Current News | Introduction | Colloidal Silver | Chemtrails | Sylphs | Emerging Diseases | Forbidden Cures | Ozone | Immunity Boosting | Nutrition | Tone Gen Writer Criticizes Focus on the Family for Embracing False Memory Syndrome Foundation Deceit [Editor's Note: It was only after I found out the story on government
mind control programs from Brice Taylor, Ted Gunderson, Cathy O'Brien,
Arizona Wilder, & Fritz Springmeir and read the books of John Coleman
and David Icke did I realize that the "False Memory Syndrome Foundation"
was a disinfo front organized by the Illuminati to discredit the many thousands
of victims of satanic rituals and mind control operations who would unexpectedly
recovery memories of these terrible experiences. Of course, there are surely
cases of false memories, but the FMSF gives the impression that it's over
eager therapists who were implanting false memories in the minds of vulnerable
people for the sake of financial gain or professional recognition. This
is exactly what they did in the McMartin Preschool case of the 1980's.
Here was a bona fide case where over 465 children were used and abused
in satanic rituals, forced prostitution, and pornography in tunnels and
small subterranean rooms under the school as well as locations removed
from the school. After a decade long trial, both Mrs. McMartin and her
grandson Ray Buckey got off scott free because the prosecutors sabotaged
the case and the "False Memory Syndrome Foundation" convinced the jury
and the public (with enormous media assistance of course) that these children
were implanted with 'false' memories. An outrageous case of injustice and
prosecutorial government collusion to cover up the many Illuminati protected
abusers and perpetrators in this case.
By Diane Hawkins
Rebuttal Letters to Physician magazine and Dr. James Dobson of Focus on The Family
Susan Stevens, Editor
Dear Ms. Stevens, I was greatly saddened to read the article “Recovered Memories: Fact or Fiction” by Paul Simpson in your May/June issue of Physician magazine. While he appears to be an excellent spokesperson for the disreputable False Memory Syndrome Foundation (one of the founders was interviewed by a European journal of pedophilia and challenged pedophiles “to become more positive and make the claim that paedophilia is an acceptable expression of God’s will for love and unity among human beings” Paidika; Journal of Paedophilia, Winter 1993, vol. 3, no. 1, p. 12), he unfortunately is not giving a full or accurate picture of the issue of “recovered memories.” First of all, he makes no distinction between “repressed” memories and “dissociated” memories. Nor does he distinguish “traumatic” memory and “ordinary” memory. He also fails to recognize the critical difference in how the mind copes with extreme trauma occurring in the early years of childhood and trauma occurring in later years. These are very glaring omissions for one endeavoring to speak authoritatively on “recovered memories.” The term “repressed memories” implies that these memories were once known and were then deliberately pushed out of one’s consciousness. In years past this was perhaps the only terminology available to describe the phenomenon of memories which were seemingly “forgotten” and then “remembered” at a much later time. Since the early 80’s the concept of dissociation has come to the forefront (though recognized over a century ago by figures such as Freud and Janet) as another possibility to explain such memories. In this case the events were never “known” and then “forgotten.” Instead they were almost immediately separated from the normal stream of consciousness. In extreme cases such partitioning of consciousness may lead to the development of separate identities or personalities. These separated identities “know” about the trauma, but the Host personality, who lives out the person’s daily life, does “not know.” When the separation is removed years later or the Host somehow learns what the alter-identities have always known, it gives the appearance of a “recovered memory,” but the dynamics are entirely different from “repression.” Researchers such as Dr. Bessel van der Kolk, a staff psychiatrist at Boston University, are also documenting that events which are extremely terrifying, overwhelming, and immobilizing affect the memory organs of the brain differently than more ordinary events, especially in young children In the case of such extremely traumatic events there seems to be an impairment of the neural pathways leading from the amygdala to the hippocampus (which serves to categorize and store ordinary memories). The memories of these events therefore do not reach the normal “memory bank” of the person but are stored separately in their original sensory and affective form (Bessel A. van der Kolk & Onno van der Hart, “The Intrusive Past: The Flexibility of Memory and the Engraving of Trauma” (American Imago, vol. 48, no. 4, 1991; 425-54) and Bessel A. van der Kolk, “Trauma, Memory, & the Integration of Experience,” Keynote Address at the ISSD Regional Conference, Alexandria, VA, June 1, 1996). It is these memories which can potentially be “recovered” years or even decades later. I can appreciate with Dr. Simpson that the process for “recovering” them can sometimes be flawed, but we mustn’t throw out the baby with the bathwater. To cast all therapists and clients in the mold described as typical by Dr. Simpson is gross negligence as is using the research and figures of such a biased group as the False Memory Syndrome Foundation. Because false memory mechanisms do exist, careful standards for both accessing and evaluating such memories are necessary. Since the true traumatic memories which do not get processed through the hippocampus are stored as raw sensory data, if and when they are recovered, they will come back as a virtual replay of the sensory experience, that is, the individual will once again see, hear, taste, smell, and feel the event as if it were happening all over again. This should be the gold standard for evaluating the validity of “recovered” traumatic memories. As van der Kolk and his colleagues point out, the mind is indeed suggestible but the body is not. In other words, while people can easily imagine and create mental imagery of all sorts in their heads, either of their own volition or in response to suggestion by others, it is virtually impossible to “imagine” an actual replay of the other physical senses. To say that there is no evidence to support the reality of recovered memories is also tremendously inaccurate. Certainly external collaboration of some sort is the most irrefutable type of “evidence,” and in many cases, including my own, this does, in fact, exist. However, the significance of implicit memory must also not be ignored. Implicit memory is recognized as the ongoing effect of an event