Controversial Memories // Documentary Explores False Accusations
04/04/95
CHICAGO SUN-TIMES

Frontline:
 Divided Memories
 (STAR) (STAR) (STAR)  1/2
  WTTW-Channel 11.
 Part 1: 9 to 11 tonight.
 Part 2: 9 to 11 p.m. April 11.

 Before 1993, the concept of "recovered memories" meant very little
to many Chicagoans, unless they were devoted talk show or
movie-of-the-week viewers. But in that year, Steven Cook accused
Joseph Cardinal Bernardin of sexually abusing him almost 20 years
earlier, claiming that he had remembered the incident only recently.
It wasn't until many painful months later that the young man admitted
that the incidents he had "remembered" during hypnosis had never
really happened.
      The cardinal was vindicated, but the concept of recovered or
repressed memories - championed by some mental health professionals
and scorned by others - was more controversial than ever. Detractors
said the case proved that recovered memories were false. Supporters
argued that one instance of false accusation proved nothing about the
stories of other victims.
      In a fascinating two-part documentary, "Frontline" producer
Ofra Bikel examines the raging battle over whether memories of
traumatic childhood abuse can be buried for years and then
"recovered" in adulthood. But the programs, airing from 9 to 11
tonight and continuing from 9 to 11 p.m. next Tuesday, also delve
into the history of psychoanalysis, the politics of gender, the power
of talk shows and best sellers, the cult of addiction and the
symbolic meaning of sexual abuse in our culture.
     If there is any weakness in this far-reaching, intelligent set
of films, it is that Bikel forsakes any discussion of memory in
neurological or empirical terms, instead favoring the passionate
theorizing of therapists, authors and psychoanalysts on both sides of
the issue.
     Bikel is no stranger to such territory. In two groundbreaking
films, "Innocence Lost" and "Innocence Lost: The Verdict," Bikel
examined the group dynamics of false accusation in Edenton, N.C.,
where allegations of abuse at a day-care center mushroomed into a
virtual witch hunt that destroyed lives, careers and the social
fabric of a small town.
     In "Divided Memories," Bikel uses the compelling testimony of
adult children, parents and therapists to draw the boundaries of the
debate. Bikel, who clearly believes that the phenomenon of repressed
memory is suspect, presents several cases in which the "victims" have
imagined or invented outrageous claims of childhood abuse. In Part
2, for example, a young woman named Maura describes how a therapist
insisted she accuse her father of a rape that never really happened.
She also talks about a best seller that made it very easy to
attribute all of her problems - emotional and otherwise - to sexual
abuse.
     "In the back of the book that I read there was a list of
symptoms, and it was like a check mark," says Maura. "I think I
checked off almost every single one of those. I said, `Bingo! This
is sexual abuse.' "
     But Bikel also presents at least one case that seems to prove
that repressed memory is indeed possible. In that instance, a mother
knew her daughter was sexually abused but never discussed the
incident with the little girl. The girl grew into a troubled young
woman but did not remember the incest until her mother told her about
it. At that point, the memories came rushing back.
     "It just all fit together," she says. "I immediately could
remember what she was telling me. It was just a wave of memories."
     While Bikel digs up many instances of psychological quackery and
presents a strong case that bad therapists and overeager authors have
turned false accusation into a thriving industry, she does not prove
that long-repressed memories are always false. Actually, the very
fact that memories can be "implanted" by a therapist suggests that
memmory is a mysterious, malleable thing, which makes it easy to
believe that childhood trauma could easily be repressed for years.
But the bottom line, as suggested by one doctor, is probably that
repressed memories should not be trusted if there is no objective
information to support the allegation.
     Says Dr. Elizabeth Loftus: "There's no way for even the most
sophisticated therapist, clairvoyant, anyone to tell the difference
between a memory that is real and a memory that is a product of
suggestion unless you've got some corroboration."

