formed "
satisfy the media's 'craving for human drama'" Sure!
  Not all the news this month has been positive. Many of you probably
know about the death of Violet Amirault who, along with the Souzas and
the Perkins, had become a symbol for us all in the fight against
injustice. Violet Amirault died of stomach cancer on September 12 at
her home in Saugus, MA. Violet, her daughter Cheryl Amirault LeFave
and her son Gerald spent the past twelve years fighting charges of
sexually abusing preschoolers at the Fells Acres Day Care in
Massachusetts. Gerald is still in prison, but Violet and Cheryl have
been free since 1995 while arguments over whether they should be given
a new trial have gone on.
  Violet "died in legal limbo, either one of the sickest pedophiles in
Massachusetts' history, or one of the greatest victims of witch hunt
hysteria since Salem." (Boston Herald, September 18)

  "The images of Violet and her family at Salem last January, their
  freedom still tentative, their dignity and courage unquenchable, is
  etched forever in my mind, eye, and heart. We who were there
  witnessed, and touched, a witch hunt as few have done. Violet's
  force will be far beyond her death in the quiet tide of commitment
  to justice her spirit has generated in us all. Let us fight with
  deepened determination for the justice Violet and her family were
  denied. Rest in Peace."                       Moira Johnston

  While there is much to be thankful for in the changes that are
taking place, we can't overlook the sadness that false memories have
created for so many families. The Foundation work needs to continue
and so our annual fund-raising drive is underway. We wish we didn't
have to ask for money. It doesn't come easy to ask the very people who
have been victims of this madness, who have lost their families, to
give more. The reality is that the Foundation is still dependent on
the dues and contributions of supporters. The tide has turned in the
"memory wars," but the damage is still going on. Intellectual support
from the memory research community about the reliability of memory was
the first change that we saw. Now we are seeing changes in the legal
arena. We are also seeing hints of changes in insurance policies and
in a better handling of third-party complaints. But we still have a
long way to go to help families reunite. Legal issues are not
finished. Accountablity is needed.
  We can only file amicus briefs, compile research and disseminate
information if we have the resources to do it. This problem is not
going to go on forever. Make FMSF a priority this year in the
knowledge that the tide has indeed turned and the expectation that
this support will not be needed much longer. Thank you.
  [1] Others are making similar points. For example one cognitive
psychologist wrote, "Memory may be largely true or largely false for
either continuous or recovered memories. We are aware of no scientific
research showing that memory is more fallible for recovered memories
than for continuous memories."(p 69), Freyd, J. J. & Prince, A. P.,
The Judges Journal, Summer 1997.
  [2] Stanton, M. (July-August 1997) "U-TURN ON MEMORY LANE" Columbia
Journalism Review.

/                                                                    \ 
|                         We Need Your Help                          |
|                                                                    |
| The 1998 Fundraising campaign is now underway. Important and       |
| dramatic changes have taken place during the five and a half years |
| since the Foundation opened its doors, but the Foundation's work   |
| is still not finished. Donations are the major source of funding   |
| for the Foundation. Lee Arning and Charles Caviness, co-chairs of  |
| the Foundation's annual drive, ask that you return the pledge card |
| with your tax deductible gift today. Your gift is important.       |
|  Please be as generous as you can.                                 |

     |                      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: Ric Powell                      |
     |  COLUMNISTS: Katie Spanuello and                         |
     |      members of the FMSF Scientific Advisory Board       |
     |  LETTERS and INFORMATION: Our Readers                    |
                            F M S  N E W S
                           Legislative News
  MISSOURI: The legislature passed a new section of the Psychology
Practice Act and Rules Act. Section 337.035 No. 4 reads as follows:
"An interested third party may file a complaint or appear or present
evidence relative to such complaint or another complaint filed
pursuant to this section. For purposes of this section, an interested
third party includes a parent or guardian of a person who received
treatment by a psychologist or any person who is related within the
second degree of consanguinity or affinity and who is financially
responsible for the payment of such treatment." Under this section,
third-party complaints against a psychologist are dependent upon that
third party (parent) having paid for the treatment, according to a
legislative assistant.
  ILLINOIS: In late July, Governor Edgar signed House Bill 1664 into
law. This bill regulates the practice of hypnosis in the state and
limits hypnotists from engaging in mental or physical health practice
that is normally performed by a registered and licensed psychologist
or physician. Hypnotists will not receive any documentation from the
Illinois State Board of Registration indicating they are registered.
Both the Illinois Psychologist Association and the Illinois State
Medical Society were interested in the passage of this bill as were
many concerned FMS families in the state.
           Warning patients does not prevent pseudomemories 
Two recent research studies examined the effect of warning people
about false memories. Gallo, Roberts and Seamon found that warning
subjects about the danger of forming memory illusions or false
memories will reduce but not eliminate the false recognition effect.
("Remembering words not presented in lists: Can we avoid creating
false memories?" (Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 1997, 4 (2) 271-276).
  At the American Psychological Association annual meeting this
summer, Joseph Green (Ohio State) and Steven Jay Lynn (SUNY
Binghamton) reported on their research in which subjects were warned
that hypnosis could lead to false memories. While the warnings
discouraged pseudomemories to some extent, they did not prevent
pseudomemories and did not reduce the confidence subjects had in those
memories. In another study, Dr. Green found that false memories can be
created with self-hypnosis. (New York Times, September 10, 1997, Jane
 How Suggestible are Preschool Children? Cognitive and Social Factors
                      S.J. Ceci and M.L. Huffman
  Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry
                     36:7 pp 948-958, July, 1997
This article describes seven studies that examine the cognitive and
social conditions that can undermine the accuracy of young children's
reporting. Many of the studies show how some young children can
internalize false suggestions, especially through the use of repeated
suggestions, stereotypes, and visually guided imagery. These studies
have become familiar because they have received much publicity in the
past few years. Less well known are some studies that show that
professionals (psychiatrists, psychologists, social workers, attorneys
and judges) are unable to distinguish between true and false accounts
in videotapes of children making false statements (that they have come
to believe are true). These participants watched for children who were
shifty-eyed or twitchy or who displayed inappropriate emotion.
According to Ceci, these clues can be misleading.
  The average child is formally interviewed 3.5 to 11 times before
appearing in court and that gives much opportunity for the creation of
false beliefs. The studies showed that even 3-year-old children, if
not interviewed suggestively, can recall 90% accurately. However, once
a young child has accepted a fictitious event as true, the studies
showed how difficult it can be for either the interviewer or the
parents to convince the child otherwise.
                   Embezzler admits defense a hoax
                     Register Guard, July 9, 1997
                             Bill Bishop
In July at her sentencing hearing, Cathleen Byers admitted that she
really knew what she was doing when she stole $630,000 from a credit
union that she managed in Eugene, Oregon. Byers had earlier been found
guilty in a trial in which she had claimed that separate individual
personalities did the thefts. MPD specialist Phillip Coons, M.D., the
princiipal defense expert, had described Byers' as a "classical case."
(Register Guard, 3/18/97) At her sentencing hearing in July, however,
Byers admitted that she had known what she was doing when she stole
the money.
                             Sybil Minds
                 Saturday Night, Sept. 1997 pp 35-42
                            Carol Milstone
Skepticism about Multiple Personality Disorder (MPD, now called
Dissociative Identity Disorder, DID) seems to be spreading. "Sybil
Minds" is the first article in a major popular magazine in Canada to
deal with the questions that many professionals have about this
diagnosis. Milstone brings to light the powerful institutional and
government support and funding that MPD has received. MPD was a rare
diagnosis until after the publication of the book Sybil. Milstone
notes the recent revelations by Herbert Spiegel that Sybil, about whom
the book was written, did not have MPD.
                   Sex-assault plaintiff threatened
                  Montreal Gazette, August 30, 1997
A 76-year-old unidentified Canadian woman who is suing her brother for
alleged sex assaults that began 69 years ago claims that she received
a threatening telephone call. The woman claims her now 81-year old
brother was 12 years old when the first assault occurred. After
watching a television program, she began to think that there was a
link between her psychological problems and the childhood assault.
Apparently the anonymous threat came just hours after publication of a
story about the suit. The woman's family is seeing to her safety.
  Editors comment: To our knowledge ,69 years is the longest time
  between alleged sexual abuse and the filing of a lawsuit.

