Psycho-Babble Psychology Thread 670899

Shown: posts 1 to 19 of 19. This is the beginning of the thread.

 

Hypnosis, anyone?

Posted by antigua on July 26, 2006, at 20:43:37

Has anyone tried hypnosis to recover childhood memories? I have this major piece of my puzzle memory that I know is there; I've always known that it is there and truthfully, while sometimes I can convince myself that it will be o.k. if I never know, that I could live w/o knowing, etc., I know the blasted thing is there. Actually, I think it is at the heart of my problem.

My T believes me that it's there and that I'm stuck. She said several years ago that she didn't think hypnosis would be helpful in my case because she was afraid that something might come up that I wouldn't be ready to handle. Today we talked about it, and she thinks it might be helpful now. She's looking into it for me.

I'm much stronger now and while it may be a difficult experience, with the support system that I have, I think (hope) it could help. I am really excited.

Has anyone tried this? If so, did it help?
antigua

 

Re: Hypnosis, anyone? » antigua

Posted by ClearSkies on July 27, 2006, at 14:05:57

In reply to Hypnosis, anyone?, posted by antigua on July 26, 2006, at 20:43:37

I was treated for headaches using hypnosis at a young age - 12 years old - and did regression to establish just when my migraine headaches first appeared. Even though I was so young when they first manifested themselves in me; and despite the trauma I had because my complaints of pain were grounds for punishment by my mum;, I was able to recall specific instances when a migraine was triggered, without having to experience the incident again.

I should think that a skilled hypnosis practioner would be very knowledgable about when to pull back during a session to avoid inflicting new trauma for the patient.

ClearSkies

 

Re: Hypnosis, anyone?

Posted by Daisym on July 28, 2006, at 0:22:42

In reply to Re: Hypnosis, anyone? » antigua, posted by ClearSkies on July 27, 2006, at 14:05:57

I haven't tried it, but one of the women in my group did it. She recovered not only the memory she was after but a sense of sureness...like "yes, this really did happen." She recommends it highly and often.

I would want my therapist to be with me when I first tried it. I think that safety would be important. I know you had a bad experience a year or more ago with a recovered memory so preventive sessions might be needed as well.

Good luck with this. Please let us know how it goes. (Are you scared?)

 

Re: Hypnosis, anyone? » Daisym

Posted by antigua on July 28, 2006, at 9:25:43

In reply to Re: Hypnosis, anyone?, posted by Daisym on July 28, 2006, at 0:22:42

No, I'm not scared, and I'm pretty sure my T will be with me. I probably have unrealistic expectations that this one memory will heal me, but I least hope that it will unleash some things that I have been too afraid, too defensive to deal with.

I have to wait until Sept because my T is going to be gone most of Aug. Probably for the best as I have to also deal with sending my first one off to college. WAAAHHH! He is going half way across the country so I won't see him very often.
but I'm happy for him; he's very excited.

Promise to let you know how it develops.
I know you've been suffering, and i've been having a terrible time lately too, but we're going to make it--we're going to feel whole again!
best,
antigua

 

Shame on the silent skeptics » antigua

Posted by pseudoname on July 28, 2006, at 11:12:21

In reply to Hypnosis, anyone?, posted by antigua on July 26, 2006, at 20:43:37

I am really sorry that other people on this board are not helping you consider other options. It is not fair to you for you to come away with the impression that hypnosis for recovered memory is in quality on the same level as other validated therapies.

> Has anyone tried hypnosis to recover childhood memories?

I would strongly urge you to consider the criticisms of this practice before undertaking it. There is absolutely *no* scientific research supporting the idea that any childhood memories every recovered under hypnosis are REAL. But the risk of creating "memories" is very high. Hypnosis is, by definition, suggestion. This is a potentially disastrous path to go down.

One could start here: http://www.fmsfonline.org/reliable.html
or here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recovered_memory_therapy

> I have this major piece of my puzzle memory that I know is there

Such feeling that a memory "is there" but can't be accessed can be a misinterpretation of many other things, including current uncomfortable feelings that really *are* there but that we'd rather not contact. A competent therapist could begin by exploring with you your fears and feelings about the events and people in your current life, right now, who can have many effects you might rather avoid than confront. That's perfectly natural and there are thousands of research articles addressing those real-time relationships.

> I know the blasted thing is there. Actually, I think it is at the heart of my problem.

I know very well the pull of wanting to believe that there is some magic key to "my problem". That there must be *something*, some specific thing that will make all these seemingly unconnected, bizarre feelings and impulses and inhibitions that I have all make sense. And I know how intensely I can want one specific cause of it all so that I can finally address THAT and be free of these crazy problems.

