Witch-Children: The Myth of the Innocent Child
Hans Sebald*
ABSTRACT: In the majority of witch panics throughout history, children
have played a pivotal role. The question arises whether this type of child
behavior is a result of an aberrant cultural climate or if it is an
expression of a timeless condition found in the child's psyche. The role
of children is examined in the light of the current proliferation of child
sexual abuse allegations. The historical witch-hunts bear similar
social-psychological features to the modern day accusations.
In a world that agonizes over perennial betrayal, cruelty, war, mass
slaughter, and other failures of humanity, we passionately long for
exemplars of unadulterated goodness and the child, like some sacred
icon, has been traditionally placed upon an imaginary altar so that we
might revere virtues lacking in ourselves. This is the benchmark of
romanticism: to seek virtue and beauty in groups, places, and times
which are remote and relatively unknown. Such lack of knowledge
preserves the impeccability of the icon.
Alas, "the innocence of the little ones" is a phrase of
dubious veracity, since historical events suggest otherwise. Nowhere
has this optimism stumbled over more obstinate obstacles than during the
witchhunts of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. During those
not-so-distant years vast numbers of children gave free rein to
imagination and played back the image of the witch with such zeal that
they substantially contributed to the persecution. Without any
compunction did they denounce and bring to the stake uncounted thousands
of innocent persons. Their victims were old and young, men and women, playmates, and even members of their immediate
families.
Many Americans, when hearing of witch trials, only visualize the
Salem incidence. Yet compared to the European extent of the witch-hunt,
Salem was a minor episode, limited to a panic raging merely one year
(1692) and costing the lives of about two dozen victims. Immediately
afterwards, the Salem authorities sobered up, realized their lapse into
hysteria, admitted to miscarriage of justice, openly apologized, and
tried as much as possible to make amends to the victimized families.
The
defaming children, however, were never punished for their lethal role.
In Europe, where not one country was spared the scourge of the
witch-hunt, no official retraction has ever come forth. No church has
ever officially admitted that the witch-hunts were a mistake.
Researchers have just recently become more fully aware that in the
majority of witch panics children were responsible for starting the
hysteria, fueling it with the wildest of allegations, and completing it
with lethal accusations. Children played a pivotal role, linking the
power of the inquisitor or the judge to the fates of a variety of
people. It is this nexus that is overdue for scientific examination.
The
question arises whether this type of child behavior was merely an
expression of an aberrant Zeitgeist, of an era of theological
fanaticism, or whether it was an expression of a timeless condition
found in the child's psyche.
Evidently the children's destructive behavior cannot be put aside as
a neatly encapsulated phenomenon of an erring era, because the classical
Salem syndrome is anything bat past history: It is an ongoing process.
Children again are the masters of the nexus between prosecutor and
defendant. This time the accused are not called witches but molesters or
abusers, and a new panic of epidemic proportion is underway.
There are, of course, significant differences between the two
maniacal hunts. Most importantly, child molestation is an unfortunate
fact of life. It's not fictional, it happens. On the other hand,
witchcraft certainly in form of its assumed effectuality
was a figment
of the theological imagination. Extremely few of the accused had ever
tried their wits in the black arts, and yet the persecutions proceeded
with the utmost certainty that they had a prejudged certainty as we see
it again emerge in the persecution of presumed child molesters today.
Persons eager to persecute frequently seem to forget that such claims
can be true or false. Hence the great art today is to learn to
distinguish between false and true accusations. Perhaps a better
understanding of child psychology can help in this matter.
Modern situations in which children can wreak tragedy include court
proceedings where children are stimulated to tune into a theme and
harmonize with it. They often pick up cues how to harmonize with leading
questions questions that are not meant to be leading but cannot withstand
the intuitive exploitation by perceptive children. Fertile ground for
abusing the abuse-accusation are court situations dealing with divorce
and the custody of minor children, and the molestation-accusation of
teachers, especially of preschool teachers. Children are well endowed
with intuitive acuity to figure out what is to their advantage and how
to cater to suggestive questions. And some children are veritable
virtuosi in doing so.
