Email
Web Site Title: Website under construction
I am newsletter editor and contact for South Western Ontario of mainly older man falsely accused of child sexual abuse as a result of recovered memory therapy. My phone is (519) 471 6338 Fax (519) 471 0583
We have other contact persons in Canada: AREA CONTACT PERSONS: False Memory Support Groups.

BRITISH COLUMBIA
Penticton   June   (250) 492 6638
Vancouver   Ruth   (604) 925 1539
Victoria   John   (250) 721 3219

ALBERTA
Edmonton   Audrey   (403) 461 0316

MANITOBA
Winnipeg   Joan   (204) 284 0118

ONTARIO
Hamilton   Marina   (905) 637 6030
London   Adrian   (519) 471 6338
Ottawa   Eileen   (613) 836 3294
Peterborough   Ethel   (705) 924 2546
Sudbury   Paula   (705) 692 0600
Toronto   Pat   (416) 445 1995

QUEBEC
Montreal   Alain   (514) 335 0863
St. André Est   Mavis    (450) 537 8187

NEW BRUNSWICK
Moncton     Bernice     (5050 382 8378

NOVA SCOTIA
Deep Brook    Jo Ann     (902) 638 3283
Contact name: Adrian J.W. Mak
555 Kininvie Drive
London ON N6G 1P1
Association in Defence of the Wrongfully Convicted These are dedicated, hard working volunters who have an impressive record of righting wrongfull convictions. They are all Canadian heros.

Recovered Memory Syndrome is another of the many absurd and fabricated diseases invented by a psychiatric profession which is based more on mumbo jumbo, then on any known science. Unfortunately the women who claim to have recovered memories and the "therapists" who helped them fabricate these delusions are never the victims. It is always some innocent man, a father, husband or close relative in the life of a hysterical, demented woman. This sick woman, (the 20th century versions of the girls at Salem who accused innocents of being witches) is lashing out, seeking to find a scapegoat for her failures as a human being. These are the women and therapists who insist that some innocent man take responsibility for things that never happened, but they never take responsibility for what they do or for their failure. These women and therapists never are jailed for falsely jailing innocent men. Why is that?

This letter will stay open until the Justice Minister takes action.

Minister of Justice Spurns Advice of Legal Scholars and Mental Health Researchers.

Re: Wrongful convictions as a result of repressed memory therapy

Recently, yet again another professional organization, the Royal College of Psychiatrists, condemned what has been called "repressed memory therapy", calling the practices used "powerful and dangerous methods of persuasion". (Recovered memories of childhood sexual abuse, British Journal of Psychiatry April 1998, 172, pp 296-307)

Alan Gold, as president and with the support of the board of Canadian Criminal Law Association, wrote a letter (see below) to the Minister of Justice asking that the cases of men falsely accused and wrongfully convicted as a result of accusations that surfaced in "repressed memory therapy" be reviewed and that these men be released from prison.

The Globe and Mail in an Editorial see below " Remember those justice forgot" ( Wednesday, April 15, p. A14) supported the concerns of Alan Gold.

Meanwhile the Minister of Justice has chosen to ignore the concern of Alan Gold and the legal scholars as well as the scientific evidence provided by the mental health researchers who share his view. (See list of names below). On May 4, Southam Press newspapers across Canada reported that the minister considers an inquiry into the cases of the wrongfully convicted men "premature".

Alan's letter therefore will stay open for others to endorse it until action is finally taken.

We are asking you to do one or all of the following things to help the unjustly incarcerated men.

1. Study the matter carefully. Read the reports at the bottom of this page.
2. Add your name to a list of people in support of Alan Gold's letter.
3. Write a letter to the Minister of Justice as well.
4. Bring the matter to the attention of others of your acquantance who understand the issues.

Alan Gold's Letter

Minister of Justice and Attorney General for Canada
Justice Building 239 Wellington Street
Ottawa, Ontario, K1A 0H8

Minister

Under the direction of your predecessor in office, a special inquiry was conducted into a particular category of past criminal convictions, namely that of women found guilty of murdering their husbands; you were involved in acting on that inquiry's conclusions. The ground for reopening all those cases was not the usual one applied in appeals of individual convictions (such as errors at the trial level or new evidence); rather, it was a new psychological concept (the "battered wife syndrome"), one not explicitly existing in law at the time of the original trial, but later deemed applicable to an entire group of cases.

