FMSF NEWSLETTER ARCHIVE - November/December 2001 - Vol. 10, No. 6, HTML version

Return to FMSF Home Page

F M S   F O U N D A T I O N   N E W S L E T T E R     (e-mail edition)
November/December 2001 Vol. 10 No. 6
ISSN #1069-0484.           Copyright (c) 2001  by  the  FMS Foundation
    The FMSF Newsletter  is published 6 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. 2000 subscription rates:
    USA:  $30,  Student  $15;  Canada:  $35,  Student $20 (in U.S. 
    dollars); Foreign: $40, Student  $20; Single issue price:  $3. 
           1955 Locust Street, Philadelphia, PA 19103-5766
                 Phone 215-940-1040, Fax 215-940-1042
    Legal Corner
      Bartha                   The next issue will be combined
        Pankratz                       January/February
          From Our Readers
            Bulletin Board

Dear Friends,
    "Has there been a surge in retractions since the attacks of September
11th?" a British journalist asked me last week. I replied that I was not
aware of any increase in the number of returners or retractors, that
changes took place quite slowly, and that there was a gap between any
changes in family status and our awareness of them. It seems logical,
however, that such terrible events may stir some accusers to reflect on
their families and perhaps find another perspective.
    Interviews with retractors have shown that life events are
sometimes the stimulus for a return to families. In this month's issue
you will find a letter from a father who describes his feelings and
actions as he reunites with his son after 18 years of separation, a
fascinating story that is still developing. It seems to have been a
life event -- the illness of his sister -- that moved the son to reach
out. There is another letter from a father who asks "Why should we
trust?" "Why should we reconcile?" The positions of families on the
topic of reconciliation span a continuum, and individual families may
bounce back and forth with time. However, the survey of your
experiences that we are currently analyzing shows that the majority of
FMSF families indicate that their family is unanimous in wanting
    We have found a number of trends in the survey results that
distinguish retractors, returners and refusers and we are currently
studying the trends to determine if they are significant. Some
    More families of retractors and returners reported that their
families are unanimous in wanting reconciliation than families of
    More families of returners and retractors reported that they had
someone acting as a mediator than did families of refusers. More
families of refusers reported that the accuser had support from other
family members than did families of retractors or returners.
    The survey indicated that the accusations became public more
frequently in families of refusers than in families of returners or
retractors. More families of refusers reported that contact had been
forbidden than did families of returners and retractors. Families of
refusers more often reported that they had no contact with the
accuser. Retractors and returners were less likely to have brought
legal actions against the accused than did refusers. All of these
trends seem to anchor the positions in families of refusers.
    On the other hand, more families of retractors and returners were
confronted in a therapy session than were families of refusers. This
seems counterintuitive, but it may be related to levels of
    The mean age of accusers at the time they made the accusation was
32 years, but returners and retractors were several years younger than
refusers. The mean age of the accuser at the time the alleged abuse
was supposed to have started was 4 years old. It's interesting that
such a large portion of the accusers claim memories younger than four,
the period of childhood amnesia. It's evidence of the fantastical
nature of the FMS phenomenon.
    Drs. Lief and McHugh have dubbed the years between 1988 and 1998
as the "Decade of False Memories" because survey results indicate that
is the time period in which the notions of recovered memories peaked.
The years 1991 and 1992 were the years in which most families found
out about the accusations.
    While we continue to see a welcome decline in new families
contacting the Foundation, the roots of the FMS nonsense are still,
alas, very healthy. Ignorance about memory abounds at the same time as
exciting new research moves us to a better understanding. In this
issue you will read that South Carolina has passed a law that allows
people to bring lawsuits based on memories recovered in therapy. As
the person who sent us this information noted: "the SC Legislature
certainly failed to do its homework." If you scan the web, you can
find no end of nonsense about memory or about therapy that can solve
all your problems. .
    The good news is that a few more therapists who use dangerous
techniques have been held accountable, and some conscientious
therapists are stepping up to monitor their profession. In two legal
cases reported this month, it was the intervention of courageous
therapists who had inherited damaged patients who provided appropriate
    Both the Feld and Pankratz columns this month should be required
reading by professionals. Feld's column offers direct and simple ways
for professionals to think about their work and keep their
perspectives fresh. Pankratz tackles the minefield of post traumatic
stress disorder (PTSD) with a message that some may find
uncomfortable: PTSD can be easily feigned. It's a timely topic because
there has been much in the news about the effects of the September
11th tragedies on those who observed them.
    By now, you should have received our annual fund raising
letter. Please note that this year we are combining our membership
renewals with the fund-raising drive. We expect this will further
streamline our office operations and expenses as we move closer to the
time of providing most services on the web. We thank you for your
generosity that will enable us to work at applying what we learn from
the family survey about reconciliation to help others.
    We send our best wishes for the holiday season and the New Year.

/                                                                    \
|               An Open Letter to Foundation Members:                |
|                                                                    |
| The Foundation has been collecting information about the           |
| conditions that influence reconciliation with our estranged        |
| children. Our personal and collective responses to the             |
| questionnaires have been critical to the research program in its   |
| effort to identify the factors that either impede or encourage the |
| return of our children. Perhaps we are writing the "final chapter" |
| in this long and sad story but our continuing financial support    |
| remains vital to this task. We hope that you may find the strength |
| and means to provide that help.                                    |
|                                         Marion and Chris Koronakos |

        |                   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, Janet   |
        |           Fetkewicz, Howard Fishman, Peter Freyd   |
        |  COLUMNISTS: August Piper, Jr. and members         |
        |           of the FMSF Scientific Advisory Board    |
        |  LETTERS and INFORMATION: Our Readers              |

                        I N   T H E   N E W S

                 DSM-V Scheduled for 2010 Publication
The American Psychiatric Association expects to publish the Fifth
Edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual in 2010. The long
delay allows time to define and stimulate the research that will be
needed to provide a stronger empirical base for the manual. Six
research planning groups have been formed: Nomenclature, Disability &
Impairment, Gaps in current system, Developmental disorders,
Neurosciences, and Cross-Cultural Issues.
    Ivanovs, N. & Marshall, T. "DSM-V Research Planning Process"
    Psychiatric Research Report, Summer 2001, p. 6.

  British Parliament to Examine False Accusations of Child Sex Abuse
An all-party group in Parliament will examine flaws in the way police
and courts examine allegations of child sexual abuse. In response to the
question of how this came about, Margaret Jarvis, Legal Affairs Adviser
for the British False Memory Society, explained: "It's the result of
some hard lobbying by several groups that are part of the United
Campaign Against False Allegations of Abuse. We think it is important to
recognize the kaleidoscope of false allegations of abuse, especially
since there is no limitation period in criminal law here so that retro
criminal convictions are rife. Also, different constituencies have
gained a greater understanding of each other and have united around the
justice banner."
                   South Carolina Law Extends Time
             for Adults to Sue for Childhood Sexual Abuse
On August 31, South Carolina Governor Jim Hodges signed into law a
bill that gives adults more time to file lawsuits alleging incest or
sexual abuse during their childhood. Charges may now be brought up to
three years after a person discovers the abuse or until age 27,
whichever is first. For example, a person may discover the abuse
through a therapist helping with problems such as depression or
post-traumatic stress disorder. That allowance falls under the South
Carolina Supreme Court decision last year in Moriarty v Garden
Sanctuary Church [1] that allows repressed memory to be used as a link
in a lawsuit. In that decision the justices said that alleged victims
must present "independently verifiable, objective evidence" to back up
their claims.

[1] Moriarty v Garden Sanctuary Church No 25156 SC sup Ct, June 26,
    2000, filed (1000 S.C. LEXIS 149).

    "Law gives adults more time to sue for childhood sexual abuse"
     Associated Press, Aug. 31, 2001.