/                                                                    \ 
|            Children's Memory for Traumatic Experiences             |
|                                                                    |
| "[F]ailures to recall traumatic events, when they do occur may not |
| be the result of "repression" or dissociation, but rather to an    |
| inability to interpret, and hence provide a stable encoding of,    |
| the event in the first place. These failures, like those           |
| potentially associated with extreme (and perhaps unusual)          |
| neuroendocrine reactions, are at the level of storage, something   |
| that suggests that these extreme events are not well represented   |
| in memory at all." (page 168)                                      |
|                                                      Mark L. Howe  |
|    Learning and Individual Differences Vol 9 (2), 1997 pp 153-174  |
|                                                                    |
|  Editors Comment: Readers who are interested in the role of stress |
|  in modulating memory performance in children will want to obtain  |
|  this article.                                                     |

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

  This 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.
                     Can People Repress Memories?
               Evidence of Prospective Studies, Part I
                       Harrison Pope, Jr., M.D.
In previous columns in this Newsletter, we have examined retrospective
studies that purport to show scientific evidence of "repressed
memory." As we have noted, however, such studies are fraught with
methodological flaws, in that they rely on individuals' unconfirmed
recollections of whether or not they forgot an event for some period
of time earlier in their lives. Such designs, which we have previously
termed "do-you-remember-whether-you-forgot" studies, do not pass
scientific muster as satisfactory tests of the "repression"
  Instead, a much better way to test the repression hypothesis would
be to design a prospective study, in which one is not dependent upon
somebody's unconfirmed recollections of any sort of information. Such
a design would not be difficult. First, one would obtain the names for
a large group of people who had undergone a known, documented trauma.
For example, one could go to the records of a hospital emergency room
to find 50 children who were seen for trauma -- severe injuries,
physical abuse, or sexual abuse -- and where there were specific
medical findings in the records to show that the trauma actually
occurred. Alternatively, one could identify 50 children who underwent
a traumatic medical procedure, such as a painful rectal or gynecologic
examination. One could get 50 assault or rape victims from police
records, 50 victims of a tornado, or any other group where the facts
of their personal traumatic experience were known and documented.
Then, one would locate all of those trauma victims several years
later, interview them, and simply ask them if they remembered the
traumatic event. If a certain percentage of the subjects reported that
they had completely forgotten the event, then we would have persuasive
evidence that some people can repress the memory of trauma. On the
other hand, if none of the subjects in any of the studies reported
forgetting the trauma, then we would suspect that repression does not
really happen -- except, of course, in the movies.
  We would have to be careful about several confounding effects in
such a study. The first is the normal amnesia of early childhood. If
someone has no memory of having been brought to the emergency ward at
age 1 or 2, such a case clearly provides no evidence of repression. We
all have amnesia for most events before the age of 3, and even most
events before age 6. Second, we would have to exclude neurological or
medical causes of amnesia. If an individual was knocked unconscious in
an accident, or if she received anesthesia for a medical procedure, we
would expect her to have amnesia without any need to postulate
repression. Similarly, combat veterans would represent a poor choice
for our study, because head injuries, severe sleep deprivation, and
other neurological insults to the brain are so common in wartime.
Third, we would not want to study people with only mild trauma,
because then we could not rule out the possibility that the subject
was just experiencing ordinary forgetfulness for an event that was not
particularly memorable. In other words, to test whether one can truly
repress a memory, one would have to study a group of subjects who
experienced a trauma that no ordinary person would be expected to
forget. Fourth, when we interviewed our subjects to ask them about
their memories, we would have to take care to make sure that they were
disclosing all that they remembered. We will discuss this issue in
detail in the next two columns, but an example will suffice here.
Suppose that a girl undergoes a painful and embarrassing gynecologic
procedure at age 10. When she reaches age 15, a researcher sees her
for an interview and asks her if she has undergone any unusual medical
procedures. Even if the interviewer is careful and sympathetic, the
girl may still answer, "no," even though she actually remembers the
event. To minimize such non-disclosure, the interviewer may need to
ask the subject about the specific event in a more direct manner: "I
know from your medical records that when you were 10, you were seen at
the hospital for a special medical examination. Do you remember that?"
  In summary, then, a satisfactory scientific test of repression would
have to follow only a few simple rules: 1) locate a group of people
who were victims of a documented trauma, and 2) interview them some
years later to see if any of them report amnesia for the trauma. We
would exclude cases where the failure to report might be due to 
a) early childhood amnesia, b) neurological or medical causes, 
c) ordinary forgetfulness, or d) deliberate non-disclosure. If after
these exclusions, we were still left with a fair number of patients
who described amnesia for the event, we would have evidence that
repression really does occur. Those are the ground rules. What is the
verdict? To our knowledge every study in the world literature which
has come even remotely close to the above standards has failed to show
any evidence that people can repress memories.
  Here are some examples. In the 1960s, Leopold and Dillon (1) studied
34 men who had survived a terrible explosion when two ships collided.
In interviews conducted about four years after the explosion, many of
the men reported serious post-traumatic psychopathology, but none
displayed amnesia. The authors wrote, "repression does not appear
possible." In another study, Terr (2,3) interviewed 25 children who
had been kidnapped and buried alive in a school bus four years
earlier. She found that "each child could give a fully detailed
account of the experience." Malt (4) interviewed 107 individuals who
had been seen at an emergency ward for traumatic injuries 16 to 51
months previously. The only amnesia found in these individuals was
that due to neurological injuries; no one was described as having
repressed the memory. Wagenaar and Groeneweg (5) studied 78 subjects
who were seen in relation to a Nazi war crimes trial in the 1980s.
These subjects were asked about their memories of having been in a
concentration camp 40 years earlier. Although many of the subjects
were quite elderly by the 1980s, most remembered the camp "in great
detail." Although the subjects had forgotten various specific items
from their experience, they had forgotten non-traumatic items just as
much as traumatic items; there was no evidence that they had
selectively repressed traumatic memories. Interestingly, there were
six men who had testified to various specific traumatic experiences
when they were originally liberated from the camp in the 1940s, but
who did not describe these memories when they were re-interviewed in
the 1980s. However, when they were reminded of their earlier
testimony, all but one of them promptly recalled the particular
events. This is a remarkable record when it is considered that these
former inmates were 65 to 82 years old by the 1980s -- and hence
vulnerable to biological amnesia. Peterson and Bell (6) interviewed 90
children who had been seen at a hospital in Newfoundland for traumatic
injuries six months earlier. It appears that every child, including
even those only two years old at the time, remembered the event. Among
the children who were 9 to 13 years old at the time of their injuries,
so few made errors in their recall that the investigators could not
even include them in a statistical analysis of the causes of errors of
  The above studies span a range of traumas, from single events like
the marine explosion to longstanding events like the concentration
camp experience. Some of the subjects in some of the studies had
spoken at length about their experiences to other people, or undergone
prior interviews, and hence might be expected to have particularly
clear memories. On the other hand, some of the subjects were being
studied for the first time, and had had no opportunity to "rehearse"
their memories previously. The one feature shared by the subjects in
every study was that they remembered their trauma.
  Some critics might still object to our evidence here. They would
argue that explosions, kidnappings, concentration camps and hospital
visits are very different from "secret" traumas such as childhood
sexual abuse. Even allowing that repression does not occur for
ordinary traumas, perhaps it might still occur in certain special
situtaions, like that of a child who is forced to undergo repeated
sexual assaults from someone whom she is supposed to love. Therefore,
rather than be too quick to dismiss the possibility of repression, we
owe it to ourselves to examine prospective studies that look
specifically at the memories of victims of childhood sexual abuse.
However, as will be seen in the next two columns, these studies also
fail to provide any methodologically sound evidence that repression
can occur.

  1. Leopold, R.L. and Dillon, H: Psycho-anatomy of a disaster: a long
term study of post-traumatic neuroses in survivors of a marine
explosion. Am J Psychiatry 1963: 119-921.
  2. Terr, L.C.: Children of Chowchilla: a study of psychic trauma.
Psychoanal Study Child 34: 552-623, 1979.
  3. Terr, L.C.: Chowchilla revisited: the effects of psychic trauma
four years after a school-bus kidnapping. Am J Psychol 140: 1543-1550,
  4. Malt, U: The long-term psychiatric consequences of accidental
injury: a longitudinal study of 107 adults. Br J. Psychiatry 153:
810-818, 1988.
  5. Wagenaar, W.A. & Groeneweg, J: The memory of concentration camp
survivors. Appl Cog Psychol 4: 77-87, 1990.
  6. Peterson, C. & Bell, M.: Children's memory for trauma injury.
Child Develop 67:3045-3070, 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., Upton Books, 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.

/                                                                    \ 
|              At What Age Did The Alleged Abuse Start?              |
|                                                                    |
| FMSF Family Survey data show that approximately 68% of the         |
| accusers believed they remembered abuse happening before the age   |
| of 4 years.                                                        |
|               Age at which abuse allegedly started                 |
|                                                                    |
|                      age        N         %                        |
|                      0- 2      N=149    34.97                      |
|                      2- 4      N=142    33.33                      |
|                      4- 6      N= 71    16.67                      |
|                      6- 9      N= 40     9.38                      |
|                      9-13      N= 18     4.23                      |
|                     13-17      N=  6     1.41                      |
|                                                                    |
| The phenomenon of childhood amnesia raises questions about claims  |
| of very early memories of events. "The term childhood amnesia      |
| refers to the fact that very few adults can recall more than a     |
| handful of events from when they were aged below about five years  |
| (cf Rubin et al. 1986; Wetzler and Neber 1986). Thus, the older    |
| child and the adult cannot remember what they were able to         |
| remember when they were aged five years and younger. .."           |
|                                                       Conway p 9   |
|                          Recovered Memories & False Memories   |
|                                    Oxford University Press, 1997   |


  Comments about" recovered memories" are frequently made in contexts
  that are not part of the ongoing debate within the psychological
  community. Following are excerpts from reviews of a new movie," A
  Thousand Acres" based on a Pulitzer Prize novel (1990) of the same
  name by Jane S.. S.'s novel was a retelling of "King Lear."
  It seems that opinions about "recovered memories" have changed
  greatly since 1990.

