Adult recovered memories of childhood sexual abuse

Prevention and management of false memory syndrome

As with most issues in medicine, the prevention and management of a problem is best understood when the origins are known. The term ‘false memory syndrome’ (FMS) came into use in March 1992 with the foundation of the False Memory Syndrome Foundation (FMSF), a non-profit-making organisation established in the USA by a group of families in which one or more of the parents was accused. The parents in these families were reacting to a phenomenon which developed in a characteristic form in the preceding decade and had become common enough by 1991 for a number of them to realise that they were not alone, and to join in setting up the Foundation with a professional and scientific advisory board.

Memory for murder. A psychological perspective on dissociative amnesia in legal contexts

There is currently a complex and inconsistent state in the law relating to dissociation and dissociative amnesia (McSherry, 1998). Although dissociative amnesia in defendants is relevant to both competency to stand trial and criminal responsibility in principle, courts have typically assumed a skeptical stance toward such claims in practice. However, there is considerable evidence from both nonoffender and offender populations to support the validity of dissociative amnesia in defendants. Further, there is information available to aid in the evaluation of amnesia, such as the quality of the report itself and characteristics of the person reporting the amnesia (e.g., psychopathy). When consideration is given to the legal response to reports of dissociative amnesia by complainants, the situation becomes even more complex. While some courts have rejected recovered memory evidence, others have convicted defendants of historical offenses based on such evidence. In some cases, judges have argued that jurors should be left to decide on the validity of recovered memories based on their common sense and experience. The uncritical acceptance of the validity of repressed memories in complainants by many courts stands in stark contrast to the response to claims of amnesia from defendants. It seems apparent that the courts need better guidelines around the issue of dissociative amnesia in both populations. We think that the increasing scientific understanding of memory in the past decade (see Schacter, 1999) can meaningfully contribute to the development of such guidelines. Responsible, nonpartisan expert testimony from mental health professionals would be one step in the direction of rectifying the current state of law in regards to dissociation.