The False Memory Syndrome Foundation is officially dissolved tomorrow. It was launched 27 years ago, claiming that adults disclosing child sexual abuse were suffering from a “syndrome” of vivid false memories of abuse.
No such “syndrome” exists – it is, ironically enough, a false syndrome. The organization arose to contest law reform in the United States that expanded opportunities for sexual abuse survivors to pursue civil or criminal charges, and then quickly spread to other countries.
Much of the intellectual heft of the “false memory syndrome” movement came from FMSF-aligned academics and lawyers who were paid to defend men accused of CSA in court. The FMSF played a central role in matching accused abusers with defence lawyers and expert witnesses.
This obvious conflict of interest went largely unchallenged by journalists at the time. The FMSF catalyzed a 180 degree turn in global media coverage of CSA so that, by the mid-1990s, news stories about CSA focused predominantly on the threat of false allegations.
If you are interested, @jennykitzinger published a fantastic book in 2004 examining media sympathy and journalistic advocacy for the “false memory” movement throughout the 1990s. plutobooks.com/9781783715633/…
Almost every CSA survivor that I’ve ever interviewed has discussed the destructive impact of widespread media coverage of “false memories” on their lives.
The notion that CSA memories are particularly untrustworthy has become a widespread “common sense” that destabilizes police investigations and prosecutions, and obstructs access to healthcare and social supports.
Once it was successfully mobilised against trauma survivors, the notion of "false memories" has been used to undermine other truth claims by vulnerable groups, including survivors of the Stolen Generations and ethnic cleansing.
The field of trauma therapy is only now emerging from the culture of fear and silence engendered by the FMSF and their journalist and academic champions.
By all means, trauma practice should be scrutinized and held to the highest standards. But that scrutiny should also be extended to lobby groups of people accused of abusing children, and lawyers and academics earning hundreds of thousands of dollars defending them in court.
The FMSF closes with a whimper rather than a bang. They have been inactive for many years, with almost half of their advisory board deceased, and many of those still alive in their 80s and 90s.
But the legacy of their lies and distortions remain, alongside unanswered questions about media ethics and academic accountability.
