When adult offspring started filing lawsuits based solely on claims of recovered repressed memories of childhood sexual abuse, they raised many legal questions in the courts, such as those related to the statutes of limitations and expert testimony. Later, some of these same people came to the opinion that their previous memories were false and were the result of a disastrous therapeutic program. They then began to file lawsuits against their therapists. In addition, some of the parents who had been accused filed third party lawsuits against their children's therapists. All of these lawsuits rest on the scientific understanding of repressed memories. Indeed, recovered-memory lawsuits reflect the broad problem of the relationship between the law and science. The papers and decisions in this section were selected to provide an introduction to some of the key issues.
Lipton, A. (1999). Recovered Memory in the Courts (Overview of period 1993-1997)Piper, A., Pope, H.G., Borowiecki, J.J. (2002, Summer). Custer's Last Stand: Brown, Scheflin, and Whitfield's Latest Attempt to Salvage "Dissociative Amnesia." The Journal of Psychiatry & Law 28, 149-213. (Includes a list of relevant appellate decisions, 1995-2000).
Studies of Psychological Symptoms in Trauma Survivors, from Pope, H.G., Oliva, P.S. & Hudson, J.I. (2002). Scientific Status of Research on Repressed Memories. In D.L. Faigman, D.H.Kaye, M.J. Saks & J. Sanders (Eds.) Modern Scientific Evidence. St. Paul, MN: West Group.
Some Lower Court Decisions in Frye/Daubert Hearings
New Hampshire v. Hungerford (1995)(The 1995 Daubert hearing in Hungerford was upheld by the New Hampshire Supreme Court in July, 1997.)
Rhode Island v. Quattrocchi (1999)
New Hampshire v. Bourgelais (2005)
Retractor Cases (under development)
Federal Criminal Trial against Therapists and Texas Hospital [United States v. Peterson et al., 1998 (mistrial)]