From International Viewpoints (IVy) Issue 17 - June 1994
See Home Page at

Regular Column

Kemp's Column

By Raymond Kemp, USA

Repressed memory syndrome

In the general field of counseling there arise 'fads', current
trends that suddenly appear, and seemingly become the answer to all
difficulties. The Bridey Murphy(1)
case was one, and now we have another, known as RMS
(Repressed memory syndrome), where the therapist discovers repressed
memories in the client, of physical, but more usually sexual abuse,
long ago, and suppressed until opened up by the therapist.

As a result of this phenomenon, priests, doctors, school teachers
and fathers have recently had to defend themselves in court, and many
judgements for thousands of dollars have been awarded, and lives

One case however is demonstrating the other flow, where the accused
father is now suing the therapist on the basis that the suppressed
memories were false and were instilled by the therapist into the

All of this has made for a great deal of conversation and argument
among professionals as to what exactly has been happening, and
I was discussing the whole thing, and it seems that it might be of
help to put this down for others to view.

What we know

As usual we have to go no further than what we were taught, to
gain an understanding, and see the missing factor in these cases.

We all should be well aware of suppression, and the fact that
incidents can be totally blacked out in a person's ability to recall,
and we are equally aware that when recounting an incident, engram,
conomone or meme, call it what you will, the incident will not erase
until it has been viewed, and actually confronted many times.

We know that as we run such engramic incidents, they are often
vague and patchy for the first viewing, and then open up, as more
of the details become available.

This as you know further needs no hypnosis, (we are trying to
waken a person, not put them to sleep), it does need careful attention
to the Auditor's Code, no evaluation, no judgement, and quiet
to uncover the incident.

As we do this, using whatever systemology we care, be that Book
One technology, or Expanded Dn. or any other tool we have properly
applied, we observe that the client moves up and down the emotional
Tone Scale.

Dub in

We also know the phenomenon of 'dub in', and we have a full
understanding of valences, both real and false. By the way, valences
are only dimly recognized by some therapists under the heading of
Transference, which is about the same level of understanding as
about an automobile by studying wheels.

The big error however is one that no level 1 graduate would
make (I hope), and that is that an incident once contacted must be
run to erasure. The important knowledge we have on end phenomena.

Having to do something about it

Secondly, we know the dynamics of a problem, and we know that
if a client feels that they must now, or want now, to 'do something'
about the problem then it has not been fully handled.

An incident that is erased is erased. A problem that is handled,
is handled. Nothing further has to be done.

Therefore if a person has contacted a sexual abuse incident,
in session, now feels the need, and takes action such as suing the
perpetrator, the one thing we know without a doubt is that the
was only restimulated and not erased.

The current arguments as to whether the incident was real,
or imagined, or implanted by the therapist, are irrelevant, and come
under the heading of added, inapplicable data.

The truth is that the incident, or chain, dub in or actual,
was not erased, and that demonstrates and proves incompetence
on gross negligence, by the therapist.

It also shows that the client was left at a tone level of about
1.1 to 2.0, and is seeking revenge, and using the incident to justify
their present time actions.

This by the way is the phenomena of the DED-DEDEX (Deserved
actions and Deserved actions Excused) fully covered in 1951.

Now the argument against this was interesting, especially since
there were MD's and lawyers present.

'But what about Justice, Punishment of the Perpetrator.
Society can not allow these people to go unpunished.'

My response to that is that it is not the part of the therapist
to dispense justice or judgement. Our job within society is to erase
the trauma or bank of the person who has entrusted us to his care,
so that whatever has or seemingly has happened in the past, is no
longer affecting that person in the present or into the future.

I also might point out that society is pretty low toned anyway,
in their endless search for someone or something to blame and
punish ... for what?

Society operates on a moral code. Some societies have different
moral codes, but all moral codes are a degradation of ethics.

If any of you have a problem with this, I invite your response
in open forum. Write in to IVy with your views, comments and

I will tell you that the response in the professional people
I have discussed this with was one of enlightenment, followed by
along the lines of 'Then this means that ...'

As I said then and say now, we may not know it all, but what
we do know we know thoroughly.

(1)In the 40's /50's - an astounding
(at that time) case of a lady who remembered her past life as Bridey

Fri Aug 18 12:52:57 EDT 2006