Without considering the merits of the earlier inquiry, it has become increasingly plain that an urgent and powerful need exists for that type of governmental action in another category of cases. In recent years, a certain concept has been allowed uncritically into jurisprudence in Canada and elsewherethat of "repressed" and later "recovered" memory. There was never any legitimate reason for regarding such alleged memories as trustworthy; but by this point in time it is perfectly clear that they are not.

In the past two years, professional associations of psychiatrists, psychologists and other mental- health workers in various countries (including Canada) have officially warned that such "memories" are so unreliable in general that their evidential value in any individual case is zero. In fact, great numbers of practitioners in those fields maintain that memory "repression" (an unconscious act, not mere forgetting) does not exist at all, certainly not in the case of serious trauma. But that debate is immaterial to the concerns of the Justice system; real or not, such alleged memories are too readily confused with the results of suggestion and confabulation to have any degree of reliability.

As realization of the total unreliability of "recovered memory" has taken hold in the justice community, courts in many places have responded appropriately. In the US, Appellate and Supreme Courts in New Hampshire, Michigan, Iowa, Minnesota, Tennessee, Texas, Rhode Island, Alabama, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Arizona, California, Wisconsin, North Carolina, Utah and Maryland have issued judgments recognizing the injustice of an accused being convicted on grounds of "recovered memory".

And yet that now-discredited concept has by this point in time been applied in scores of court cases in our country. More recently, such "evidence" has not been allowed to hold sway in Canada either. But those men convicted under the older naive views continue to suffer - and some of them are still in prison because of it. Worse yet, courts in certain individual "repressed memory" cases in Canada have turned down appeals based on today's greater awareness of how memory works - apparently on the narrow grounds that all was done properly under the jurisprudence of the time. Because of these circumstances, the undersigned believe, there is only one just and proper thing for the Justice Minister to do. Conduct an inquiry into this entire category of convictions, with a view to releasing forthwith all those prisoners who would not have been convicted but for the testimony of "recovered memories".

Given the systemic nature of the original injustice, and given the failure of Canadian courts to act on the problem even in individual cases, and given the ongoing suffering of those convicted without any adequate grounds, it is absolutely imperative that you act on this matter without delay.

Yours very truly,

Alan D. Gold,
President Criminal Lawyers Association

Doreen Kimura, Ph.D., F.R.S.C.; ,LL.D. (Hon.).
Professor in Psychology and in the Neurosciences Graduate Programme;
University of Western Ontario

Elizabeth F. Loftus, Ph.D.
President American Psychological Society
University of Washington

Endel Tulving , Ph.D., F.R.S.C., F.R.S.
Chair in Cognitive Neuroscience, Rotman Research Institute;
Professor Emeritus Psychology, University of Toronto;
Rotman Research Institute of Baycrest Centre 3560 Bathurst Street, Ontario

C. Tana Dineen , Ph.D., C.Psych.(Ontario), R.Psych.(B.C)
Author: Manufacturing Victims:
What the Psychology Industry is doing to People, 1996.
Victoria. B.C.

Shimon Amir, Ph.D.
Professor Center For Studies in Behavioral Neurobiology,
Department of Psychology ,
Concordia University

Maggie Bruck, Ph.D.,
Professor of Psychology, McGill University,
co-author of Jeopardy in the Courtroom
A Scientific Analysis of Children's Testimony,
American Psychological Association.,1995.
Member of American Psychological Society,
Society for Research on Child Development,
Psychonomics Society

Nancy Marcus,
Attorney at Law, J.D.
William G. Webster, Ph.D.,
Dean of the Faculty of Social Sciences,
Professor of Psychology,
Brock University.

Timothy E. Moore, PhD, C Psych.,
Chair, Dept. of Psychology Glendon College,
LaMarsh Research Program on Violence & Conflict Resolution,
York University

Lawrence Greenspon ,
Specialist in Criminal & Civil Litigation
c/o KARAM, GREENSPON ,
Ottawa,

Michael von Grünau ,
Department of Psychology, Concordia University Charlotte Vale Allen, Author of Daddy's Girl The Shocking Story of a Child's Ordeal.

R. Christopher Barden, Attorney , J.D., LP , Ph.D.(psychology),
President, National Assn. for Consumer Protection in Mental Health Practices
North Salt Lake, Utah

Peter Suedfeld, Ph.D., F.R.S.C.
Professor of Psychology, The University of British Columbia

Neil Boyd, LLB, LLM,
Professor, School of Criminology,
Simon Fraser University

Karl Akiba Enright, MD. FRCPC.,
Psychiatrist, Whistler, B.C.