But wishing doesn't make it so. Our brains are very tricky and our reactions to emotionally provocative events throughout our lives are generally too complex to follow. Childhood influences count most when they are consistent and persistent over long periods of time. Childhood events have been compared to how a tree's growth is influenced: to change a tree's direction of growth, a gardener must apply pressure in a given direction constantly for many years. Knocking the tree hard a few times, no matter how otherwise injurious, does not affect the overall direction of growth. Similarly, single events in childhood seen apart from persistent overall conditions, will not provide a key to anything! You already know what consistent unhappy pressures were applied to you over the years: maybe you could focus your attention on being less rigidly defended (i.e., more mindfully accepting) toward those reactions to scary events and pressures now, in your current life. That's not easy for any of us, but it's scientifically validated, you can do it for free any time, and it doesn't carry the risk of false memories about people you still love.

> while sometimes I can convince myself that it will be o.k. if I never know, that I could live w/o knowing, etc

Even if you have the hypnosis and visualize something, you will be in the same position of NOT KNOWING. Because how on earth would you tell if the memories recovered in hypnosis were real? What do you plan on using as your validity test? Will you simply rely on whether they FEEL real or not? That is a terribly unreliable standard. Think of all the old movies or TV repeats you've seen; when you watch the same one again, sometimes there's a scene or plot that you remembered having gone differently when you saw it before. Sometimes the incorrect memory is *so vivid* it's astonishing that it could be wrong. But the evidence in those cases is incontestable; and it happens all the time.

How much greater is the risk from a procedure that by its very nature is suggestive and will be coming at you when you are in a weakened, vulnerable, cognitively compromised state!

> My T believes me that it's there and that I'm stuck.

Perhaps you could get another opinion from a therapist -- preferably from a university teaching clinic -- where alternative explanations and therapy plans could be considered before you risk so much in such a scientifically unsupported, LEGALLY INVALID, overwhelmingly professionally denigrated procedure as recovering memories. (Look at all the major psychological & scientific organizations that dismiss the procedure: http://www.fmsfonline.org/reliable.html)

If the memories you recover are of abduction by space aliens, will that be a productive development? But alien abduction is a commonly-reported memory recovered by hypnosis. Books have been written about it!

> she was afraid that something might come up that I wouldn't be ready to handle.

She should be afraid that something might come up that would be completely bogus.

Uncovering memories may simply not work, even if the memories were real. Catharsis -- getting out all of those feelings supposedly bottled up since a childhood experience -- doesn't work because emotions don't work that way. "Carol Tavris" made that clear 30 years ago but apparently some therapists haven't gotten the message.

> one of the women in my group did it. She recovered not only the memory she was after but a sense of sureness... like "yes, this really did happen."

This is an upsetting account to me. A "sense of sureness" is not an indication of ANYTHING! Experiments have shown that people develop absolute conviction about deliberately induced falsehoods. Even when the people are shown that the memory was totally false and experimentally induced by an experimenter, people still insist that the memories are nevertheless accurate because they FEEL so real.

> while it may be a difficult experience, with the support system that I have, I think (hope) it could help.

What exactly will it HELP? Suppose you get some memory, presumably of trauma; what will in change in your current life in any respect one iota? You'll know that your emotional problems have a "cause"? You can get that reassurance without memories. I'm telling you, your emotional problems, whether uncomfortable feelings, disturbing thoughts, bizarre impulses or inhibitions, all have causes. They are exactly what a person in your situation SHOULD feel. (Just as my emotional problems are exactly what I should be going through.) The question is, what would you do even if you did "recover" something?

> I probably have unrealistic expectations that this one memory will heal me

This is an excellent insight. We all can develop unrealistic expectations of therapy. That doesn't mean therapy is ineffective, just that it may not "cure" us in the way we desperately want. Therapy is unlikely to remove problems like a surgeon can remove a foreign body. It may be a much healthier, more realistic, goal of therapy to help you accept your CURRENT feelings better and work to build a better life with them than to spend so much time, energy, money, and emotional investment pursuing "buried" memories.

> I am really excited.

You are clearly so hopeful about this procedure; but what if a year from now you've gone through it and you have some painful, awful "memory" about someone you do in fact still LOVE, and yet you're in the same place otherwise in your life?

Against the energy of hope that you have in this procedure and the (in my opinion indefensible) SILENCE on the part of skeptics on this board, perhaps it is unlikely that you would now consider getting a second opinion before the hypnosis from a university-based clinic. But you do have some time before September. I would urge you at least to delay committing to the hypnosis for a while to let yourself percolate some doubts & mull them over a little more first.