without a cognitive memory of its cause. Even an abused dog, for instance, will act and respond differently than a well cared for dog. The same is true for traumatized persons. There will be increased sensitivities to certain places, persons, or things; irrational fears; or peculiar reactions as well as psychosomatic symptoms in the body, often in connection with digestion, elimination, and/or sexual function. I am speaking of real effects of abuse, not the ridiculous ones Dr. Simpson listed as being typical indicators used by “RMT therapists.” Whether he wants to admit it or not, unspeakable abuse does not occur without leaving telltale signs in the life of the individual. If none exist, the “recovered” memories should indeed be considered suspect. I myself am a survivor of severe childhood abuse and only began “recovering” these memories in my 30’s. In addition to having much implicit memory consistent with the nature of these memories, I have also been able to find the barn in which many of the teen memories took place and evidence of the cabin in the woods which was the site of many of the earlier memories as well as other external objects and data which are consistent with the content of my recovered memories. I also never “forgot” my father’s coming in the middle of the night and getting in bed with me. It was only after he got in bed that my memory was blank (indicating an immediate dissociative process at work). Furthermore, when I confronted him with the challenge that the only way he could possibly leave behind a positive memory of himself was to acknowledge what he had done, he virtually confessed, writing the following: “The path of each person’s life is crossed by many treacherous side-roads that seem to promise rapt fulfillment. We all have met them along our courses and know how tempting they can be, so let us not condemn those who were beguiled by them, although the innocent must suffer with them.” I would also like to point out that dissociation is primarily used as a defense mechanism by children experiencing overwhelming trauma before the age of 5 or 6. After that age people seemingly have greater coping capacities and are much more apt to remember any severe trauma they experience, often with a very heightened awareness, as would have been the case of the examples Dr. Simpson used as evidence that no one forgets trauma. Children who begin using dissociation as a psychological defense before the age of 5 or 6, however, will generally continue to use it at even older ages, especially if they are in an ongoing abusive environment. Such individuals usually have large gaps in their historical memory. I would also challenge Dr. Simpson’s claim that memories prior to age 3 or 4 are particularly questionable. This statement is sometimes made because the myelination of the amygdala is not complete until that age. Therefore, no data can be transmitted through it to the hippocampus, which serves as the ordinary “memory bank.” In reality all this means is that there is generally no “ordinary” memory recorded prior to this time. It does not, however, eliminate the possibility of traumatic memories being stored in their sensory and affective form as described by van der Kolk. In the interest of truth, fairness, and accuracy, I hope that you will re-examine the position taken by Dr. Simpson and print the “other side of the story,” whether it is my own rebuttal or someone else’s, as I know you will be deluged with objections to this extremely slanted article based on incomplete and sloppy research. Focus on the Family must respond if it is to restore its image and credibility on this subject. Respectfully submitted, Diane W. Hawkins, M.A., MT (ASCP) Cc: Dr. James Dobson
Dr. James Dobson
Dear Dr. Dobson, Quite a few years ago I wrote “An Open Letter to Child Sexual Abusers” and sent you a copy, which you read on one of your programs. You also seemingly kept it on file to send to other sexual abuse survivors who contacted you. You can’t imagine how gratifying that was to me. However, since that time I have heard you express things on your programs that have been very disappointing and disaffirming to people like me, questioning the validity of many sexual abuse memories. At one time I heard you say that memory before the age of 3 or 4 is impossible because of the lack of development for memory capacity in the brain before this age. While this is certainly true in regard to “ordinary” memory, research is showing that it is not true in the case of extremely traumatic memories. (Please see my enclosed letter to Ms. Stevens.) It is the article “Recovered Memories: Fact or Fiction?” in the latest issue of Physician magazine that has finally compelled me to write to you and at least challenge your perspective on this whole matter. Frankly I am appalled that Focus on the Family seems to be aligning itself with the False Memory Syndrome Foundation. I would urge you to research the personal histories of its founding members. In addition to the dubious interview Dr. Ralph Underwager and his wife gave to a Dutch journal of pedophilia, I was in a meeting in which he declared that there was no evidence at all to support the claims of the children in the McMarten Pre-school case. I raised my hand to object because Dr. Roland Summit has photographs of the excavations done under the building after it was sold and torn down showing where the tunnels had been (and were later filled with loose dirt) with pipes and a concrete wall butting out just as the children had described. There was even a shopping bag found with a dated receipt in it, proving that the tunnels were open and used during the dates in question. When I just began to tell about this, Dr. Underwager pointed his finger at me and sternly shouted, “That is not true and I will not allow you to say that in here!” I was severely castigated by him for telling the truth. When people like Dr. Paul Simpson give such slanted views and paint a worst-case scenario as the norm among “RMT therapists” and clients, it makes me wonder what their agenda is. I too believe that there is vast potential for inaccuracy and suggestibility with so-called “recovered memories,” but that doesn’t mean that they are all false. A much more reasonable approach would be to acknowledge both possibilities and work for ways to distinguish them. Because of your personal profile in the worldwide Christian community, I urge you to consider carefully where you come down on this issue and whom you use as authorities. There are a lot of true abuse survivors who have been very offended, hurt, and disavowed by you in this matter. Sincerely, Diane W. Hawkins P.S. I am enclosing a copy of my book Supporting Ritual Abuse
Survivors as well as another copy of my “An Open Letter to Sexual Abusers”
and my letter to the editor of Physician magazine.
|