Poor Shakespeare -- obliged to motivate his tragedies with nothing
more than seven terribly familiar sins and a smattering of Aristotle.
How much richer his works might have been had the blessings of post-
modernism been his. He might, for example, have been free to draw
openly on incest as a theme instead of dropping little hints of it
here and there for the scholars to ferret out 400 years later. And
what about recovered memory? That's a dramatic device he never 
dreamed of.
                                            Richard Schickel, Time
                              *   *   *

The post-Shakespearean bugaboo of recovered memory is now important
here, as is incest as an explanation of the family's deepest woes.
Think obsessive-compulsive Lady Macbeth or Ophelia with an eating
disorder, and you have an idea of just how simplistic that seems.
                                       Janet Maslin, New York Times
                              *   *   *

A secret involving that discredited trick, the recovered memory.
                                  James Verniere, The Boston Herald
                              *   *   *

The movie repeats the currently fashionable pattern in which men are
bad and fathers are the most evil of all...All white male patriarchs
must be guilty of something in modern women's fiction, preferably the
sexual abuse of their children, and I was not surprised to find out
that Larry visited the bedrooms of Rose and Ginny. Rose describes the
visits in lurid detail, but Ginny cannot remember, although they took
place as late as her 16th year; her memory lapse, I think, serves to
prolong the breathless scenes of description. The screenplay is based
on a novel by Jane S., unread by me, which won the Pulitzer Prize
-- which means that either the novel or the prize has been done a
great injustice.
                                       Roger Ebert, Chicago Sun-Times
                              *   *   *

Oh, woe!
Oh, adultery, insanity and incest! Oh, alcoholism, cancer and divorce!
Oh, poisoned water, drunken driving and cold-hearted lawyers!
Oh, repressed memories, disfiguring mastectomies and lingering
    deathbed scenes!
Oh, the misfortune that occurs in "A Thousand Acres!" Oh, the trials
    of Job! Actually, it's "Lear."
                                        Soren Andersonm, News Tribune
                              *   *   *

That "A Thousand Acres" winds up choosing a different direction from
"Lear" isn't the problem. The problem is the direction it chooses.
Once Rose drops the bomb about a family secret, the deck is stacked
against ol' Larry. He becomes the villain, with no hope of redemption,
or forgiveness by the audience. Everything else goes out the window,
and the film becomes a saga about repressed memory.
                             Mick LaSalle, The San Francisco Chronicle

/                                                                    \ 
|                     Conversation With A Parent                     |
|                                                                    |
| A woman from Florida called the Foundation wanting to update her   |
| family's situation. After no contact with her accusing daughter    |
| for five years, not knowing whether the daughter was dead or       |
| alive, the woman hired a private investigator to find her. The     |
| investigator found her living in the Boston area. The mother was   |
| so happy to know she was alive, and wrote her several short notes, |
| saying that she loved her and missed her. She also sent her a      |
| Christmas present. After five months, she received a letter from   |
| an attorney, written on letterhead stating that her daughter       |
| wanted absolutely no contact from her mother, and if she did not   |
| abide by this, legal action would be taken.                        |
|   The mother was distraught, her offense being that she told her   |
| daughter she loved her and she sent her a present.                 |

  /                                                                \ 
  |                    Questions For Therapists                    |
  |                                                                |
  | Do you or do you not acknowledge that there are both true and  |
  | false memories?                                                |
  |                                                                |
  | If you acknowledge that there are both, how do you distinguish |
  | between the two?                                               |
  |                                                                |
  | If you do not distinguish between the two, what does that say  |
  | about therapy?                                                 |
  |                                                                |
  | How do you know if a patient is a legitimate victim, deluded,  |
  | highly suggestible and under therapeutic suggestion, or even   |
  | malicious?                                                     |
  |                                                                |
  | If you do not distinguish among these, what are the means to   |
  | test the therapeutic hypotheses that form the foundation of    |
  | your 'expertise'?                                              |
  |                                                                |
  |                            Adapted from Spencer Harris Morfit  |

                       L E G A L   C O R N E R
                              FMSF Staff
             California Court of Appeals Orders Dismissal
              of "Repressed Memory" Claim in Ramona Case
       Ramona v. Ramona, 66 Cal. Rptr .2d 766 (Aug. 19, '97)[1]
In a widely watched "repressed memory" case, the Second District Court
of Appeal ordered a lower court to dismiss the "repressed memory"
claim brought by Holly Ramona against her father. The court stated
that her proposed testimony was inadmissible because it was tainted by
the drug sodium amytal, administered during therapy. In California, it
is well-settled that memory refreshed by use of the drug is tainted
and, therefore, the Court held that recollections induced by sodium
amytal must be excluded under the Kelly rule.[2]
  The court agreed with the defense contention (offered on a motion
for summary judgment) that all of Holly's "recovered memories" were
inadmissible-regardless of whether they were "recovered" during or 2
years after a sodium amytal interview. The court considered expert
declarations from both sides. Elizabeth Loftus, Ph.D., James Hudson,
M.D., and Richard Ofshe, Ph.D. offered expert testimony concerning the
lack of acceptance in the scientific community of the reliability of
repressed memories recalled after commencing therapy and undergoing a
sodium amytal interview. Daniel Brown, Ph.D., Jon Conte, Ph.D., and
Colin Ross, M.D. provided declarations for the Plaintiff. The court
quoted extensively from Martin T. Orne, Ph.D., M.D., finding his
expert opinion sufficient to shift the burden of providing evidence 
to Holly.
  The court further concluded that expert testimony for Holly failed
to produce any rebuttal evidence on the issue of the reliability of
memories recalled following a sodium amytal interview. Nor was it
sufficient to create a triable issue of fact to withstand the defense
summary judgment motion. In fact, Colin Ross' statements that "memory
contamination can occur during a sodium amytal interview," and "the
risk of contamination is increased," were used to support the court's
determination that Holly's testimony must be excluded under Kelly. In
its unanimous opinion the court concluded that "Holly's testimony on
[what she believes are recovered repressed memories] is inadmissible
under Kelly due to the lack of general acceptance in the scientific
community of the reliability of memories recalled after a sodium
amytal interview."
  Following an extensive review of California case law regarding the
admissibility of hypnotically-enhanced testimony, the court concluded
as a matter of law that "the trial court cannot reasonably determine
Holly's memories were not created during the sodium amytal interview."
[3] The court was not persuaded by Holly's contention that Kelly does
not apply because the sodium amytal interview is not a new procedure,
it was not a scientific technique, and it was conducted solely for
therapeutic purposes. The court wrote "If there is a consensus
regarding the reliability of a sodium amytal test, it is
overwhelmingly negative....Holly's motive for undergoing the procedure
bears no relevance to the procedure's reliability."
  The court focused on the narrow issue of the scientific validity of
sodium amytal and memories recalled while under its influence. It
expressly declined to rule inadmissible all of Holly's repressed
memory testimony, finding it unnecessary to decide the case.
  In 1990, Holly Ramona claimed that when she was 19, she recovered
memories of sexual abuse that occurred as early as age 5. She said she
repressed memories of the abuse until she sought psychiatric
counseling for an eating disorder. That same year, after Holly's
counselor told her that a large majority of women who suffer eating
disorders were also sexual abuse victims, Holly underwent a sodium
amytal interview. After that interview, Holly said she became
convinced that her father had molested her as a young child.
Thereafter, her father, Gary Ramona, filed suit in Napa County against
his daughter's therapists, alleging that they planted false memories
of sexual abuse in her mind. The jury found that the therapists were
"negligent in providing health care to Holly Ramona by implanting or
reinforcing false memories that plaintiff [Gary Ramona] had molested
her as a child," and awarded him $500,000 in 1994.
  In the current case, the trial judge granted Gary Ramona's motion
for summary judgment in 1995, citing the $500,000 judgment Gary Ramona
had won against his daughter's therapist at trial. The appeal court
reversed the grant of summary judgment in October 1995, ruling that
the Napa County case and verdict against the therapists did not decide
the claims filed by Holly herself.
  In the current case, the appeal court has now ordered that the trial
court reverse its ruling and grant summary judgment to the defendant.
Gary Ramona was awarded costs. Attorney Richard Harrington of San
Francisco represented Mr. Ramona.
  The Napa Valley Register (9/6/97) reported that Holly Ramona has
decided against appealing this decision to the California Supreme