     Guided Imagery and Memory: Implications for Psychotherapists
         Arbuthnott, K.D., Arbuthnott, D. W.,  & Rossiter, L.
    Journal of Counseling Psychology 2001, Vol 48, No 2, 123-132.
This article reviews the research linking mental imagery with changes
in memory. The authors' purpose was twofold: to sensitize clinicians
to possible inappropriate applications of guided imagery techniques
and to discourage researchers from understating the potential utility
of guided imagery. They note that research has shown that imagery can
help patients anchor important therapeutic moments or rehearse
behavior-change plans. They also note that it may facilitate the
recollection of previous memories, but at the expense of increasing
confusion between imagery and previous perceived events. The authors
conclude that the "research suggests that therapists should become
more sensitive to the possible memory distortion risks associated with
guided imagery but that eliminating imagery from their practice
entirely is not necessary."

     Changing Beliefs About Implausible Autobiographical Events:
                A Little Plausibility Goes a Long Way
             Mazzoni, G.A.L., Loftus, E.F., & Kirsch, I.
             Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied,
                    March 2001, Vol. 7 (1) 51-59.
          Available at:
Many studies have shown that people can be led to believe they
experienced events that did not happen. Some psychologists have
suggested that there are limits to the types of experiences that can
be suggested, and that such experiences must have some degree of
plausibility. In a series of three studies, the authors investigated
the malleability of perceived plausibility and the subjective
likelihood of occurrence of plausible and implausible events in
subjects who had no recollection of experiencing them. Plausibility
was manipulated with a series of mini-articles about implausible
events from a presumably credible source. The authors note: "These
three experiments tell a consistent story. Exposing people to a set of
articles that describe a relatively implausible phenomenon, like
witnessing possession, made people believe that the phenomenon is more
plausible," and it increased their confidence that they had had the
                    Repressed Memory Accusations:
             Devastated Families and Devastated Patients
                           Elizabeth Loftus
         Applied Cognitive Psychology, 1997, Vol. 11, 25-30.)
Loftus discusses the British survey of families with disputed
"recovered memory" accusations and compares some results to surveys
done with families and patients in the United States. These surveys,
however, have the methodological weaknesses associated with all
retrospective studies. She then describes the study by staff employees
working for the Department of Labor and Industries in the State of
Washington that examined repressed memory claims registered with the
Crime Victims' Compensation Program. This study used medical records
and other documentation as well as a tabulation of certain outcome
measures. The results of the Crime Victims study (previously reported
in this newsletter) are shocking: recovered memory patients in the
Crime Victims study appeared to get worse rather than better. Loftus
concludes that the Crime Victims study should be repeated using better
controls and scientific checks.

            Lower Precombat Intelligence is a Risk Factor
                  for Posttraumatic Stress Disorder
       Macklin, M.L., Metzger, L.J., McNally, R.J., Litz, B.T.,
               Lasko, N.G., Orr, S.P., & Pitman, R.K.,
            Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology,
                     1998, Vol. 66, (2) 323-326.
Because most veterans of combat do not develop posttraumatic stress
disorder (PTSD), the authors are studying variables that may increase
the risk for the disorder in combat soldiers. They examined the
relation between intelligence and PTSD by studying the association
among precombat intelligence, current intelligence, and self-reported
PTSD symptoms. They used military aptitude test results for 59 PTSD
and 31 non-PTSD Vietnam combat veterans who had undergone recent
interviews and testing. People with lower precombat intelligence were
more likely to develop PTSD symptoms assessed by the Clinician-
Administered PTSD Scale after adjusting for extent of combat
exposure. The authors note that the "results suggest that lower
pretrauma intelligence increases risk for developing PTSD symptoms,
not that PTSD lowers performance on intelligence tests."

           Catharsis, Aggression, and Persuasive Influence:
            Self-Fulfilling or Self-Defeating Prophecies?
             Bushman, B.J, Baumeister, R.F, & Stack, A.D
            Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
                       1999 Vol. 76 (3) 367-376
    Article available at,html
Even though past studies have failed to validate the catharsis
hypothesis, the authors of this study note that pop psychologists and
the mass media have continued to endorse the view that "expressing
anger or aggressive feelings is healthy, constructive, and relaxing,
whereas restraining oneself creates internal tension that is unhealthy
and bound to lead to an eventual blowup."
    The researchers sought to answer two questions. Can people be
persuaded by a media message to deal with anger in a certain way? And,
if people chose to attempt to vent their anger through physical
aggression would they feel less anger after having done so (as the
catharsis theory suggests)?
    Venting anger or "rage work" was a component of the therapy for a
great many people who came to have false beliefs about childhood
sexual abuse. Indeed, in one of the first articles written about
recovered memory therapy, Debbie Nathan[1] described a weekend retreat
she attended in which a participant hit telephone books with a bat,
pretending they were her perpetrators.
    The conclusion of the study is that contrary to popular belief,
venting anger through physical aggression such as hitting a punching
bag does not decrease one's anger. In reality, such acting out only
increases a person's hostility.

[1] Nathan, D. "Cry Incest" Playboy, October 1992, 84-164.

                     Ontario Doctor Loses License
A disciplinary committee of the College of Physicians and Surgeons of
Ontario revoked the license of Dr. Raymond Danny Leibl in September.
In a written decision, the four person committee noted, "Revocation is
necessary to repudiate his severe misconduct, to protect the public
and to maintain the integrity of the profession." It is rare for the
disciplinary committee to strip a physician of his license.
    Leibl was accused of misdiagnosing a former patient as having
multiple personality disorder, and planting memories of sexual abuse
that were not there. According to the charges, Dr. Leibl tried to
"re-parent" the patient by feeding her from a baby bottle and having
her call him "Mommy daddy Ray." He allegedly carried out a mock
funeral for the patient's parents and then installed himself as the
ideal parent and even took her on a trip to Florida where they slept
in the same bed.
    Dr. Leibl gave the patient high doses of sodium amytal, a drug
used to "retrieve" suppressed memories, combined with large amounts of
vodka. He billed the health system for about 33 hours a month for this
    Dr. Molyn Leszcz, a psychiatrist and head of the psychotherapy
program at the University of Toronto stated that "reparenting" "was
never considered mainstream." He said it is not and would never be
taught at the university.
    Even though Leibl's medical license was revoked, he can still
offer psychotherapy. The College of Physicians and Surgeons has
established a task force that will set guidelines to govern
psychotherapy, but they are only at the draft stage.
    See FMSF Newsletter March/April 2001.
    Eby, C. "Psychiatrist guilty of misconduct: Disciplinary hearing:
`Disgraceful, dishonorable and unprofessional'" National Post, June
28, 2001.
    Lu, V. & Daly, R., "Doctor loses license over therapy:
Psychiatrist uses odd `reparenting' method on patients" Toronto Star,
Sept 22, 2001.
                  Massachusetts Doctor Loses License
The Massachusetts Medical Board repealed the license of Dr. William A.
Kadish in August. Kadish was the medical director of psychiatry at
UMass Memorial Marlborough Hospital where he supervised physicians and
patients, planned curriculum and gave lectures. The Board cited "gross
misconduct in the practice of medicine" and "extreme deviation from
any clinically appropriate standard of care."
    According to the complaint, Kadish had a sexual relationship with
one of his clients who was suffering from depression, low self-esteem,
and multiple personality disorder. He drew out more than 20 different
personalities identified by him and gave them a life of their own by
writing letters to them. There was also another patient who had filed
a complaint against him.
    The Medical Board learned about the problem because the patient
told an independent therapist about what was going on. With the help
of this therapist, the patient reported the treatment to hospital
officials and his practice was suspended immediately.
    Gaines, J. "Doctor's license revoked: Respected psychiatrist
admits abuse charges" Boston Globe, Aug. 26, 2001.
    Lasalandra, M. "Doc loses license after affair with psychiatric
patient" Boston Herald, Aug. 23, 2001.
    Editor's comment: The facts of this case underscore the potential
for creation of false beliefs in a vulnerable patient by means of
unethical and irresponsible suggestion. They also highlight the
critical role of ethical therapists in bringing an end to such
shameful practices.

