Tagged: DID

Dispelling Myths About Dissociative Identity Disorder Being “Misunderstood”

JANUS2

*Updated

I’ve been noticing an aggressive internet propaganda campaign about Dissociative Identity Disorder, apparently being waged by certain members of  International Society for the Study of Trauma and Dissociation (ISSTD), using mental health journalists – who happen not to be mental health professionals themselves – as ‘fronts’.  Specifically, there are several quasi-interviews with Bethany Brand PhD – a member of the ISSTD Journal of Trauma and Dissociation Editorial Board – purporting to be concerned with “dispelling myths about Dissociative Identity Disorder”.

One example of this campaign can be found on the PsychCentral website. Titled  “Dispelling Myths about Dissociative Identity Disorder” and written by Margarita Tartakovsky, M.S., it is located here:

http://psychcentral.com/lib/dispelling-myths-about-dissociative-identity-disorder/0009785

This article by Margarita Tartakovsky portrays itself to be a matter of public health education, intended to ‘correct’ myths and misunderstandings about DID that “the public” is supposedly confused by;

“(DID), known previously as multiple personality disorder, is not a real disorder. At least, that’s what you might’ve heard in the media, and even from some mental health professionals. DID is arguably one of the most misunderstood and controversial diagnoses in the current Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM). But it is a real and debilitating disorder that makes it difficult for people to function”.

Tartakovsky & Brand begin their myth and misunderstanding expose with an obtuse Strawman;

“Why the controversy? According to Bethany Brand, Ph.D, a professor of psychology at Towson University and an expert in treating and researching dissociative disorders, there are several reasons. DID is associated with early severe trauma, such as abuse and neglect. This raises the concern over false memories. Some people worry that clients may “remember” abuse that didn’t actually happen and innocent people may get blamed for abuse. (“Most people with DID don’t forget all their abuse or trauma,” Brand said; “sufferers may forget episodes or aspects of some of their trauma,” but it’s “fairly rare not to remember any trauma at all and suddenly recover memories of chronic childhood abuse.”) It also “pries into families’ privacy,” and families may be reluctant to reveal information that might put them in a negative light”.

Innocent persons being falsely accused of sex abuse crimes against children, based on false memories, is indeed a legitimate concern in our society. However, Tartakovsky and Brand are contending that DID is a controversial diagnosis/ research subject/ treatment specialization, because DID is alleged to arise out of the trauma of childhood abuse & neglect, and “families” [readers are intended to infer “abuse perpetrating family members”] don’t want information about abuse & neglect to be revealed.

The strawman here is an insinuation that the only reason for DID to be “controversial”, is that child abusers don’t want to get exposed by adult survivors of their abuse.  Extend the insinuation…DID skeptics must be child abusers! The ongoing recourse to this type of slanderous crapola by DID therapists, researchers and ‘advocates’ only demonstrates that they possess no valid evidence for the legitimacy of DID and must resort to slanderous insinuations against those who expose the truth about it.

Continue reading

Ritual Abuse Therapists & Advocates State That Victim Claimants Have False Memories

I’m tired of encountering this type of hypocritical bs, on various blogs and websites;

“There is no medically, or clinically, recognised diagnosis of ‘False Memory Syndrome’. The concept was invented in the USA by the False Memory Syndrome Foundation (FMSF), a group of ‘accused parents’ – mainly fathers – whose adult daughters had confronted them about sexual abuse in childhood. Having created this fictional concept of ‘false memory’ to defend themselves against these allegations, this group then went on to sell it to the media”. [CWASU false memory page]

…so I’m going to debunk it.

[I don’t belong to or work for FMSF, although I know people who do, so I won’t be discussing that organization or the meaning & validity of the term “False Memory Syndrome” from their perspective. This discussion will be about the inherent hypocrisy of Ritual Abuse therapists, advocates, and victim claimants, denouncing the idea that there might be false memories in RA-Mind Control victim narratives. It is my personal perspective on the subject]

Ritual Abuse therapists, advocates and victim claimants ‘invented’ the idea that false memories had been “implanted” into victimization narratives, many years before FMSF was founded in 1992.

They have all professed to believe in implanted false memories, since at least 1988, and continue to publicly promote belief that RA-Mind Control victim’s recollection of their abusers and abuse experiences may be tainted with implanted false memories, to this very day.

Ritual Abuse therapists, advocates and victim claimants invented the idea of implanted false memories, to explain away all of the demonstrable falsehoods uncovered in virtually every RA-MC victim narrative.  Once RA-MC therapists and their victim claimants started parading their fantasies on major media, skeptics started investigating the validity of their statements and – surprise, surprise! – many of the alleged people, places and events in those statements turned out to be imaginary. People that RA-MC ‘victims’ claimed to have murdered or to have seen the murder of, were alive & well!  Women who claimed to have bred dozens of sacrificial babies for satanic slaughter turned out to be virgins! Alleged secret satanic temples turned out to be never-developed empty fields, and so on & on. To explain all of these lies, therapists and victim claimants invented the idea of Satanic-Mind Control cults deliberately implanted misleading, false memories, in their victims minds. Here’s a typical explication of this ‘theory’ ;

Memories of Satanic ritual abuse may be at least partially “screen memories” intentionally created by others. Some therapists and attorneys point to mind-control projects performed by the CIA and other groups in the 1950s and 60s. MK-ULTRA and Bluebird were two of the best known projects. Documents obtained by Alan Shefflin and others under the freedom-of-information act confirm that the U.S. government put some effort into creating “Manchurian candidates” who would perform dangerous missions for the U.S. government after they had been programmed through hypnosis and mind control. It is hypothesized that stories of Satanic rituals were implanted as screen memories in case these subjects began to remember being programmed. The idea behind this theory is that the ritual abuse memories are so far-fetched that nobody would believe them. They may have been created using staged rituals, Hollywood makeup, and props in order to plant a memory that would “emerge” later“.

It is very common to find some version of this false “screen” memory theory, on the very same blogs & websites where you find angry & slanderous denounciation of FMSF and False Memory Syndrome! The very same Ritual Abuse therapists, advocates and victim claimants promoting the idea that RA-Mind Control abusers routinely implant false memories in the minds of their victims, expressing outrage over any suggestion that false memories related to their RA-Mind Control victim narrative might have arisen, even accidentally, through their therapy. “How dare anyone suggest therapy-implanted false memories – they must be child abusers or apologists for child abusers, trying to discredit victim’s memories…trying to cast doubt on the reality of child sex abuse altogether!”

Ritual Abuse therapists, advocates and victim claimants don’t reject the concept of false memories in victimization narratives – in fact, they embrace it and promote it! – so long as they can find some way to make that concept support the RA-MC mythology they are evangelizing. Which is fine with me, until they start simultaneously accusing other people of having invented the concept of False Memories (and somehow, specifically to facilitate child abuse), and then denouncing that concept – the same concept that they profess to believe in when it serves their purposes – as a fiction!

Why would anyone believe anything that such self-serving hypocrites have to say, on any subject?