I wish you the best. I can empathize with a lot of what you're going through, and I want you to feel better and stronger and braver, too. Good luck.

 

Re: Shame on the silent skeptics

Posted by antigua on July 28, 2006, at 13:12:52

In reply to Shame on the silent skeptics » antigua, posted by pseudoname on July 28, 2006, at 11:12:21

Wow, that was quite a barrage and I'm not quite sure how to take it, since I don't know how much you know about my situation. It would make things clearer if you could justify your positions on some of this things, as it's hard to know if you are talking from experience or just on what you've read.

> I am really sorry that other people on this board are not helping you consider other options. It is not fair to you for you to come away with the impression that hypnosis for recovered memory is in quality on the same level as other validated therapies.

1. Besides psychodynamic therapy, what are you recommending?
>
> I would strongly urge you to consider the criticisms of this practice before undertaking it. There is absolutely *no* scientific research supporting the idea that any childhood memories every recovered under hypnosis are REAL. But the risk of creating "memories" is very high. Hypnosis is, by definition, suggestion. This is a potentially disastrous path to go down.

2. Have you experience with this? And yes, I have looked into it.
>

> Such feeling that a memory "is there" but can't be accessed can be a misinterpretation of many other things, including current uncomfortable feelings that really *are* there but that we'd rather not contact. A competent therapist could begin by exploring with you your fears and feelings about the events and people in your current life, right now, who can have many effects you might rather avoid than confront. That's perfectly natural and there are thousands of research articles addressing those real-time relationships.

3. I'm so far past in my therapy what you've written above. What you write is not the issue I'm facing here; this is not about my current life.
>
> > I know the blasted thing is there. Actually, I think it is at the heart of my problem.
>
> I know very well the pull of wanting to believe that there is some magic key to "my problem". That there must be *something*, some specific thing that will make all these seemingly unconnected, bizarre feelings and impulses and inhibitions that I have all make sense. And I know how intensely I can want one specific cause of it all so that I can finally address THAT and be free of these crazy problems.
>
> But wishing doesn't make it so. Our brains are very tricky and our reactions to emotionally provocative events throughout our lives are generally too complex to follow. Childhood influences count most when they are consistent and persistent over long periods of time. Childhood events have been compared to how a tree's growth is influenced: to change a tree's direction of growth, a gardener must apply pressure in a given direction constantly for many years. Knocking the tree hard a few times, no matter how otherwise injurious, does not affect the overall direction of growth. Similarly, single events in childhood seen apart from persistent overall conditions, will not provide a key to anything! You already know what consistent unhappy pressures were applied to you over the years: maybe you could focus your attention on being less rigidly defended (i.e., more mindfully accepting) toward those reactions to scary events and pressures now, in your current life. That's not easy for any of us, but it's scientifically validated, you can do it for free any time, and it doesn't carry the risk of false memories about people you still love.

4. Who said I still love this person? Also, perhaps you may have misunderstood. This is a PIECE, not the whole thing. I have the outside corroboration that is so necessary and many other memories that I've already dealt with. Actually, I wouldn't be surprised if it wasn't less than I imagine, but as a child it could have had stronger influence.

> > while sometimes I can convince myself that it will be o.k. if I never know, that I could live w/o knowing, etc
>
> Even if you have the hypnosis and visualize something, you will be in the same position of NOT KNOWING. Because how on earth would you tell if the memories recovered in hypnosis were real? What do you plan on using as your validity test? Will you simply rely on whether they FEEL real or not? That is a terribly unreliable standard. Think of all the old movies or TV repeats you've seen; when you watch the same one again, sometimes there's a scene or plot that you remembered having gone differently when you saw it before. Sometimes the incorrect memory is *so vivid* it's astonishing that it could be wrong. But the evidence in those cases is incontestable; and it happens all the time.

5. Have you ever recovered a memory or had a flashback?

> How much greater is the risk from a procedure that by its very nature is suggestive and will be coming at you when you are in a weakened, vulnerable, cognitively compromised state!
>
> > My T believes me that it's there and that I'm stuck.
>
> Perhaps you could get another opinion from a therapist -- preferably from a university teaching clinic -- where alternative explanations and therapy plans could be considered before you risk so much in such a scientifically unsupported, LEGALLY INVALID, overwhelmingly professionally denigrated procedure as recovering memories. (Look at all the major psychological & scientific organizations that dismiss the procedure: http://www.fmsfonline.org/reliable.html)
>
> If the memories you recover are of abduction by space aliens, will that be a productive development? But alien abduction is a commonly-reported memory recovered by hypnosis. Books have been written about it!
>
> > she was afraid that something might come up that I wouldn't be ready to handle.
>
> She should be afraid that something might come up that would be completely bogus.