/                                                                    \
| "Being a rather empathic group, however, probably few clinicians   |
| overlook the potential impact of the way they communicate messages |
| to their clients. If in current clinical work there is any         |
| significant threat in transmitting unintended meanings to clients, |
| it likely occurs not (directly) at the level of communication, but |
| through the use of empirical constructions. Consider the therapist |
| who adheres to the theory that the recovery of repressed memories  |
| is important in overcoming some forms of psychological trauma.     |
| Independent of its truth or falsity, a belief in this theory will  |
| likely shape the scientific efforts of the therapist, namely, the  |
| data that are sought, and how these data are used to explain the   |
| causes of the client's trauma and the factors that may lead to its |
| effective treatment. But a trusting or suggestible client may also |
| assume the truth of the theory, the consequences of which may be a |
| transformation in the way the client views his or her experience   |
|(Bowers & Farvolden, 1996). Like a search for fossils among mere|
| stones, `repressed memories' may become new mental objects in the  |
| landscape of the client's mind, to be spotted, gathered, and       |
| examined. Should we be surprised that our client finds the         |
| evidence that he or she is looking for? And that, when found, his  |
| or her confidence in the theory, as well as the therapist's, will  |
| only be reinforced. Such a possibility reveals a problematic       |
| pattern: An empirical construction, which is adopted to help       |
| explain a client's difficulty or how to treat it, may              |
| inadvertently alter the client's view of that difficulty (i.e.,    |
| generate a creative construction), and thus lead to new            |
| experiences (i.e., data). Critically, these experiences may appear |
| to confirm the validity of the original empirical construction.    |
| "It is neither the prevalence or inevitability of this phenomenon, |
| however, that is so troublesome, but rather the possibility that   |
| clinicians do not always recognize it. Such recognition could      |
| entail several advantages. First, clinicians would be more likely  |
| to maintain an attitude of healthy skepticism about their          |
| empirical constructions and thus remain more open to alternative   |
| possibilities. Second, even if clinicians held to particular       |
| empirical constructions because they seemed helpful from a         |
| scientific standpoint, clinicians could do so at least with the    |
| explicit understanding that a potentially important aspect of such |
| constructions was not only their scientific merit but also their   |
| utility for changing clients' perspectives. In this context,       |
| constructions could be described as dual, insofar as they          |
| simultaneously subserve scientific efforts and efforts to          |
| reconstruct meaning."                                              |
|                                                    Peter Gaskovski |
|                "The clinician's art, or why science is not enough" |
|              Canadian Business and Current Affairs, November 1999. |

                              Allen Feld

Since my major professional activity had been teaching graduate
students in a Master of Social Work (MSW) program, I sometimes wonder
what I might say to them today. I have had many thoughts as I
witnessed the havoc created by therapists and false memory syndrome. I
think I would vigorously explain to students the reasons for the
scientific uncertainty about repression, and emphasize the necessity
for securing independent corroboration of any memory before accepting
its veracity. To these important cornerstones, I would add the caveat
that effective help is proffered when the focus is on the patient's
present, not the past. But, what else would I say? The following
propositions are at least a partial answer.
towards information that supports one's beliefs and views is not
unusual. There seems to be a natural tendency for people to become
involved with like-minded people. Professionals often select
continuing education and training programs that support, rather than
challenge, their beliefs. These self-imposed blinders may be
magnified by an inclination to limit professional discourse, debate,
and disagreement to a narrow continuum, even among those with whom
there is face-to-face contact. As a result of these tendencies, people
often select details that are likely to support rather than contradict
their beliefs.
    Vigilance is necessary in order to create professional objectivity
and to be open to new learning.
YOUR BELIEFS. Balance does not necessarily mean a 50-50 split.
Avoiding the "other side's" reading is another way of wearing blinders
and it may constitute a grave injustice to clients. Professional
practice should be scientifically based and professionals are
obligated to keep apace with the evolving thinking in their field.
Limiting reading to a narrow range furthers a myopic view, a common
hazard associated with the rigors of work, caseloads, efficiency and
trying to make means and ends meet.
    3. CHALLENGE YOUR OWN THINKING. While many of us may profess a
willingness to challenge our own thinking, that behavior may often be
elusive. Try placing yourself on a continuum with "Rarely Challenge
Myself" located at one pole and "Frequently Challenge Myself" at the
opposite pole. Place yourself on the continuum. (If you want to try an
interesting experiment and have an adolescent at home, ask that teen
to complete this continuum about you and compare your placements!) The
difficulty in self-challenge may be significantly reduced by factors
referred to in Propositions 1 and 2.
CONSISTENT WITH WHAT YOU MAY BELIEVE. A common therapeutic activity is
to test a hypothesis with probing questions. There is a tendency both
to ask questions that target the hypothesis and to accept answers that
fortify your thinking.
    This approach may not supply all of the information that is
therapeutically helpful. It might also indicate that the client
understands what a therapist is looking for, and the desire to please
may be influencing the response.
BEING WORKED ON IN THERAPY. Using technical terms can become a
stumbling block to effective communication with a client. Instead, use
terms that are common outside of therapy to describe the therapeutic
efforts. The client should be able to explain the focus of therapy to
non-professional significant others. If a patient is unable to do
that, it is sensible to question his or her understanding of the
YOU AND TO LAY PEOPLE. The description should not be just the textbook
words or names that may be used to identify the particular therapy of
choice. Descriptors such as "eclectic" should be avoided. A
professional's behavior is more definitive than a commonly
recognizable name given to a theory. Some therapists claim that they
are "multi-theory users." This too requires clarification and
This may seem like an obvious suggestion, but when was the last time
you asked this question to a client? (Or, if you have been a client,
were you asked this type of question?) A patient's answer to this
question can be a source of important therapeutic clues and have some
evaluative significance.
Evaluating progress in therapy should not be relegated to the ending
phase of therapy. Does the patient describe any change in the areas
that led her or him to seek therapy? What is the overall view of the
patient's life?
    Periodic reviews are meant to be informal and resemble an ongoing
therapy session. Reviews can initiate a dramatic turn in the therapy.
I recall a conversation with a colleague who was troubled by what he
felt to be a client's lack of progress. After a review session both
made adjustments that helped the therapy become more productive.
    Many patients who believed that they had False Memory Syndrome
have reported that their mental health deteriorated while they were in
therapy. Even though that decline may not have been a result of the
therapy, the possibility that it may be should not be overlooked.
    In reviewing these propositions, I came to a gratifying
conclusion. This is what I would say to my students even if I had not
been witness to the false memory fiasco. These ideas are not specific
to a particular issue; they represent some of the elements that I
believe are components of good therapy.

  Allen Feld is Director of Continuing Education for the FMS
  Foundation. He has retired from the faculty of the School of Social
  Work at Marywood University in Pennsylvania.

/                                                                    \
| Judge Moraghan rejected the video testimony of two Arizona         |
| therapists as expert witnesses, and criticized their neo-          |
| psychology. He noted that a "disturbing feature" of many such      |
| therapy regimes is that they are commercial programs with their    |
| own unique vocabularies and definitions. He wrote: "It is quite    |
| evident that many [therapists] are capable of and do significantly |
| damage their clients or patients; the court declines to accept     |
| their diagnoses [of post traumatic stress disorder]."              |
|                                                      Scheffey, T.  |
|                  "Litchfield judge utterly unconvinced by victim"  |
|                Connecticut Law Tribune, Oct 15, 2001, Vol 27 (42). |

