Weeks of heated debate concerning the appointment of a US supreme court judge, has come to an end and a decision was made – a decision by the Republican majority that was not swayed by the bravery of Dr. Blasey Ford. This hearing reminded people of a previous confirmation hearing in 1991, that also revolved around alleged sexual misconduct. The latest hearing went beyond simply bringing the issue of sexual harassment into the public eye. It went beyond that earlier hearing involving workplace sexual harassment, and forced the issue of sexual assault into the light of public scrutiny.
The #Me Too movement has been critical in raising public awareness on the issue of sexual assault. But there remains, in general, serious misunderstandings on the question, function and qualities of traumatic memory. Until the public is better educated about how trauma impacts memory, victims’ statement will always be doubted and misunderstood. In that way, victims of sexual assault will be retraumatized.
This dynamic played out in these hearings where many Senators affirmatively ignored the depth of research into how sexual abuse events are remembered by victims. The logic used by deniers of Dr. Blasey Ford’s testimony relied on their so-called “common sense.” Senators expressed their denial based on the questions people that have as anyone else might raise that has no genuine understanding of sexual trauma:
[1] If something so terrible as sexual assault or rape did happen, why does she not even remember the time/place/persons involved, with some clarity? The subtext of that question is barely hidden: If it was me, I would remember.
[2] It something so devastating did happen, why did she not make a formal complaint right afterwards? This also extends into the scenario pointing out, perhaps, that the victim repeatedly saw (or returned to) the abuser and acted as if nothing serious had happen. The subtext of that question is similarly barely hidden: She kept seeing him to wait in ambush to make a complaint decades later.
The public, and certainly elected officials, need to be better educated about the unique phenomenon of traumatic memory and behaviour. When judges, or other people in high position, fail to understand the nature of traumatic memory and phenomenon of victimization, all victims of sexual assault are subject to retraumatization. Unfortunately, one can simply refer to President Trump’s mocking of Dr. Ford – attacking her memory of being sexually assaulted.
Once again, we must go back to distinguishing the different kinds of memory. We can easily access non-traumatic memory. This ordinary explicit memory, which is termed declarative memory, can be expressed in narrative form. An example of this is recalling what you had for lunch, when you had it and with whom you were eating; at around 1 pm, sitting at a corner of such and such eatery, hastily downing soup and a sandwich with my friend John. This is ordinary explicit, or declarative memory.
In contrast to explicit memory, there is implicit or non-declarative memory. This kind of memory is usually without verbal references. Generally speaking, it is vague, all jumbled up non-verbal memory. It often manifests in the body as somatic sensations and visual imageries.
It is in this kind of non-declarative memory that trauma is processed and stored. It is challenged and often disbelieved by people evaluating the memories of victims of abuse. Those who deny this kind of memory misjudge it. They make the mistake of comparing their own explicit memory to a victim’s implicit memory. In other words, as was seen in the analysis of people denying Dr. Ford’s testimony, their erroneous logic is, “If I can clearly remember what I had for lunch with John yesterday, why can’t you remember clearly where, how and when XX attacked you?” They make that error in judgment because implicit memory related to trauma and explicit memory related to everyday experience is processed very differently in our brain.
When an experience is encoded in fragmented, non-declarative memory, only raw emotions and physical sensations are accessible in one’s consciousness. These may manifest in hyper-vigilance, sudden and overwhelming feelings of panic or dread. They usually include intense feelings of alienation, rage, and helplessness as well as terror at loss of control.
Instead of precisely expressive words, victims of assault (such as my patients when I was actively practicing psychiatry) may speak of “wanting to throw up,” or an intensely “yucky feeling.” Often they have intrusions of bizarre visual images. The inability to translate what is so strongly felt into something expressible in words leaves them frustrated, bewildered, angry, and hopeless. Their dilemma is perhaps best expressed by John Harvey (1990): “Trauma victims have symptoms instead of memories.”
Working with patients in therapy, a psychiatrist must translate this body of knowledge into appropriate therapeutic processes. While therapy is quite a different process than a hearing involving an assault victim’s statement of recollection, it does not excuse the misjudgment of those denying someone’s traumatic memories.
The second issue raised in such misjudgments is why a victim would remain in some kind of relationship with an abuser or fail to make a complaint within the “right” time frame. Once again, one has to understand the dynamics of the victim/abuser relationship. Suffice to say that I have encountered a victim of incest who continued to allow the abuse to take place even after she reached the age of 30 and had gotten married.
Even for someone without experience in dealing with trauma, one should consider the following question: “If I let someone abuse me and have complete power over me at age 3, how could I suddenly have the strength to rebel and stop the abuse at age 3 plus 1 day?” It is easy to answer that question. Of course one wouldn’t have that strength at 3 years plus 1 day. But if the power hierarchy is maintained for decades, when does one day finally become different from the previous day? If it happened at age 30, could I have the strength to stop it at age 30 plus 1 day?
When we make an informed judgment, we must make sure we understand the various dynamic factors. We should not jump to conclusions when we have insufficient information or, just as important, insufficient empathy. Empathy, the ability to put ourselves in the other person’s shoes and try to think and feel as they might, is the real key.
The leadership in society should be willing to be educated in matters related to post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and Complex PTSD. Many women suffered and continue to suffer in the prevailing culture of male entitlement. This cultural view accommodates men taking what they want, treating women as sex objects, and treating women simply as objects over which they can assert power.
This entitlement culture is simply wrong, it opens the door to potential horrors. We only need to open our eyes to cultures that advocate female circumcision, cultures where gang rape is the norm rather than an isolated incident, and cultures where families sell their young girls (and boys) for sex slaves. The President openly admitted to what he called “locker room talk”, of how he could easily grope women’s genitals. We have a long way to go before we can arrive at a better world – for our daughters, sisters and our mothers. Such a world would be far better for our sons, brothers and fathers as well. Dr. Ford’s bravery is a poignant marker on this journey.