6. Please don't insult my therapist
>
> Uncovering memories may simply not work, even if the memories were real. Catharsis -- getting out all of those feelings supposedly bottled up since a childhood experience -- doesn't work because emotions don't work that way. "Carol Tavris" made that clear 30 years ago but apparently some therapists haven't gotten the message.

7. I'm sorry, I don't know what you're talking about in the above.
>
> > one of the women in my group did it. She recovered not only the memory she was after but a sense of sureness... like "yes, this really did happen."
>
> This is an upsetting account to me. A "sense of sureness" is not an indication of ANYTHING! Experiments have shown that people develop absolute conviction about deliberately induced falsehoods. Even when the people are shown that the memory was totally false and experimentally induced by an experimenter, people still insist that the memories are nevertheless accurate because they FEEL so real.
>
> > while it may be a difficult experience, with the support system that I have, I think (hope) it could help.
>
> What exactly will it HELP? Suppose you get some memory, presumably of trauma; what will in change in your current life in any respect one iota? You'll know that your emotional problems have a "cause"? You can get that reassurance without memories. I'm telling you, your emotional problems, whether uncomfortable feelings, disturbing thoughts, bizarre impulses or inhibitions, all have causes. They are exactly what a person in your situation SHOULD feel. (Just as my emotional problems are exactly what I should be going through.) The question is, what would you do even if you did "recover" something?

8. I could go on forever with what you've written above, on how I could be helped by remembering this incident. Failing at it could even help. Real or not? Yes, that's a question. But let's go way out there. What if I do recover something, real or not, and it DOES help me. Memories are often fragments of other memories that don't necessarily fit together perfectly as a complete puzzle; they can be a mishmash of what's going on, but they often can provide clues to what's underneath it all, 100% truth of the memory or not. It's like a dream. It may not be exact, but it contains elements that can be very useful in therapy.

> > I probably have unrealistic expectations that this one memory will heal me
>
> This is an excellent insight. We all can develop unrealistic expectations of therapy. That doesn't mean therapy is ineffective, just that it may not "cure" us in the way we desperately want. Therapy is unlikely to remove problems like a surgeon can remove a foreign body. It may be a much healthier, more realistic, goal of therapy to help you accept your CURRENT feelings better and work to build a better life with them than to spend so much time, energy, money, and emotional investment pursuing "buried" memories.

9. I have accepted my current feelings, but that doesn't mean my mind gives me peace.
>
> > I am really excited.
>
> You are clearly so hopeful about this procedure; but what if a year from now you've gone through it and you have some painful, awful "memory" about someone you do in fact still LOVE, and yet you're in the same place otherwise in your life?

10. Who said anything about someone I still LOVE? This seems out of left field. I think it would be more honest to face that person with the truth, which is not an issue here anyway.
>
> Against the energy of hope that you have in this procedure and the (in my opinion indefensible) SILENCE on the part of skeptics on this board, perhaps it is unlikely that you would now consider getting a second opinion before the hypnosis from a university-based clinic. But you do have some time before September. I would urge you at least to delay committing to the hypnosis for a while to let yourself percolate some doubts & mull them over a little more first.

11. Rest assured, I am working on that second opinion with my Pdoc.
>
> I wish you the best. I can empathize with a lot of what you're going through, and I want you to feel better and stronger and braver, too. Good luck.

12. I don't see the empathy, and if I did, maybe I could understand your position. I don't know if you are in therapy, what your issues are, etc., so it's hard to hear what you have to say.
That said, thank you for taking the time to answer.
antigua

 

apologies » Babblers » antigua

Posted by pseudoname on July 28, 2006, at 14:17:06

In reply to Re: Shame on the silent skeptics, posted by antigua on July 28, 2006, at 13:12:52

> Wow, that was quite a barrage

You're right, it was a barrage. I'm sorry about that. I hope it was civil, but there's a lot of space between that and contributing something supportive or helpful.

> I don't see the empathy

Yeah. There is empathy here with me, where I'm sitting, at least for what I thought I connected with in your post, but it doesn't come through much in what I wrote or how.

I want to say, though, that your response to my barrage is measured and civil and open. You have taken me seriously point by point, even though I came out of nowhere.

> it's hard to know if you are talking from experience or just on what you've read

I had two therapists suggest I have repressed memories of child sexual abuse, and I have had a flashback-like experience (shaking, sweating, racing pulse, etc) reading in a bookstore about an incident of CSA. Those things put me on a road to try recovering memories, and I made initial attempts in therapy and using the Bass/Davis book at home over 2 or 3 periods of a few weeks or months each in the mid-1990s.