  1. For a thorough review of the Ramona case, see Moira Johnston
(1997) Spectral Evidence; The Ramona Case: Incest, Memory and Truth on
Trial in Napa Valley, Mifflin. See also FMSF Brief Bank #140.
  2. The court relied on the seminal People v. Kelly, 17 Cal.3d 24
(1976) in which the California Supreme Court barred evidence gleaned
from scientific techniques that do not meet general acceptance in the
scientific community.
  3. In so writing, the court drew a parallel to the long history of
case law which typically has held that because determining the role of
hypnosis in the content of and confidence in a memory is impossible,
such testimony must be inadmissible. The court quoted Dr. Martin
Orne's declaration, "sodium amytal is, in some aspects, even more
problematic than hypnosis in its effects on producing false memories
and confabulations."
             Pennsylvania Supreme Court Refuses to Apply
              Discovery Rule to "Repressed Memory" Claim
                         Dalrymple v. Brown,
                1997 WL 499945 (Pa. Aug. 25, 1997)[1]
In deciding what it described as "an issue of contemporary
significance," the Pennsylvania Supreme Court has refused to apply the
discovery rule to cases involving repressed memory. The court held
that the discovery rule "cannot be applied so loosely as to nullify
the purpose for which a statute of limitations exists." The court
noted that Pennsylvania has always applied the discovery rule in "the
most limited of circumstances." In a concurring opinion, the court
noted that the majority's ruling was really motivated by its distrust
of the entire theory behind repressed memory theory.
  Under Pennsylvania law, the court held that a party seeking to
invoke the discovery rule bears the burden of establishing the
inability to know of the injury despite the exercise of reasonable
diligence. The court stated that, "[u]nder application of the
objective standard it would be absurd to argue that a reasonable
person...would repress the memory of a touching so that no amount of
diligence would enable that person to know of the injury." The purpose
of the objective standard is to protect both parties: plaintiffs who
didn't know they were injured and defendants who may be faced with
"indefensible" claims. The court added, "[A]lthough this court is
sensitive to the issue of child abuse, that sensitivity cannot
overcome solid jurisprudence."
  The court also found that actual hard evidence is necessary in order
to demonstrate an undiscoverable injury. Noting that recovered memory
does not provide the necessary hard evidence, the court stated,"Here
we have only the 'memories' of the plaintiff to rely upon in
determining that an actual injury occurred...There is no objective
evidence of an injury. To require an alleged tortfeasor, no matter how
heinous the allegations, to respond to claims of an injury many years
after the fact, where the only 'evidence' of the actual injury is held
in the 'memory' of the accuser, would allow the exception known as the
discovery rule, to swallow the rule of law embodied within the statute
of limitations itself."
  Plaintiff, now 35 years old, alleged she was sexually assaulted in
1968 and 1969, but could not recall the events until 1990, because she
had repressed the memory. Rejecting plaintiff's argument that memory
repression was part and parcel of the injury caused by the alleged
sexual assault, the court called her theory "original" but "not
persuasive." "Regardless of how [plaintiff] categorizes repressed
memory, she cannot escape the fact that the original injury was a
battery...[I]n a typical battery all the elements of the offensive
touching will be present and ascertainable by the plaintiff at the
time of the touching itself."
  In a concurring opinion, the court reasoned that plaintiff had
failed to produce any affidavit or expert report that would have
enabled a fact finder to evaluate her claim of repressed memory. The
concurring opinion noted that "the validity of repressed memory theory
is subject to considerable debate in the psychological community, and
some courts have rejected its admissibility," citing New Hampshire v.
Hungerford, 1995 WL 378571 (N.H. Super. 1995) and Doe v. Maskell, 342
Md. 684 (Md. 1996), cert denied, 117 S.Ct. 770 (1997). However, the
specific question of whether repressed memory evidence is
admissiblewas not addressed in the opinion.
  Plaintiff's attorney William Lamb agreed that the majority doubted
the validity of the theory behind repressed memory stating, "[T]here's
a natural suspicion of these kinds of cases by judges. During oral
argument there was a lot of discussion about the whole notion of
corroborating evidence." Defense attorney Andrew Forbes wasn't
surprised by the court's decision stating, "During oral argument the
justices were skeptical and seemed to be in need of a lot more proof
of the theory of repressed memory." Both Lamb and Forbes are quoted as
saying that the decision effectively closed the door to repressed
memory claims in Pennsylvania.
  1. FMSF amicus curiae brief submitted in this case is available as
Publication #807.
    Illinois Supreme Court dismisses "repressed memory" claim [1]
      M.E.H. v. L.H., WL 562001 (Ill., Sept. 4, 1997), slip copy
The Illinois Supreme Court affirmed dismissal of a repressed memory
claim finding no compelling reasons to justify the plaintiffs' delay
in filing the claims. The court stated,"[A]lthough plaintiffs assert
that they were still uncovering new and different incidents of abuse
as late as 1995, they both admitted that they had discovered that they
were victims of childhood sexual abuse by 1992. Yet they did not file
suit until the fall of 1994, two years later and almost three years
and 10 months after the 12-year period of repose [2] took effect."
  The court narrowly defined the issue it chose to consider as
follows: Was the claim barred by the Illinois statute of repose which
was not in effect when the abuse occurred and was repealed before the
action was filed. The court did not rule on whether the discovery rule
should have been applied to the "repressed memory" claims, concluding
that the complaint was time-barred irrespective of whether or not the
discovery rule applied. In a concurring opinion, the court indicated
it would have preferred a more definite statement regarding the
"repressed memory" question, stating, "[t]he majority opinion
sidesteps these issues."
   Plaintiffs, two sisters, 44 and 45 years old, alleged that their
father sexually abused them from age 4 until they completed high
school. They argued that the Illinois discovery rule applied because
they were still in the process of discovering, with the aid of
therapy, new incidents of abuse even after they filed their complaint
in 1994. While the court did not specifically decide this issue, it
noted that Illinois courts typically apply a case-by-case approach to
the question of whether a plaintiff acted within a reasonable time.
The court also noted that,"[T]he amount of time the courts will grant
plaintiffs to initiate their litigation is not limitless...[I]f they
fail to [proceed within a reasonable time following the effective date
of the statute of repose], their actions will be barred even if they
have not yet discovered that they have a claim."
  The court found that even if the discovery rule were to apply, the
claims expired in 1991 when the 12-year repose period was enacted. At
that time, both sisters were over the age of 30. They did not file
until the 12-year period was long past. The court emphasized that upon
expiration of the limitation period, a vested constitutional right of
the defendant against further liability is generated.

