“History” has a way of feeling as though it happened long ago. Selfies are such a ubiquitous part of our culture it’s hard to believe the technology that gave rise to them appeared only 15 years ago.
One more example. Seatbelts. On entering the car, my kids and grandkids fasten theirs without thinking. Amazing given that the first law mandating their use did not appear until 1984!
1984.
I’m sure that date seemed far off in the future to George Orwell. Truth is, however, it’s not so long ago. I was a graduate student at the time doing a practicum on the psychiatric ward of a local hospital – and it was full to capacity with patients diagnosed with what previously had been considered an exceptionally rare disorder, multiple personality.
That same year, in what at first seemed an unrelated development, news broke about a child pornography and sexual abuse ring operating at a preschool in Southern California. Interviews of the children by therapists revealed even more sinister details – ritualistic abuse, animal mutilation, sacrificial murder. It didn’t stop there. Other daycare centers were soon implicated, beginning nearby and eventually spreading across the country, exposing a heretofore unknown network of satanic cults.
One day, while working on the unit, I noticed something peculiar. Amidst the changing names, dress, and interactional styles, several of the patients had multiple sets of eyewear. I’m not talking about Ray-Ban’s versus Maui Jim, but rather prescription glasses. More, the pair they wore seemed to vary depending on which of their many personalities was dominant at the time.
And that’s when my dissertation project was born. Over the next year-and-a-half, I ferried patients from the unit to the office of an ophthalmologist who had volunteered to run the tests for the study. Three alters per person had their eyes refracted, retina and vascular structure examined, and intraocular pressure measured. The same tests were completed on an equal number of people who had been trained to feign the disorder during the examination.
During this time, allegations of sexual abuse by organized groups of devil worshipping pedophiles continued to emerge. I’m not sure where I was when a connection was suggested between satanic ritual abuse and the development of multiple personality disorder. In truth, it wasn’t a big leap. A decade earlier, the book, Sybil, and later television mini-series starring Sally Fields, made the public aware of the link between sexual abuse and splintering of personality.
I do remember where I was when I heard that expressions of doubt about the validity of reports regarding widespread satanic abuse could be evidence of complicity. I was at a national conference. Even more mind-bending were the rumors about who was behind the global conspiracy and their true intentions. Can you guess?
By the time I’d finished my dissertation and published a larger, follow-up study, much had changed. My own research challenged the view of the diagnosis popular at the time; namely, that the chief characteristic of the disorder was the existence of separate and distinct alter personalities. Turns out, the visual functioning of people with the diagnosis was indeed highly variable, but not reliably so.
On the legal front, despite spending seven years and fifteen million dollars, the prosecution of the teachers or owners of the original daycare facility resulted in no convictions for any crime. Excavations of an adjacent lot found no evidence of the “secret underground rooms” reportedly used for photographing and abusing children. Despite extensive investigations by the FBI and National Center on Child Abuse and Neglect, none of the twelve thousand accusations of cult led sexual abuse were substantiated. It would take decades in some instances, but all who were convicted were eventually released, including a man whose daughters’ recovered memories of sexual abuse and human sacrifice led to his conviction and twenty-year prison sentence. In time, even Shirley Mason, the real Sybil, recanted, admitting in a letter to her psychiatrist that she’d fabricated the entire story.
And then, just as quickly as it all had started, public and professional interest came to an end. Media stories all but disappeared. Incidence of the diagnosis in hospitals and clinical practice declined precipitously. Specialized treatment centers closed, and professional associations disbanded.
Progress, it seems, was to be had elsewhere. The “decade of the brain” was underway, and the field was moving on. Remember that? It wasn’t that long ago.
Thank you, Scott, for having the courage and the intellect to write this.
Scott, your story certainly highlights the worst of the “bad old days” of poor practices that often centered on the diagnosis of DID. Your account ends giving the impression that the disorder itself was “debunked” not the poor practices (of which there were many – using hypnosis to recover “memories,” the use of checklists to infer that one “must have” experienced childhood sexual abuse whether it was recalled or not, etc. It’s good to recognize bad practices, and whatever the whole satanic thing was about. But obviously there is a real problem with severe, early childhood sexual abuse, and there’s a reason the diagnosis of DID has not been pulled. Good, valid demographic studies have found DID in the community. It is seen, even without any exotic or just plain poor practices, in plenty of practices, including my own. Good people can disagree, but I feel your article implied there is no such thing without being clear about that.
Thanks for reading my post Allison. So good to hear from you! I appreciate your concerns that somehow others might read the post as dismissing the impact of adverse childhood events. I didn’t see it that way. I experienced our field compounding the problem and witnessed the impact personally and professionally when politics, public pressure, and ideology impact service delivery and science. During my time in the field — while I have seen, experienced, and provided documentation of very helpful clinicians and services — I have also seen how poorly evidenced ideas and practices are forwarded as progress. To me, this is a very serious issue. If clinicians cannot see themselves as vulnerable to such practices and movements, we are likely, as we have over and again, repeat this pattern.
I don’t know lived-experience (about other societies/nations/cultures) but the collective we in the lower 48 states is regularly subject bouts of “mob psychology.” As we are living thru a period of ‘distributed network’ mob psychology, yes?, the “virus” of language is even more transmissible.
p.s. I was there for this particular diagnostic ‘fad.’