So I do not have much experience with recovered memories or flashbacks and none with hypnosis. I am going by what I've read.

Thanks for helping me climb down. I did feel kinda seized by panic, which was not warranted. (I guess it almost never is, which should've been a cue to me.)

> > …the risk of false memories about people you still love.
>
> 4. Who said I still love this person?

Good point. I was extrapolating from reports of people who've gone into hypnosis and recovered abusive memories of people that they did currently love who were not previously remembered or suspected of any abuse. I should have simply mentioned such possible outcomes.

> > She should be afraid that something might come up that would be completely bogus.
>
> 6. Please don't insult my therapist

I could have constructed that better. I know how to suggest a concern about someone's practitioner while acknowledging the fact that the T can still be an important personal resource and a valued, competent professional.

> That said, thank you for taking the time to answer

Thank you for replying graciously and asking me questions. I have to go outside now, but I'll reply more later.

What *I* should've done is ask more questions first about your situation, as you have just done with me.

I should also apologize to the other Babblers for suggesting that any of them have something to be ashamed about.

 

Re: apologies » pseudoname

Posted by ClearSkies on July 28, 2006, at 16:27:50

In reply to apologies » Babblers » antigua, posted by pseudoname on July 28, 2006, at 14:17:06


> I should also apologize to the other Babblers for suggesting that any of them have something to be ashamed about.

Thanks for that. I don't think I could have been as polite as Antigua.

 

Re: apologies » ClearSkies

Posted by antigua on July 28, 2006, at 17:49:55

In reply to Re: apologies » pseudoname, posted by ClearSkies on July 28, 2006, at 16:27:50

Thank you ClearSkies. You and Daisy were the first friends I made here and--unfortunately for you!, you've been with me through a lot and know my story.
I appreciate your support.
antigua

 

Re: apologies ***Trigger** » pseudoname

Posted by antigua on July 28, 2006, at 17:59:18

In reply to apologies » Babblers » antigua, posted by pseudoname on July 28, 2006, at 14:17:06

I asked about the flashbacks because in my experience when I have one, I know it's real, I know it is something that has happened and in no way is it to be doubted. You sound like you got close to one so you know how frightening they can be.

My T never suggested that I had repressed childhood memories--she was very careful not to suggest it, although she told me that she had hints much earlier than I did. I realized there were some csa memories that I had that I hadn't ever realized as csa, because they were just part of my life, but once I spoke out I realized the full extent of what they were. As children oftentimes what goes on in our home is "normal" to us because it's all we know.

I really didn't start to open up until my father died (who was my abuser) and it has been a long haul ever since, and I'm still not there.

write whenever you feel like it,
antigua

 

Re: apologies » antigua

Posted by daisym on July 28, 2006, at 18:22:40

In reply to Re: apologies » ClearSkies, posted by antigua on July 28, 2006, at 17:49:55

I'm glad you said that because I hope you know that "we" would never sit back and "just" let you walk down a potentially harmful path without questioning why you were choosing it. I would want you to be honest with me as much as I hope to always be honest with you. And supportive. And never run out of lemon-aid.

I know how badly you want to break this open. And I trust that your therapist will walk with you as you find your way -- she has all these (14?) years, hasn't she? I think pseudoname has a very good point about catharsis though. I've written this a bunch of times, but don't we all wish it was the ABC Afterschool Special in which you get the "aha!" moment and then all is well and healed. Your struggles and my struggles and lots of others here show that this just isn't so. BUT, there is something genuinely good that happens when you do finally let some of it out, cry really hard or whisper a deep fear or dark secret. Trust grows when it is accepted and understood.

And I must say, your grace, as always, impresses me. I wanted to leap to your defense (mine too) but there is no need, is there? (((Antigua)))

 

Re: Shame on the silent skeptics » pseudoname

Posted by daisym on July 28, 2006, at 18:39:29

In reply to Shame on the silent skeptics » antigua, posted by pseudoname on July 28, 2006, at 11:12:21

>>>I am really sorry that other people on this board are not helping you consider other options. It is not fair to you for you to come away with the impression that hypnosis for recovered memory is in quality on the same level as other validated therapies.

<<<<Two things. Never assume that "other people on this board" are not helping. Many of us talk in "live" time, on email or whatever. I realize there is no way for you to know that, but that was a pretty scathing statement. Some of us have histories that go back years, so we are sometimes insensitive about filling in "newbies" and our posts might be unintentionally cryptic.

