The debate regarding False Memory Syndrome is being fought in the courts. Elizabeth Loftus, now on the Board of Directors of the False Memory Syndrome Foundation, holds the view that repressed memory for sexual abuse is not valid evidence as testimony in cases where the victim is alleging abuse by parents or prominent caregivers. Loftus also questions the accuracy of delayed recall and states false memories are being planted by overzealous or openly unscrupulous therapists. Loftus, and the growing number of False Memory proponents, assert that scientific evidence is not available to substantiate trauma theories that repression is a basis for periodic lack of recall. Recently, Lotus argued that in cases of delayed recall, the subjects are not using repressive defense mechanisms, but are displaying normal forgetting. She "argues against any specific psychological mechanisms associated with abuse or other forms of traumatic stress" (Williams, 1994). Critics of Loftus note that while Ms. Loftus may have qualification regarding the functioning of normal everyday working memory storage, she has disregarded currently available and increasingly abundant clinical data regarding trauma related symptomology.

Loftus likens proof of repression as being similar to the likelihood of one being able to prove there is a God. She believes it can not be scientifically proven and therefore can not be used to substantiate allegations against allege abusers. She believes repression of memory is not credible. Based on delayed recall alone, the accuser, or victim, is not credible. Note that this assumes delayed memory accusation is the only basis for the accuser's belief of prior abuse.

Recent research indicates that the accuser has more to point to than repressed memory to substantiate prior abuse of a significant nature. Research involving Viet Nam veterans diagnosed with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder indicate trauma based physiological changes in the sympathetic nervous system. Other research indicates physiological changes, resulting from conditional response to specific traumatic stress, may implicate neuroendocrine damage.

Clinical research by Linda Meyer Williams, (1994), recently dealt a blow to False Memory proponents. Ms. William's research has demonstrated that repression of memory about abuse is a valid phenomena and in many cases also includes a high accuracy rate of recall for specific details of the abuse. (Peripheral details of recall contained a lesser degree of accuracy.) William's study was based on interviews with 129 women with highly authenticated documented histories of sexual abuse dating in the early 1970's who were reinterviewed as adults to check their recall of the abuse. (Williams, 1995)

Important conclusions of Ms. William's study revealed that subjects who did not recall the documented abuse were younger (age 0-6) at the time of the abuse and were more likely to have been abused by a perpetrator with a close relationship to them. Overall 38% did not recall the "index abuse" recorded in the hospital. However, 68% of the women who did not recall the indexed abuse, did recall times of other abuse. 12% of the total sample reported they were never sexually abused. Williams questions whether "maternal support may help alleviate the trauma associated with child sexual abuse and therefore increase the child's likelihood of having continuous memories of the abuse." (p 15) Portions of the research appears to imply that the children who were abused and did not receive maternal support were more likely to have no recall. This is not surprising given the view that incidents of incest are generally more secretive in nature, often recurring, and frequently involve lack of support from family members.

When first interviewed during the 1970's the subjects were part of a study regarding rape. It came as a surprise to researchers at that time that a large portion of those interviewed, as part of the community based study, were in fact children. During the early 1970's discussion of child abuse, particularly regarding cases involving primary caregivers, was just coming into awareness.

That a significant number of these subjects either no longer recalled the documented incident or admit to periods of not remembering the incident is notable. Ms. Meyer suggests the significance indicates there is more to lack of recall than simple forgetting as proposed by Loftus. In Meyer's opinion, her research is yet another piece of evidence to be added to the existing body of clinical research implying trauma experiences may be stored differently than normal every day experiences.

Research by others such as Briere, Herman and Van der Kolk imply defenses such as dissociation, cognitive avoidance or repression as defensive coping mechanism for trauma. Interestingly, 5 women with recovered memory of the incident, who were under the age of 3 at the time of the abuse had substantially accurate recall of the incident. Meyer's findings seem to verify a recent study by Usher and Neisser which "shows(s) that the offset of the (childhood) amnesia varies with the kind of experience in question (and that) some events are likely to remain in memory even if they occur at age 2." (Childhood amnesia and the beginnings of memory for four early life events, Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 122, pp 155-165). To further add fuel to the fire, Meyer's subjects had not had access to the therapeutic contaminations professed by Loftus in her arguments of implantation of abuse memories by overzealous therapists.

