| crime.files |
| |
 |
|
| crime.features |
| |
|
|
| crime.resources |
| |
|
|
| crime.co.nz |
| |
|
|
|
| |
Concluding Remarks
Therapists who accept uncorroborated stories of ritual abuse do so at the risk of their client and their profession. Reliable evidence for the existence of such abuse is virtually non-existent; thus far the memory of clients in therapy, and the testimony of children has been the only source of evidence. This is not to say that childhood physical and sexual abuse is not a widespread problem, or that it never involves acts that so are repugnant that they are difficult to comprehend. It does mean, however, that alternative explanations should be sought for the huge number of claims of ritual abuse.
The mechanisms by which memories may be distorted, added to and subtracted from, or even created, have been the focus of much research in recent years. In part, interest in these areas has been driven by the alarm with which experimental psychologists view the practices of a few of their clinical counterparts, who have embraced highly controversial concepts and techniques such as the theory of repression, body memory, and the use of age regression to search for historical truth. While precise models of how and when false memories arise require further study, the ease with which people mistake fiction for factual memories has been well documented, and should be regarded by therapists as a warning about their role in the 'recovery' of memories.
The general public, too, would benefit from an understanding of issues relating to suggestibility in therapy. It would seem fair to assume that most people who voluntarily go into therapy hope to resolve issues that they themselves feel unable to combat alone. In doing so, they must place the therapist in a position of trust, power, and respect, and must obviously feel that the therapist knows more about mind and memory than they do themselves. Without an understanding of suggestibility issues, and with an already confused mind, the client would surely be more willing to let the therapist decide for them what is real and what is not.
In summary, therapists should be wary of reading into what their client tells them in order to confirm the suspicion that they have been sexually abused. Additionally, they should not take everything said by their client at face value, even when it involves the very serious matter of childhood sexual abuse.They should be especially careful if their client expresses doubts about their memories, as persisting in trying to recover faded recollections may only confuse the client. Therapists who believe that they have seen large numbers of ritual abuse cases should take a good look at their methods of diagnosis and treatment, and take heed of studies about suggestibility and memory fallibility.
|
|
|