The other is this - the Anti-Recovered Memories movement has just as many "problems" as those working with recovered memories. The more we learn about the brain and the effects of trauma, the more surprised we are at the neuropathways and how we store things. I don't believe it is accurate to state that a single huge trauma cannot have an influence on a person's direction in life. People are not trees. Think about kids who've seen their parents killed, or the children who were in the NY daycares on 9-11 or rape victims or combat vets who have to kill. These single events can and do change a person forever, whether they are remembered in detail or not. I argue with some of my colleagues who state, "it isn't the trauma, it is how it is managed afterwards." I disagree. I think it is how it is managed afterwards AND the trauma itself. It is all very complicated. But an overwhelming event that makes a child split psychologically can be buried for a very long time yet still be putting pressure on the entire system.

We can (and probably should) argue theories for days. (I'd actually like that.) But the truth is, recovery from trauma, particularly csa, isn't a "one-size-fits-all" prescription. We all need very different things...and we all need each other.

I hope this was civil enough and you don't feel chastised. That wasn't my intent.

 

further explanation

Posted by pseudoname on July 28, 2006, at 18:44:31

In reply to Re: apologies » pseudoname, posted by ClearSkies on July 28, 2006, at 16:27:50

I don't know if I should take up any more time in Antigua's thread to talk about me, but maybe a little more explanation would help.

As I'm starting to unbend myself from the emotional pretzel-shape I was twisted into by depression for so many years, I'm finding that I'm not taking account of all the changes that are going on in me. This is very new territory for me.

Without the constant overwhelming depression, I've lost a little awareness of other people. One might expect the reverse, but as a depressed person, I could easily put myself mentally into the place of anyone who was suffering. I didn't accurately understand them, necessarily, but at least I was vividly aware that real human suffering might be going on in a given situation.

Now with my own depression gone, that sort of automatic empathy seems gone, too. I may have to make myself stop now and deliberately consider others' feelings until that (I hope) becomes my default response.

The fact that the thread topic is a "button" issue for me is not an excuse for my brusqueness or presumptions, but its buttonness was a factor. Without depression as a sort of overwhelming counterweight to everything else, I can sometimes give other feelings too much attention now. I think that the aversive feelings that come up when getting a "button pushed" scares me into thinking that the depression is coming back and it'll crush me again if I don't go all-out to, you know, defend my button. That's a terrible way to react, but I just wasn't really aware that it was going on for me. I'm sorry.

I was not empathetic or considerate or respectful enough even by my own standards, and I really hope that Antigua & others (even all other Babblers, whom I included in my subject line; sheesh!) won't have to waste too much of their own time and energy on my account.

I also want to apologize to Daisy, who was also barraged by implication. I feel especially bad about that, looking over the post again. Sorry.

 

How I should have acted to begin with » daisym

Posted by pseudoname on July 28, 2006, at 21:02:22

In reply to Re: Shame on the silent skeptics » pseudoname, posted by daisym on July 28, 2006, at 18:39:29

> but that was a pretty scathing statement.

Yeah, it was. It was uncalled for.

> Never assume that "other people on this board" are not helping.

My statement was overheated and unfairly rhetorical. I was reacting to the fact that no one had posted anything skeptical in the thread. I wish I had not personalized it and just posted something skeptical myself.

> Many of us talk in "live" time, on email or whatever. I realize there is no way for you to know that

I feel awkward saying this, but I am badhaircut. I am not new to Babble. I changed my name last fall for dumb reasons. I regret any feelings of deception or misuse that may have created, since deception was not my intent.

As you might (or not) recall, we've had civil and I thought good (helpful to me anyway) discussions about these issues in years past.

I've gotten off to such an poor, unproductive start in this thread, I almost feel I should sit it out now, but you & Antigua have thoughtfully engaged the issues I brought up, so…

> The other is this - the Anti-Recovered Memories movement has just as many "problems" as those working with recovered memories.

I'm not sure what you mean by the "Anti" movement's problems; though there are some various ones. I agree (despite my own tone earlier) that the Anti movement does seem peremptory and closed-minded. However, the activists there are mostly active in regard to recovered memory's legal status and the courts, aren't they? Their closed-mindedness doesn't bother me in regard to the courts, where the standards used with other branches of science would not *currently* qualify recovered memory as scientific evidence there (for example, the consensus opinion statements of professional societies).

There are ways in which recovered memory questions — even if not appropriate for a courtroom — do seem worth investigating; as you say, like with some brain research. Closed-mindedness there seems more of problem, even though the weight of evidence so far doesn't support it.

In therapy, the therapist and the client may both be satisfied of a memory's historic accuracy, and that belief may be important to them and the therapy process, but if they are not legally imposing it on others, then the political "Anti" activists are overstepping their bounds by interfering there. I assume they're motivated by a larger goals in regard to recovered memory and the courts.