This is where the concept of "mythomania" comes into play.
This
mania to make up myths is also known by the technical term "pseudologia
phantastica" and refers to a person's compulsive lying and making up
fantastic stories. This phrase originated with experts in forensic
medicine who had opportunity to observe children giving false testimony.
Psychiatrists discovered that a mythomane may initially lie deliberately
and consciously, but gradually come to believe in what he or she is
saying. The vast majority of persons engaging in such confabulation were
children or the mentally retarded.
Interestingly, experts have found that lying by children does not
necessarily indicate a chronic pathology and is not classified as mental
illness, whereas it is if it persists in adults. Children have an
incomplete grasp of the contours of the real world and often resort to
making up stories if they are under pressure or if they sense that such stories are expected.
When they
do make up stories they can be motivated by a variety of reasons. Many
engage in mythomania to gain attention and praise, some use it to satisfy
precocious sexual appetites, some revel in the power it affords them,
and some use it as a vehicle of pure malice. In situations where
mythomanes are motivated by attention-seeking, they are particularly
susceptible to suggestion. With a flair for figuring out what is
expected, they set out on their mythomaniacal journey, during which
compelling autosuggestion evolves, with the storytellers programming
their brains to confer reality status to the stories. Ultimately it is
no longer a question of the child lying; the child starts to believe in
the reality of the story.
The material children use to build imaginative structures frequently
consists of what they glean from adult conversations. Mythomaniacal
children seek suggestions; their radar, as it were, is constantly
scanning the social horizon for cues to spin stories rewarding them
recognition. Theirs is the skill to quickly evaluate what they overhear
and use it to advantage-and sometimes to the detriment of others,
innocent or guilty.
This skill, in addition to verbal expressivity, enables mythomanes to
tune into a theme with persuasive loquacity. Through confabulation and
strategic gossiping they can humor people's biases and expectations with
such effectiveness that their utterances are accepted as true
revelations.
Countless archival documents reflect children's accusations or
children's confessions as they were brought before the Inquisition or
voluntarily came to the authorities to accuse themselves or others of
witchcraft. A classic example is the case of a nine-year-old boy from
Bamberg in southern Germany. Let's call him Witchboy. This street urchin
stood trial for witchcraft in 1629, after he had lingered in prison for
more than a year. His confession glittered with all the splendor of
mythomania and he knew which sort of exotic story would net him
credulity and reward. Couched in the rich imagery of what the
contemporary mind understood as witchery, he skillfully interweaved
fantastic details into a supernatural tapestry, including the
description of familiars (demons in disguise of domestic animals,
usually the stereotypical black cat or dog); the raiding of wine cellars
by magical means; the minute depiction of the witches' night flight; the
ointments needed to accomplish such; and the bonus illustration of an
accident while in flight: his companion riding with him on the pitch
fork fell off, plunged into the River Main, magically metamorphosed into
a mouse and scurried on the water to shore, where he, Witchboy, made an
emergency landing to pick him up and resume the flight to the witches'
sabbath. Other stories by the boy described additional events of magical
quality for example, the metamorphosis of his playmates into various
creatures; a variety of witchery crimes, such as poisoning, conjuring up
bad weather, and attending the witches' sabbath; and finally
denunciations of scores of persons.
People at the turn into the 21st century, steeped as they are in
present-day empirical science, might think that such childish prattle
must have been absolutely incredible to the inquisitors. Let me assure
you, however, that they believed every word of it. There is evidence for
that: They acted on it! At least one of the persons denounced by the boy
was consequently burned as a witch.
The ultimate escalation of mythomania is not only telling stories and
believing them, but acting them out. There are innumerable historical
episodes exemplifying this type of mythomaniacal enactment, with the
classic case being "possession." The state of being
"possessed" signifies the escalation from being a mythomane to
being a "demonopath," a person claiming to be suffering from
demonic torments. The demonopath is far from being a passive victim of
his or her affliction and was often the active initiator of witch
panics, playing an aggressive role in the prosecution of witches.
Also, the demonopath is far from being a historical relic.