                       L E G A L   C O R N E R
                              FMSF Staff

       SJC Signals Doubts About Validity of Recovered Memories
                     Commonwealth vs. Frangipane,
    SJC-08359, Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, 2001 Mass.
                 LEXIS 170, March 20, 2001, Decided.
In a unanimous 17-page ruling, the Supreme Judicial Court (SJC), the
highest court in Massachusetts, said that William Frangipane is
entitled to a new trial because the prosecution's expert witness
strayed too far from her expertise when she discussed the effects of
trauma on memory.
    Frangipane was convicted of raping a teenager who did not recall
most of the details of the assault until five years after it allegedly
occurred. Frangipane was a school bus driver hired to take a church
youth group to a nighttime Halloween hayride. He allegedly raped a
14-year-old boy who was on his way to the bathroom while participants
were gathered around a bonfire.
    The expert, a social worker, stated that she had studied in `the
area of memory [of sexual abuse]' with a variety of researchers,
including Dr. Bessel van der Kolk and Dr. Judy Herman and had
attended seminars and workshops. The SJC ruling included the expert's
explanation of a PET scan. She explained that it was "a scan of the
brain [whereby dye is injected] into various parts of the brain [and
one] can actually see by the color [that comes] up how different
memories are being stored in the brain, the different parts of our
brain that we are actually storing memory in." The court noted that
evidence on the neurology of how trauma victims store memories in the
brain should have come from a medical doctor, not a psychotherapist.
    The SJC ruled that there is enough disagreement on the issue [of
recovered memories] among mental-health specialists that it would be
appropriate for a judge to review the issue before allowing it to be
used in a criminal case."
    The Boston Globe noted that "the SJC's stance brings the court in
line with appellate courts across the country."
    Ellement, J. "New trial ordered in recovered-memory case" Globe,
March 21, 1001

       Throneberry vs. Shults-Lewis Ends in Mistrial in Indiana
In 1990 Teri Throneberry and Margie Cole initiated a lawsuit against
the Shults-Lewis Child and Family Services Facility for negligent
hiring, supervising and training of employees. The women claimed they
had been abused when they were residents at the facility in the 1960s.
The lawsuit was brought in 1990 after the criminal statute of
limitations had expired for Rodney Grantham, an employee at
Shults-Lewis in the 60s who admitted abusing the girls.
    This was the third attempt at a trial in this case. The first
trial was scheduled for 1995 but became tied up in appeals about the
civil statute of limitations that had also expired. Cole died in 1995.
Throneberry, now 50, argued that she had repressed the memory of the
event for 22 years and that the statute of limitations should not
begin until she remembered the abuse. That argument kept the case in
the appeal courts until 1999, when the Indiana Supreme Court remanded
the case for trial.[1]
    Although almost half of the states now have laws that give
plaintiffs time beyond the normal statutes of limitations to file
repressed memory lawsuits, there is no such law in Indiana. "In
Indiana there is no precedent one way or the other on repressed
memories," said James A. Tanford, an Indiana University law professor
and an expert on law and psychology. "The Indiana Supreme Court has
not decided any case yet on the admissibility of repressed memory."
Tanford noted that the Indiana Supreme Court "has relied quite heavily
on the published scientific literature. The weight of scholarly
opinion within the fields of psychology and law is that these
recovered memories are factually unreliable."[2]
    Before ending in a mistrial because the plaintiff's lawyer had to
be hospitalized, Daniel Brown, Ph.D., who had examined Throneberry,
testified that she suffered from 1) PTSD, 2) sexual desire disorder,
3) moderate anxiety and depression, 4) amphetamine abuse, 5) body
dysmorphic disorder in which she feels ugly all the time, 6) a
personality disorder that causes her to avoid relationships and 7) a
dissociative disorder that causes her to switch mental states. The
plaintiffs had to convince a jury that repressed memories are
"reliable" and that the memories were genuinely Throneberry's and not
suggested by others.
    Experts scheduled for the defense were memory researcher Elizabeth
Loftus, Ph.D., psychiatrist James Hudson, M.D. and Paul Frederickson,
Ph.D., an Indianapolis psychologist who also examined Throneberry. The
defense was expected to argue that "repressed memory" or "associative
amnesia" is not a legitimate, science-based concept, but rather a
convenient legal argument to override the statute of limitations.
Attorney for Throneberry was Gregory Bowes of Indianapolis.
    Attorneys for Shults-Lewis were Steve Strawbridge of Indianapolis
and Mark Lienhoop of LaPorte.

[1] Indiana Supreme Court No. 64S05-9712-CV-658, 718 N.E.2d 738; 1999
    Ind. LEXIS 933.
[2] Jewel, M. "Repressed memory lawsuit tests wide-open area of
    Indiana law" Associated Press, Sept 2, 2001.
[3] Kosky, K., "Victim of molestation still suffers" Valparaiso Times,
    September 23, 2001.
[4] Seibel, T. "Porter sex abuse case a mistrial" Post-Tribune, Sept
    26, 2001.
                  Update: Rebirthing Trials Conclude
                            Jaye D. Bartha
Rebirthing Aides Given Probation: On October 4th , Brita St. Clair,
42, and her husband, Jack McDaniel, 48, assistants who actively
participated in the `rebirthing' session that killed 10-year-old
Candace Newmaker in April 2000, both received 10 years probation and
1000 hours of community service from Judge Jane Tidball in Golden,
    St. Clair, a former special education teacher, and McDaniel, a
construction worker, assisted psychotherapists Connell Watkins and
Julie Ponder in swaddling young Candace in a flannel sheet and placing
her beneath heavy furniture cushions. The four adults then pushed
against Candace to simulate birth contractions. The child was supposed
to free herself and become "reborn" to her adoptive mother, but after
70 minutes of pleading for freedom, she suffocated.
    Michael Steinberg, attorney for St. Clair, characterized his
client as a devoted mother and an upstanding member of the community.
He reiterated that St. Clair knew nothing about rebirthing therapy and
that she "never thought to question Connell Watkins's judgment."
    Bob Ransome, attorney for McDaniel, said his client "heard of
rebirthing one night before this session," and he was "thrilled to be
in the presence of this expert [Watkins]," who is currently serving a
16-year sentence for child abuse resulting in death. Following the
reading of a tender letter McDaniel wrote to his daughter after the
fateful rebirthing session, Ransome asked, "We should put this man in
jail? Give me a break!"
    Prosecutor Laura Dunbar painted a contrasting picture of the
defendants "based on evidence and fact ? not on emotion." In a
methodical fashion, Dunbar recounted the involvement of St. Clair and
McDaniel during the "two week intensive" that preceded Candace's
death. They were "willing and active participants, practicing
psychotherapy," she stated before introducing evidence showing that
St. Clair repeatedly lied to investigators by diminishing her
involvement which was caught on tape and viewed by the court. Both
defendants, she said, played key roles in teaching young Candace
"compliance training" and "strong sitting" (a technique whereby the
child sits motionless in isolation for prolonged periods).
    McDaniel addressed the court saying, "We were there to help her
[Candace] live a better life" and "I wish I had more knowledge and
insights. We are out of the social work business for good." St. Clair,
through her attorney stated, "Candace Newmaker's death, and my being
present, will be a source of agony for me for the rest of my life."
    The presumptive range for sentencing was probation to 4-16 year
prison terms. Judge Tidball stated both defendants "were acting under
direction and neither were trained" and "there was no evidence they
tried to harm." Although Tidball received requests from mental health
groups asking for stiff sentencing, she disagreed: "They are not
mental health providers and the felony conviction" will "constitute a
significant deterrent. Any other punishment would be inappropriate."
    Newmaker Pleads Guilty: Jeane Newmaker of North Carolina pled
guilty to child abuse resulting in death, a class III felony, on
October 11, 2001. Newmaker brought her adopted daughter, Candace, to
Evergreen, Colorado to be treated by Connell Watkins. Newmaker, a
nurse practitioner at the pediatric gastro-intestinal clinic at Duke
University Medical Center, participated in the rebirthing session in
which her daughter died.
    The Court imposed a four-year suspended sentence with 400 hours of
community service and mandatory brief counseling. Newmaker must report
to the probation department. If she complies, her felony conviction
will be expunged.
    Prosecutor Steve Jensen had requested that Newmaker be barred from
working with children during her suspended sentence stating, "the
evidence raises questions about her ability to recognize and
intervene" with a child in distress. Defense attorney Pamela Mackey
said Newmaker "placed her trust in Watkins, not as a professional, but
as a mother." Judge Tidball agreed and added that a nursing
restriction would be a "meaningless punitive sanction."