D. Stephen Lindsay,Ph.D.
Professor, Department of Psychology, University of Victoria,
memory researcher,
Member of the Psychonomic Society, the American Psychology and Law Society,
the American Psychological Society, the Canadian Society for Brain,
Behavioral, and Cognitive Science,
and the Society for Applied Research on Memory and Cognition.

Gerald Nemiroff,
Professor, Faculty of Law, University of Manitoba

Barry Spinner, Ph.D.
Professor, Department of Psychology,
University of New Brunswick

Paul Sandor MD FRCPC,
Staff psychiatrist,
The Toronto Hospital, Toronto

Hamar Foster,
Professor Faculty of Law,
University of Victoria

Barry L. Beyerstein, Ph.D.,
Brain Behavior Laboratory, Department of Psychology,
Simon Fraser University

Wayne Sumner, B.A., M.A., Ph.D., FRSC
Professor, Department of Philosophy and Faculty of Law,
University of Toronto

Harold Merskey, D.M., F.R.C.P(C)., F.R.C.Psych.
Professor Emeritus, Dept. of Psychiatry,
University of Western Ontario,

Gerry Ferguson, Professor,
Faculty of Law,
University of Victoria

John J. Furedy, Ph.D.,
Professor of Psychology,
University of Toronto,
and President (1993-8), Society for Academic Freedom and Scholarship.

Joseph Magnet,
Professor, Faculty of Law,
University of Ottawa,
formerly Distinguished Visiting Professor, University of California, Berkeley
formerly Assistant Crown Attorney, Ottawa

Dr. Ted Hannah, Department of Psychology,
Memorial Unversity of Newfoundland

Sheila Taub. J.D.
Professor , Quinnipiac College School of Law

Gerry Ferguson,
Professor, Faculty of Law,
University of Victoria

Prof. Michael G. Kenny, D.Phil (Oxon.)
Department of Sociology & Anthropology,
Simon Fraser University

Mark Pendergrast,
Journalist, Author, Victims of Memory Incest Accusations and Shattered Lives

Charles Traynor ,
Vice President
Campbell Goodell Traynor Consultants Ltd ,Victoria,

Herman W. Ohme,
National Co-Chair,
National Association for Consumer Protection in Mental Health Practice

Dr. Griffith Pearson M.D.
18 A Lower Village Gate Apt. 112
Toronto

Jane Dywan, Ph.D., C. Psych.
Associate Professor, Dept. of Psychology,
Brock University

Dan C. McIntyre, Ph.D., Professor,
Department of Psychology,
Carelton University, Ottawa

Sidney J. Segalowitz, Ph.D. Professor,
Dept. of Psychology,
Brock University

Robert M. Zacharko, PhD, Professor,
Carleton University,
Institute of Neuroscience, Ottawa

Donald J. Egleston,
Faculty of Law ,
University of British Columbia

Donald V. Coscina, Ph.D.
Chair and Professor, Department of Psychology,
Professor, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Neuroscience,
Wayne State University,
Visiting Professor in Psychology and Psychiatry at the University of Toronto,
Visiting Scientist at the Clarke Institute Toronto.

Fred J. Boland Ph.D.,C.Psych.,
Associate Professor of Psychology and Psychiatry,
Queens University.

Brian E. Butler, Ph.D.
Associate Professor of Psychology and Education,
Queen's University

Gordon Winocur, PhD,
Research Scientist Rotman Research Institute,
Professor of Psychology, Trent University,
Professor of Psychology and Psychiatry,
University of Toronto

R. C. L. Lindsay, PhD,
Professor, Department of Psychology, Queen's University
Member of: American Psychological Association;
American Psychology-Law Society;
Society for Applied Research on Memory and Cognition

Michiel Horn
Professor of History,
Glendon College of York University

Gary C. Walters, Ph.D.,
Professor of Psychology,
University of Toronto,
Director, Child Studies Program

Philip Merikle. Ph.D.
Professor of Psychology,
University of Waterloo

Derek Besner Ph.D.
Professor, Psychology Department,
University of Waterloo,

David Piggins, M.A., F.S.M.C., F.C. Optom., D.Opt.
Department of Psychology, University of Guelph,
Visiting Research Fellow, University of Wales, Bangor,
Visiting Research Fellow, University of Cambridge, England,