The case of Anneliese Michel deserves mention, if for no other reason than to
demonstrate historical continuity of religio-cultural images. This
22-year-old woman was a student at the University of
Würzburg and in
the late 1 970s exhibited symptoms including spasms, writhing, speaking
in devilish tongues construed by her devout Catholic family as diabolic
possession. The archbishop of Würzburg concurred with their diagnosis
and entrusted two priests to perform the Exorcism from the 17th-century
Rituale Romanum. To the embarrassment of the church, the victim died of
starvation during the procedures, for the exorcists had added the
discipline of fasting to the other means of driving out the demons.
Insult was added to
embarrassment when the district attorney's investigation and a trial
found the two priests guilty of negligent manslaughter.1
There are at least two conditions that intensify the aggressiveness of
mythomanes in general and demonopaths in specific: Group reinforcement
(they often enact their roles collectively) and an accepting
audience. In fact, there are no such things as private demonopaths; they perform
only when they are able to captivate an audience. The case of Anneliese
Michel revealed the full complement of a performance of possession: Star
(herself), manager (priests), and audience (family, relatives,
neighbors).
Intense collective reinforcement was observed among the Salem girls.
A crescendo performance took place when they attended the hearing of
Goody Cory whom they accused of having bewitched them. When Martha Cory
tried to defend her innocence and assured the court that she was a
Godfearing "Gospel woman," one of the girls yelled
"Gospel witch," a cry that was immediately taken up by the
rest of the girls. At the same time they imitated every move the woman
made. The significance of the two behavior forms, echolalia
(compulsively repeating sounds in an echolike fashion) and echomania
(compulsively imitating bodily movements or gestures), was the
collective method reinforcing the individual girl's behavior in fact,
one should not refer to individual behavior; it was group behavior. The
girls behaved identically; they all had regressed to a common
emotional-visceral denominator.
The basic ingredients of such role enactments are taken from three
sources: the cultural context (beliefs, traditions), the social context
(direct involvement in social Interaction), and the personal motives.
What that means in regard to children is that they take the concerns of
the day, interweave them with cultural images, and then mold stories
from which they can derive personal benefit. In the process, they take
advantage of the credibility accorded them and pursue personal goals,
such as prestige, praise, rebellion, revenge. This doesn't mean that the
children themselves recognize their own motives, they act on the basis
of a variety of emotional needs unexamined by the rational mind.
The Salem girls Abigail and Betty, members of a Puritan preacher's
family, for example, got away with insulting what probably constituted the most sacred item in the home,
the Holy Bible, by scornfully flinging it across the room. Here is a
convergence of the cultural, social, and personal elements: the Bible as
a sacred item in the culture of the Puritans, the family context with
parental authority, and personal feelings of resentment against
authority, sacred and parental. The result was the eruption of that
resentment with impunity under the protection of enacting "the role
of the afflicted." Betty Parris, brought up by the strictest of
Puritans, finally found a way to strike back. Her skillful acting
granted her celebrity status by the very people she abused.
The key element in mythomania and demonopathy is suggestibility.
Observers on the modern scene have witnessed the creation of
mythomaniacal profusion during numerous court hearings dealing with
claims of child molestation. They noticed how a biased and one-sided
climate was created through the unconscious collaboration of the
questioner and the child, whereby the child emerged as if a proven
victim of perverse crime.
In the majority of cases, concerned adults, particularly parents,
showed anxiousness to know all about the assault its nature, time,
place, motive, and so on. The child may initially have been bewildered
and embarrassed by all the questions a reaction interpreted by the
questioner, or the court, as a sign of shame. Right away the child would
be inundated by encouraging words and leading questions. The child would
follow the lead and answer in a way to meet the more or less obvious
expectations of the questioners. The hearing would turn into a rehearsal
of a story that the child now learned by heart. In future rehearings,
the child stuck to the version now imprinted in his or her mind. The
only changes the child might make consisted of adding new material
conforming to this version.
The majority of the cases included claims of sexual abuse.
