The Validity of Recovered Memories
Defense Paper One: The Validity of Recovered Memories
The sudden recovery of repressed memories from a traumatic event such as childhood sexual abuse can be both validating and confusing for clients that are seeking help with various problems. These new memories might be able to help client identify the cause of their feelings and issues that are affecting their life. However for others it can be a very difficult time because of the conflicting emotions about the abuser. Worst of all when dealing with the recovery of repressed memories they may be all together false. The accuracy of recovered memories in regards to sexual abuse is low and can come with significant consequences. These false memories can be very harmful to the client as well as anyone falsely accused of sexual abuse.
In the late nineteenth century Sigmund Freud began using the term repression to explain how memories of a traumatic event can be inaccessible for a period of time and then return at a later date sometimes suddenly while during other times slowly developing over a period of time into a more clear memory. It was believed that repressed memories or motivated forgetting was a defense mechanism for people who needed to protect themself from the harmful and painful memories of a traumatic experience (Boag, 2006). More recently repressed memories being recovered about childhood sexual abuse (CSA) has caused more studies to be conducted to determine if the memories being recovered are valid or if false memories are be produced due to the fact that “human memories are vulnerable to distortion, that illusory memories can be created and therapies designed to recover memories of repressed abuse may inadvertently foster false memories of trauma” (Clancy, Schacter, McNally, & Pitman, 2000, p. 26) Some therapist believes that memories that have been repressed can be successfully recovered with therapy and that these memories accurately portray the past events to the extent that legal action can
The sudden recovery of repressed memories from a traumatic event such as childhood sexual abuse can be both validating and confusing for clients that are seeking help with various problems. These new memories might be able to help client identify the cause of their feelings and issues that are affecting their life. However for others it can be a very difficult time because of the conflicting emotions about the abuser. Worst of all when dealing with the recovery of repressed memories they may be all together false. The accuracy of recovered memories in regards to sexual abuse is low and can come with significant consequences. These false memories can be very harmful to the client as well as anyone falsely accused of sexual abuse.
In the late nineteenth century Sigmund Freud began using the term repression to explain how memories of a traumatic event can be inaccessible for a period of time and then return at a later date sometimes suddenly while during other times slowly developing over a period of time into a more clear memory. It was believed that repressed memories or motivated forgetting was a defense mechanism for people who needed to protect themself from the harmful and painful memories of a traumatic experience (Boag, 2006). More recently repressed memories being recovered about childhood sexual abuse (CSA) has caused more studies to be conducted to determine if the memories being recovered are valid or if false memories are be produced due to the fact that “human memories are vulnerable to distortion, that illusory memories can be created and therapies designed to recover memories of repressed abuse may inadvertently foster false memories of trauma” (Clancy, Schacter, McNally, & Pitman, 2000, p. 26) Some therapist believes that memories that have been repressed can be successfully recovered with therapy and that these memories accurately portray the past events to the extent that legal action can
References: Asch, S. E. (t956). Studies of independence and conformity: 1. A minority of one against a unanimous majority. Psychological Monographs, 70(9), 1-70. Boag, S. (2006). Freudian repression, the common view, and pathological science. Review of General Psychology, 10(1), 74-86. Clancy, S. A., Schacter, D. L., McNally, R. J., & Pitman, R. K. (2000). False recognition in women reporting recovered memories of sexual abuse. Psychological Science, 11(1), 26-31. Gorman, G. (2008). The recovered memory controversy—A new perspective. European Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, 8(1), 22-31. Holmes, L. (May 06, 2006). The debate over recovered memories In About.com. Retrieved December 3, 2012, from http://mentalhealth.about.com/cs/dissociative/a/dabaterec.htm. Lein, J. (1999). Recovered memories: context and controversy. Social Work, 44(5), 481-484. Partlett, D.F., & Nurcombe, B. (1998). Recovered memories of child sexual abuse and liability: Society, Science, and the law in a comparative setting. Psychology, Publice Policy, and Law, 4(4), 1253-1306. Pettifor, J., Crozier, S., & Chew, J. (2001). Recovered memories: Ethical Guidelines to Support Professionals. Journal of child Sexual abuse, 10(2), 1. Pope, K. S., & Brown, L. S. (1996). Clinical work with people who report recovered memories. In Recovered memories of abuse: Assessment, therapy, forensics (pp. 145-205). Washington, DC US: American Psychological Association. Stocks, J.T. (1998). Recovered memory therapy: A dubious practice technique. Social Work, 43(5), 423-436.