Repressed memories of abuse being used as evidence in court cases (for a debate of mine)

[Meian]

As title says, there is a debate for my Abnormal Psychology class towards "Repressed memories of abuse should be used as evidence in court cases."

Our side is "Pro" desire to let such repressed memories be used. But, giving the nature of the type of topic this is, I am a bit of a loss on how to research this specifically. Seeing as how in the past I saw BG help others with topics so I am hoping for some insight and possible resources I can use to find information regarding this topic.

[Kerberoz]

watch the Bullshit! episode on hypnosis

[Alleya]

I don't know why your professor would want you to argue the "pros" of it, since there really are none. Still, you could try to find some research about it in academic databases like psycarticles or OVID.

[mootsfox]

You mean coached memories?

[Moridam]

memory recovery therapies have been pretty thoroughly discredited, i'm at a loss as to why your professor is trying to make you argue for it. i cant imagine you're going to find much empirical support for that position, maybe you're supposed to argue emotionally? i dunno.

[Khamsin]

You mean coached memories?

I think he means accurate memories untainted by the psychologist, that the patient wouldn't otherwise have remembered without therapy.

Like:

"You are ten years old, what do you see?"

"I'm with my father."

"Is he beating you?"

"Yes..."

"With his belt?"

"No.. at scrabble."

"I meant, did he physically abuse you?"

"No, he would never do that."

"Did he touch you?"

"He always picked me up and patted me on the back."

"Inappropriately?"

"No"

"Ok, wake up."

"Thanks doc, I remember clearly now... he was a good man that always treated me well and loved me!"

[Enkidu]

Personally I would start with talking about how children repress traumatic events that happen when they're young, there should be some sort of psychological proof you can call up here. From there I'd go to an argument that focuses on using repressed memories to corroborate other evidence such as strange injuries when they were a child or something like that. Don't try to say the memory itself should be used as evidence as anyone can quickly shoot that down.

So you take a strong argument: "strange injuries as a child" and couple it with a very weak argument: "repressed memories of the events" and you're set with a good argument for a debate. When the anti-side shoots back with real evidence that repressed memories are nearly always coached, you simply shoot back with "but with other evidence such as strange injuries, witness testimonies, <whatever else you can think up> the repressed memories could be instrumental in determining a verdict".

[Khamsin]

On a more serious note, I think it'd be acceptable if there was a videotape of the session to prove the psychologist didn't pose leading questions. If the memory surfaced without any leading or biased questions that could possible suggest or plant the memory, then it should be legit.

[Moridam]

you're still dealing with a reactive environment though, assuming the client understands the purpose of the therapy. simply knowing that there is an attempt to recover memories could skew their responses, with or without leading questions. certainly, the absence of leading questions or unintentional cues strengthens validity, but it seems to me the chance of a viable alternate explanation for the results is going to be so high, you're probably not going to get anything useful out of it in many cases.