  Jaye Bartha majored in psychology. She recently settled a lawsuit
  she brought against her former therapist who practiced recovered
  memory therapy.
                           Wenatchee Update
The four children of Doris Green who were removed from their mother in
1994 have filed a suit against the city of Wenatchee, Chelan county
and the Department of Children and Family Services claiming that they
were subjected to improper interrogation. Green, whose conviction was
overturned and whose parental rights were restored by a state Court of
Appeals in 1999, has not yet gotten her children back.
    The 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals ruled 8-3 that Robert
Devereaux failed to present evidence supporting either of his claims;
that detectives continued their investigation of him despite the fact
that they knew or should have known that he was innocent; and that
they used investigative techniques that were so coercive that they
knew or should have known they would result in false information.

/                                                                    \
| "Confirmation bias should be a matter of great interest and        |
| concern to lawyers and judges. For example, lie-detector           |
| (polygraph) examiners may start with a hypothesis that they        |
| `confirm' by asking just the right questions. Or a mental health   |
| professional investigating child abuse may too readily (albeit     |
| unwittingly) collaborate with the presumed victim to create        |
| memories of abuse that never occurred. The easily made diagnosis   |
| of child abuse can be notoriously difficult to falsify,            |
| particularly when the victim is an adult and the abuse occurred    |
| early in childhood.  This has led to several spectacular           |
| miscarriages of justice."                                          |
|                               Kenneth R. Foster and Peter W. Huber |
|      Judging Science: Scientific knowledge and the federal courts. |
|                                              1997, MIT Press.p. 45 |

                        Loren Pankratz, Ph.D.

Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) first appeared in the third
edition of the Psychiatric Diagnostic Manual in 1980. Soon after,
psychiatrist Landy Sparr and I were the first to publish a paper
describing the imitators of this disorder. We described five men who
said they had been traumatized in the Vietnam war; three said they
were former prisoners of war. In fact none had been prisoners of war,
four had never been in Vietnam, and two had never even been in the
    Several factors convinced me that factitious PTSD was more common
than even the most cynical observer would guess. [Factitious means
arising from an artificial or manufactured source; a factitious
symptom or disease, then, is one that develops outside the natural
course of illness.] I discovered all sorts of individuals with
different personality styles and varying motives who were pretending
that they had suffered trauma. Twenty years later, I have some reasons
to believe that my fears are correct.
    In 1998, Dallas stockbroker and Vietnam veteran B.G. Burkett wrote
a book called Stolen Valor in which he provided painful and
embarrassing examples of veterans deceiving gullible mental health
professionals. His argument does not rest on single case studies of
therapist blunders. Burkett also attacked the very foundation of the
Veterans Administration's understanding of PTSD, the National Vietnam
Veteran Readjustment Study, a four-year project that cost $9 million
to complete. This study concluded that when lifetime prevalence was
added to current PTSD, more than half of male veterans and nearly half
of the female veterans had experienced clinically significant
stress-reaction symptoms. Senator Allan Cranston, then chairman of
the Senate Veterans' Affairs Committee, found the result "shocking."
    Burkett found these results shocking as well, but for different
reasons. Fewer than 15% of the 3.3 million men who served in the
Vietnam theater of operation were in direct line combat units. How can
50 percent of these veterans have experienced PTSD? Burkett points out
some serious errors in the methodology of the study, and he suggests
that many of the subjects lied. For example, the sample has three
times the expected number of reported Purple Hearts. Even if the
deceivers were identified and thrown out, would we really expect such
high rates of PTSD from this war?
    Ian Hacking wrote a book known to many readers of this newsletter
called Rewriting the Soul. In a more recent book, Hacking (1998)
reviewed the history of a disorder that was popular at the end of the
1800's but has now essentially disappeared, namely fugue-state
wandering. This wandering disorder was constructed to explain some
unusual behaviors of the time, and once described, there was an
epidemic of fugue wanderers or perhaps more precisely an epidemic of
diagnosing fugue wanderers. This was not a disease process but a
phenomenon that happened in reaction to social conditions of the
time. Physicians gave these people a diagnostic label, a label that
protected them from personal responsibility for their actions.
    Hacking noted that some mental disorders bear a stigma that you
would not want anything to do with. But if a disorder is
conceptualized as a misfortune that happens to basically decent souls,
then patients and clinicians will direct their attention to that
diagnosis. Perhaps some insights into PTSD can be gained by viewing it
within this light.
    The old diagnostic terms associated with war trauma include combat
fatigue, shell shock, and war neurosis. All of these terms carry a
notion that after a certain extended period of combat, some soldiers
might break down: weaker ones first, then the stronger, and finally
only the strong surviving. However, PTSD was developed and adopted in
the context of an unpopular war. The diagnostic manual suggests that
the symptoms of PTSD emerge from an event, a stressor that would evoke
"significant symptoms of distress in most people" (emphasis added,
DSM-III, 1980, p. 236).
    In 1997, Canadian Marilyn Bowman reviewed the world literature on
response to trauma in a book entitled Individual Differences in
Posttraumatic Response: Problems with the adversity-distress
connection. She concluded that "toxic events are not reliably powerful
in yielding a chronic, event-focused clinical disorder such as PTSD."
Indeed, most people do not respond to toxic events with persistent
symptoms that would rise to the level of a diagnosable disorder, like
PTSD. Individuals who do are characterized by pre-existing factors
such as longstanding personality traits of emotionality and personal
vulnerability, suggesting that their pre-event factors contribute more
to serious distress disorders than the toxic event.
    Because these conclusions seem so far from the clinical practice
of most mental health professionals, Bowman devoted a full chapter to
why clinicians are reluctant to look for causes of distress beyond an
event. The insight and wisdom of this chapter are compelling.
Therapists have fallen for easy explanations, readily blaming others
and the environment for the patient's distress. They have confused
the acute symptoms of trauma with chronic disability or, even worse,
created victims by reinforcing the idea that one's behavior is
attributable to situational events in instances where that is not
    One could make a case that mental health professionals were
insufficiently prepared to understand the new diagnosis of PTSD. They
were buffeted by social and political winds that blew us away from the
harbors of psychological science. As a result, they were easy marks
for anyone who wanted to spin a false story about how their life was
ruined by some trauma. At the same time, therapists made patients with
problems into victims. The most dramatic examples involved searching
for sexual abuse as the repressed trauma behind some ordinary symptom.
Although this practice seems to have dramatically changed over the
past few years, I am concerned that many therapists are still
practicing without a revised conceptualization of the PTSD diagnosis.
I recommend that this organization give the matter some attention.


  Bowman, M. (1997). Individual differences in posttraumatic response.
Mahwah NJ: Erlbaum.
  Buckley, R., & Bigelow, D.A. (1992). The multi-service network:
Reaching the unserved multi-problem individual. Community Mental
Health Journal, 28, 43-50.
  Burkett, B.G. & Whitley, G. Stolen Valor. Dallas, TX: Verity Press,
  Hacking I. Mad Travelers, University Press of Virginia, 1998.
  Sparr L, & Pankratz L. (1983). Factitious posttraumatic stress
disorder.  American Journal of Psychiatry, 140,1016-9.

  Loren Pankratz, Ph.D., is a consultation psychologist in Portland OR
  and Clinical Professor in the Department of Psychiatry at the Oregon
  Health Sciences University. He is a member of the FMSF Scientific
  Advisory Board.