Research
by psychologists David Raskin and Phillip Esplin found that children
involved in parental abuse cases often took advantage of their power in
court proceedings to fabricate sexual abuse in order to punish one
parent or side with the other. The researchers noted that such
distortion was a strong tendency when divorce, custody, or visitation
disputes were involved.2
After so many rehearsals, children become unable to recognize their
stories as fabulations, and only through evidence from other sources can it become clear that they
made up stories. Such evidence emerged at the end of a trial in Bjugn,
Norway, in 1993, when six accused persons had to be set free and
financially compensated. Also the accusing children were financially
compensated, since it was recognized that they had been, almost
systematically, led astray by suggestive questioning. Consequently, the
Norwegian Ministry of Justice made an effort to establish binding rules
for hearing testimony by minors.3
While research into the actual forensic problems proved to be
extremely difficult, a number of psychologists have chosen laboratory
situations in an attempt to identify the principles underlying children's
vulnerability to influence and manipulation. While the findings are far
from complete, several insights have been gained.
Suggestibility varies with age. Psychologist Maria
Zaragoza found
that young children (under eight) have greater difficulty than older
children and adults in distinguishing between imagined events and those they actually experienced.
"Given the greater tendency to
confuse imagination with perception, young children might also be more
likely to confuse items I that were merely suggested to them with those
they had actually perceived."4
If, however, intrusion of extraneous information and the posing of
leading questions are avoided thus creating a sort of cognitively
sterile environment for the child children's recall of factual material has been found to
be amazingly accurate, approaching in quality that of adults. Research
data show that "children are capable of being good eyewitnesses,
but that their recall appears to be more vulnerable to various distorting
influences in the interview situation than does adult recall."5
Once a child begins a course of confabulation, a process of
self-brainwashing snaps into action. Self-brainwashing differs from
brainwashing, as the former starts with voluntary confabulation and gradually assumes
truth value in the mind of the narrator. The latter starts with
external pressure to persuade a person to change his or her mind and ends
with a new orientation.
Studies on the truth value of children's verbalizations have been
conducted at the Institute for the Study of Child Development at the
University of Medicine of New Jersey. It was discovered that already at age three a
majority of children will lie in certain situations. When the liars were
challenged, only 38% of them admitted to having lied, with boys more
likely than girls admitting their dishonesty.6
Another study found that
deception can often be detected by unconscious body movements that
differ from the person's normal movements. However, such differentiating
body language was missing in "pathological liars or those who
simply feel no remorse about lying."7
Findings of this nature bear on the credibility of children's
testimony and accusations in more than one way. First, they remind us
that children may lie; second, they proffer the disturbing fact that
liars and truth-tellers cannot easily be told apart.
A revealing study identified some of the dangers that may arise from
children's reports. Psychologists Karen Saywitz and Gail Goodman
interviewed 72 girls, ages five and seven, about routine medical
procedures they had received. Half were given full examination,
including vaginal and anal checks; the rest were given just general
physicals. When the first group was asked broad and nonspecific
questions about the procedure, only eight mentioned the vaginal checks,
and when the children were shown anatomically correct dolls, six pointed
to the vaginal area. But of the girls who had undergone a merely general
checkup, three claimed they also had had vaginal or anal examinations;
one child even said that "a doctor did it with a stick."8
Most of the claims of abuse and the resulting trials involve day care
centers, preschools, and divorce/custody disputes. The most frequent
charges of sexual abuse occur as a part of custody quarrels. According
to estimates, the charge is raised in about 5% of child-custody cases.9
A 1988 study by the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts
concluded the charges probably are false 30-40% of the time.10
Hollida
Wakefield and Ralph Underwager researched the psychological profile of
the accusers (mostly parents using their children's testimony) and
discovered that 74% of the falsely accusing parents were afflicted with
personality isorders.11 Regardless of their problems, they usually are
successful in using sex-molestation charges as a strategy to obtain
custody and to achieve revenge against former spouses. The children
become pawns in the process, and the opponents vie for their cooperation.
The party winning is usually the one that is more
successful in manipulating the children.
