Repressed Memory Testimony Feuls Controversy Blogger: Being Sane Takes Too Much Work

Several people, mainly women, who recollect memories of abuse 10, 20, or 30 years after the abuse occurred have sued the perpetrators in court for damage to physical and psychological well-being.  Many have won.  One of the primary concerns of skeptics is that 'repressed memory testimony can be used in court to indict someone.  Overzealous therapists and willing victims led to any number of false allegations and the resulting damage to families can not be overstated.  Many assume the accused is guilty even with a hint of child abuse.  There have been instances where an adult child accuses parents of abuse that happened years before.  The parents consistently deny the accusation.  This leaves accused feeling victimized.  Eventually this can tear families apart.  Being able to testify against long-ago abusers has been known to aide in the recovery of many who have endured childhood sexual or physical abuse.  At the issue is how to prove whether memories of trauma can be repressed and the resurface later in life.  Considering the truth of a resurfaced memory is nearly impossible to prove with scientific evidence, this may be a situation where researchers have to rely on the word of practicing psychologists and therapists who have witnessed countless cases of repressed recall in action.  For those who experienced the abuse, being able to seek justice is essential to their ability to move on and recover.  Many experience years of psychological torment before remembering fully the abuse, and their supporters believe lawsuits should be an option. To them, it should not matter how long it takes for the memories to appear.