Carl L. von Baeyer, Ph.D.
Director of Clinical Training
Registered Psychologist
Professor Department of Psychology
University of Saskatchewan

Rolf Kroger, Ph.D.
Professor Emeritus of Psychology
University of Toronto

Michael Dixon, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor of Psychology,
Member of the International Neuropsychological Society
University of Waterloo

A. Daniel Yarmey Ph.D.
Professor Department of Psychology University of Guelph,
Fellow of the Canadian Psychological Association;
Member of Society for Applied Research in Memory and Cognition,
American Psychology - Law Society

John M. Kennedy , Ph.D.
Editor: Metaphor and Symbol
Past President: American Psychological Association, Division 10:

Psychology and the Arts Supervisor, Cognitive Science Program, University
of Toronto at Scarborough
University of Toronto -- Psychology

Patricia Bowers, Ph.D., C. Psych.,
Assoc. Professor, University of Waterloo,

W. C. Corning, Ph.D.
Neurophysiologist and Professor of Clinical Psychology,
University of Waterloo.

Marvin Brown, Ph.D.
Professor of Psychology
University of Saskatchewan

Jennifer A. Stolz
Assistant Professor of Psychology
University of Waterloo, Ontario,

Robert Zemore, Ph.D.
Professor of Psychology
University of Saskatchewan

Charles B. Crawford
Professor of Psychology
Simon Fraser University

Joanne Wood, Ph.D.,
Associate Professor,
Department of Psychology,
University of Waterloo

Geoffrey T. Fong, Ph.D.
Associate Professor
Department of Psychology
University of Waterloo, ON, Canada
Visiting Research Collaborator,
Princeton University,
At present Visiting Scholar,
Stanford University, Stanford, CA

Thomas B. Wishart, Ph.D.,
Professor, Department of Psychology
University of Saskatchewan,

Delroy L. Paulhus
Associate Professor
Dept of Psychology
University of British Columbia

Ian Maynard Begg, Professor
Department of Psychology,
McMaster University
Hamilton, Ontario, Canada

Roberto Cabeza,Ph.D.
Assistant Professor
Department of Psychology
University of Alberta

Lori Buchanan, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor
Psychology Department
University of Alberta

Don Dutton
Professor, Dept. of Psychology,
University of British Columbia.

and many others. J Kirby Inwood
Executive Director
Canadian Coalition of Men's Organizations 2503 80 St Clair Ave E
Toronto On M4T 1N6

PLEASE ADD YOUR NAME HERE:

AND RETURN TO

or mail to

Unfortunately, many of these people are unable to marshal DNA or any other evidence to bolster their protestations of innocence. That's because they have been convicted of horrible crimes, including rape and murder, based on nothing more substantial than an accusation founded on so-called repressed and then recovered memories of sexual abuse. Most of them can't even publicize their stories because publication bans have been imposed to protect the privacy of the alleged victim.

Recovered-memory therapy was one of the most pernicious trends to sweep North America in the late 1980s and early 1990s, fracturing thousands of families and leading to hundreds of arrests and financially crippling lawsuits. Almost two years ago, the Canadian Psychiatric Association followed the lead of the Americans and the Australians and produced a position paper saying that memories of childhood sexual abuse triggered in adults during psychotherapy are unreliable and should not be accepted without corroborating evidence. In January, a leaked report from Britain's Royal College of Psychiatrists went even further.

"Despite widespread clinical and popular belief that memories can be "blocked out' by the mind, no empirical evidence exists to support either repression or dissociation," said the report, which went on to say that "repression and recovery of verified, severely traumatic events, and their role in symptom formation has yet to be proved."

These denunciations have yet to penetrate the Canadian criminal- justice system. That's why we are calling on Justice Minister Anne McLellan to order an inquiry into all convictions based on this internationally discredited therapeutic theory. There are precedents for such a review.

In 1995, the justice minister and solicitor-general asked Madam Justice Lynne Ratushny of the Ontario Court's Provincial Division to review nearly 100 cases of women convicted of murder or manslaughter before 1990, when the Supreme Court ruled that battered- women syndrome is a legitimate defence. As a result of the review, the federal government granted conditional pardons or early release to four women and referred the case of a fifth woman to an appeal court.

