Could this have really happened? It seems like there are many holes in Paul Ingram’s horrific story. We’re they brainwashed into thinking those rituals happened to them, but actually didn’t? Their testimonies seem too vivid to disregard, but there’s no physical proof that those heinous acts happened other than another person confirming those events with the same testimony. I immediately thought they we’re brainwashed as a group or in the same fashion, but some pieces of Julia’s memory was slightly different then Erika’s. It’s also noteworthy that each of the characters in the article never remembered any details until the investigators cued them asking for specific details. If these rituals did happen, why didn’t the girls/victims tell anyone before? Why now? The end of the article notes on the act of repressing such traumatic events. Does repression really exist if the memories are brought back to thought again? It’s also really interesting to think that this occurred to such a religious family and out of nowhere and then they are demons. It hints at what religion can do to you and the family converted religions, but that didn’t seem to affect them. The point is they we’re devoted followers from the beginning and ended up participating in abusive satanic rituals. Wright emphasizes that these rituals were so awful that it suggests that what they practiced was a form of abuse. He quoted, “The purpose of the mind control is to compel ritual abuse victims to keep the secret of their abuse, to conform to the beliefs and behaviors of the cult, and to become functioning members who serve the cult by carrying out the directives of its leaders without being detected within society at large,” which is why I believe they were brainwashed. Can religion be a form of ritual abuse? Finally, I have no idea what the mini cartoons meant in the article. I also find it funny that Sandy felt so upset by the accusations on her family that she went to the mall and got her ears pierced.
From the beginning Paul seems open to the idea that there is this darker side of him that he doesn’t know about. It is strange that he is so willing to admit he doesn’t know himself fully. How can someone admit to doing things to his children when he honestly can’t remember doing the acts? Since the children reported their father before they were prompted by anyone else, there must be some truth in what they say. Paul is told that if he just confesses, the memories will come back to him, but when he speaks, it’s in a bit of trance-like state and he is very distant from what he says, using the words “I would’ve” rather than ‘I did.’ The fact that he even says what he would have done shows the sexual thoughts roaming in his mind, and he doesn’t exactly seem sad that these things happened to his children, but more curious. In the article it says that during ritual abuse, brainwashing drugs are given to the victims in order to keep the abuse secret, so perhaps this contributed to why the children couldn’t remember much until they started talking about it. Their stories contradicted, and it was said that the mother just watched the children being raped, but then later claimed to remember being the one raped. It makes sense that the children would repress the memories because they were so traumatic, but why would the person committing the acts feel so horrified by what he has done and repress the memories when it continuously happens. Because Paul admitted he did these things he was sent to jail, even though it was proven that he was remembering things that didn’t even happen and then he would elaborate on them. There just wasn’t clear evidence so memories can’t be the only source for putting someone in jail. Though memory is used as a survival mechanism, it is extremely scary because a case like this shows that we don’t even know if we can trust ourselves, let alone other people. It’s just so confusing how another person could get a dad to make up stories like that in detail about his own children. If he didn’t do any of that, he must have at least had it on his mind…
It’s interesting the immense role that religion played in the Ingram case. It seems probable that devoutly religious persons are ‘primed’ to fabricate memories of SRA, as is proposed briefly at the conclusion of Wright’s article. Paul and Sandy Ingram were encouraged to delve into their “darker sides,” the parts of themselves which Christian dualism would equate with the Devil. Satanism seems a remarkable leap from people living on a subsistence farm, actively attending church and highly involved in the community, however it truly is just the other side of the same theoretical coin. This upbringing also lends the children, and parents, particularly susceptible to suggestion from figures of religious authority, such as Pastor John Bratun, who Paul trusted completely and called upon on many occasions, and who told Sandy that “the charges were probably true, because children didn’t make up those kinds of things.” (Wright, 66) In fact, Erika’s first revelation of abuse occurred after Karla Franco at the Christian Camp said “you have been abused as a child,” and based on ‘divine prompting’ continued on to say “it’s by her father, and it’s been happening for years.” After these statements she urges Erika to seek counseling to “uncover the memories.” It is also noteworthy that the first mention of ritual abuse was not introduced by either the accusers or the alleged perpetrators, but by psychologist Richard Peterson who launches an out of the blue inquiry as to whether Paul Ingram had ever been involved in black magic. Peterson also feeds into Ingram’s religious affinity over and over again in prompting memories. Many of the techniques used by investigators throughout the case are ideal for prompting potentially fabricated of false memories. Both the children and parents are bombarded with suggestive questioning and imagery techniques, and dream interpretation is even utilized to illicit memories from Chad. Paul Ingram is continually assured by authority figures that “once he confessed, the repressed memories would come flooding back.” While no evidence was ever uncovered to validate any of the SRA claims, Olfshe did demonstrate that Paul Ingram was capable of generating false memories, which landed a devastating blow to a case which was under immense pressure to be the first proof of the occurrence of SRA. While the SRA claims may have been false or even fabricated memories, they were perhaps based off of a modicum of truth. Based on Paul Ross’s memories, which were not revealed under the same circumstances as the rest of the family due to his distance, and were corroborated by his brother Chad, it seems likely that some level of sexual depravity did exist within the Ingram house. Investigator Thompson also expressed that Julie was “the most traumatized child she had ever seen,” and her teacher had noticed a significant personality change in the girl. It does not seem fantastical or unlikely that some level of abuse did occur within the Ingram home. Along these lines, Paul Ingram was administered a standard sexual-deviation test which he took three times, based on his state of mind before the before arrest, before he was delivered of evil spirits by Pastor Bratun, and once for his current mindset (in custody, post-delivery). While the first of the scores was normal, the counselor judged him to have “significant sexual problems,” following his memory retrieval. (Wright, 61) One would wonder whether a truly depraved man has been forged through the formation of these memories.