This brings to mind a disturbing parallelism between patterns of the
past witch-hunt and patterns of the present court proceedings. In both
scenarios children were often asked to report on their family life,
especially whether it incorporated elements deviating from acceptable
standards. And in both situations children catered to the
inquisitiveness of the authority figures in order to be appreciated and
made to feel important.12
Increasing numbers of preschools have become the target of child
molestation charges. One dealt with a San Diego Sunday school teacher,
Dale Akiki, whom nine children accused of rape, sodomy, and torture.
The
drawn-out court hearings heard the children's claims that the teacher
had killed a baby, sacrificed rabbits, and slaughtered an elephant and a
giraffe. The jury in the Superior Court concluded that the children
weren't credible and acquitted Akiki after he had spent two and a half
years behind bars.13
Another case dealt with a teacher at a New Jersey day-care center.
Kelly Michaels, 25, was convicted on 115 counts of sexually assaulting
20 pupils at the Wee Care Day Nursery in Maplewood during the 1984-85
school year. The children ranged in age from three to five at the time
of the alleged abuse and were six to eight when they testified. Michaels
was convicted despite her lawyer's demonstration that the children's
stories were fantasies that had been created through suggestive
questions asked by overzealous investigators, and that there was no
medical evidence of abuse. The jury, however, believed the parents who
said "they observed marked changes in their children's behavior
while they were in Michaels' care. They reported that some children
experienced nightmares, developed a fear of the dark, showed aversion to
peanut butter, and exhibited increased interest in sex play."14
The
convictions were ultimately overturned on appeal after Michaels spent
five years in prison; she had received a sentence amounting to hundreds
of years in prison.
A most destructive version of the genre took its fateful course in
1983 at a preschool in Manhattan Beach, California.15
Two teachers at
the McMartin preschool, Peggy Buckey, 63, and her son Raymond, 31, were
accused by Judy Johnson, the mother of a two-and-one-half-year-old boy,
of having molested her son. Thereupon a public hysteria spread,
resembling old Salem, and soon 41 children were involved and 208 counts filed
against seven individuals.
Johnson's complaints against the teachers grew bizarre. Later, as the
investigation was still underway, Johnson was diagnosed an acute
paranoid schizophrenic and died of alcohol-related liver disease. But by
then the prosecution had stirred up enough other witnesses and felt no
need to revise the initial witness's testimony. The police had written
to 200 parents announcing their investigation of sexual abuse at the
preschool, thereby fanning the hysteria and encouraging more children to
come forth with lurid tales of abuse.
An administrator-turned-therapist soon established that 369 of the
400 children she interviewed had been abused. Her technique was
blatantly suggestive she gave emotional rewards to the children who
accused the teachers, and rebuffs to those who did not. "What good
are you? You must be dumb," she said to one child who knew nothing
about the game Naked Movie Star."16
The collection of stories she
presented to the authorities as being credible included children digging
up dead bodies at cemeteries; being taken for rides in airplanes;
killing animals (including a horse) with bats; observing devil worship;
being buried alive; seeing naked priests cavorting in a secret cellar
below the school; seeing a teacher fly; having been given red or pink
liquids to make them sleepy. Reminiscent of the denunciations made by
children at witch trials during past centuries, the preschool children
identified a number of members of the community as they were driven
around town and asked to point out molesters. The children pointed out
community leaders, store clerks, gas-station attendants; one child
picked out photos of actor Chuck Norris and Los Angeles City Attorney
James Hahn.
Rather than discrediting the testimony of the children, the district
attorney in Los Angeles pressed ahead with the prosecution and presented
18 children to the grand jury, which in March 1985 returned indictments
against Raymond Buckey, his mother, sister, grandmother, and three
preschool teachers. They were arrested with full (national and
international) publicity. In January 1986, charges against five of those
jailed were unexpectedly dropped as a new district attorney took over
and declared a complete absence of evidence. However, Peggy Buckey and
her son Raymond remained incarcerated and suffered the longest criminal trial
in American history. It was not until 1990 that they were
acquitted after they had spent two years and five years, respectively,
in jail.
