Do the Courts, Child Protection Agencies and CPS investigators have the ability to decide what science is or not, using Loudoun County as a guide, the answer is uneqiuvocally no. As long as the County Attorney and the Commonwealth Attorney is selecting experts for a case, the line between science and neuroscience will continue to be grey. In my opinion, certain psychologically testimony is nothing more than spectral evidence.
Amazingly and to the detriment of the judicial system, debunked myths continue to be recycled. Case in point “Repressed Memories” has been repackaged and listed in the DSM-5 as dissociative amnesia. The name changes but the pseudoscience remains the same. The idea being that an event is so traumatic that the victim represses it until a crusading therapist can retrieve them. This flies in stark contradiction to those who have seen events, such as war, they remember all too well.
The following judicial ruling was provided and it is very disturbing that some Courts recognize “repressed memories” as a proven accepted science. False beliefs die hard. One of the more troubling portions of the opinion is that the Court stated that “dissociative amnesia” is accepted science within the profession. The opinion also stated that there is no consensus among the various States whether or not to accept the theory of “dissociative amnesia”.
It seems nothing has been learned from the daycare hysteria and Satanic Panic of the 80′s. Loudoun County in particular is in the dark ages when it comes to abuses cases, with Sandra Glenney leading the way and a Guardian Ad Litem who will defer to her. Any accusation, evidence or not will gain momentum and take years to wind through the courts.
My advice to any defendant is to know your research; most Judges are not educated in the latest research. It will be important to critically examine the background of any professional that Sandra Glenney recommends.