  1. FMSF amicus curiae brief submitted in this case is available as
Publication #808. See also FMSF Brief Bank #124.
  2. During the past 8 years, the Illinois legislature has passed and
then repealed a series of statutes of limitations. In 1991 prior to
the filing of this claim, a statute of repose, 735 ILCS 5/13-202.2
(West 1992), was enacted. It allowed litigants 12 years after the age
of 18 to file for personal injuries based on childhood sexual abuse.
Then, shortly before plaintiffs filed this suit, the 12-year repose
period was deleted from the statute.
  At the time of this filing, ILCS 5/13-202.2(c) (West 1994) was in
effect. It provides in part: "[I]f the injury is caused by 2 or more
acts of childhood sexual abuse that are part of a continuing series of
acts of childhood sexual abuse by the same abuser, then the discovery
period under subsection (b) shall be computed from the date the person
abused discovers or through the use of reasonable diligence should
discover (i) that the last act of childhood sexual abuse in the
continuing series occurred and (ii) that the injury was caused by any
act of childhood sexual abuse in the continuing series."
    Minnesota Court of Appeals Dismisses  "Repressed Memory" Claim
        Doe v. Dickinson, 1997 Minn. App. LEXIS 1017 (Sept. 9)
A Minnesota Court of Appeals affirmed dismissal of a claim for
negligent infliction of emotional distress brought as part of a
repressed memory claim. The court held that the statute of limitations
had expired. The court wrote that by its nature, sexual abuse of a
minor is an intentional act. Therefore, Minn Stat.@541.073 applies,
such that any action for damages based on personal injury caused by
sexual abuse must be commenced within 2 years (rather than 6 years for
a negligence claim) of the time the plaintiff knew or had reason to
know the injury was caused by the sexual abuse. Plaintiff had claimed
sexual abuse from infancy to age 18, but stated that he had repressed
his memory and did not recall the alleged abuse until age 28.
Plaintiff conceded that under Sarafolean v. Kauffman, 547 N.W.2d 417
(Minn. App. 1996), the battery and intentional infliction of emotional
distress claims had already been properly dismissed by the district
     Michigan Court of Appeals Dismisses "Repressed Memory" Claim
               Terry v. Transfiguration Lutheran Church
      unpublished per curiam, Lawyers Weekly No. 30188, 2 pages.
A Michigan Court of Appeals found that where plaintiffs claimed
repressed memory, but failed to allege verifiable evidence, the trial
court properly found that their sexual misconduct claims were barred
by the applicable statute of limitations. Plaintiff alleged
molestation when he was a minor and again as an adult. Defendant
admitted he had taken plaintiff to a public health club, but denied
that the acts occurred. The court held that "because plaintiffs have
failed to 'take these cases out of the arena of stale and unverifiable
claims,'...we conclude that the claims are time-barred," citing
Lemmerman v. Fealk, 534 NW.2d 695 (Mich. 1995)
Washington Court of Appeals Interprets Victims Crime Compensation Act 
              in Case Involving "Repressed Memory" Claim
            Christensen v. Dept of Labor Industries, 1997
           WL 537736 (Wash. App. Div.1) slip copy (Sept. 2)
The Washington Court of Appeals affirmed denial of benefits under the
Washington Victim's Compensation fund[1] in a case involving a
repressed memory claim. The claimant, a woman in her 40s, sought
benefits for injury due to an alleged sexual assault in 1975. She
claimed she did not recall "additional events" until nearly 20 years
afterward. The court held that the woman was not eligible to receive
benefits because she was an adult at the time of the alleged
assault. In addition, the court held that because she did not report
the alleged crime within one year of the events, or within a year of
when she could reasonably have been expected to report, she was not
eligible for benefits.
  1. The Washington Crime Victims Compensation Act, RCW 7.68.060(3)
states in part that "Because victims of childhood criminal acts may
repress conscious memory of such criminal acts far beyond the age of
eighteen, the rights of adult victims of childhood criminal acts shall
accrue at the time the victim discovers or reasonably should have
discovered the elements of the crime. In making determinations as to
reasonable time limits, the department shall give greatest weight to
the needs of the victim." (See FMSF Newsletters April, 1993, May 1993,
September, 1994, May, 1996, November, 1996, March, 1997, and April
1997.) Our research could find no other state with a similar statute.
             Wisconsin Court of Appeals Dismisses Claims
              Joseph W. v. Catholic Diocese of Madison
                1997 Wisc. App. LEXIS 965 (August 21)
The Wisconsin Court of Appeals applied a recent Wisconsin Supreme
Court decision [1] to negligence claims brought by a 24-year-old man
and by his parents. One of the questions raised in this case concerned
application of the statute of limitations to parents' claims arising
from the sexual assault of their child. The court concluded that the
parents' claims against the diocese accrued at the same time as their
son's, and that the statute of limitations for their claims is the
same as that for his claims citing John BBB Doe.
  The plaintiff claimed he had been sexually abused by a priest on
several occasions over 10 years prior to filing this action. He did
not claim loss of memory, but stated that he did not discover the
causal relationship between his suffering and the assaults until 10
years later. The court considered only the negligence claims against
the diocese and church. The parents argued that their claims did not
accrue until their child revealed that he had been assaulted. The
court disagreed and emphasized that John BBB Doe enunciated a clear
public policy against an indefinite extension of the statute of
limitations stating,"[A]ccepting the parents' position means that the
defendants in a case such as this are subject to suit indefinitely.
Such an indefinite extension of opportunity to assert a claim greatly
increases the difficulty of defending against claims and the risk of
fraudulent claims."
  1. John BBB Doe v. Archdiocese, 565 NW.2d 94 (1997). In which the
Wisconsin Supreme Court concluded that all claims (whether Type 1 or
Type 2) accrue at the time the alleged assaults occur. Accrual of a
cause of action is not dependent upon knowing the full extent of one's
injuries. The court pointed out that delaying the accrual of a
plaintiff's cause of action until they regained their memory would
extend the tolling period indefinitely: "Such an extension would
increase the risk of fraudulent claims and severely undermine the
statute of limitations...That legislative restraint, together with our
balancing of the policies protecting plaintiffs' right to enforce
legitimate claims and those protecting defendants from having to
defend against stale or fraudulent claims, causes the balance to tip
against judicially extending the applicable limitations period for
these claims of repressed memory." John BBB Doe at 115. See FMSF
Newsletter, Sept. 1997, p. 10.
          Jury Awards $5.8 Million in Satanic Memories Case
                Mark Smith, Houston Chronicle, 8/16/97
          Carl v. Peterson, U.S. Federal Ct., Southern Dist.
            Case No. H-95-661, Judge Ewing Werlein Jr.[1]
On August 15th, a Texas jury awarded nearly $5.8 million to a woman
who claimed her family was torn apart when her psychotherapy produced
false memories of satanic ritual abuse. The judgment is believed to be
the largest among several handed down in recent years against
therapists accused of implanting false memories of sexual abuse, often
involving a satanic cult.[2] Many other such suits filed around the
country have been settled out of court.
  Lynn Carl filed the malpractice suit in March 1995 against some 25
Texas mental health professionals and organizations. All but two
defendants settled out of court prior to trial. Remaining defendant
psychiatrist Gloria Keraga treated Carl during the early 1990s when
Carl and her two minor children were hospitalized at Spring Shadows
Glen. Carl states that her treatment convinced her that she had
developed more than 500 personalities to cope with past satanic ritual
abuse, ritual murder, cannibalism and torture. Carl testified that she
was never warned the memories she recovered through hypnosis and other
forms of psychotherapy might be unreliable. In addition, she was
forced to report herself to the police as a child abuser, even though
she had no memory of abusing children. The family's two years of
treatment cost $2 million, with Keraga charging $225 per day per
patient. During this time, Carl states that her mental state
deteriorated and she blamed herself for her children's problems. She
divorced and was no longer allowed to see her children. Last December,
the Carl family was reunited and Lynn and her husband remarried.
  Carl's teenage children were also hypnotized at Spring Shadows
Glen. They came to believe they had been programmed by the cult and
that they had to come up with new memories in order to get better and
be released from the hospital. Carl's daughter described her treatment
in Spring Shadows Glen as "a year of extensive brainwashing." Carl's
husband testified that he was told his family had retrieved memories
that they "raped, robbed, sold drugs, murdered and cannibalized."
Keraga, he said, "never portrayed these things as anything but true."
  During trial, Keraga testified that she didn't know if the specific
memories Carl recovered in therapy were true, but said she believed
the "gist" of them. One of Keraga'a attorneys, Suzan Cardwell, argued
that the medical care Keraga provided was a reasonable effort to help
the patient work through severe emotional problems. Cardwell described
members of the family as "evil," and said Carl demonstrated symptoms
of abuse. Referring to Carl's journals, Cardwell said such memories
could not be falsely implanted.
  Jurors said they reached a general consensus in favor of plaintiff
Carl during the first few minutes of their deliberations. Several
jurors said they were concerned Keraga and other Spring Shadows Glen
therapists failed to warn their patients about the risks of the
treatment. The jury found that Keraga as an individual bore 12% and
Keraga, Inc. bore an additional 12% of the liability in the case. A
number of others (who had already settled out of court) were
identified as sharing the blame for Carl's negligent treatment. A
separate negligence claim by Carl's children is still pending.
  "This verdict validates my story, and I hope gives strength to those
other patients who have suffered similar abuse," said Carl. Carl's
attorney, Skip Simpson of Dallas, argued during the trial that
therapists implanted false memories that worsened Carl's condition so
they could collect more than $1.1 million in insurance. "This case was
all about creating victims so the mental health field could have
patients and expensive treatment," he said.

  1. See FMSF Newsletter April 1995, Smith, M. (8/10/97) "Family says
therapists implanted 'false memories' of satanic abuse," Houston
Chronicle, and Tedford, D. (3/8/95) "Woman sues her therapists
alleging fraud," Houston Chronicle.
  2. For a review of some of these cases, see FMSF publication
#833. Carl is one of more than a dozen patients who filed lawsuits
against therapists at the former Spring Shadows Glen Hospital in
Houston. The patients allege that therapists planted false memories of
abuse and misdiagnosed multiple personality disorder. In 1993, Spring
Shadows Glen closed the dissociative disorders unit, where Carl and
the other patients were treated, after state authorities cited the
hospital for excessive use of physical restraints on patients and, in
one case, making a patient's discharge contingent upon safety from a
"satanic cult."
   /                                                              \ 
   |                      Memory and Justice                      |
   |                                                              |
   | "And this is what's anguishing, I think, about memory, is    |
   | in questions of justice. It's enormously important to try    |
   | to figure out what really happened. But the more you try to  |
   | unravel the past, the more the mix of fact and narrative     |
   | overlay becomes inextricable."                               |
   |                                 Mary Gordon, June 9, 1997    |
   |                                Fresh Air with Terry Gross    |
   |                                     National Public Radio    |

|             WHAT THE FOUNDATION HAS SAID ABOUT MEMORY              |
|                                                                    |
| Some people, apparently, misunderstand the FMS Foundation position |
| on the accuracy of memories. When we have written about the truth  |
| or falsity of memory, we have been talking about "normal" memory.  |
| It is about normal memory that we have information. There is no    |
| scientifically accepted theory about special memory mechanisms for |
| trauma and we have suggested that those who claim the existence of |
| such mechanisms have the burden of proof. As Martin Conway writes, |
| "...for memory recovery of a small number of events, for example   |
| one or two, there is little reason to postulate any special memory |
| mechanisms. Our current understanding of human memory can provide  |
| good accounts of how this may occur. Amnesia for many experiences  |
| and whole time periods cannot, however, be easily accounted for by |
| current models of memory and it may be that new research and new   |
| theory will be required here." So far, we have no evidence.        |
|                                                                    |
| * Whether they occur in or out of therapy, some memories may be    |
| historically accurate, some distorted or confabulated and some     |
| false. (Frequently Asked Questions)                                |
|                                                                    |
| * Memories for events are reconstructed and reinterpreted. There   |
| is no scientific evidence for any other kind of memory for events. |
| Some memories may be historically accurate and some confabulated   |
| or false. (Vol 2 No. 5, May '93)                                   |
|                                                                    |
| * Researchers agree that some memories are true, some memories are |
| confabulated and some memories are false. (Vol 2 No. 6, June '93)  |
|                                                                    |
| * It does not contradict the weight of scientific evidence that    |
| memories of events are reconstructed and reinterpreted and that    |
| some memories are true, some a mixture of fact and fantasy and     |
| some false. (Vol 2 No. 7, July '93)                                |
|                                                                    |
| * They have helped us remind people that while some memories are   |
| true, some are a mixture of fact and fantasy and some are false.   |
| (Vol 2 No. 8, Aug. '93)                                            |
|                                                                    |
| * While the debate flares, it is still the case that there is      |
| agreement within the psychological community on many issues such   |
| as the fact that some memories of events are true, some a mixture  |
| of fact and fantasy and some are false. (Vol 2 No. 9, Oct. '93)    |
|                                                                    |
| * Is the idea that some memories are true, some a mixture of fact  |
| and fantasy and some false such a threat? (Vol 2 No. 11, Dec. '93) |
|                                                                    |
| * Some memories are surely true, but some are just as surely a     |
| mixture of fact and fantasy or even false. (Vol 3 No. 1, Jan. '94) |
|                                                                    |
| * We have stated again and again that "some memories are true,     |
| some a mixture of fact and fantasy and some are false."            |
| (Vol 3 No. 3, Mar '94)                                             |
|                                                                    |
| * At one extreme are those who argue that such repressed memories  |
| do not occur, that they are false memories, created memories, or   |
| implanted memories, while the other extreme strongly supports not  |
| only the concept of repressed memories but the possibility of      |
| recovering such memories in therapy. Other professionals believe   |
| that some memories may be false and others may be true.            |
| (Vol 3 No. 7, July '94)                                            |
|                                                                    |
| * Whether they are continuous or not, some memories (of abuse or   |
| anything else) can be true, some can be a mixture of fact and      |
| fantasy and some can be false.(Vol 5 No. 3, Mar. '96)              |
|                                                                    |
| * First, the position of the FMS Foundation has always been that   |
| whether they are continuous or recovered -- some memories are      |
| true, some a mixture of fact and fantasy and some false.           |
| (Vol 5 No. 8, Sept. '96)                                           |
|                                                                    |
| * The Foundation has stated from the start that some memories are  |
| true, some a mixture of fact and fantasy and some are false,       |
| whether they are continuous memories or recovered.                 |
| (Vol 6 No. 1, Jan. '97)                                            |
|                                                                    |
| * 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.                      |
|  (Vol 6 No. 6, June '97)                                           |
|                                                                    |
| * Some memories may be true, some false and some a mixture of both |
| (Vol 6 No. 8, Sept. '97)                                           |

