Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 15, No. 2, 1998, page 78
like a series of interpretations than a courtroom controversy or the heated give and take of
a town meeting.
As an educator of professional psychologists, I am aware that academic psychologists tend
to reason differently from clinicians about human behavior. Practitioners rely heavily on
anecdotal evidence based on direct experience and on theory -often some variation of
psychoanalysis. Academic psychologists prefer to generalize cautiously from data yielded by
well designed experiments. In this volume about the memory of CSA, the 34 contributors
cite more primary sources than can be summarized here in detail. Therefore, for
convenience, I will paraphrase some of the major scientific and applied interpretations.
The academic psychological perspective views memory as complex and involving many
variables. In the case of CSA, it is necessary to account for (among other things) the extent
of emotion and stress during and after the event, the child‘s point in her development, her
age, her understanding, her personal autobiography, and her temperament. Memory thus
varies in accuracy and can be influenced to some extent in some children. Although false
memories have been created in laboratories, there is very little experimental evidence about
the truth or falsity of alleged traumatic sexual events. Verification of a particular alleged
CSA is essential. Popular beliefs, supposedly originating in Freudian theory, are unfounded.
For example, many therapists assume that certain psychopathologies in adults indicate
possible CSA and that if childhood memories of abuse are not remembered initially, they
can be recovered during counseling. According to some scientific psychologists, however,
therapeutic methods of memory retrieval, such as hypnosis, age regression, guided
imagery, drugs, and direct suggestion, are invalid. In fact, well designed studies show that
such methods can create false memories.
Many clinicians say, ―Of course, memories of CSA are true. I‘ve encountered them in my
own work.‖ According to a survey of 810 chartered psychologists in the U.K., a majority
(90%) reported CSA among their patients and over half of these clinicians cited recovered
memories of some kind among their clients. Therapists argue that if a child or adult says
she was sexually abused, she probably was. Furthermore, in their opinion, the experimental
evidence from laboratory studies that memories can be false is not representative of real
life. The profound trauma of CSA by a beloved parent or relative, like posttraumatic stress
syndrome in war veterans, differs in its effects on memory from other painful experiences.
For example, although some studies do show that some child patients do forget real and
painful medical procedures, in the opinion of practitioners, a single vaginal and anal
evaluation of five to seven year old girls is just not the same as the profound insult of
repeated sexual abuse and its devastating consequences over years.
I noted a striking gap in these contributions. There was almost no mention of the alleged
perpetrators of sexual abuse. Studies of deviant priests and ministers who victimize
choirboys, of perverts, experimenting adolescents, and straying husbands are not included.
What, if anything, are proved abusers willing to remember? And what is the effect on the
lives of those charged but later proved innocent? How can sexual abuse be understood and
prevented? Most important, how can true victims of false charges be distinguished from
true abusers?
This volume concludes with two official reports, one by a working party of the British
Psychological Society and an interim report by the American Psychological Association. The
APA working group included both distinguished scientific and clinical psychologists, all of
them contributors to this book. They concluded in part that ―It is possible for memories of
abuse that have been forgotten for a long time to be remembered…It is also possible to
construct convincing pseudo memories for events that never occurred…‖ (p. 372).
The British Psychological Society‘s working report, concerning recovered memories of
childhood sexual abuse, is much fuller than the APA interim report. Among its overall
like a series of interpretations than a courtroom controversy or the heated give and take of
a town meeting.
As an educator of professional psychologists, I am aware that academic psychologists tend
to reason differently from clinicians about human behavior. Practitioners rely heavily on
anecdotal evidence based on direct experience and on theory -often some variation of
psychoanalysis. Academic psychologists prefer to generalize cautiously from data yielded by
well designed experiments. In this volume about the memory of CSA, the 34 contributors
cite more primary sources than can be summarized here in detail. Therefore, for
convenience, I will paraphrase some of the major scientific and applied interpretations.
The academic psychological perspective views memory as complex and involving many
variables. In the case of CSA, it is necessary to account for (among other things) the extent
of emotion and stress during and after the event, the child‘s point in her development, her
age, her understanding, her personal autobiography, and her temperament. Memory thus
varies in accuracy and can be influenced to some extent in some children. Although false
memories have been created in laboratories, there is very little experimental evidence about
the truth or falsity of alleged traumatic sexual events. Verification of a particular alleged
CSA is essential. Popular beliefs, supposedly originating in Freudian theory, are unfounded.
For example, many therapists assume that certain psychopathologies in adults indicate
possible CSA and that if childhood memories of abuse are not remembered initially, they
can be recovered during counseling. According to some scientific psychologists, however,
therapeutic methods of memory retrieval, such as hypnosis, age regression, guided
imagery, drugs, and direct suggestion, are invalid. In fact, well designed studies show that
such methods can create false memories.
Many clinicians say, ―Of course, memories of CSA are true. I‘ve encountered them in my
own work.‖ According to a survey of 810 chartered psychologists in the U.K., a majority
(90%) reported CSA among their patients and over half of these clinicians cited recovered
memories of some kind among their clients. Therapists argue that if a child or adult says
she was sexually abused, she probably was. Furthermore, in their opinion, the experimental
evidence from laboratory studies that memories can be false is not representative of real
life. The profound trauma of CSA by a beloved parent or relative, like posttraumatic stress
syndrome in war veterans, differs in its effects on memory from other painful experiences.
For example, although some studies do show that some child patients do forget real and
painful medical procedures, in the opinion of practitioners, a single vaginal and anal
evaluation of five to seven year old girls is just not the same as the profound insult of
repeated sexual abuse and its devastating consequences over years.
I noted a striking gap in these contributions. There was almost no mention of the alleged
perpetrators of sexual abuse. Studies of deviant priests and ministers who victimize
choirboys, of perverts, experimenting adolescents, and straying husbands are not included.
What, if anything, are proved abusers willing to remember? And what is the effect on the
lives of those charged but later proved innocent? How can sexual abuse be understood and
prevented? Most important, how can true victims of false charges be distinguished from
true abusers?
This volume concludes with two official reports, one by a working party of the British
Psychological Society and an interim report by the American Psychological Association. The
APA working group included both distinguished scientific and clinical psychologists, all of
them contributors to this book. They concluded in part that ―It is possible for memories of
abuse that have been forgotten for a long time to be remembered…It is also possible to
construct convincing pseudo memories for events that never occurred…‖ (p. 372).
The British Psychological Society‘s working report, concerning recovered memories of
childhood sexual abuse, is much fuller than the APA interim report. Among its overall
