Recovering suppressed memories has been discredited as a therapy, but it could rear its ugly head again because of recent abuse scandals

Memories aren’t made of this (Image: Petrified Collection/Getty)

AS THE scale of historical sexual abuse perpetrated by British celebrities and politicians becomes clearer, another scandal may be brewing. Recovered-memory therapy – claimed to be able to draw out suppressed memories of childhood trauma – is in danger of rearing its ugly head and undoing much of the progress that has been made towards transparency and closure (see “Why resurgence of therapy that unearths ‘lost’ memories is risky“).

“Recovery of suppressed memories has been almost completely discredited as a therapeutic tool”


There is no specific allegation that any new claim of abuse has been precipitated by memories regained as a result of this therapy. But memory researchers are concerned. A surprising number of practitioners in the UK still use recovered-memory therapy, and as more people come forward with claims of historical abuse, there is a danger that people will become victims of a different kind.

That this is even a possibility is scandalous. Even in its heyday a few decades ago, recovered-memory therapy was built on shaky scientific ground. It has now been almost completely discredited as a therapeutic tool.

Much of the blame has to be laid at the door of psychotherapy, a broad term for a variety of techniques for resolving personal and psychological problems. Many of these techniques are evidence-based. Many others are not; recovered memories are among the least well supported.

Scientists in the field rightly point to the “satanic panic” of the 1980s and 1990s as a warning. Dozens of children made allegations of satanic abuse, often under pressure by well-meaning social workers and therapists. Some cases were also “revealed” by recovered-memory therapy. The whole thing turned out to be a collective delusion.

Part of the problem is regulation. Rules vary between countries, but in the UK, psychotherapy is regulated quite loosely. The government did consider mandatory registration for practitioners, but in 2012 decided to let the profession regulate itself. Voluntary regulation is better than none, but when people are allowed to mark their own homework it rarely leads to the most rigorous regime.

One result is a competitive psychotherapy market, where consumers have a choice of therapies as if choosing between brands of soap. Some may welcome such a choice, but free-market solutions only work when consumers have good information about the available options – something that vulnerable and desperate people might not seek out or receive.

This is not to say that all recovered memories are false. Most experts think they can be true. But placing faith in them is dangerous. Certainly they need to be corroborated by independent evidence. And the nature of how they emerged is crucial; any memory that has to be drawn out by a therapist must be regarded as suspect. We need to know more about the circumstances under which memories are suppressed and recovered, and their reliability. Without this, there is an ever-present danger of descending back into voodoo.

There is no doubt that many recent revelations of historical sexual abuse are rooted in reality. Those who went through it deserve recognition, compensation and a chance to rebuild their lives. But if a discredited therapy is allowed to sneak in through the back door and threaten a repeat of previous scandals, there is a danger that genuine victims’ stories will be tainted by doubt. That cannot be allowed to happen.

This article appeared in print under the headline “Bad memories”