                       B O O K   R E V I E W S
                           Try to Remember
                            by Zane Kotker
             Random House, $22 (254p) ISBN 0-679-440-42-9
It's encouraging that Random House, the nation's largest publisher of
hard-cover books for adults, has published this engaging novel. Zane
Kotker has attempted the most difficult task: to make it
understandable how a well-adjusted young person can fall victim to
false memory syndrome. Publishers Weekly said, "Timely and trenchant,
Kotker's examination of family dynamics in an era of confrontational
blame is a gripping read....Her well-intentioned therapist, a young
intern, is convinced by her supervisor that Phoebe's symptoms indicate
prototypical childhood sexual abuse syndrome, and she coaxes Phoebe
into recollections of molestation. When Phoebe confronts her parents
with this accusation, hazy memories and self-doubt lead to anguish all
around. The rest of the family finds that they are no match for
credulous Phoebe's zeal in exposing the atrocities that no one but she
believes can have happened. Kotker is adept in portraying family
relationships, and especially the tensions between the generations."
(Alas, even Kotker's skill won't work for everybody. Kirkus Reviews
said, "It's never quite clear why Phoebe, a well-educated, self-aware
adult, is so thoroughly gullible.")
                Recovered Memories and Other Nonsense
                        Reviewer: Adriaan Mak
The above fairly translates the Dutch title: Hervonden Herinneringen
en Andere Misverstanden (publisher: Contact), a new book by
psychologists Hans Crombag and Harald Merkelbach of Maastricht
University. The "other nonsense" in the title refers to Multiple
Personality Disorder and Psychoanalysis. In an interview with Dutch
newspaper Haagse Post, the authors attack the notion that childhood
experiences determine the rest of one's life. Psychoanalysis lacks a
solid scientific foundation; its continuing practice is gross
ignorance in the light of evidence that it does not help and even can
have detrimental effects on the client. On page 204 of their book,
they affirm: "Recovered memories are always pseudo-memories."
  Two years ago the public in The Netherlands was shocked by the
revelations of Yolanda, whose book, an overnight best-seller, detailed
the most horrendous recovered memories of gross sexual indecencies and
cannibalistic infanticides perpetrated by both her parents and dozens
of townsfolk of Epe. After hours of exhausting police interrogation
and emotional blackmail, reminiscent of the Ingram case, Yolanda's
father finally admitted to some of the unspeakable cruelties. Multiple
Personality disorder specialist Onno van der Hart became involved in
the case and wrote a lengthy afterword to Yolanda's book. Yolanda's
parents are still serving time for alleged illegal abortions, although
a second trial clearly showed the highly fantastical and nonsensical
nature of the testimony. Crombag and Merkelbach's work may help to
clear up this miscarriage of justice; investigation in the Yolanda
affair is continuing.
  The motto for their book is from Dutch writer, Hofland: "One
hallmark of reason is that it frequently allows itself to be surprised
by insanity." Following the recent translation into Dutch of Loftus
and Ketcham's The Myth of Repressed Memory, this is the second book on
this topic to appear on the Dutch scene. Both will go far to restore
sanity and reason.
  Adriaan Mak is a retired high school teacher of literature and
  dramatic arts. He is the editor of the Canadian False Memory

|                         Psychology Astray:                         |
|  Fallacies in Studies of "Repressed Memory" and Childhood Trauma   |
|                   by Harrison G. Pope, Jr., M.D.                   |
|                            Upton Books                             |
| This is an indispensable guide for any person who wants or needs   |
| to understand the research claims about recovered memories. A      |
| review by Stuart Sutherland in the prestigious Nature magazine     |
| (July 17, 1997) says that the book is a "model of clear thinking   |
| and clear exposition." The book is an outgrowth of the "Focus on   |
| Science" columns that have appeared in this newsletter.            |

/                                                                    \ 
|                          Lost Daughters:                           |
|          Recovered Memory Therapy and the People It Hurts          |
|                          Reinder Van Til                           |
|                    Foreward by Martin E. Marty                     |
|                      Wm B. Erdmans Publisher                       |
| This long-awaited book is now available. It contains five chapters |
| that are moving first-hand accounts of families devastated by the  |
| loss of children who claimed to have recovered repressed memories  |
| of sexual abuse. These chapters alternate with five chapters of    |
| analysis that "expose the underbelly of the recovered memory       |
| movement," (Stephen Ceci). The introductory comments by eminent    |
| theologian Martin Marty should help this book reach deep into the  |
| religious community where so much of recovered memory therapy is   |
| taking place.                                                      |


                      A LATE-BREAKING REVELATION
                        August Piper Jr. M.D.
  Here's an early autumn potpourri for newsletter readers!
  In the last column, I promised to discuss the recent revelations of
a well-known expert in the multiple personality disorder field. Yes,
Dear Reader: in the January 27, 1997 issue of U.S. News and World
Report, National Institute of Mental Health psychiatrist Frank Putnam,
M.D., who is described as "a leading MPD researcher," is interviewed.
  The magazine says Dr. Putnam now believes some 20 percent of MPD
diagnoses are incorrect. He acknowledges that the criteria for the
disorder are too vague, requiring, according to the article, "little
more than the appearance of distinct personalities" and claims of
extensive amnesia. He furthermore states that therapists sometimes
fall in love with the diagnosis.
  Especially astute readers will recall that some of us have been
repeating the identical claims, to anyone who will listen, for several
years now. But I fear I digress: better a late revelation than none at
  According to the article, experts say the best way to diagnose this
condition is to "wire up patients in the laboratory and watch their
brains at work." People with the disorder "show massive shifts in
electrical activity between altered states, patterns that control
subjects have never been able to fake."
  This idea of using the electroencephalogram (EEG) to diagnose MPD
sounds very exciting, doesn't it? -- all neat, tidy, and scientific.
There's just one little problem, however: the notion has been pretty
thoroughly debunked. For example, here's what one study, published in
the Archives of General Psychiatry (39: 823-825, 1982), says:

  EEG differences among personalities in [an individual with MPD]
  involve intensity of concentration, mood changes, degree of muscle
  tension, and duration of recording, rather than some inherent
  difference between the brains of [MPD patients] and those of normal

  Employing the EEG for this purpose is criticized in a scholarly text
by psychiatrist Carol North and colleagues (Multiple Personalities,
Multiple Disorders: Psychiatric Classification and Media Influence
[Oxford, 1993]). These writers comment that "no laboratory measurement
has been developed that can differentiate MPD from other disorders."
  Herein lies psychiatry's Holy Grail: finding an objective test to
reliably distinguish one psychiatric condition from another, and to
reliably distinguish psychiatric disorders from non-psychiatric ones.
Various people at one time or another over the years believed they had
discovered such tests. None, however, has lived up to its discoverer's
hopes. Thus, until the Grail is found, psychiatric disorders will be
diagnosed just as they are today: not with golly-gee-whiz technology
or sophisticated blood tests, but by taking careful histories from
patients. It's not very glamorous, I admit -- but so far, it's all we
                           *      *      *
  I was glancing through a certain women's magazine (the name of which
I blush to disclose) the other day when I found something that
reminded me of a remark Charles De Gaulle made. "You have to be sure,"
he said, "that the Americans will commit all the stupidities they can
think of, plus some that are beyond imagination."
  What was in the magazine? An article on past-life regression
therapy. According to one of its practitioners, identified in the
piece as "an Ivy League-trained psychiatrist" in private practice, the

  involves the mental act of going back, through hypnosis, to a time
  prior to this life in order to retrieve memories that may still
  negatively influence a patient's present life and [that] are
  probably the source of symptoms running the gamut from phobias to

                           *      *      *
  Last time, the column contained some advice for parents (and others)
facing being deposed by an attorney or testifying in court. Several
people commented favorably and requested a few more thoughts, so I
contacted a couple of lawyers for their ideas. Here they are:

   * Stay calm.
   * Stay calm.
   * Stay calm.
  It's not a misprint: the opposing lawyer is in his or her element to
  begin with, and therefore owns an advantage over you, who are on
  unfamiliar ground. Do you want to increase that advantage by having
  anger hormones gum up your brain's thinking molecules?
   * Don't be theatrical at trial -- it's serious business (as if you
     didn't know that).
   * Dress appropriately -- it's serious business.
   * Answer the question asked of you, then shut up. Beware of
   * You may see the opposing lawyers acting as if they are going to
     rip each others' eyeballs out any second. They rarely do, so
     relax. They're just doing their jobs; after the trial, you may
     see them making plans to go to dinner together. Don't let the
     displays of anger upset you.
   * Remember -- you may hear at trial what you say during the
     deposition. Think!