But I disagree that the "problems" of the two camps are equivalent. I've read stories about the Anti movement's political shenanigans and scandals. But those are different sorts of problems entirely from the scientific evidence problems of recovered memory.

Opponents of recovered memory therapy do not have the problem of rejection or no-confidence statements by virtually all of the major relevant scientific and professional societies. They don't have the problem of a lack of scientific evidence currently available supporting their current specific assertions. Those are not "just as many problems" nor as severe.

I agree that as we learn more about the brain and collect more information about, for example, CSA victims, we may in fact discover that active repression does occur and can influence later behavior and that it can be reversed in therapy and that the results are beneficial. But for now it's a speculation and, as far as I understand, it goes against currently available evidence. So it might be true, and someone might want to do therapy work based on that possibility, but the basis for doing so would not be equivalent to that of any other mainstream therapy. On the other hand, it might accomplish more.

The problem I'm most concerned about is when such a tactic causes harm without benefit. False memories have been implanted, as even Bass & Davis acknowledge. Given that risk, and no means for assessing what the risk is, I don't know how a disinterested therapist could support it. A client may choose on her own to go that route anyway (I've done it and taken other treatment risks), but the therapist's requirement to do no harm would seem to preclude the therapist's participation. To me, it seems that way.

> I think it is how it is managed afterwards AND the trauma itself. It is all very complicated.

Yes, I agree. And we can throw in genetics, too. Events sure do impact different people very differently. My "tree" analogy was taken from "Robyn Dawes", who was talking about studies of later-life differences between people exposed to early-life trauma and those without trauma, which found statistically very little differences in the areas they measured. I'll concede that it's complicated and we will probably be surprised by further research. (But that surprise could also come to those who believe that recovered memories are real, couldn't it?)

> I hope this was civil enough and you don't feel chastised. That wasn't my intent.

You are civil and generous. Thank you for treating me with such respect even though I was so thoughtless before.

 

Re: How I should have acted to begin with » pseudoname

Posted by antigua on July 28, 2006, at 22:38:42

In reply to How I should have acted to begin with » daisym, posted by pseudoname on July 28, 2006, at 21:02:22


> In therapy, the therapist and the client may both be satisfied of a memory's historic accuracy, and that belief may be important to them and the therapy process, but if they are not legally imposing it on others, then the political "Anti" activists are overstepping their bounds by interfering there. I assume they're motivated by a larger goals in regard to recovered memory and the courts.
>
> But I disagree that the "problems" of the two camps are equivalent. I've read stories about the Anti movement's political shenanigans and scandals. But those are different sorts of problems entirely from the scientific evidence problems of recovered memory.

1. I'm not sure I agree. I don't think the problems I've read about are so different. The Anti-Movement was founded by a set of parents who were defending themselves against accusations from their daughter. Their underlying motive was clearly biased in an effort to dispute her claims and save their reputation. Denial is denial is denial; i see no difference.

> Opponents of recovered memory therapy do not have the problem of rejection or no-confidence statements by virtually all of the major relevant scientific and professional societies. They don't have the problem of a lack of scientific evidence currently available supporting their current specific assertions. Those are not "just as many problems" nor as severe.

2. This doesn't make sense to me. I would think you would be arguing the exact opposite.
>
> I agree that as we learn more about the brain and collect more information about, for example, CSA victims, we may in fact discover that active repression does occur and can influence later behavior

3. I think it has been proven, at least anecdotally, if not scientifically that active repression does occur. The standard I've followed is that the earlier, more severe and more often the abuse occurs, it is more likely that the memories are repressed. Throw in that some things may have happened pre-verbally and
you have a whole other issue to deal with, which I don't know how it would be possible to deal with "scientifically."

and that it can be reversed in therapy
4. I don't think it can ever be reversed; it's something to deal with and hopefully integrate into the self.

it goes against currently available evidence.
5. not according to what I've learned.

So it might be true, and someone might want to do therapy work based on that possibility, but the basis for doing so would not be equivalent to that of any other mainstream therapy. On the other hand, it might accomplish more.

6. Again, what do you define as "mainstream therapy"? We could be arguing apples and oranges without citing specifics.

> The problem I'm most concerned about is when such a tactic causes harm without benefit. False memories have been implanted, as even Bass & Davis acknowledge. Given that risk, and no means for assessing what the risk is, I don't know how a disinterested therapist could support it. A client may choose on her own to go that route anyway (I've done it and taken other treatment risks), but the therapist's requirement to do no harm would seem to preclude the therapist's participation. To me, it seems that way.

7. I certainly accept that false memories can be planted by therapists. I'm not arguing that at all. your Ts suggesting that you may have repressed memories made you seek out to see if it was true, and I could see how that could lead to false memories. My therapy has never worked that way; it has never been pushed on me. I have always lead my therapy.

