Hypnosis--Truth-Serum-of-Make-Believe

Back

Hypnosis

Truth Serum of Make Believe

By David Andrew

Hypnosis has been used extensively by abduction researchers across the board for decades now. Everyone from artists, history teachers and social workers turned abduction researchers, to licensed PhD’s in Psychology and Psychiatry investigating the abduction phenomenon have employed the technique. The use of hypnosis in the abduction research field has gotten to the point where it is wielded by it’s practitioners like some kind of infallible sword of truth - or so they would like you to believe.

I read on one researcher’s website the following statements:

The AMA (American Medical Association) and the American Psychological Association take hypnotherapy very seriously, both having recognized hypnotherapy as a valid medical procedure since 1958.

Organizations such as the American Medical Association, American Psychological Association, the Veteran's Administration, the Mayo Clinic, Harvard Medical School, American Cancer Society and many others accept the reality that the use of hypnosis as a treatment to reduce pain, anxiety and stress and therefore to accelerate the healing and recovery time from conditions such as post traumatic stress disorder.

The text refers to such organizations as the American Cancer Society, the National Institutes of Health and, the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs as all recognizing the benefits of using hypnosis in the treatment of chronic pain and Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). It also mentions a prestigious British medical journal, which reports that hypnosis reduces pain, anxiety, and blood pressure complications. I do agree that the use of hypnosis for these things has shown itself at times to be beneficial. Keep in mind though that hypnosis used in this manner is actually a form of mental trickery. For instance, if the hypnotist is trying to convince the person under hypnosis that they feel less pain then, the person’s mind can trick their body into feeling less pain. The mind is a powerful thing and, in a lot of cases this will work to some extent in easing a person’s pain but, it is still a form of deception.

The statements and references posted on that particular website clearly give the reader the impression that hypnosis has a wide spread acceptance by the medical community and, in many instances it does. What the statements on this researcher’s website do not address is the medical community’s stance on the use of hypnosis for the purpose of memory retrieval or memory enhancement. In fact the use of hypnosis for memory retrieval isn’t touched on at all in this section on the website in question. This mistaken attitude about hypnosis and memory recovery is not unique to that particular researcher. I have found that almost all abduction researchers who utilize hypnosis believe they are uncovering truthful information from abductees under hypnosis. I have also found that these same researchers ignore the information from qualified researchers and health organizations that show the technique of using hypnosis for memory retrieval doesn’t work!

The truth is that the majority of medical and mental health organizations have a very negative view of hypnosis being used for memory retrieval. Abduction researchers who rely on hypnosis to obtain a majority of their data would not dare provide such information to the unsuspecting or uniformed public or heaven forbid to any actual abductees they might be working with. If they were to share such information with people they would be out of business and their book sales would plummet.

So, just what is the medical community’s stance on the use of hypnosis for the purpose of memory retrieval or enhancement?

American Medical Association (1985): Policy statement on hypnotically enhanced memory. JAMA 253:1918-1923.

Journal of American Medicine (JAMA) Vol. 253 No. 13, April 5, 1985

The Council finds that recollections obtained during hypnosis can involve confabulations and pseudo-memories and not only fail to be more accurate, but actually appear to be less reliable than non-hypnotic recall. The use of hypnosis with witnesses and victims may have serious consequences for the legal process when testimony is based on material that is elicited from a witness who has been hypnotized for the purposes of refreshing recollection.

American Psychiatric Association 1993,

“It is not known how to distinguish, with complete accuracy, memories based on true events from those derived from other sources.”

American Psychological Association 1995,

“At this point it is impossible, without other corroborative evidence, to distinguish a true memory from a false one."

Royal College of Psychiatrists in England published the following statements about hypnosis in their association's journal Psychiatric Bulletin on October 1, 1997,

“There is a good deal of evidence that patients will produce the material the therapist seeks, but it is often a product of fantasy”.

Also from that same report,

“Hypnosis increases the confidence with which the memory is held, while reducing its reliability.”

Professor Elizabeth Loftus of the Psychology Department at the University of Washington stated as her final comments in a paper entitled, “The formation of false memories”:

Nearly two decades of research on memory distortion leaves no doubt that memory can be altered via suggestion. People can be led to remember their past in different ways, and they even can be led to remember entire events that never actually happened to them. When these sorts of distortions occur, people are sometimes confident in their distorted or false memories, and often go on to describe the pseudo memories in substantial detail.

Experiencers Ignored

I have presented to the reader information and references from professional, qualified sources in the previous section. If that information doesn’t give one pause to stop and really consider the negative aspects of hypnosis and it’s widespread use in abduction research then, consider what two famous abductees had to say about it. Both people had undergone hypnosis to try to unlock further memories of what had happened to each of them. Both of these individuals became staunch opponents against the use of hypnosis for the purpose of memory retrieval.

The first was Betty Hill and, the following text contains brief excerpts from a long interview with Betty Hill, conducted by Peter Brookesmith and published in the April 1998 edition of Fortean Times.

"I try very hard not to have guilt feelings about the way stupid people have misinterpreted my experience. The reason I wrote my book was to try to get across to people that they should stay away from hypnosis. Don't let anybody fool around in your brain. I mean, you have problems enough to live with yourself, without other people making their contribution.”

So here we have one of the most famous abductees railing against the use of hypnosis. Did anyone listen to her and consider her opinion? It seems as though input from the person who had the experience became secondary to others agendas.

Whitley Strieber said in an article he wrote for UFO magazine in 1989;

“I have seen what I feel are abuses perpetrated by "investigators" who are really nothing more than part time, unlicensed and mental health counselors. They are carrying out their activities in an inappropriate, misguided and dangerous effort to use hypnosis to build a so-called "credible" case for UFO abduction.

Abduction research may not even be possible utilizing hypnosis; even highly trained hypnotists cannot use the technique reliably for retrieving basic factual information. Until there is a base of information gained from unhypnotized subjects, it must properly remain a therapeutic tool, not an investigative one.

The so called "abduction narrative," which has been gained primarily from hypnotically-induced recall, probably does not reflect actual experience, but rather the application of the subject's worst fears to their most enigmatic experiences.”

He goes on to say;

“I have come to believe that many techniques used by amateur investigators are not just suspect, but disastrous. They amount to a form of unintentional but devastatingly effective brainwashing that denies witnesses access to the truth of their experiences as they originally perceived them.”

I think most people familiar with the abduction phenomenon would agree that Mr. Strieber has influenced the acceptance of the abduction phenomenon more than anyone. Knowing his position on hypnosis, did his opposition to the use of hypnosis influence anyone researching abductions? The vast number of abduction research related books where the researcher used hypnosis is proof that most researchers have their own agendas. These are agendas which, in my opinion, do not involve “truth” or the well being of the abductees.

When you look at the testimony from abductees who have never undergone hypnosis you find a lot of details about their experiences which are completely contrary to what researchers claim they find using hypnosis. With all the information I have gathered, it makes me wonder just what "truths" about abductions have been uncovered over the last forty years. I am sure I’ll be shunned and attacked for this article but, if I can get just one abductee to reconsider their decision to resort to hypnosis and explore other options then, it is worth it.

*****