_________________________________________________________________________________
http://web.archive.org/web/20001217093400/http:/www.report.ca/CLASSICS/fathers.html
_________________________________________________________________________________
In 1992, at the beginning of the fathers' rights movement, the Report Newsmagazine uncovered the fact that half the allegations of sexual abuse in the province of Alberta were false. What was causing this sudden surge in bogus accusations? Reporter Kim Hazelwood discovered that some women were using the charge to tip the balance in acrimonious custody battles. We were well ahead of the rest of the media on this one, who took a few years either to catch on or develop the stomach to tell the truth. --The main story is followed by a sidebar on false memory syndrome.
The fathers fight back
Of the hundreds of Albertans falsely accused each year of child sex abuse, 21 have demanded a probe of why Social Services was so determined to find them guilty
by Kim Hazelwood
The horrific phenomenon of child abuse, especially sexual abuse, has begun coming out into the open in the past 20 years, with a staggering increase in the number of cases being reported to child welfare authorities. However, an equally horrific travesty is following out of the closet. Alberta Social Services reports that as many as half of the cases of reported sexual abuse are false accusations, often made in connection with child custody and access disputes.
The flurry of interviews, medical examinations, criminal charges, and restraining orders that typically follows each accusation can destroy an innocent parent’s life. Twenty-one Edmonton parents accused of sexual abuse say the system is unnecessarily brutal because child care workers lack adequate training and enter investigations with the bias that the accused must be guilty or the accusations would never have been made. The parents' group sent a letter two weeks ago to Alberta Social Services Minister John Oldring demanding a public inquiry into the way his department investigates sexual abuse allegations.
Greg (not his real name) is a father in the new parent group. He had been married 17 years when his wife left home. Greg was granted interim custody of his 15-year-old son and 11-year-old developmentally handicapped daughter. His wife, who was undergoing psychiatric care, had visiting rights, and she took the daughter every Wednesday and every second weekend. The son refused to see his mother. On the day of one visit, Greg’s wife failed to return their daughter, and Greg began frantically calling to find out what was going on. At 1 a.m., the police arrived at his doorstep and charged him with sexually touching his daughter. They wouldn’t tell him the specifics of what had been alleged.
Greg was detained in the Edmonton Remand Centre and denied bail for one week. During this time, he says, a social worker visited him and urged him to sign a consent form to give custody of their daughter to his wife. “She told me that she believed I was guilty and it would be better for everyone involved if I just admitted it and got into therapy,” he recounts. “She got irate when I refused.” Greg was moved to the university hospital following a basketball incident in the Remand Centre which left his leg broken in three places. Later that week, police arrested his wife and charged her with arson and two weapons charges after she set fire to the family house and approached Greg’s hospital room with a knife concealed in a towel. She pleaded guilty to the more serious of the weapons offences and was given two years’ probation.
Greg was released on bail, and several months later his criminal charges were stayed (although not dropped) for lack of evidence. A week after that he was granted custody of his daughter, who had been staying temporarily with a relative.
He was one of the fortunate ones. Most of the parents in the group have only supervised access to their children. “No one [in authority] wants to take the chance of saying the guy is completely innocent, because if something ever happened, they’d be morally responsible. There’s always that uncertainty, always that fear,” says Greg. “I spent $10,000 fighting the civil battle and another $4,000 on the criminal fight,” he says. “I’m left with a permanent disability in my leg, and a permanently scarred reputation. If I ever wanted to take in foster kids, work at a day care, coach minor league ball or whatever, people are going to be afraid. It could happen to anyone, and you’ll never ever really be exonerated.”
It could happen to anyone—an anonymous phone call to Social Services could set the process in motion, and childcare workers are required to investigate every report, for the safety of the children. Thomas, another father who was falsely accused of abuse, says the members of his group recognize that the investigations are necessary. “We realize that sexual abuse happens. We’re willing to go through the investigations, which are hell, for the sake of those other kids who really are abused. But what really is unfair is that we are subject to incompetent investigators with unjust biases.”
Thomas also points out that accusations made during the vitriolic heat of a custody battle are highly suspect, and should be regarded with a measure of scepticism. “Since false accusers are safe from prosecution, and an accusation almost always results in the loss of access or supervised access at best for the accused, the sex abuse charge is the most potent weapon in a custody battle.”