Recognizing battered-woman syndrome provided a retroactive defence to women charged with murdering their partners. A similar consideration should be extended to people who were convicted based on another syndrome that has, in this case, been discredited. We aren't the only ones arguing for such a review. Late last month, Alan Gold, president of the Criminal Lawyers Association made a similar appeal in a letter to the Justice Minister. He asked her to "conduct an inquiry into this entire category of convictions, with a view to releasing forthwith all those prisoners who would not have been convicted but for the testimony of 'recovered memories.' " As Mr. Gold said, "an urgent and powerful need exists" to act on this matter without delay.

On the Validity of Repressed Memory Therapy

Published in the April 1998 issue of the British Journal of Psychiatry, the review article by Professor Sydney Brandon and colleagues presents the conclusions of an overview of recovered memories and the techniques used to elicit them. This follows last year's publication of consensus recommendations for good practice (Royal College of Psychiatrists Working Group on Reported Recovered Memories of Child Sexual Abuse, 1997). A recovered memory, in the context of this paper, is the emergence of an apparent recollection of childhood sexual abuse of which the individual had no previous knowledge.

A false memory is the recollection of an event which did not occur, but which the individual subsequently strongly believes.

The paper distinguishes different types of memory, namely episodic, autobiographical and implicit. Numerous studies in children and adults have found that psychologically traumatic events often result in an inability to forget, rather than a complete expulsion from awareness. Amnesia for prolonged recurrent abuse is rare. Adult patients suffering from amnesia are well aware of the gap in their memory. It has not been possible to demonstrate any clear link between clinical accounts of trauma and the neurobiology of memory.

Memory changes overtime and is subject to error and distortion

A growing body of research indicates that memory is fallible and vulnerable to suggestion; and that suggestibility and confabulation increase with the length of time between the events and later attempts to recall it. The authors conclude that individual autobiographical memory is unreliable, and that people are often unable to remember considerable parts of their past experiences. Expectations and beliefs can colour people's recollections, and gaps in memory will be filled to create a "life story" which they find satisfying.

Confidence in one's memory does not correlate with the accuracy of the memory. No autobiographical memory can be relied on without some external corroboration, but the frequent denial, even by proven abusers, and the secrecy surrounding child abuse often make such corroboration difficult to obtain.

Memory enhancement techniques questioned

Therapists may use a number of techniques, some of which are regularly employed in orthodox therapy but are questionable when used as 'memory recovery' procedures. These include:

• Check Lists: there is no evidence that any check lists, syndromes, symptoms or signs indicate with any degree of reliability that an individual has been sexually abused in the remote past.
• Drug-induced abreaction: It is inappropriate to use repeated abreaction to 'trawl' for traumatic events. There is considerable anecdotal clinical evidence that in repeated session patients will eventually generate material which is a product of fantasy. Even in a single session of abreaction great caution is required.
• Hypnosis: this technique has been shown to be unreliable as a means of eliciting memories of past events, and such 'memories' are no longer admitted as legal testimony.
• Age regression: there is no evidence for the efficacy of this technique, nor can it be shown that the subject's 'memories' actually do regress to the target age.
• Dream interpretation: there is no evidence that dreams are a 'royal road' to historical accuracy; and interpretations usually reflect the training and personal convictions of the therapist.
• Imagistic and 'feelings' work and art therapy: although many of these techniques are applications of accepted clinical practice, they can be powerfully suggestive and induce trance-like states. The beliefs of the therapist are the determining factor in how a patient's production are shaped.
• Survivors' groups: whilst these can be supportive, the practice of mixing those who clearly remember abuse with those who are suspected by the therapist of having repressed their memories has been strongly criticised because of the risk of suggestion and contagion among group members.

The authors conclude that memory enhancement techniques do not actually enhance memory, and that there is evidence that they can be powerful and dangerous methods of persuasion. Many of the memories 'recovered' by these measures refer to events in the early months and years of life, which fall within the period of infantile amnesia, and must be regarded as implausible for that reason. The evidence suggests that all the techniques outlined above can create entirely new and false memories, not only experimentally but also in clinical practice.

Can repeated, severe childhood abuse be forgotten?

There is no evidence that memories can be 'blocked out' by the mind, either by repression or by dissociation. Given the revalence of childhood sexual abuse, even if only a small proportion of memories are repressed and only some of them subsequently recovered, there should be a significant number of corroborated cases recovered through psychotherapy in the literature. In fact, there is none.

Distortion of memory may occur in any therapeutic situation, and psychiatrists need to be aware of the techniques employed by other members of their teams, such as community psychiatric nurses, psychologists and social workers.