> > I think it is how it is managed afterwards AND the trauma itself. It is all very complicated.
>
> Yes, I agree. And we can throw in genetics, too. Events sure do impact different people very differently. My "tree" analogy was taken from "Robyn Dawes", who was talking about studies of later-life differences between people exposed to early-life trauma and those without trauma, which found statistically very little differences in the areas they measured.

8. what areas did they measure? this is crucial information, especially if you're referring to a scientific study.

>> I'll concede that it's complicated and we will probably be surprised by further research. (But that surprise could also come to those who believe that recovered memories are real, couldn't it?)

9. I guess what sets my defenses off is that for years I denied anything happened to me, and once there was enough evidence that it did happen I still fought to denial. The denial can do great damage, to doubt oneself, and place oneself right back to no, it didn't happen to me. There are many parts to a memory--they can be very visceral and to discount those that are accurate does a great disservice to the efforts of those who are seeking to claw their way out of the effect csa has had on their lives.

Feel free everyone and all to respond. I'm more than open to discussion.
antigua

 

Re: How I should have acted to begin with

Posted by Daisym on July 29, 2006, at 0:55:02

In reply to Re: How I should have acted to begin with » pseudoname, posted by antigua on July 28, 2006, at 22:38:42

I think it is much easier to point to "lack of scientific information" to prove something, rather than disprove it. What I mean is, those who don't believe in recovered memories cross their arms and say, "prove it" and if you can't to their satisfaction, they can say, "see -- not reliable, no proof." But someone who has recovered memories can't exactly say, "NO, you prove that I don't..." (this is clear as mud, huh?) I guess it is the over generalization and zealot attitudes on both sides that I would quarrel with. All I can tell you is that as a professinal woman, with an MS, a reasonably dubious mind, a stable life and no drug or alcohol problems, recovering the memories I have, and experiencing the flash backs has been a mind blowing experience. I mean, I always "knew" but I didn't know the half of it. And once this started happening to me, believe me, I researched it. My therapist teases me about how much time I spend in the University library stacks. I tend to think about teething children and runny noses. Every mother in the world will tell you that children who are teething have runny noses. But it still hasn't been scientifically proven.

I'm interested in what you consider main stream therapy too. From my research, trauma work includes remembering, processing and working it through with a trusted "other." You begin to sort out what is true and what was embedded in you.

I have to tell you that while I am a great believer in CBT, I don't think it is typically effective with csa survivors. Parts of it are, but the overall experience lacks the trust and relationship rebuilding that is usually needed. I know that CBT has many studies (often paid for by insurance companies) that show efficacy for large numbers of therapy patients, but individual therapy is so much harder to scientifically measure and standardize. So the research is slower to come and less "impressive" in some ways. Why then do so many csa survivors talk about the healing they received from the relationship they had with their therapist...psychodynamic in nature?

In my fellowship program, we looked at PET scans of traumatized children and you could see the rebuilding and changes that occur when relational therapy and play therapy techniques were used. It is fascinating to see what a difference, at a brain stem level, a caring individual makes.


I'm glad you identified yourself, btw. And yes, we've had some interesting discussions in the past. I'm not saying that there haven't been cases of false recovered memories and bad therapy that encouraged this to happen. But I think any therapist who is intent on "do no harm" would know that abandoning someone who begins to talk about this stuff would be so harmful and retraumatizing. This isn't a place for amateurs, I think as a therapist you must be oh so careful not to lead, not to suggest and to titrate things so that the patient isn't overwhelmed and pushing too hard.

It's late and I'm not sure I'm making sense so I'll stop. I think my final thought is why would someone want memories like these? This has been the most painful thing I've ever done in my life.

 

Re: thanks (nm) » pseudoname

Posted by Dr. Bob on July 29, 2006, at 0:59:24

In reply to apologies » Babblers » antigua, posted by pseudoname on July 28, 2006, at 14:17:06

 

Re: further explanation » pseudoname

Posted by Dinah on July 29, 2006, at 10:12:10

In reply to further explanation, posted by pseudoname on July 28, 2006, at 18:44:31

I think that was very gracious of you, pseudoname, and I appreciate it.

 

And everyone else, as well

Posted by Dinah on July 29, 2006, at 10:16:16

In reply to Re: further explanation » pseudoname, posted by Dinah on July 29, 2006, at 10:12:10

So very nice to see measured responses.


This is the end of the thread.


Show another thread

URL of post in thread:


Psycho-Babble Psychology | Extras | FAQ


[dr. bob] Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD, bob@dr-bob.org

Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.