In their letter to John Oldring, the parent group claims that Social Services is guilty of subjecting innocent parents and children to abuse through the manner in which false accusations have been investigated. The letter alleges that the department’s “abuses of power and abdication of responsibility” include the following:
- Social workers lack adequate training and use flawed investigative techniques (e.g., leading questions).
- They seek, often relentlessly, to prove the
accusation true rather than objectively seek facts which could reveal
that it is or it isn’t.
- The accused are not allowed to respond or offer
information, or even to know the details of the accusation, while social
workers and therapists employed by Social Services supply confidential
information to the accuser only.
- Some agencies act as both investigators and
therapists, and are eager to validate sexual abuse so they can access
government funding for therapy.
- No appeal process or reasonable safeguards for the accused are available.
- False accusers are not held accountable for the harm they inflict on the accused or the child.
This isn’t the first time that problems with the giant sex abuse system have arisen. Nearly two years ago, the Psychologists Association of Alberta (PAA) initiated investigations into the alleged unprofessional conduct of three psychologists from the now non-operational Group 5 clinic, a government-funded sex abuse assessment and therapy unit. The review was triggered by complaints from falsely accused fathers and scathing criticism from Queen’s Bench Justice Marguerite Trussler, who described the group’s therapy techniques as “almost a brainwashing procedure.” PAA registrar Dr. Sandra Wolffe says that the hearing has been continuously delayed by court battles. The three psychologists made an application to Court of Queen’s Bench challenging the PAA’s right to investigate them. While the right to continue the review was upheld, an appeal is now in progress.
Mr. Oldring was not available for comment last week, according to his secretary. His communications officer, Bob Scott, admits that about half of the sex abuse accusations the department investigates are false; oddly, he adds that the department doesn’t keep a separate count of sex abuse allegations as distinct from physical abuse and neglect, and therefore doesn’t know how many sex abuse complaints there are. Mr. Scott comments that it is a tragedy, but not the fault of department that “children are being used as pawns in custody cases at a time when they’re already traumatized.”
He emphasizes that Social Services must investigate every allegation to ensure children’s safety. He suggests that if the parents’ group has a problem, they should take their concerns to the provincial ombudsman or the provincial children’s advocate, not the Social Services Department. He adds that if there are only 21 unhappy parents out of the thousands that have been investigated each year, then, “generally the system works very well. Children are being protected.”
Greg and Thomas vehemently disagree. “How many parents have to come forward and say that their lives have been ruined, financially and emotionally, before it’s regarded as a legitimate problem?” demands Thomas. He points out that children who are coaxed and coerced by parents, therapists and investigators to make false accusations which they know to be vicious lies are certainly not being protected. The parents’ group also rejects the recommendation that the ombudsman or children’s advocate should investigate the department. “Everyone is scared to death on this issue, and they’re all passing it off. They know that if some of this stuff is uncovered in an investigation, they’re opening themselves up to mega-lawsuits.”
Harley Johnson, the province’s ombudsman, says he has looked at the request for a review, but has not found sufficient grounds to launch an investigation of the system at this time. He is, however, willing to investigate individual cases. Four of the cases of members of the parents’ group are currently before him for review.
Bernd Walter, Alberta children’s advocate, is currently conducting a review of the child welfare system. Sparked by the death of a foster child last fall, the broad review of the system will be delivered to Minister Oldring late this year or early next. “Certainly the issue of investigative practices is well within the scope of this review,” says Mr. Walter. He welcomes public submissions on the matter.
Greg and Thomas say it isn’t enough to bury the issue in a broad review on the child welfare system. “We need an independent review that concentrates solely on this problem, conducted by someone not connected with Social Services so it can be completely free of biases,” says Greg.
The Alberta Association for Social Workers agrees with the parent group’s contention that social workers in Alberta are not sufficiently trained. President Margot Herbert, who has 40 years’ experience in the field and teaches in the University of Calgary’s faculty of social work, insists that a Bachelor of Social Work degree and several years’ experience in Child Welfare should be minimum requirements for frontline investigators. She also stresses the importance of expert and constantly available consultation with very mature and experienced childcare workers.
