You do not currently have permission to view the full text for this document. Please sign in to an account with an active subscription or contact support.
From Dr Phil Mollon
Subtle disturbances of thought, easily overlooked, are common in contemporary discussions of trauma, memory and abuse. Evidence of these pervade Cleo Van Velsen's review of my book Multiple Selves, Multiple Voices and Showalter's Hystories (Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy 12, 163-171). The result, even though no doubt well-intentioned, falls short of expected standards of accurate representation and coherence of argument in a number of worrying ways.
One example is where Van Velsen quotes a section of my book describing the experience of working with very severely disturbed patients presenting narratives of perverse abuse:
My experience is of feeling burdened—by communications of bewilderingly bizarre evil, the truth of which I have no way of knowing. [Mollon]
Immediately after quoting this, she asserts:
This statement links to what Showalter describes, namely moving from a realm of objectivity and rationality … to one of belief … [Van Velsen]
She then goes on to say:
I do not see it as the psychoanalytical therapist's job to be the patient's advocate or the true believer … [Van Velsen]
Thus, because I state that I do not know what to make of narratives of ritual abuse, unlike Van Velsen who believes they are not true, she places me in a category she terms ‘true believer’ and describes me as a ‘patient's advocate’. In fact, as the book indicates, I stand for a position of disciplined enquiry, which aims to avoid falling into states of mind characterised by ‘belief’.
Later, Van Velsen remarks: