France, False Memory Organization

 

“The memories induced in a recovered memory therapy (TMR) are often false memories.  The mind control techniques lead to weakened patients recover false memories of childhood sexual abuse and to accuse a member of their families. Patients hope to find healing.

Le site Psyfmfrance recueille les informations disponibles sur ce phénomène. Psyfmfrance site collects information available on this phenomenon. …researchers, lawyers and judges who want to learn comprehensively about false memories induced in adult patients during a psychotherapy of recovered memory.”

French:
“Le site Psyfmfrance recueille les informations disponibles sur ce phénomène. Psyfmfrance site collects information available on this phenomenon. Elles sont destinées aux victimes,aux patients, aux familles, aux professionnels de santé, aux chercheurs, aux avocats et aux juges qui veulent s’informer de façon complète sur les faux souvenirs induits, chez des patients adultes, au cours d’une psychothérapie de mémoire retrouvée. They are intended for victims, patients, families, health professionals, researchers, lawyers and judges who want to learn comprehensively about false memories induced in adult patients during a psychotherapy of recovered memory.”

www.psyfmfrance.fr

 

Advertisements
Leave a comment

14 Comments

  1. Jeanette,

    I don’t know if you are interested in being “fair” and showing both sides of the debate or if you figure there are enough other voices on the other side of the debate.

    I’m in the process of joining TAG in the UK and here were some links they provided on the “memory wars”
    http://www.cwasu.org/page_display.asp?pageid=STATS&pagekey=109&itemkey=111

    http://blogs.brown.edu/recoveredmemory/

    You won’t hurt my feelings if you remove this comment. But I personally always feel the strongest position is the one that can best answer ALL objections (if that is possible to do in a truly objective manner).

    Sam

    Like

    Reply
    • Hey Sam,
      Thanks for your comments – I”ll check out the links. What are you referring to regarding one-sided reporting?

      Like

      Reply
    • Sam. Of course I support groups that are working to stop violence against women and children.

      I took a quick glance at the first link. It says, “The concept was invented in the USA by the False Memory Syndrome Foundation (FMSF), a group of ‘accused parents’ – mainly fathers – whose adult daughters had confronted them about sexual abuse in childhood.”

      Already, they have it wrong. See my FMSF page where it states how the FMSF was started and by whom. It was accused parents AND professionals from The University of Pennsylvania and Johns Hopkins to study the phenomenon of memory as well as the growing trend of accusations.

      I will continue reading, but already I am skeptical about them reporting accurate information. I don’t care if it’s one sided or not. Just give me facts, and I will read. Or, if it’s an opinion that’s fine too.

      That’s why I started the FMSF page, I’m quite sick of this debate being perpetuated by people who misquote and otherwise give out misinformation. No better way to fuel a fire and to not educate those who need help properly.

      Like

      Reply
      • Jeanette,

        normally both sides of a debate “just give…the facts” but conveniently leave out any facts that don’t agree with their position. Like I said, I won’t be offended if you remove the links. You seem to be getting riled. That wasn’t my intention. I for the most part disagree with your blog as I’m sure you do with mine, but I enjoy reading your posts because 1) I’m not omninscient 2) I really do find both sides of a debate often have some merit. So I feel your blog helps me to have a better informed position so that I don’t go blindly through this journey with my wife, not understanding any of the pitfalls or problems that could arise or have befallen people like yourself.

        Sam

        Like

        Reply
        • Hey Sam, If everyone agrees with me, this will be boring to say the least! I see no reason to remove your links at this time -when I read further I may put them on my blog roll. It’s frustrating when organizations that do good work and offer much needed services make statements that are not true – or in this case are 1/2 true and omit the part that would make a huge difference to many people who use their services or to people who, if they knew the full story, would use their services.

          I agree, any argument can be swayed to prove a point. It’s difficult not to do it. I struggle with that impulse all the time. And, it might be time to start viewing these mental health issues as ones with many sides and be accepting of people and not force them to pick one “side” or the other.

          I appreciate that you read and comment on this blog. It keeps me honest about what I report and makes me think before I press the publish button. Yes, I was ticked off this morning. I was excited about the links you provided and then felt slammed on the floor when page one was giving out incorrect information – or as you said, not incorporating all of it as in the history of the FMSF.

          I left that site thinking that they chose not to read the FMSF website and reported what has been heard through the grapevine for decades.Perhaps I erroneously assumed they didn’t read it because if they did, they would know they were not telling the truth. Because of the thoughts you shared, I realize that their reporting may have been intentional. The slant they choose, rather than “not doing your homework” as they say.

          I appreciate that you took the time to comment, Sam you helped me a lot. With my respect. JB

          Like

          Reply
      • Fred Pauser

         /  03/12/2011

        (Jeanette, just for the record, it is clear you meant to address that comment to Sam instead of me.)

        Like

        Reply
        • oops, thanks, Fred. I hate when that happens. I don’t know about you, but I’m meeting so many people it’s difficult to keep everyone straight!

          Like

          Reply
    • Fred Pauser

       /  03/12/2011

      Sam,

      This quote is from your first link: “Alongside the invention of ‘FMS’, those who promote it have also introduced the concepts of ‘recovered memory therapy’ and the ‘recovered memory movement’ neither of which exist.”

      It has been reported by hundreds clients/patients who went see a psychotherapist regarding seemingly unaccountable feelings of anxiety or depression, that the therapist would then suggest the possibility of repressed memories of abuse as the cause. Eventually the client would submit to allowing the therapist to help her (or him) look to see if such memories could be retrieved. This might involve the “guided imagery” technique, or hypnosis, or even “true serum” such as sodium amytal. Lo and behold, in many cases, memories that had been buried supposedly for decades would emerge! SO WHAT WOULD YOU CALL THAT KIND OF THERAPY, SAM, IF NOT *RECOVERED MEMORY THERAPY*??