Ms. Herbert, however, is critical of the current attack on social workers. “It is unfair for people to feel hostile towards child protection workers for doing their investigations. It’s a very sensitive area, and there will be times when an error is going to be made. It’s a question of how far society is willing to go to protect children,” she explains. She denies there is a presumption of guilt when investigators go into cases. “That has not been my perception. I would be very concerned if that were the case,” she says.
Dr. Brian Hindmarch, an Edmonton psychologist who has been doing custody assessments since 1985, says that it is the case: many investigators and therapists do presume that accused parents are guilty. “The alleged perpetrator is never consulted. If you want to come up with a valid determination of the likelihood of abuse, you have to interview all the players. Also, the people who are investigating need to be cognizant of the body of literature documenting the phenomenon of false accusations. Right now, they go in with a view toward proving the allegation, which greatly increases the likelihood that ‘proof’ will be found,” says Dr. Hindmarch. He also points out that it is wrong when the same therapist performs assessments and then secures a contract for the prescribed therapy. “I feel like a broken record,” says Dr. Hindmarch, “I’ve been saying for years that these things are a problem. Now it is finally getting the attention it deserves.”
Marie Laing, NDP spokesman for family issues, also supports a review of Social Services investigations, but for the opposite reason. “What we have are investigators with a political agenda. They believe that very little abuse happens, and there is a general bias against women and children.” Ms. Laing, former chairman of Group 5’s board of directors, is alarmed that Social Services claims that half the cases are false. “In reality, 90% to 95% are real victims. We need trained investigators that believe the children,” says she.
MLA Laing, who has counselled adult victims of sexual abuse since 1978, says it is best to err on the side of protecting the child from living with his or her rapist, even in the context of a custody dispute. “I think it’s rarely the case that false accusations are used as a tool in custody battles. More often, when divorce proceeds, the child feels free to disclose abuse because he is safe from the abuser and is no longer worried about being responsible for the break-up of the family.” Ms. Laing adds that, from her experience, the few false accusations that do occur can usually be detected. “It’s a very intuitive thing. I wouldn’t necessarily say that I could identify what was amiss, but I would know something didn’t fit right.”
Edmonton lawyer Daniel Hogan represents the group of falsely accused parents. He proposes three positive improvements. “Malicious and false accusers need to be prosecuted. At this point, they can be charged with public mischief under the Criminal Code, but they never are. The Child Welfare Act needs to amended for stiff prosecution.” Mr. Hogan also suggests that a study needs to be undertaken of the effect on children of false accusations, along with the full public inquiry of the way abuse allegations are investigated.
Susan Lynham, an Edmonton lawyer who has worked with custody cases for six years, says the instances of false accusations are becoming more and more common. At a national law conference she attended in Charlottetown last month, family lawyers from across the country discussed the issue as presented in a paper entitled “The Allegation of Sexual Abuse within Custody/Access Litigation.” The paper quoted a member of the Ontario judiciary: “…these courts will go to any length to ensure, as positively as possible… the safety of the children. Accordingly, when [a false] allegation is raised, there is created a shadow of suspicion that, I think practically, is impossible to completely eradicate, no matter how unfounded the allegations turn out in retrospect to be. It spoils, or at least shadows, the future relationship that child has with the now proven innocent parent.”
Ms. Lynham relates, “Studies in the U.S. show that up to 85% of the allegations which arise in custody litigations are false. Childcare workers need to be aware that this is a special situation, and need to look on these cases with a sceptical eye.” She explains that in a custody battle women often feel they have less power because they cannot afford as expensive a lawyer. Using the ultimate weapon of a sexual abuse charge tips the balance of power in their favour. Ms. Lynham suggests that a unit of specifically trained investigators should be established to deal with these cases, and that the accused should definitely be interviewed in the process.
The issue promises to invade the lives of ever more Alberta families in the future. Social Services now investigates more than 2,300 new cases of alleged abuse monthly, although it doesn’t report how these break down into sex abuse, physical abuse, or neglect. But every month hundreds of innocent parents and children are subject to intrusive investigations—all in the cause of protecting them.--
Memories of abuse—real, or pure invention?