Clinical literature indicates that many victims of childhood sexual abuse display classic symptoms of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) as a result of the trauma. Are there implications within PTSD studies which would indicate a need for repression of memories associated with traumatic abuse? Multiple researchers, covering a period of 1960 to present, have concluded that physiological symptoms are a result of classic conditioning in which subsequent exposure to similar stimuli results in activation of the sympathetic nervous system. Persons suffering from PTSD learn defensive mechanisms in an effort to avoid the unwanted stimuli. Earlier studies of physiological effect of trauma uncovered rapid heart rate and skin resistance responses when a stimulus of combat conditions were studied with Viet Nam veterans vs non vets. Later replications of these earlier studies included refinement of methods used including selection process of study subjects. These studies further demonstrated that while veterans who did not display PTSD could simulate sympathetic nervous system arousal, PTSD veterans could not "voluntarily terminate their arousal response" as could non PTSD vets. (McFall et al, pp 246-247) Later studies also indicated that PTSD vets were not any more reactive to nonrelated combat stimulus than control subjects. They were highly reactive to stimulus which simulated their individual combat traumas.

Research by Kolk in since 1987 document that PTSD patients have abnormal neuroendocrine responses to perceived threat. Other neuroendocrine studies support that the adrenergic and noradrengeric function is abnormal in PTSD. (McFall et al, pp 252) Studies involving neuroendocrine models of PTSD support the physiological findings of a connection between conditioned response resulting from specific trauma resulting in neurological changes.

Both physiological and neurological changes would suggest a level of stress, likely associated with memory of trauma or triggers to memory of trauma, which would result in both psychological and physiological need to reduce stress by use of extraordinary coping strategies, i.e repression, dissociation.

One should also consider that Viet Nam PTSD veterans were not faced with accusations that they never in fact experienced Viet Nam combat. To a certain extent support systems existed to confirm the trauma experience for these individuals. The physiological and neurological effect of trauma hardly place recovered memory of sexual abuse in the same ballpark as "simple forgetting" nor argues against extreme forms of defense mechanism by the human organism, such as repression.

Early empirical studies trying to define repression identified repressors as people having a combined affect of low levels of subjective distress and high levels of physiological arousal when word association tests included phrases with sexual or aggressive content (Weinberger et el Low- anxious, high-anxious, and repressive coping styles: Psychometric patterns and behavioral and physiological responses to stress. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 88, 369-380 (1979) A few year earlier, in 1974, Holmes published an influential study which disregarded research that included data involving affective memories, calling it subjective and highly questionable. He concluded repression did not exist and it could not be used as an explanation for behavior. Penelope Davis takes exception to the omission of the correlation between repression and affective memory

Studies by Davis concluded repression involves inaccessibility to affective memories. Incidents of fear and self consciousness (shame) were the two significant factors for repression. Both factors play a large part in incidents of child sexual abuse. It was also found that the period of time it took for subjects to recall incidents of fear was significantly higher than control groups not classified as repressors. It was also noted that repressors did not have poor recall for general every day occurrences. Specifically the study concluded that incidents which demonstrate a threat to the self, whether physical or psychological, evokes repression in some individuals.

In conclusion, Loftus' argument is not based on research with trauma victims. Her involvement as an expert witness for the defense in cases involving alledged recall concerning events of trauma have not influenced her to study, within her laboratory setting, persons with substanciated past incidents of trauma. Ample subjects can be drawn from combat, holocaust victims, rape victims and substantiated cases of sexual abuse victims - they are all out there.

Davis, Penelope J.; "Repression and the Inaccessibility of Affective Memories", Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol 53, No.3, pp 585- 593 (1987)

Loftus, Elizabeth., Ketcham, Katherine, (1994) The Myth of Repressed Memory. St Martin's Press, NY.

McFall, Ph.D., Miles E.; Murburg, M.D., M. Michele; Roszell, M.D., Douglas K., Veith, M.D., Richard C.; "Psychophysiologic and Neuroendocrine Findings in Posttraumatic Stress Disorder: A Review of Theory and Research", Journal of Anxiety Disorders, Vol 3, pp 243-257 (1989).

Williams, Linda Meyer; "Recall of Childhood Trauma: A Prospective Study of Women's Memories of Child Sexual Abuse". Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, Vol 62, 1167-1176. 1994.

Williams, Linda Meyer; "Recovered memories of abuse in women with documented child sexual victimization histories", In press; Journal of Traumatic Stress, pp 1-33, Sept 1, 1995.

Williams, Linda Meyer; "What Does It Mean to Forget Child Sexual Abuse? A Reply to Loftus, Garry, and Feldman; Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, Vol 62, pp 1182-1186, (1994)