Therapy as Memory-Work: Dilemmas of Discovery, Recovery and Construction

In this paper I have sought to shift the focus on the construction of memory within psychotherapeutic practice in a number of different directions to draw some more general lessons for the process and status of therapeutic accounts. The precipitating context for the current scrutiny of memory-making within therapy may have limited its scope and fruitfulness. The fact that this issue was largely prompted by debates about the status of (usually) adult women's recovery of memories of early abuse within therapy is a relevant factor that has been compounded by issues of professional credibility and hierarchy. Clearly, at a cultural level, women's memories of childhood abuse function politically as well as personally, as reflected by the social and legal responses to this challenge.

However, guidelines for professional practice cannot legislate for the indeterminacies surrounding the subjectivity of memory, while assumptions underlying the empirical psychological resources drawn upon to inform debates in psychotherapy require critical scrutiny. Clinical and interpretive dilemmas extend beyond the status accorded client memorial reports to therapists' memory-making practices as textualized via both supervision and clinical note-taking. Drawing on more recent (including feminist) discussions of memory that identify different political possibilities within third and first person accounts it was suggested that, rather than eschewing the subjectivity of memory, therapists can instead analyse this as a key interpretive and reflexive resource to inform their own practice.