  I close by asking Dear Reader to add to this list any suggestions he
or she has found helpful. Many thanks!

  August Piper, Jr. M.D. is in private practice in Seattle. He is a
  member of the FMSF Scientific Advisory Board and the author of the
  book Hoax and Reality: The Bizarre World of Multiple Personality
  Disorder, Northvale, NJ: Jason Aronson, Inc.

                  M A K E   A   D I F F E R E N C E
| When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall |
| one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle.      |
|                                                       Edmund Burke |
|    Thoughts on the Cause of the Present Discontent Vol. i. p. 526. |
  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?

CALIFORNIA: Just about every state has a huge selection of mental
health seminars that professionals can attend to comply with
continuing education requirements. Many are sponsored by universities,
hospitals or professional associations (Nursing, Social Workers,
Psychologists). Call these different places and get your name put on
their mailing list. You will then be able to monitor what information
is in these seminars. If you spot something that is "misinformation"
you can alert the sponsors. This whole phenomenon (FMS) continues
because so much misinformation is given at professional conferences
and seminars.

CANADA: Recently in this column you read about a Mom who had read an
article in the magazine Chatelaine (a Canadian monthly journal for
women.) The Mom complained about an article that published advice to
a recovering alcoholic to read The Courage to Heal. The editor replied
that Chatelaine "was unaware of the checkered history of The Courage
to Heal until readers alerted us." As a result of complaints
Chatelaine received, the September issue had a really good five-page
article about False Memory Syndrome.

INDIANA: A Mom writes -- I was astounded at the list of books on FMS
published in the July/August newsletter. Fifty-eight and not one
published before 1992. I have duplicated this list and with a cover
letter have sent it to every head librarian in my part of the state.
In my letter I stated how we were falsely accused in 1990. The only
thing I could find in the library then was The Courage to Heal (3
copies). I explained that to this day they only have 3 books on False
Memory Syndrome. If they had provided more good information sooner,
fewer people would be in my position today.
  So far I had one response, but, it was very rewarding. The librarian
gave me some very helpful advice and some excellent suggestions. In
many libraries they have monthly book reviews. Lost Daughters by
R. Van Til would be a natural for such a forum. Call your local
library and see what you can accomplish.

  Send your ideas to Katie Spanuello c/o FMSF.

            |          SMILING THROUGH TEARS            |
            |                                           |
            |    Pamela Freyd and Eleanor Goldstein     |
            |               Upton Books                 |
            |          ISBN No 9-89777.125.7            |
            |                  $14.95                   |
            |                                           |
            | Over 125 cartoons by more than 65         |
            | cartoonists lead the way through a        |
            | description of the complex web of         |
            | psychological and social elements that    |
            | have nurtured the recovered memory        |
            | movement.                                 |
            |                                           |
            |            Advance comments:              |
            |                                           |
            | "At once both thoroughtly informative     |
            | and devastatingly witty."                 |
            |                               Alan Gold   |
            |      Criminal Defense Attorney, Toronto   |
            |                                           |
            | "I think the book is terrific. I liked    |
            | it because it supported a lot of the      |
            | opinions I've had on psychiatry, cults,   |
            | brain-washing and other ideas mentioned   |
            | in the book."                             |
            |                             Mort Walker   |
            |                Creator of Beetle Bailey   |
            |                                           |
            | "It's a must read"                        |
            |                  Elizabeth Loftus, Ph.D.  |
            |      Author of Myth of Repressed Memory   |
            |                                           |
            | Smiling through Tears will be available   |
            | in bookstores in November. Ask your       |
            | bookstore to order the book. For          |
            | brochures about the book call             |
            | 1-800-232-7477 and ask for Stacey.        |

                   F R O M   O U R   R E A D E R S

Dear Editor,
  I would like to comment on the debate over the term "middle ground"
in the recovered memory debate. I have found a few cases in which
people were sexually abused for a limited period of time, forgot that
the events occurred, and then recalled them much later. Most of these
cases have firm corroborating evidence, although there is always the
question of whether people "really forgot" the abuse or not.
Nonetheless, it should come as no surprise that people can forget
events and then recall them later. None of these cases, however,
involved "massive repression" in which someone experienced years of
traumatic events, completely forgot them, then recalled them again.
After years of research into this issue, I have yet to find even one
convincing case of massive repression.
  Although various therapists have claimed that they have many such
corroborated cases, no one has allowed me to interview anyone, though
I promise complete anonymity. Of course, I realize that a therapist
could not request that a patient submit to even an anonymous
interview, but they could indeed ask whether they would be interested
in doing so, in the name of truth. None have been willing to do so. To
be convinced of the validity of a case, I would want to interview the
accuser and the accused and to see any physical evidence, such as
medical records or diaries.
  Stephen Lindsay argues in favour of a "middle ground" between two
extreme positions: One that holds that all recovered-memory
experiences are accurate memories and one that holds that all
recovered-memory experiences are iatrogenic illusions. As I have said,
I agree with Lindsay that it is likely that at least some "recovered
memories" are essentially accurate. However, I want to emphasize that
Lindsay's comments should not be misconstrued as claiming that
massively repressed memories of repeated violent abuse are often
  Much of this argument has become mired in semantics. Some prefer the
term "discovered memories" for the confirmed cases of limited abuse
that are recalled, to distinguish them from "recovered memories" that
often imply massive repression. That makes sense, but of fundamental
importance is the recognition that "massive repression" is unproven
and unlikely.
  As things stand, my conclusion is that the term "middle ground" is a
misleading misnomer. The implication of the term "middle ground,"
whether Lindsay intends it or not, is that while many cases of
"massive repression" are untrue, many are also accurate. Most of the
cases that surfaced during the 1985-1995 decade involved massive
repression. Those constitute the majority of the cases in my book. I
consider it unlikely that any cases of massive repression constitute
real memory retrieval.
  Imagine a line two miles long, with massive repression on one end,
and always remembering every incident of sexual abuse on the other
end. I believe that the "middle ground" lies a few inches from the
latter end - not anywhere near the middle. People may indeed sometimes
forget limited incidents of sexual abuse, particularly if it occurred
on the "cusp" of infantile amnesia (around the age of five), or if the
abuse was not initially perceived as traumatic. But that is a far cry
from the wildly improbable notion of massive repression.
                                                   Mark Pendergrast
                                          Author, Victims of Memory
                             A Phone Call
I just had a phone call that I'm dying to tell someone about. It was
from my oldest grandson who is 17. His mother was the prime mover in
the lawsuit against me. My grandson brought me up-to-date on the news
with him, gave me the address of my youngest daughter and told me of
his plans to get out of the house and maybe move to California. We
spoke for twenty minutes.
  I was absolutely delighted, of course, but I kept having the feeling
that there was something he wanted to say and hadn't gotten to it. Did
he want money? Was somebody sick? No: he wanted to thank me for his
birthday card and the check enclosed. I said "You're welcome,"of
course, thought a second, and then said "I've been sending you
birthday cards for years, you know. I don't know if you've gotten them
all." He replied, quite softly, "No, I don't think I have."
  I have to admit I'd been thinking of stopping sending cards and
checks to people who never acknowledged them, but said to myself, "No,
don't give up quite yet." Am I glad.
  My grandson's call raised some questions in my mind. Are some of
these accusing women going to find themselves cut off not only from
their parents but from their children, too? Will my grandson treat his
mother the way she has treated me? Could he have made that phone call
if he had not had some serious doubts about her charges against me.
That is a wedge of distrust.
                         A Business Decision
I would like to comment further regarding the letter from "A Father"
in the February, 1997 issue of the newsletter. His letter was
provocative, with heartfelt insight into parents' reactions and the
  Let me take talk of reconciliation a few steps further. False Memory
Syndrome not only involves anger, hate and blame, it also involves
power and greed. In our case, two daughters sued us for one half
million dollars each, seven years ago. Their lawyer was Mary Williams
who wrote the chapter on "How to Sue Your Parents" in The Courage to
Heal. After a period of many months and many depositions and before
the FMS Foundation was in existence, our daughters petitioned to
settle with us for approximately $25,000 each. BUT for a further
$5,000 each they would both recant.
  Ours was a business decision combined with a desire to get on with
our lives (we were in our late sixties) that prompted us to settle.
What was at first a void grew to an abyss because of lies,
accusations, humiliations and manipulation of family and friends. We
offered to go into therapy to understand "why"; we paid for their
therapy; we took lie detector tests. We didn't need this further "to
hell and back" problem as we already had a severely retarded child and
a son with serious memory problems that were the result of an auto
accident. We tried.
  Now, discussion of "it" is limited to less than five minutes a
day. We have changed the locks to which each of our five children used
to have a key. We have changed our wills. Money which would have been
left to these two daughters has been left to charity. We travel, enjoy
the company of other family members and wonderful friends. [1]
  Wringing our hands will not make them return. Indeed, it is
difficult to see how an honest disclosure now could possibly undo the
damage done by the lies and a lawsuit. There seems no end to what was
set in motion with the decision to embrace a therapy and false
memories that relied on imagining, dream recording, autobiographical
writing and self help groups. There is nothing more frightening than
human beings who are convinced beyond a shadow of a doubt that they
are right. So much lost for a little bit of money. For some families,
it is not just false memories but also greed, power and hate that make
reconciliation seem unlikely.
                                                            A Mother

 [1] Editor's Comment: Some families have chosen FMSF as that charity.