Editor's Comment: In addition to the references listed above, the
following are suggested reading for those interested in a critical
appraisal of PTSD:
  Young, A. The Harmony of Illusions: Inventing Post-Traumatic Stress
Disorder, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1995.
  Website run by Gerald Rosen, Ph.D., clinical psychologist at the
University of Washington.

| "Junk science results when conclusions are drawn using low-quality |
| data such as testimonials, anecdotes, and case reports rather than |
| from randomized, controlled clinical experiments."                 |
|                                                      John C. Dodes |
|                                         "Junk Science and the Law" |
|                                  Skeptical Inquirer, Jul/Aug 2001. |

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

                         One Family's Journey
                     After 18 Years of Separation
It's hard to know where to begin. A couple of months ago, we were
shocked to receive a letter from our 34-year-old son who, after l8
years, was reaching out for contact.
    By way of background, I should point out that ours was a blended
family. He was my son from my previous marriage, but he lived with my
wife (his stepmother) and me. We raised him from age 4 until age 16.
His stepmother says that he was every bit as dear to her as if he were
her own child. There was a younger sister as well, but she lived with
her mother and visited us. We were not particularly fond of the
children's mother, but we kept this to ourselves and supported the
boy's relationship with his biological mother.
    On the bad advice of a therapist, we let him go just before his
16th birthday to live on a trial basis with his mother. The counselor
insisted that this was the only way the boy would find out what his
biological mother was really like. Unbeknownst to us, the mother was
involved in recovered memory therapy. Soon after our son went to live
with her, she involved the children in recovered memory therapy as
well. It wasn't long before the boy and his sister were accusing us
and other relatives of molestation. When the dust settled, the
authorities determined that the allegations were unfounded.
Nonetheless, we were not successful in getting our son back. A bond
that we thought indestructible was severed as profoundly and
completely as if there had been a physical death.
    In his letter, our son wanted to let us know that his younger
sister, also estranged from us, had been diagnosed with an aggressive,
possibly terminal cancer. He wrote that he did not expect a response
from us, knowing how devastated we were by the allegations he and his
sister made against us and other family l8 years ago.
    Our son tried reaching out once before, about 12 years ago, and we
really got our hopes up. There was an exchange of letters but nothing
ever got off the ground because we needed to know that he understood
that all those molestation allegations never happened, and he was not
willing at the time to reassure us. We wrote that in that case, we
couldn't have any contact with him. He wrote back saying that it was
good-bye. But he did let us know by letter when each of his two
children were born.
    It was cataclysmic the way my son and daughter were lost to our
family; we became convinced the loss was permanent. Our entire
extended family grieved along with us for a long time. Eventually, we
made peace with the loss -- or so we thought. Though we hadn't seen
our son in l8 years, and had given up hope, the emotional impact of
receiving the letter from him wiped us out for days. My wife read it
and told me it was good, but I couldn't read the letter myself until
four days later. It was good, but I felt all mixed up and anxious and
wasn't sure how I wanted to respond.
    I reached out to Pamela Freyd and a couple of other good friends
for advice. The message I got from them was clear and consistent.
Regardless of all the difficult feelings, we should seize this
opportunity. Our son was giving us all another chance to see if we
could be a family again. My wife wanted to go for it, but felt the
decision was up to me, his biological father. She said that if we go
forward we should go full throttle without hesitation. I must admit,
had it not been for the encouragement I received from Pamela, my
brother, and other friends and family, I might have blown this
opportunity. The pain and terror stirred up by my son's letter, nice,
as it was, felt unbearable.
    He wrote that his sister did not know he had written to us and was
going to be upset with him for doing so. He asked us not to contact
her directly, but was willing to deliver any message we might wish to
send. We asked him to tell his sister that we loved her and that we
wanted very much to see her, but would respect her decision if that is
not what she wanted. She's still refusing contact, but we feel that
may change pretty soon now.
    Meanwhile, it was my son's turn to be shocked. He wasn't expecting
a response to his letter because, like us, he'd lost all hope. I wrote
him back. I called him. Within a week we were talking daily on the
phone, often for hours at a time. My wife had long phone conversations
with him too. We were blown away by the depth of feeling he expressed,
how much he loved us and how deeply he missed us. Of course the
feeling was mutual. He couldn't believe how happy we were to have him
back in our lives and how much we'd missed him. He acknowledged that
his attitude the first time he tried to reconnect made it impossible
for us to have contact with him at that time. I learned that he had
followed in my footsteps, getting married because of a pregnancy,
despite knowing it was a mistake, then leaving the marriage before his
second child was born. As a divorced father himself, he saw the
potential for being falsely accused of molestation, because he wanted
more visitations with his children than his ex-wife was willing to
allow. He reassured me that he nipped this in the bud and was able to
see his children on a regular basis, though not for as much time as he
would like. He is remarried now, to a lovely woman who has a son from
her previous marriage, a boy who lives with them and is about the same
age of his two boys.
    Before the devastation, my son worshiped my father (Papa) and
dearly loved the rest of my family and my wife like a real mother. My
son was crushed to learn that his papa had passed away 6 years ago. He
got directions to the cemetery from my brother, and the next day
visited my father's grave, spending several hours there. When it is
the right time, he and I are going to visit Papa's burial site
together, just the two of us. My wife's mother had also passed away a
few years earlier. Our son wept on the phone saying that he was so
sorry that he didn't get a chance to see them before they passed
away. For the first time in l8 years, my son and I also laughed
together, when he told me he felt like a fish out of water trying to
be a part of the family again, and I told him I was feeling that way
too, trying to be his father again. The issues concerning his sister
remain in limbo. She was furious at him for making contact with us and
felt betrayed by him. He reports that she will consider making contact
with us under one of two conditions: that she completes her
chemotherapy and radiation treatment and is considered to be in some
state of remission or that after the treatment she is considered
terminal. Right now she is fighting for her life and doesn't want to
deal with us.
    The letter from our son came by coincidence a month before our
30th anniversary celebration party. After a couple of weeks and
talking on the phone for hours everyday, we asked him if he would come
and celebrate this event with us. His response was, "Didn't your
brother tell you, I've already got plane reservations to come?"
    We picked him up at the airport the day before our party, the
first time we'd seen him in l8 years. It was the highlight of the
party having him with us and re-introducing him to all our friends and
family who he was close with growing up. We were surprised and
thrilled to discover that the person our son has become as an adult is
someone who my wife, I, and everyone else really like.
    He also has lots of courage. Together with us, he wants to go
through all the file boxes and documents we have, chronicling the
story of our family and how it was torn apart. We all know this is
going to be very upsetting at times and have made a commitment to work
through whatever it is in a way that maintains our love and family
bonds instead of tearing them apart. Our son reports that he knows
about parental alienation, false memories and some of the problems
with mental health professionals. He says he was 22 when he began to
realize what happened to him when he went to live with his biological
mother, and that my wife and I were not his enemies; she was.
    We have already had some very heavy conversations about the
allegations. My wife and I were afraid that he may had come to
believe them at some point, but he says no. He said that there was
just so much pressure from his mother and her supporters to say he was
molested that he couldn't stand it any longer and complied in order to
get her off his back.
    It has been been enlightening to hear his views about the various
court-appointed therapists he saw. He said there was one he didn't
trust and another he described as stupid. We disliked all of them
because in our view they were helping to destroy our son by eliciting
more and more molest allegations. He respects our feelings about this,
but says that the last of the therapists actually helped him a lot. My
wife and I refused to believe this until I found information in one of
the file boxes which made us realize that some of our perceptions may
have been wrong.
    We want to fill in all those missing years, and not miss anymore.
Our son's going to spend the upcoming weekend with us. Then he and I
are going to load up his piano, which we've kept for him all these
years, and drive together to his house. I'll be meeting my
grandchildren for the first time next week.
                                                              A Father
                      Retractors' Responsibility
I am writing to address one theme that I see with increasing frequency
in the letters from offspring who "retract" and wish to reunify with
their families. The "retractors" often blame their therapists. The
therapist took advantage of them at a vulnerable time, were untrained
or relied on unproven theories, or were motivated by insurance money.
Now that the offspring have recovered, they are suing the therapists.
    This theme is seductive. It is what families want to hear. Their
offspring were innocent and misled. It is also what the FMSF wants to
hear because it is confirmation that the therapists based their
practices on unscientific theories. This theme promotes the
humanitarian goal of the Foundation: reunification of families based
on love and understanding.
    In my opinion, many of the accusers and retractors are not
innocent at all. They actively sought out therapists who advocated
breaking with their families. They were attracted to the idea of
recovered memories of childhood abuse and sought ways to find support
for their message of anger and hate. They chose to hurt parents and
family in the most effective manner available to them. In a recently
published letter to a newspaper advice columnist, the writer said that
her sister had gone to a therapist with bizarre recovered memories of
childhood abuse. When the therapist asked her to set them aside and
deal with the current issues in her life, the sister left the
therapist to seek one who would support her "memories." I believe that
this is more common than the Foundation wants to admit in the
    Perhaps most important is that by allowing the retractors to blame
their therapists, we avoid some important issues. Why did the accusers
seek out this therapy? What responsibility do they have for their
actions? By blaming their therapists, aren't retractors just
continuing their theme of blaming others? The letter from "A Dad" asks
questions that the Foundation finds difficult to answer. Why should we
trust? Why should we reconcile?
                                                           Another Dad

    Editor's Comment: The position expressed by this writer is
undoubtedly both legitimate and not uncommon. The Foundation has no
"policy" on this matter. We recognize that each family responds to the
despair associated with losing a child in its own way. We apologize to
the writer and all others who may believe that we have evidenced less
respect for this point of view than the one it challenges. In our
view, both are valid. We would like to hear responses to this point
of view, especially from retractors.