Does anyone else find it a little suspicious that this whole thing happened in Washington when one of the leading researchers in false memory works at the University of Washington? I do. But anyway. “Remember Satan” was an incredibly elaborative case study and incredibly real example for the disastrous implications false memory can have. Although this article was specific to one story, it revealed how “popular” allegations of Satanic Ritual abuse have become and other such “normal” abuse- enough for falsely accused parents to form an organization against its occurrence. It really is amazing that this situation could get so out of hand, and encompass so many people. One would think that at some point the fact that so many outsiders were brought into the case would have eventually been able to curb the allegations. And yet every single accused person finally confessed and conceded, often offering information far beyond the original accusations. To me one of the most persistent themes in this article shows the importance of authority in creating false memories. According to many false memory researchers, there are three steps to creating a false memory- accepting the information as plausible, attaching a visualization and narration to the memory, and finally making a source-misattribution error- mistaking the false memory for a true one. Although some might argue (as I originally thought) that these situations seem to negate the idea of “plausibility” as the first step (because some extremely outlandish allegations have been accepted and ultimately recalled as true memories), I think authority plays a huge part in completing the first, “plausibility” step. To explain, authority may not be the only mitigating factor in the creation of a false memory- adding a narrative/visual and source-misattribution are still imperative as the final steps. I do think, however, that authority is necessary in, first and foremost, accepting information as plausible. It also seems to me that the higher the authority present, the loftier an imagination may be present in the false memory that is created. While the “lost-in-the-mall” effect is likely to occur in the case of a narration by an older brother or experimenter, what happens when the “authority” is, well, God? It is easy to look at the Ingram’s story in regards to the three steps: The Ingram’s pastor is reported to have repeatedly told Paul Ingram that “God would not allow his memories to be anything but true.” This immediately passes the first step- Ingram is now likely to accept any memory that comes to mind as plausible, as there is technically no higher authority in his mind. Why would he have reason to doubt his memories if he believes they are truly led to him by God himself? The other steps follow easily- investigators urged Ingram to attach a narrative and visualization to the memories. They asked him to narrate what could or might have happened, asked him to pray and visualize the occurrence. Finally, despite hesitation, Ingram would accept these memories as his own instead of fanciful, wildly imaginative images.
As I read this article I became increasingly struck by the length to which false memories can extend. Toward the beginning, I suspected that, since the article had to do with false memory, some aspects of the memories would be false, but I was shocked at the extent to which these elaborate stories were constructed from hardly anything. I was particularly struck by the implications that false memory has. It’s interesting to me that psychologists, therapists, etc, often prompt supposed victims to recollect memories that are based on nonexistent experiences. The article explores the influence of such authority figures as therapists on patients “who used their authority to persuade vulnerable clients that the complex problems they experience in adult life can be attributed to a single, simple cause: childhood abuse” (70). First of all, this over simplification of deep seated, complex problems is fascinating to me. It seems that for a while (which is slowly changing), recollected images are automatically assumed to be memories, often said to be repressed. Recalled false memories, even if heavily prompted by a therapist or some other kind of questioner, seem to have been taken at face value for so long, their validity rarely questioned. This leads me to speculate about all the factors that lead into the construction of memories, constructive mechanisms that seem so intricate that their separation from a true memory isn’t usually even questioned. But now that the concept of false memories is gaining more validity, and the mere explanation of repression in terms of “recovered” memories is losing ground, it seems so obvious that so called memories are not always guaranteed to be memories. Images and feelings about one’s supposed past can arise from a large number of factors. If images were to arise in one’s mind, it seems that it were once automatically accepted that these images, these supposed memories, were evidence enough alone that an experience had taken place. It’s about time that we start to take the concept of false memory as a valid one, especially since memory is now widely accepted as a reconstructive process. Not only that, but images can arise out of nowhere for a number of reasons, and don’t necessarily have to be linked to an experience. I’m curious as to why, besides the prompting of authority figures, certain images arise when they are not linked to a specific experience, and what these images can mean . I think it’s important to do more research and try to take these images and supposed recollected experience for what they are. In that way, such images won’t be over simplified and placed into the assumed category of “memory.” Instead, their implications can be more deeply explored.