The review paper ends with a series of guidelines to help psychiatrists to avoid the pitfalls of memory recovery. The issue of false or recovered memories should not, the authors emphasize, be allowed to confuse the recognition and treatment of sexually abused children. However, it is also essential to minimise the risk of creating false memories of abuse which will cause the patient and family further suffering. More research is needed into the reported associations between childhood sexual abuse and later adult psychopathology. The authors conclude that at present there is no specific post-sexual abuse syndrome.

For press copies of the paper or further information contact
Deborah Hart
or Vanessa Harries
on Tel 00 44 171 235 2351 ext 127 or 154

From the "RECOMMENDATIONS"
• Psychiatrists are advised to avoid engaging in techniques which are intended to reveal evidence of past sexual abuse of which the patient has no memory, and should regard with extreme caution memories of this kind whenever they appear. There is no evidence that the use of consciousness-altering techniques, such as drug-mediated interviews or hypnosis, can reveal or elaborate evidence of childhood sexual abuse. Techniques of ‘regression therapy' (age regression, guided imagery, ‘body memories' journaling, or literal dream interpretation, where this is used as evidence of fact) are of dubious provenance.
• Forceful or persuasive interviewing techniques are not acceptable in psychiatric practice. Doctors should be aware that patients are susceptible to subtle suggestions and reinforcements, whether or not these communications are intended.
• The psychiatrist should alert the patient to any doubts about the historical accuracy of recovered memories of previously unknown sexual abuse. This is particularly important if the patient intends to take action outside the therapeutic situation. Memories, however emotionally intense and significant to the individual, may not necessarily represent historical truth.
  Memories may be
  (1) historically true,
  (2) metaphorical representations,
  (3) caused by the psychological state of the patient or
  (4) be the result of unintentional suggestion by the practitioner.
• It may be legitimate not to question the validity of a recovered memory while it remains within the privacy of the consulting room, although this introduces the risk of colluding in the creation of a life history based upon a false belief.
• The psychiatrist should help the patient think through the consequences of any confrontation. In these circumstances it is important to encourage a search for corroborative evidence before any action is taken. The truth or falsity of the underlying memories cannot be known in the absence of such evidence.
• Where an alleged abuser is still in touch with children, serious consideration must be given to informing the appropriate social services. This must be done where there are reasonable grounds for believing that the alleged assault took place and that children may still be at risk. The psychiatrist must also be prepared to state clearly whether he or she believes that the grounds for any accusation are unlikely or impossible.

Alongside reports of recovered memories of sexual abuse there have been growing numbers of cases of multiple personality disorder (also known as dissociative identity disorder).

There seems little doubt that many of these cases are iatrongenically (caused by the doctor or therapist ed.) determined.

Psychiatrists should be particularly aware of the unreliability of the memories reported in these cases and of the close association both with prolonged therapy and with recovered memories of sexual abuse, particularly alleged satanic abuse. Since there is no settled view of the validity of multiple personality disorder, and because of the very strong correlation with recovered memories of sexual abuse which is itself a disputed concept, there is a strong case for a consensus paper on multiple personality disorder based upon a substantial review of the literature.

The Royal College of Psychiatrists working party produced also a full report which was published in the April 1998 issue of the house organ of the College the British Journal of Psychiatry. The following are the conclusions of that report based on a study of the relevant scientific research:

1. There is NO empirical evidence to support either repression or dissociation, though there is much clinical support for these concepts. Evidence does not support the existence of "robust repression."
2. Events are constantly forgotten and remembered on a daily basis.
3. There is abundant evidence, both clinically and experimentally, that memory can be distorted and that false memories do occur.
4. Illusory memories can arise during the course of any psychological treatment, whether or not it is designated as "recovered memory therapy". Their creation seems to depend upon the conviction of the therapist or the patient that child sexual abuse underlies adult psychopathology.
5. Memory enhancing techniques do not improve the quality of remembering. They do increase the conviction with which memories, true or false, are held. They appear to be dangerous methods of persuasion.
6. More research is needed into the associations between childhood sexual abuse and later adult psychopathology. At present we can only conclude that there is no pathognomic post sexual abuse syndrome.
7. There is no means of determining the factual truth or falsity of a recovered memory other than through external evidence, difficult though this is to obtain. Some reported events are so incredible that they could not have occurred and should not be believed.

For the full report and biblography see The British Journal of Psychiatry (1998) 172, 296 - 307