      Following the recovery of memories of abuse, some clients found that there was actual evidence that proved their memories of abuse to be impossible to have happened. Also for other reasons, some say “I came to my senses” and realized those memories were not real. In both such case the memories were FALSE! Those false memories were generated in conjunction with the therapeutic process that specifically searched for repressed memories, SO WHAT BETTER LABEL FOR THE PROCESS THAT ESSENTIALLY CREATED FALSE MEMORIES THAN *FALSE MEMORY SYNDROME*??

      Like

      Reply
      • Jeanette,

        1) Like I said before, both sides hold parts of the truth. I do believe memories can be implanted by unscrupulous or ignorant therapists. That HOWEVER does not negate the many memories that trauma victims have “lost” access to.

        2) Somewhat those on the FSM and even some in the DID camp don’t really seem to understand how DID works because they see everything from the “host’s” point of view.

        Karen my “wife” may not have access to all the memories, but that doesn’t mean the other various insiders don’t have access. So…from the point of Karen these are “recovered” memories, but from the viewpoint of Alley the defender or the other insiders, they ABSOLUTELY ARE NOT RECOVERED!!!.

        In my opinion FSM seems to have some validity, but then it is applied IGNORANTLY to the case of people with DID without truly understanding how DID structurally works.

        Sam

        Like

        Reply
        • Fred Pauser

           /  03/12/2011

          Sam,
          I assume your wife is still in therapy with someone or a team who believes in the concept of DID and repressed memories of abuse.

          If she were to leave therapy, or go into therapy with a more science-oriented therapist (to the extent that scientific evidence exists, it indicates counter to DID and repressed memories of abuse), or just not have therapy at all, and you and others no longer catered to different alters, it is likely that her multiple personalities would soon disappear (read Try to Remember, by Dr Paul McHugh).

          ~~~~~~~~~~~

          A correction regarding my previous comment: I gave two examples by which recovered memories turn out to be false, and then stated: “In both such case the memories were FALSE!” In the first case, yes, there is evidence to that effect. In the second case there may not be evidence one way or the other, except for the conviction of the recanter that the recovered memories are false.

          At the very least, some recovered memories of abuse have irrefutably been shown to be false.

          Like

          Reply
      • Fred, your deductions seem reasonable. The problem, as I understand it, is with the word “syndrome.” I’ll need to look into it further, but the argument goes something like: the criterion for a “syndrome” are not meet by the phrase “false memory syndrome.” I don’t know what constitutes a syndrome,exactly. Maybe the founders should have called it false memory hysteria, or false memory what–the-heck-is-going-on? problem. Who knows at this point. I don’t believe anything the founders would have come up with would have been good enough for its critics.

        The group of people who founded the Foundation are highly educated and most are at the top of their respective fields (see my page False Memory Syndrome Foundation). I’ve posted the board members and their background from the Foundation website http://www.fmsfonline.org My point is that I believe much thought went into what to call the organization.

        I’m interested to know what other people think and what words could have been used instead of “false memory syndrome”?

        Like

        Reply
  2. Fred Pauser

     /  03/07/2011

    It’s great to see that within many other nations, it is now recognized that Recovered Memory Therapy often leads to false memories of abuse. Thanks, Jeanette, for making this fact clear.

    The indications are that the APA authors of their upcoming edition of the diagnostic manual (DSM 5) will likely retain the artificial cultural/therapist induced disease of MPD/DID.

    However, if they do not also include the in the new manual the False Memory Syndrome, which has growing support both scientifically and politically, they would be making themselves look like fools! It will be interesting to see what they finally do.

    Like

    Reply
    • Fred, if you can get any of the authors of the DSM V to admit the inclusion of DID is NoT political, I’ll eat my proverbial hat! You make a good point, it’s political rather than based on scientific information. Once MPD/DID started in America, it slowly wafted across the ocean and infected many other countries.

      False Memory Syndrome, per se, is not a syndrome according to some. I am not a doctor, so I will not opinion about it. That point may be why the term will not be included.

      Like

      Reply
      • Fred Pauser

         /  03/07/2011

        Good point, Jeanette. I’m not a doctor either, but I’m going to offer a line of reasoning and an opinion.

        Disorder = “Derangement of physical or mental health or functions; sickness; ailment.”

        Syndrome = “An aggregate or presence of concurrent symptoms indicating the presence and nature of a disease.”

        False memories of sexual abuse in and of themselves do not constitute a syndrome, disorder, or disease. However, false memories of abuse do not occur in a vacuum — for that to occur, it apparently requires:

        1) Cultural inducements such as movies and books such as “Sybil” and “The Three Faces of Eve,” The Courage to Heal, “Trauma and Recovery,” etc.; official sanctions (eg: DSM).

        Or:
        2) A trusted authority figure in the form of one’s psychotherapist who believes that repression of memories of sexual abuse is rampant, and that this can account for general symptoms such as depression and anxiety, and that those memories must be recovered (using techniques such as hypnosis, guided imagery, and/or sodium amytal), in order to “work through” the supposed initial abuse.

        Or:
        3) A combination of 1 and 2.

        Recovered Memory Therapy (RMT) leading to uncovering memories of abuse is nearly always a part of the process of arriving at MPD/DID. It is also *now* known that very often the recovered memories of abuse that support the disorder/disease of DID, turn out to be false. Those false memories are tied in with the recovered memory process and prior suppositions about sexual abuse, thereby fulfilling the definition of “syndrome.”

        So if the authors of the DSM V were to be honest instead of political, they would have to include false memory syndrome (FMS) as a possible or even likely component of MPD/DID.

        Like

        Reply

What do you think?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s