                  Suggestible but Still Responsible
I was interested in the letter from A Dad in the July/August
newsletter. For the last several years our family, minus our accusing
daughter, has drawn together in a harmonious and happy relationship.
For our prodigal daughter to rejoin our family without repentance or
retraction would be unacceptable to us.
    Back in the bad old days of the repressed-memory hysteria, circa
1991-92, the conventional wisdom assumed that all the blame belonged
to the nasty therapist and none to the accusing daughter. Since then,
attitudes have changed. Many of us have come to recognize that
although the therapist's client was highly suggestible and vulnerable,
she still bore a responsibility for her acceptance of the therapist's
agenda. In short, it still takes two to tango.
                                                                 A Dad
                      Life Without a Retraction
The Foundation helped my late wife and me a great deal. Thankfully our
daughters returned in 1995, one year before my wife passed away from
    I have since remarried. Before the wedding, I informed my fiancee
about this issue and she went with me to an FMSF meeting. When she
informed her four children about this, however, it caused quite a
stir. To this day she warns me to be careful whenever we visit with
any of her eight grandchildren.
    Two years ago one of my daughters moved to about 10 miles from
me. The other daughter visits with her sister and me every month or
two. On one occasion about a year and a half ago, my new wife
confronted them about the FMS issue. One daughter confirmed her belief
that her grandfather had raped her and her sister. The other daughter
just cried and said while hugging me, "I don't want to lose you
again." They are still sharing a loving relationship with me, but they
have not retracted.
                                                                 A Dad
                        Living With a Returner
Contact with our accusing daughter was never completely severed
because she is a single parent with two sons and is dependent on us
for most of her support. Although she was accusing us of fantastic
acts that were never really specified, she would still call for money
when she needed it. We never knew an address unless she was near some
catastrophic event such as being months behind with rent when she
would give us the address.
    When a relative asked her why she thought we would continue to
support her in the face of her rejection of us, her answer was
"guilt." Actually the reason we continued was because the two children
were being victimized by her actions and we did not feel we could
compound her actions by depriving them.
    Three years ago when her father had a heart attack, she did come
with her children and see him. She stayed for some time and drove her
mom to the hospital every day so she could visit.
    Since that time. we have visited on many occasions. Sometimes the
visits are enjoyable and at other times they are stressful. Although
our relationship is not what we would wish, we are able to bond with
our grandsons and this alone compensates for the frustration of the
ongoing farce.
                                                         A Mom and Dad
                           A Treasured Card
One year after my dear husband's death, our accusing daughter from
whom we had not heard for 14 years sent me a purchased condolence card
-- hoping I had found peace since my loss. I debated about responding,
but finally wrote a short note of appreciation and expressed hope that
we might correspond occasionally. Seven months of silence have
followed, but I still treasure that tiny compassionate card.
                                                                 A Mom
                        We Were Non-Judgmental
Our daughter made her false accusation when alone far from home. While
still away, she turned against the therapist and the group that
supported the false memories. When she came home, she said that she
did not remember the therapy sessions, that she did not like the group
or therapist there, and that she did not remember any of her false
memories. We accepted that. We did not try to make her retract but
accepted her as if nothing had been said and no one accused. It
worked. I don't know if other families would have as happy a solution.
My instinct is that families should not be judgmental, if possible.
The FMSF Newsletter relating similar experiences was a big help in
getting through this period. We were lucky.
                                                                 A Dad
| "Daily life took as much as she had.The future was sunset; the     |
| past something to leave behind. And if it didn't stay behind,      |
| well, you might have to stomp it out."                             |
|                Toni Morrison, Beloved, Plume (Penguin) 1987, p.256 |

*                           N O T I C E S                            *
*                                                                    *
*                       FROM RUMOR TO REASON:                        *
*                     AND CULTURAL PERSPECTIVES                      *
*                                                                    *
*  A One-day seminar offering continuing education credit to Social  *
*  Workers, (Psychologists, Psychiatrists, and Attorneys, pending)   *
*                                                                    *
*                         November 17, 2001                          *
*                       University of Vermont                        *
*                                                                    *
*                          MARK PENDERGRAST                          *
*                    Memory Creation and Science                     *
*                     TERENCE W. CAMPBELL, Ph.D.                     *
*        Children, Suggestibility and Autobiographical Memory        *
*                       JACK QUATTROCCHI, Esq.                       *
*             The Roles of the Legal System and Experts              *
*                                                                    *
*       Students and interested non-professionals are welcome.       *
*                                                                    *
*                          FOR INFORMATION                           *
*       Kathy Begert, 1134 Rathburn Road, Wooster, OH  44691,        *
*          phone: 330-263-7798. E-mail:           *
*                                                                    *
*                          ESTATE  PLANNING                          *
*                 If you have questions about how to                 *
*             include the FMSF in your estate planning,              *
*               contact Charles Caviness 800-289-9060.               *
*            (Available 9:00 AM to 5:00 PM Pacific time.)            *
*                                                                    *
*                      WEB  SITES  OF  INTEREST                      *
*                                                                    *
*                                *
*                     The Memory Debate Archives                     *
*                                                                    *
*                                         *
*                      French language website                       *
*                                                                    *
*                                    *
*      Contains phone numbers of professional regulatory boards      *
*                          in all 50 states                          *
*                                                                    *
*                                       *
*                   Illinois-Wisconsin FMS Society                   *
*                                                                    *
*                                   *
*                             Ohio Group                             *
*                                                                    *
*                                           *
*                Australian False Memory Association.                *
*                                                                    *
*                                           *
*                    British False Memory Society                    *
*                                                                    *
*                               *
*            This site is run by Laura Pasley (retractor)            *
*                                                                    *
*                          *
*             This site is run by Deb David (retractor)              *
*                                                                    *
*                         *
*                            Upton Books                             *
*                                                                    *
*                    *
*                   Having trouble locating books                    *
*               about the recovered memory phenomenon?               *
*                     Recovered Memory Bookstore                     *
*                                                                    *
*                                    *
*               Information about Satanic Ritual Abuse               *
*                                                                    *
*                              *
*                       Netherlands FMS Group                        *
*                                                                    *
*                                       *
*                       New Zealand FMS Group                        *
*                                                                    *
*                     LEGAL WEBSITES OF INTEREST                     *
*                                           *
*                                       *
*                                           *
*                                                                    *
*                                FREE                                *
*             "Recovered Memories: Are They Reliable?"               *
*     Call or write the FMS Foundation for pamphlets. Be sure to     *
*     include your address and the number of pamphlets you need.     *
*                                                                    *
*     ELUSIVE INNOCENCE: Survival Guide For The Falsely Accused      *
*                         Author: Dean Tong                          *
*          Publisher: Huntington House, ISBN: 1-56384-190-           *
*                                                                    *
* "Tong delivers copious practical details on how to hire a lawyer,  *
* handle psychological testing, seek experts, establish evidence of  *
* innocence, and find support groups. This book fills the missing    *
* link in child abuse literature - overcoming the false accusation." *
* Roy Black, Esq.                                                    *
*                                                                    *
* "It should be must reading for every governmental official charged *
* with the protection of our children, especially those hardened     *
* into assuming the guilt of every defendant." Stephen J. Ceci,      *
* Ph.D., The Helen L. Carr Professor of Child Development at Cornell *
* University and Co-Author of Jeopardy in the Courtroom Contents     *
* include:                                                           *
*                                                                    *
* Case Studies from Massachusetts, Florida, England, Ohio, Colorado  *
* and Texas; The Accused; The Accuser; The SAID Syndrome; The Child  *
* Victim; The Dolls; The Agencies; The Courts; Fighting Back False   *
* Accusations of Child Abuse; Fighting Back False Accusations of     *
* Domestic Violence; Borderline Personality Disorder: A Survival     *
* Guide for Non-BPs; Self-Help Guide                                 *
*                                                                    *
* Appendices: Fake or Factual? How to Choose Your Attorney; Case Law *
* and False Accusations; Frye v. Daubert: A Look at Science in the   *
* Courtroom; Internet Resources; Consistent With What, Exactly?      *
* Defense Interrogatories of False Accusers; Investigative Intake    *
* Process Flow Chart                                                 *
*                                                                    *
*    Call 1-800-749-4009 or visit for inquiries.    *
*                                                                    *
*                           DID YOU MOVE?                            *
*        Do you have a new area code? Remember to inform the         *
*                        FMSF Business Office                        *
                F M S    B U L L E T I N    B O A R D

