Comments on the Inquiry into the
Practice of Recovered Memory Therapy

A draft report by the Government of Victoria, Australia

Sponsored link.

Terminology:

We will use the terms:

Our beliefs:

One member of the OCRT -- the group responsible for this web site -- experienced the triggered memory phenomenon. Memories of CSA came flooding back after reading a newspaper article about the perpetrator. He was being sued by his daughter for CAS. Approximately 12 other women, all of whom had continuously present memories of the CSA, emerged to join the lawsuit. The triggered memories about the perpetrator's MO and the details of the location where the molestation happened agreed with the continuously present memories of the other women. The perpetrator pleaded guilty and received multiple two year sentences, served concurrently.

From the studies that we have made of the available literature -- an in particular of the statements of professional mental health organizations -- we have tentatively concluded that RMT is extremely unreliable, and that that most recovered memories of CSA are of events that never happened. We also suspect that triggered memories may well be generally as reliable as continuously present memories of CSA.

About the Inquiry:

The Health Services Commissioner to the Minister for Health of the government of Victoria, a state in Australia, published a 161 page draft report titled "Inquiry into the Practice of Recovered Memory Therapy" (RMT) in 2005. The government agreed to investigate RMT after being heavily pressured by parents who believe that they had been falsely accused by family members of CSA as a result of RMT.

The professional qualifications of the three individuals who assembled the report are not mentioned.

Concerns with definitions used:

The Commissioner shows a degree if either bias or lack of knowledge in the definitions of the term "false memory advocates." Curiously, they include three populations under this term:

1. "Individuals or associations who do not believe traumatic events can be forgotten for a period of time and subsequently remembered. Rather they believe recovered memories are false memories." There is one professional association in Britain which has claimed that all recovered memories are false. However, no other association has expressed that belief. A consensus among individuals and associations who are skeptical of RMT believe that many, perhaps most, but not all recovered memories are not of real events.
2. Persons who believe that RMT is "currently taught and practiced in Australia [and] which has the potential to implant false memories..." This includes almost all mental health professionals worldwide, including all or essentially all mental health professional organizations. The term "advocate" seems inappropriate here; it seems to discount the professional and scientific qualifications of the "avocates."
3. Adults who believe that they have been falsely accused of childhood sexual abuse as a result of memories recovered during RMT.

A very serious concern is that, in our opinion, two very different phenomena are combined in the report. The inquiry does not clearly differentiate between:

The report uses the terms "survivors of childhood abuse" or "survivors" to refer to individuals who believe that they have experienced childhood abuse. This wording includes those who actually were abused, and those who were not abused but who have recovered false memories of abuse. To call a person a survivor who was never abused seems inappropriate.

Methodology:

The inquiry received submissions:

Their findings:

Some of the inquiry's findings are troubling:

Reference used:

1. "Inquiry into the practice of recovered memory therapy: Draft report," Health Services Commissioner to the Minister for Health, Victoria Australia. (2005). Online at: http://www.peterellis.org.nz/ and at: http://www.dhs.vic.gov.au/. The latter is a PDF file. You may require software to read it. Software can be obtained free from: