 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Watson v. Roman Catholic Church of the Diocese of Phoenix2/13/2003
or developing amnesia for incidents of abuse were (1) young age of onset, (2) multiple incidents of abuse, and (3) severity of abuse, and he acknowledged that Watson did not fit this profile. Dr. Brown also acknowledged that only 15% to 20% of victims have full amnesia after childhood sexual abuse and that, in general, the majority of people retain their memories for traumatic events. Thus, the statistical likelihood that Watson had experienced dissociative amnesia was not high.
Dr. Brown offered his opinion that, because of inconsistencies in studies of dissociative amnesia, the more recent approach in the field was to look to other factors and that a "dissociative coping style" and a "betrayal trauma" were now considered to be better predictors of persons who will be affected. Dr. Brown opined that Watson has a dissociative coping style and that molestation by a priest was the sort of trauma from betrayal by a trusted person that leads to dissociative amnesia.
Dr. Brown also testified, however, that Watson was only in the low/moderate range for a dissociative coping style, not high, and he characterized Watson's test results as showing only "some modest evidence" of it. Moreover, Dr. Brown acknowledged that other researchers had historically viewed betrayal trauma as purely theoretical. Dr. Brown himself described it as a theory supported by "some evidence . . . just emerging." Dr. Brown's description of the effect of a betrayal trauma on memory suggested that it was more akin to cognitive avoidance than to involuntary dissociative amnesia. Dr. Brown testified that a child sexually abused by a priest faces a "dilemma" because: " f he tells, destroys the parents' special relationship with the church. If he didn't tell, then he has to put it out of his mind and may completely forget it." Dr. Brown agreed that choosing to put an event out of mind is entirely different from the involuntary suppression of an experience that is too traumatic to hold in conscious thought.
Dr. Brown also conceded that the most widely endorsed explanation for later recovery of the memory of abuse was exposure to situations that remind the victim of the abuse. Yet, he acknowledged that Watson had been asked point-blank whether Bredemann had abused him on at least three occasions without "triggering" his recall.
Other evidence called Dr. Brown's opinion into question. Appellees' expert, Dr. Brainerd, did not believe that Watson suffered from dissociative amnesia. Among other things, Dr. Brainerd pointed to Watson's ability to recall, both contemporaneously and on various subsequent occasions, the circumstances of his trips to the Castle with Bredemann, including events of a sexualized nature. Watson told his parents at the time about Bredemann's nudity and skinny dipping and told an interviewing paralegal about it several years later, as well as Bredemann's comment about Watson's penis. In Dr. Brainerd's opinion, the ability to recall these sexualized details was inconsistent with dissociative amnesia.
Dr. Brainerd explained that Watson could have forgotten some of the events at the Castle yet had them available for recall if reminded, a process known as reminiscence. Reminiscence is, however, just an aspect of ordinary forgetting and "not close to being the same thing" as dissociative amnesia with recovered memory. Dr. Brainerd agreed that ordinary forgetting is not dissociative amnesia. Dr. Brainerd was unaware of any studies to confirm the betrayal trauma hypothesis and pointed out one that clearly refuted it.
Watson emphasizes Dr. Brown's "irrebuttable" testimony that it was "very unlikely" Watson was "malingering about his memory performance." Wats
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Arizona Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|