| Abstract: | The debate about the veracity of incest memories uncovered in therapy is often impassioned and acrimonious. Recent statements by various professional organizations, advising that corroboration of recovered memories is the only method for determining their accuracy, have not decreased the intensity of this debate. This response to Madden and Parody's paper discusses the importance of corroboration of recovered memories of sexual abuse and details the clinical, scientific, and legal foundations for this approach. A point of confusion in Madden and Parody's paper and an important aspect of this response is the difference between clients who uncover completely new memories of childhood sexual abuse and clients who enter therapy with a history of sexual abuse. Those clients with new memories are the focus of this debate and the standard of care proposed in this paper. |