When Paul Ingram’s 22-year-old daughter first accused him of sexually abusing her as a child, he said he couldn’t remember any of it. After a series of interviews, and a disclosure by his 18-year-old daughter that she too remembered being abused, the policeman from Olympia, Washington began to remember. He confessed to hundreds of instances of sexual abuse, as well as satanic cult meetings and the murder of a prostitute, and was sentenced to 20 years in prison. Some psychologists today point to this case as a prime example of how traumatic memories of abuse can be repressed and later recovered.
But others don’t see it that way. Dr. Richard Ofshe, a sociologist from University of California at Berkeley and an expert on cult programming and mind control, was brought in to the Ingram case by the prosecution. He ended up testifying for the defence, however, when he found that the man could be pressed to confess to almost anything. To test this, Dr. Ofshe had fabricated an event, told Mr. Ingram that his daughter had disclosed it, and asked him to try and remember it. Mr. Ingram later wrote a detailed account of his memories of that incident. Mr. Ingram has recanted his confessions and is appealing his conviction, convinced that he was a victim of both his daughters’ and his own false memories.
Dr. Ofshe is one of many noted American psychologists who have banded together to form the False Memory Syndrome Foundation in Philadelphia. Since the foundation’s establishment in March, it has received 650 calls from families experiencing the effects of a “recovered repressed memory” of sexual abuse. The group’s purpose is to study, mitigate, and prevent the phenomenon of false accusations of incest and sexual abuse resulting from “disastrous ‘therapeutic’ programs,” and to help the primary and secondary victims of the syndrome.
Dr, George Pugh, a psychologist at Edmonton’s Institute of Psychology and Law, says there are no good statistics on the accuracy of memories of childhood sexual abuse. “It’s hard to remember details when you’re trying to avoid a traumatic experience. However, I have met with many victims and perpetrators, and I’ve found that very few of the victims are lying,” believes Dr. Pugh.
The study of memory is the specialty of Dr. Elizabeth F. Loftus, a psychologist at the University of Washington. She’s sceptical about trusting the accounts that come out of “recovered” memories, and is presenting a paper on the subject this week at the American Psychological Association’s annual meeting. “People are really open to the suggestions of their therapists. We ran a study in which we were able to ‘help the subjects to remember’ and experience of being lost in a shopping mall at age five. Although the event was fictitious, they ‘remembered,’ and gave us details,” says Dr. Loftus. “You must understand what this could do to a family,” she says. “An accusation comes out of the blue, and sends the family reeling. One accused father told me that he would rather have terminal cancer than go through what he was going through.”
Dr. Renee Fredrickson, a St. Paul psychologist, acknowledges that false accusations can be devastating, but points out that false denials are equally painful. She insists that the vast majority of memories are true and accurate, and she’s written a book on the subject, Repressed Memories: A Journey to Recovery from Sexual Abuse, released last month. “Clinicians must avoid any bandwagon approaches,” she says.
Drawing from 19 years of clinical experience, Dr. Fredrickson says there are four possible situations in which the memories of accused and accuser disagree. Usually, she says, the perpetrator of sexual abuse is simply lying. But it is also possible that the perpetrator honestly cannot remember performing the abuse, or that the victim may have mistakenly identified the wrong perpetrator, or that the accuser is lying. The last, in her opinion, is the least common. When it does occur, it is usually because he or she has a multiple personality disorder or a psychosis, or is a pathological liar or attention-seeking narcissist.
Dr. Stephen Kent, a University of Alberta sociology professor who researches memories of ritual abuse, agrees that most memories are probably of true events. Over the last two years, Dr. Kent has interviewed close to 30 people who claim to remember being involved in Satanic abuse. He has attempted to find external verification for the memories. Although he has never been able to obtain concrete external validation (like buried body parts), Dr. Kent says he has found partial confirmation in parallel stories and plausible circumstances. “The most powerful incentive for me to continue doing research in this area is the fact that people tell me about bizarre and nonsensical events that make no sense to either them or me at the time, but later fall into place. When memories, which don’t seem to be contaminated by outside information, are later found to parallel many other stories, it lends credibility to what they say,” explains Dr. Kent. But he says he has also found some cases in which supposedly restored memories turned out quite wrong. “One intelligent, articulate individual described the murder of a person whom we later found to be alive and well in eastern Canada.”--
TERZO: Abbiamo già capito quale è la macchina economica attivata dalle separazioni...
QUARTO: altrove si stanno organizzando...
Nessun commento:
Posta un commento