Contacts & Meetings:

        Marge 334-244-7891
  Kathleen 907-337-7821
        Pat 480-396-9420
  Little Rock
        Al & Lela 870-363-4368
        Joanne & Gerald 916-933-3655
        Jocelyn 530-873-0919
  San Francisco & North Bay - (bi-MO)
        Gideon 415-389-0254 or
        Charles 415-984-6626 (am); 415-435-9618 (pm)
  San Francisco & South Bay
        Eric 408-245-4493
  East Bay Area - (bi-MO)
        Judy 925-376-8221
  Central Coast
        Carole 805-967-8058
  Palm Desert
        Eileen and Jerry 909-659-9636
  Central Orange County - 1st Fri. (MO) @ 7pm
        Chris & Alan 714-733-2925
  Covina Area - 1st Mon. (MO) @7:30pm
        Floyd & Libby 626-330-2321
  San Diego Area 
        Dee 760-439-4630
  Colorado Springs
        Doris 719-488-9738
  S. New England
        Earl 203-329-8365 or
        Paul 203-458-9173
        Madeline 954-966-4FMS
  Central Florida - Please call for mtg. time
        John & Nancy 352-750-5446
        Francis & Sally 941-342-8310
  Tampa Bay Area
        Bob & Janet 813-856-7091
        Wallie & Jill 770-971-8917
  Carolyn 808-261-5716
  Chicago & Suburbs - 1st Sun. (MO)
        Eileen 847-985-7693 or
        Liz & Roger 847-827-1056
        Bryant & Lynn 309-674-2767
  Indiana Assn. for Responsible Mental Health Practices
        Nickie 317-471-0922; fax 317-334-9839
        Pat 219-489-9987
  Des Moines - 1st Sat. (MO) @11:30 am Lunch
        Betty & Gayle 515-270-6976
  Wichita - Meeting as called
        Pat 785-738-4840
  Louisville- Last Sun. (MO) @ 2pm
        Bob 502-367-1838
        Carolyn 207-942-8473
  Protland - 4th Sun.(MO)
        Wally & Boby 207-878-9812
   Andover - 2nd Sun. (MO) @ 1pm
        Frank 978-263-9795
  Grand Rapids Area-Jenison - 1st Mon. (MO)
        Bill & Marge 616-383-0382
  Greater Detroit Area
        Nancy 248-642-8077
  Ann Arbor
        Martha 734-439-4055
        Terry & Collette 507-642-3630
        Dan & Joan 651-631-2247
  Kansas City  -  Meeting as called
        Pat 785-738-4840
  St. Louis Area  -  call for meeting time
        Karen 314-432-8789
  Springfield - 4th Sat. Apr,Jul,Oct @12:30pm
        Tom 417-753-4878
        Roxie 417-781-2058
  Lee & Avone 406-443-3189
  Mark 802-872-8439
        Sally 609-927-5343
        Nancy 973-729-1433 
  Albuquerque  -2nd Sat. (bi-MO) @1 pm
  Southwest Room - Presbyterian Hospital
        Maggie 505-662-7521 (after 6:30 pm)
        Sy 505-758-0726
        Michael 212-481-6655
  Westchester, Rockland, etc.
        Barbara 914-761-3627
  Upstate/Albany Area
        Elaine 518-399-5749
  Susan 704-538-7202
        Bob 513-541-0816 or 513-541-5272
        Bob & Carole 440-356-4544
  Oklahoma City
        Dee 405-942-0531
        Jim 918-297-7719
  Portland area
        Kathy 503-557-7118
        Paul & Betty 717-691-7660
        Rick & Renee 412-563-5509
        John 717-278-2040
  Wayne (includes S. NJ) - 2nd Sat. (MO)
        Jim & Jo 610-783-0396
  Nashville - Wed. (MO) @1pm
        Kate 615-665-1160
        Jo or Beverly 713-464-8970
   El Paso
        Mary Lou 915-591-0271
        Keith 801-467-0669
        Mark 802-872-8439
        Sue 703-273-2343
        Katie & Leo 414-476-0285 or
        Susanne & John 608-427-3686

  Vancouver & Mainland 
        Ruth 604-925-1539
  Victoria & Vancouver Island - 3rd Tues. (MO) @7:30pm
        John 250-721-3219
        Roma 240-275-5723
  London -2nd Sun (bi-MO)
        Adriaan 519-471-6338
        Eileen 613-836-3294
        Ethel 705-924-2546
        Ken & Marina 905-637-6030
        Paula 705-543-0318
  St. Andre Est.
        Mavis 450-537-8187
  Roger: Phone & Fax 352-897-9282
  FMS ASSOCIATION fax-(972) 2-625-9282 
  Task Force FMS of Werkgroep Fictieve 
        Anna (31) 20-693-5692
        Colleen (09) 416-7443
        Ake Moller FAX (48) 431-217-90
  The British False Memory Society
        Madeline (44) 1225 868-682
     Deadline for the January/February Newsletter is December 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". 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,      November 1, 2001

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 Wiscon-
sin, 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; FRED H. FRANKEL, MBChB, DPM, Harvard University Medi-
cal School,  Boston MA;  GEORGE K. GANAWAY, M.D.,  Emory University of
Medicine,  Atlanta,  GA;  MARTIN GARDNER,  Author, Hendersonville, NC;
ROCHEL GELMAN, Ph.D.,  Rutgers  University, New  Brunswick, NJ;  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, Phila-
delphia,  PA;  ELIZABETH LOFTUS, Ph.D., University of Washington, Sea-
tle, 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,  Westford, MA;  ULRIC NEISSER, Ph.D., Cornell
University, Ithaca, N.Y.; RICHARD OFSHE, Ph.D., University of Califor-
nia, Berkeley, CA;  EMILY CAROTA ORNE, B.A., University of Pennsylvan-
ia, Philadelphia, PA; MARTIN ORNE, M.D., Ph.D., (deceased)  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.,  Washington  University,  St. Louis, MO;  CAROLYN SAARI, Ph.D.,
Loyola University, Chicago, IL;  THEODORE SARBIN, Ph.D., University of
California, Santa Cruz, CA;  THOMAS A. SEBEOK, Ph.D., Indiana Univers-
ity,  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 Uni-
versity, Waco, TX.

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

Family - Includes Newsletter             $100_______

                       Additional Contribution:_____________


___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

*  MAIL the completed form with payment to: 
FMS Foundation, 1955 Locust Street, Philadelphia, PA 19103-5766

*  FAX your order to 215-940-1042. Fax orders cannot be processed 
without credit card information.