                       A Sad Story from Indiana
Wayne Caley had been to some of our meetings. He had been (we believe)
falsely accused by his step-daughter. His wife stood by him. She did
not believe her daughter. He was arrested, found guilty and eventually
sent to jail. Wayne and his wife lost their jobs and their home. They
found lower paying jobs where Wayne worked until he was sent to jail.
Every Sunday for almost two years, Wayne's wife and father made the
three-hour roundtrip to visit him in jail. They each were allowed to
visit him for 1/2 hour. In April he was released from jail and
returned to his job. He was killed in a job related accident 13 days
later. One member sent him FMS literature and letters almost every
week while he was in jail. She went to the funeral home which was
crowded with friends and flowers.
  His letter from jail to members of FMS Foundation follows:

  To all those connected with the False Memory Syndrome Foundation:
  How many times have you sat back and thought "If only I?" If only I
  had known about the FMS Foundation, then maybe I would not be
  writing this letter from a 9X7 room with no windows, a table that is
  smaller than a large pizza, and a corner that has a wash basin and
  toilet as one unit.
    I am in a County Jail. I am here because of a small lie, just a
  small one, but with the help of an over-zealous County Child Service
  Departrment, and a few other people, that small lie grew and grew
  until it caught the local newspapers attention. The rest is history..
  I thought my name would be cleared. After all, I was going through
  our legal system, the best in the World. I even had taken two
  polygraph tests and I had documents of dates and times that would
  prove my accusers wrong. (I was not allowed to use my log books to
  prove I had been on the road.) I was blind to the witch hunt that
  was building. I was unaware that no matter what I did, I did not
  have a chance to prove my innocence. Folks, please continue the
  fight. Do not ever give up. I can not begin to tell you how
  important the help and information about FMS has meant to me.
  Although my battle is virtually hopeless, others can win. I can
  honestly say I now have more information than my lawyer ever had at
  the time of the trial.
     Please keep fighting to stop the lies and false accusations.
                                                       Thank you
                                                     Wayne Caley
         Education -- Key to return of daughter/victim of FMS
Educating the spouse, family and friends of an FMS victim can be the
key to the return of their loved ones. The more the family knows about
the nature of how FMS affects the victim, the more they will be able
to help get their loved ones out of this tragic type of therapy. When
the victim becomes progressively worse, and the therapist persists in
telling the family or spouse that his patient has to get worse before
she can get better, they should know otherwise! Continue to send FMS
information even if you are told not to. Someone may read it when
things get desperate. That person might just realize that the family
member really is getting worse.
  Send information to relatives, in-laws, co-workers, teachers,
neighbors, family doctor and her Pastor.
  Put FMS information in any library your daughter may visit. One
retractor said that she had gone into the library looking for
information on "False Memory Syndrome" and could not find any.
  Don't be afraid to send information to your daughter. Will it make
her mad?  Yes it will. What is she going to do? Not talk to you? Make
more rules? Someday she may realize you cared enough to send her
information. She may just read the literature and realize it sounds
just like her case. At least send her a friendly post card.
  Do not close the doors to your daughter or son. There is no way to
know how hard your child has tried to resist the therapist's
suggestions or how much she has even doubted her own memories.
  The best medicine for your child is to spend time with parents and
family. Some parents want to work out all details or have a complete
retraction and apology before contact. My belief is, don't wait that
long. Start the process now. Don't throw up road blocks. Give it a
try. Be patient. When your child first starts the process of
returning, he or she may still have some "false" memories of
childhood. The good memories will return with contact.
                                             Mother of a Retractor

| "Nonetheless, I think it is generally agreed that our patients are |
| our patients because they do not perceive things or think about    |
| them or act on them "rationally."                                  |
|                                              Charles L. Rich, M.D. |
|                    Annals of Clinical Psychiatry 2:1, 1990 page 1  |

 /                                                                  \ 
 |                     Who are the therapists?                      |
 |                                                                  |
 | The Foundation received an advertisement for "Therapist Mailing  |
 | Lists" for licensed professionals in the State of California.    |
 |                                                                  |
 |    Licensed Psychologists                     10,209 names       |
 |    Licensed Clinical Social Workers           12,632 names       |
 |    Licensed Marriage and Family Counselors    21,312 names       |

   | "Psychology and fiction writing are the two trades with the  |
   | biggest stake in the idea that someone else may know more,   |
   | or uncover more about us, than we can on our own."           |
   |                                                 Paul Allen   |
   |                                      The Guardian (London)   |
   |                                         September 10, 1997   |

                     S T A T E   M E E T I N G S
             Call persons listed for info & registration
                         ILLINOIS FMS SOCIETY
   What is the Mental Health Industry doing to stop "Junk Therapy?"
                    October 18, 1997,  9AM to 5PM
 Schaumburg Marriott: 50 North Martingale Road, Schaumburg, IL  60173
                           Keynote Speaker:
          TANA DINEEN, Ph.D. Author of Manufacturing Victims
                           Everyone welcome
 Call 847-240-0100  Fax 847-240-0120 Donation: $35 person, $60/couple
          Includes lunch ($5/ person additional at the door)
                 Reservations requested by October 4.
      Call 815-467-6041 Fax 815-467-7764 e-mail:
                      Saturday, October 18, 1997
                          8:00 AM - 4:00 PM
                         Colonial Park Hotel
                   2301 Colonial Drive, Helena, MT
                            Sponsored by:
                 MUM (Montanans Understanding Memory)
                  Contact Lee & Avone (406) 443-3189
                          Families & Friends
          The Hurt That Families Endure: When Therapists Err
                      Saturday, November 1, 1997
                    Trinity Assembly of God Church
           1022 Pottstown Pike (Rte. 100)  West Chester, PA
        Registration: 9:30 AM     Meeting: 10:00 AM to 5:00 PM
         Guest Speakers:  PAMELA FREYD, The RUTHERFORD FAMILY
 A contribution of $20.00 per couple ($5.00 for other family members)
               requested to defray operating expenses.
           RSVP by October 15, 1997 with check payable to:
           James Munshour, 671 Joseph Dr., Wayne, PA  19087
                      For more information call:
   Sally or Lee (609) 967-7812 or contact Jim & Jo: (610) 783-0396
           "Crisis in Counseling: In and Out of the Church"
                        November 14 & 15, 1997
                     Rollins College, Winter Park
   Presented by Central Florida Friends of FMSF and Rollins College 
       with the cooperation of the Florida Council of Churches.
 two parents whose daughters received regression therapy by Christian
 counselors before accusing their fathers of childhood sexual abuse.
               Advanced registration for the conference 
  $25.00 for the first person, and $15.00 for each additional person
     from the same family or congregation (in the same mailing). 
                   Students may register for $10.00
                            * * * * * * *
                        Special Family Meeting
             Friday night, November 14, 7:00 - 10:00 P.M.
   There will also be a meeting for falsely accused families on the 
  Rollins campus. Dr. Simpson and the Rutherfords will discuss coping
  and reconciliation. For a brochure or more information about these
 programs, please contact John and Nancy at 352-750-5446 or Email at

             Weighing the Evidence of Recovered Memories
A conference on recovered memories of child sexual abuse, previously
announced as taking place at the Quinnipiac College School of Law in
Hamden, CT, on November 14, 1997, will be held on that date, but the
exact location has yet to be determined. The conference will either be
on the Quinnipiac campus in Hamden or in the vicinity of New Haven, CT.
For Further information contact Pamela Castellano at (203) 287-3254
           Hypnosis, False Memory and Multiple Personality
Saturday, November 1, 1997 1:00 - 4:30 p.m.  at John Jay College 445
West 59th Street (near 10th Ave / Amsterdam) New York, NY 10023 Fee
$40.00 or $25.00 (students with I.D.)  At door admission: $50.00,
Students $35.00. Mail to: The Alfred Adler Institute 24 E. 21st St.
8th Fl New York, NY 10010 212-251-1048.
  This seminar will explore recently uncovered material on the most
famous case of multiple personality. Audiotapes of a discussion
between the author of the novel Sybil and Sybil's psychotherapist will
be played and analyzed. The seminar participants will address the
therapist's role in the retrieval of (false) memory and the
manufacture of multiple personality. Speakers:Herbert Spiegel, M.D.,
Robert Rieber, Ph.D. and Robert Ellenbogen, Ph.D.

                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

Contacts & Meetings:

        Bob (907) 586-2469
        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
        Wallie & Jill (770) 971-8917
  Carolyn (808) 261-5716
  Chicago & Suburbs  - 3rd Sun. (MO)
        Eileen (847) 985-7693
        Roger & Liz (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 - 2nd Sun. (MO)
        Leslie (913) 235-0602 or
        Pat (913) 738-4840
        Jan (816) 931-1340
  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
        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
  Susan (704) 481-0456
  Oklahoma City
        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 September or October)
        Jim & Jo (610) 783-0396
  Wed. (MO) @1pm
        Kate (615) 665-1160
        Jo or Beverly (713) 464-8970
   El Paso
        Mary Lou (915) 591-0271
        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
        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 November Newsletter is October 15
                  Meeting notices MUST be in writing 
    and should be sent no later than TWO MONTHS PRIOR TO MEETING.

|          Do you have access to e-mail?  Send a message to          |
|                                         |
| if  you wish to receive electronic versions of this newsletter and |
| notices of radio and television  broadcasts  about  FMS.  All  the |
| message need say is "add to the FMS-News". You'll also learn about |
| joining  the  FMS-Research list (it distributes 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).            |
  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,      October 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