Posted by tabitha on June 26, 2004, at 23:37:07
In reply to Re: False Memory Syndrome vs. Lying Perpetrator Syndro, posted by fires on June 26, 2004, at 22:53:41
> He assured the audience that the quake "victims" would not be forgetting the quake. Why should it be different for other traumas?
>I can see some differences. For one, being a victim of an earthquake, while no doubt traumatic, doesn't have the same elements of shame, betrayal, and utter horror that could accompany childhood sexual abuse by a trusted adult. There's also no stigma attached to being an earthquake victim. Those folks probably felt pretty sure they'd be able to tell their tales, and process them, without worrying about being punished or disbelieved. They'd probably even get a positive response-- have a good story to tell and so forth. Similarly for combat trauma victims-- there must be so much more shame and horror associated with those memories than those of being in an earthquake. I am not an expert on brain functioning-- as I don't think anyone here is-- but it seems feasible to me that some types of trauma might be processed differently than other types, or that some individuals might have different responses.
And don't many victims of other traumas such as auto accidents or shootings say that they don't recall the incident itself? Remember the story of the 'central park jogger', who was a victim of a horrific assault and rape? She has made a good recovery from her injuries, but still has no memory of the assault.
I don't think you have to look too hard to find documented cases of lost or incomplete memory of trauma. Just because *some* trauma victims have complete memories, doesn't mean *all* of them do.
poster:tabitha
thread:359573
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/psycho/20040624/msgs/360856.html