There is a frightening story to be told about the power of the mass
media. The California episode was exploited by the media and produced a
tremendous repercussion across the nation not one of caution, as one
might have expected, but one of ever larger numbers of children
imitating similar claims. "Nationally, the attention generated by
the case set off an explosion of reports claiming sexual abuse of
children, increasing such reports from 6,000 in 1976 to an estimated
350,000 in 1988."17 The main responsibility for the explosion must
be placed on the mass media which wallowed in lurid detail. The perils
created by the media's suggestive force include increasing numbers of
parents and authorities using the malleable power of children to bring
about testimonies serving biases and schemes of partisan adults. As
someone warned: "Some parents, determined to damage each other in a
divorce, are throwing abuse charges around. Those bent on destroying a reputation have a surefire weapon."18
This modern
"surefire weapon" is the equivalent of the witch accusation of
past times; again it is based on the testimony of children, a testimony
whose truth value is hard to prove or disprove, but still a testimony
too often credulously accepted.
The claim of repressed memories plays an increasing role in court
cases against alleged child molesters. Stephen Ceci's experiments at Cornell University
showed, however, that children filter their memories
and, depending on the direction of the manipulation, will reassemble the
extract to form a variety of pictures.19
Elizabeth Loftus conducted a
series of experiments that showed that memories can be radically altered
through suggestive questions. Taking a person's traumatic experience
(such as having been the victim of a crime) as the starting point,
Loftus registered remarkable distortions over time in the memory of the
victim.
Loftus then tested the possibility of creating memories of events
that never took place. Here is the example of a young boy, Chris, whose
older brother was one of her students. Chris's older brother asked him
to tell what he recalled of an incident ten years ago in which he was
separated from his parents and lost in a large shopping mall. Chris was finally found by an older man and
returned to his parents. However, in reality, this incident was
imaginary. But Chris was repeatedly asked to tell and retell the episode along with other
incidents that were real. It became evident that Chris gradually came to
believe that the imaginary incident had taken place in reality. He
described the older man and filled in details, which in the original
story had not been mentioned at all.20
In the light of these research findings a new genre of
"experts" must be regarded with skepticism: counselors and therapists claiming to be able to unearth
"repressed memories." They are the new inquisitors of
postmodern civilization and, for hefty fees, will belabor the
suggestibility of troubled personalities. What these "memory
therapists" try to unearth are such traumas as incest, satanic
ritual, and witnessing human sacrifice and what, at times, they
accomplish is illustrated by this case: A 39-year-old woman sought
respite from a prolonged depression and an explanation of its cause.
During several weeks of treatment, a family counselor guided her
awareness back to incest during her childhood, though the patient
initially had no recall of such abuse. But the therapist kept prodding,
and lurid details finally emerged, assumed to be the content of
repressed memories about incestuous abuse when she was a baby. Thereupon
she confronted her father, broke off her relationship with him, moved
away, and founded an incest-survivors group.21 Later, after taking
eye-opening psychology
courses in college, she reexamined her "memories" and
recognized them as artifacts created with the cooperation of the
therapist. She asked her father's forgiveness and filed a lawsuit
against the psychiatric hospital.
It goes without saying that if an adult's suggestibility can suffer
such misguidance, what about children's? Misguidance at a young age may
result in an impression that no counselor or college course can ever
correct. But, as mentioned earlier, it would be wrong to assume that all
accusations made by children are false. Rather, the problem is to
distinguish the false from the true.
In sum, both scenarios, the early modern and the contemporary,
include social-psychological features of striking similarity:
(1) |
Widespread anxieties of adults; |
(2) |
Suggestive questioning of children; |
(3) |
Children following suit and catering to what they sense is
expected of them; |
(4) |
Credulity by adults; |
(5) |
Children's accusations are accorded the status of evidence; |
(6) |
Hasty sentences; |
(7) |
Dissenting voices are suspected of protecting criminals. |
Endnotes
1. See details in H. Sebald, Witch-Children: From Salem Witchhunts to
Modern Court Rooms (), Amherst, NY:
Prometheus Books, 1995, pp.
