Spiegel D, Scheflin A W
Stanford University School of Medicine.
Int J Clin Exp Hypn. 1994 Oct;42(4):411-32. doi: 10.1080/00207149408409368.
During the last decade, clinicians, courts, and researchers have been faced with exceedingly difficult questions involving the crossroads where memory, traumatic memory, dissociation, repression, childhood sexual abuse, and suggestion all meet. In one criminal case, repressed memories served as the basis for a conviction of murder. In approximately 50 civil cases, courts have ruled on the issue of whether repressed memory for childhood sexual abuse may form the basis of a suit against the alleged perpetrators. Rulings that have upheld such use underscore the importance of the reliability of memory retrieval techniques. Hypnosis and other methodologies employed in psychotherapy may be beneficial in working through memories of trauma, but they may also distort memories or alter a subject's evaluation of their veracity. Because of the reconstructive nature of memory, caution must be taken to treat each case on its own merits and avoid global statements essentially proclaiming either that repressed memory is always right or that it is always wrong.
在过去十年中,临床医生、法庭和研究人员一直面临着极其棘手的问题,这些问题涉及记忆、创伤性记忆、解离、压抑、童年性虐待和暗示的交叉点。在一个刑事案件中,被压抑的记忆成为谋杀定罪的依据。在大约50起民事案件中,法庭就童年性虐待的被压抑记忆是否可构成对被指控犯罪者提起诉讼的依据这一问题做出了裁决。支持这种用法的裁决强调了记忆检索技术可靠性的重要性。心理治疗中使用的催眠和其他方法在处理创伤记忆时可能有益,但它们也可能扭曲记忆或改变受试者对其真实性的评估。由于记忆的重构性,必须谨慎对待每个案例,根据其自身情况进行处理,避免做出基本上宣称被压抑记忆总是正确或总是错误的一概而论的表述。