This argument is often less about the validity of recovered memories than it is about the motivations, and therefore credibility, of those who make accusations of abuse. Two studies show that for nearly all survivors bringing their case to court, regardless of their memory, money was not a motivating factor.

Child abuse is widely considered traumatic in nature, with long-lasting negative impacts on a significant number of survivors. Studies attempting to claim that childhood sexual abuse is a neutral or beneficial experience have been thoroughly debunked and seriously flawed.

Ordinary human forgetfulness is composed of numerous mechanisms and processes, and there are no easily identifiable concrete differences between completely unavailable memories and memories subject to mechanisms that make them difficult to recall. Case reports of continuously unavailable memories and intermittently available memories provide examples of completely unavailable memories.

Therapy does not necessarily make memories more or less accurate. A scientific paper on the accuracy of memories of abuse recovered in therapy and two notable case reports on the subject serve to refute this claim.

See also: “These cases are just like the daycare abuse cases.”

In actuality, many survivors were unable to remember specific traumatic events from their involvement in the holocaust. There are numerous examples of dissociation, amnesia, and recovered memories in holocaust survivors to refute this claim.

Recovered memories are prompted by a variety of settings, people, or events. A scientific study found that a large majority of recovered memories are recovered outside of therapy. Two studies found that when recovered in therapy, there was no evidence that memories were fostered by therapists.

See also: [RMT]

Accuracy and persistence are two different properties of memory. Statements such as “recovered memories are not accurate” conflate these two properties. A theoretical model of memory differentiates accuracy and continuity; two notable cases and a scientific study show examples of accurate recovered memories.

Recovered memories have been shown to be reliable as evidence under the Daubert criteria. Supportive examples include two robust reviews of scientific evidence and a court decision on the subject.

Recovered memories are not socially constructed phenomena. One case outside the US and four cases of recovered memory decades before the ‘moral hysteria’ occurred serve as examples to refute this claim.

Corroborated cases of ‘massive repression’ have been documented. Four corroborated case examples, ranging from three to twelve years of repressed and subsequently recovered memories, serve to refute this claim.

See also: “Nobody forgot the holocaust.”

There is a large body of research supporting the phenomena of recovered memory. Notable examples of scientific evidence involve two robust studies on recovered memories in the general population and scholarship that uses Betrayal Trauma Theory.

See also: [Supportive Science]

This site exists to demonstrate that people can accurately recover memories. There is very clear documented evidence – both case reports and scientific studies – supporting the phenomenon of recovered memory.

Daycare cases generally involve children with continuous memories of abuse, who did not experience repression and subsequent memory recovery. In terms of the type of memory, daycare cases are unrelated to instances of recovered memories in adults.

While trauma is memorable for many people, scientific evidence shows that people react differently to trauma. A significant minority may find trauma difficult to remember or may have delayed recall of traumatic events.

See also: “Nobody forgot the holocaust.”

Arguments associating recovered memories with bizarre claims of alien abduction or widespread satanic cult activity do not invalidate the phenomenon of recovered memory. Furthermore, two studies show that the presence of fantastical or impossible elements in children’s accusations of abuse does not affect the accuracy of those accusations.

People who retract recovered memories of childhood sexual abuse do not invalidate corroborated cases and supportive scientific evidence of recovered memories. Moreover, Child Abuse Accomodation Syndrome describes how and why children may be pressured to retract their accusations.

See also: [Retractors]