58-60. [Back]
2. D.C. Raskin & P. W. Esplin, "Assessment of children's
statements of sexual abuse," in John Doris (Ed.), The
Suggestibility of Children's Recollections (), Washington, DC:
American
Psychological Association, 1991, pp. 153-164. [Back]
3. G. Friedrichsen & G. Mauz, Gezielt und
planmäßig, Spiegel, 12, March 20, 1995, p.87.
[Back]
4. M. S. Zaragoza, "Preschool children's susceptibility to
memory impairment," in John Doris (Ed.), The Suggestibility of
Children 's Recollections, Washington, DC: American Psychological
Association, 1991, pp.27-39. [Back]
5. H. R. Dent, "Experimental studies of interviewing child
witnesses," in John Doris (Ed.), The Suggestibility of Children's
Recollections (), Washington, DC:
American
Psychological Association, 1991,
pp. 138-146. [Back]
6. M. Lewis, C. Stanger & M. W. Sullivan, "Deception in
3-year-olds," Developmental Psychology,
25,1989, pp. 439-443. [Back]
7. R. L. Jahn, "Detecting deception." Research at Arizona
State University, 8, Fall, 1993, p. 6. [Back]
8. Quoted by J. Cramer, "Why children lie in court,"
Time,
March 4, 1991, p.76. Also see S. J. Ceci & M. Bruck, Jeopardy in the
Courtroom: A Scientific Analysis of Children's Testimony (), Washington, DC:
American
Psychological Association, 1995. [Back]
9. Quoted by R. Dvorchak, "Custody fights use sex charge as
weapon, Arizona Republic. August 22, 1992, pp. Al-A8.
[Back]
10. Ibid, p. A8. [Back]
11. Ibid. Also see H. Wakefield & R. Underwager,
"Personality Characteristics of Parents Making False Accusations of
Sexual Abuse in Custody Disputes," Issues In Child Abuse
Accusations, 2(3), 1990.
pp. 121-136; H. Wakefield & R. Underwager,
"Sexual abuse allegations in divorce and custody disputes," Behavioral
Sciences and the Law, 9, 1991, pp. 451-468. [Back]
12. Cf. Hartwig Weber, Kinderhexenprozesse, Frankfurt, Insel, 1991,
p. 243n. [Back]
13. Associated Press, "Man not guilty of molestation,"
Mesa Tribune, November 20, 1993, p. A7. [Back]
14. A United Press International
report in The Arizona Republic,
April 16,1988, p. A8. [Back]
15. See details: P. Eberle & S. Eberle, The Abuse of Innocence:
The McMartin Preschool Trial (), Amherst, NY.
Prometheus Books, 1993; V. L. Bullough, "The Salem witch trials and the modern
media," Free
Inquiry, 10, Spring, 1990, p.6; M. Carlson, "Six
years of trial by torture," Time, January 29, 1990, p.
26-27. [Back]
16. Ibid, p. 26. [Back]
17. Ibid, p.27. [Back]
18. Ibid. [Back]
19. S. J. Ceci, Some overarching issues in the children's
suggestibility debate, in John Doris (Ed.), The Suggestibility of
Children's Recollections (), Washington, DC:
American
Psychological Association,
1991, pp.1-9. Also see Ceci & Bruck, op. cit. [Back]
20. E. Loftus, "Remembering dangerously,"
Skeptical Inquirer, 19, April, 1995, p. 20-29.
Also see E. Loftus & K Ketcham,
The Myth of Repressed Memory: False Memories and Allegations of Sexual
Abuse (), New York: St. Martin's Press; E. Loftus, "The reality of
repressed memories," American Psychologist,
48, 1993, pp. 518-535. [Back]
21. L. Jaroff, "Lies of the mind," Time, November 29, 1993,
p. 52. [Back]
* Hans Sebald is Professor Emeritus of Sociology at Arizona State
University, Tempe, Arizona, 85287-2101.
Based on Hans Sebald, Witch-children. From Salem Witch-Hunts to
Modern Courtrooms ()
(Prometheus Books, 1995, 59 John Glenn Drive, Amherst,
NY 14228). [Back]
|