This article tells a story set in Washington. I grew up in Seattle, Washington. The mixture of dark and gloomy weather with depressed and isolated people seems to play a part in this strange story. So, I am familiar with the setting. I am not so familiar with Christian extremists. But, before Satan is brought into this narrative we begin with abuse, incest. Paul is accused of sexually abusing his children. He answers questions when pressed with phrases like: “I would’ve.” He imagines the possibility of his traumatic wrong doing when questioned by his colleagues. I felt that he must have been guilty when I began reading this article. His picture made him look so ominous and scary. I tended to believe the victim over the perpetrator especially in the case of children. Then satanic rituals come into play. I can think of two plausible explanations for this. One is that after a person has a traumatic experience it might be easier for them to fictionalize it and exaggerate it because the truth is much more painful to accept. The second is that there are many secret corrupt and covert operations in this country. It is possible that these horrific satanic rituals do truly occur under the radar and are carefully covered up. In the end all I can say is that this makes Washingtonians look like shit.
6 comments:
Could this have really happened? It seems like there are many holes in Paul Ingram’s horrific story. We’re they brainwashed into thinking those rituals happened to them, but actually didn’t? Their testimonies seem too vivid to disregard, but there’s no physical proof that those heinous acts happened other than another person confirming those events with the same testimony. I immediately thought they we’re brainwashed as a group or in the same fashion, but some pieces of Julia’s memory was slightly different then Erika’s. It’s also noteworthy that each of the characters in the article never remembered any details until the investigators cued them asking for specific details.
If these rituals did happen, why didn’t the girls/victims tell anyone before? Why now? The end of the article notes on the act of repressing such traumatic events. Does repression really exist if the memories are brought back to thought again?
It’s also really interesting to think that this occurred to such a religious family and out of nowhere and then they are demons. It hints at what religion can do to you and the family converted religions, but that didn’t seem to affect them. The point is they we’re devoted followers from the beginning and ended up participating in abusive satanic rituals. Wright emphasizes that these rituals were so awful that it suggests that what they practiced was a form of abuse. He quoted, “The purpose of the mind control is to compel ritual abuse victims to keep the secret of their abuse, to conform to the beliefs and behaviors of the cult, and to become functioning members who serve the cult by carrying out the directives of its leaders without being detected within society at large,” which is why I believe they were brainwashed. Can religion be a form of ritual abuse?
Finally, I have no idea what the mini cartoons meant in the article. I also find it funny that Sandy felt so upset by the accusations on her family that she went to the mall and got her ears pierced.
From the beginning Paul seems open to the idea that there is this darker side of him that he doesn’t know about. It is strange that he is so willing to admit he doesn’t know himself fully. How can someone admit to doing things to his children when he honestly can’t remember doing the acts? Since the children reported their father before they were prompted by anyone else, there must be some truth in what they say. Paul is told that if he just confesses, the memories will come back to him, but when he speaks, it’s in a bit of trance-like state and he is very distant from what he says, using the words “I would’ve” rather than ‘I did.’ The fact that he even says what he would have done shows the sexual thoughts roaming in his mind, and he doesn’t exactly seem sad that these things happened to his children, but more curious. In the article it says that during ritual abuse, brainwashing drugs are given to the victims in order to keep the abuse secret, so perhaps this contributed to why the children couldn’t remember much until they started talking about it. Their stories contradicted, and it was said that the mother just watched the children being raped, but then later claimed to remember being the one raped. It makes sense that the children would repress the memories because they were so traumatic, but why would the person committing the acts feel so horrified by what he has done and repress the memories when it continuously happens. Because Paul admitted he did these things he was sent to jail, even though it was proven that he was remembering things that didn’t even happen and then he would elaborate on them. There just wasn’t clear evidence so memories can’t be the only source for putting someone in jail. Though memory is used as a survival mechanism, it is extremely scary because a case like this shows that we don’t even know if we can trust ourselves, let alone other people. It’s just so confusing how another person could get a dad to make up stories like that in detail about his own children. If he didn’t do any of that, he must have at least had it on his mind…
It’s interesting the immense role that religion played in the Ingram case. It seems probable that devoutly religious persons are ‘primed’ to fabricate memories of SRA, as is proposed briefly at the conclusion of Wright’s article. Paul and Sandy Ingram were encouraged to delve into their “darker sides,” the parts of themselves which Christian dualism would equate with the Devil. Satanism seems a remarkable leap from people living on a subsistence farm, actively attending church and highly involved in the community, however it truly is just the other side of the same theoretical coin. This upbringing also lends the children, and parents, particularly susceptible to suggestion from figures of religious authority, such as Pastor John Bratun, who Paul trusted completely and called upon on many occasions, and who told Sandy that “the charges were probably true, because children didn’t make up those kinds of things.” (Wright, 66) In fact, Erika’s first revelation of abuse occurred after Karla Franco at the Christian Camp said “you have been abused as a child,” and based on ‘divine prompting’ continued on to say “it’s by her father, and it’s been happening for years.” After these statements she urges Erika to seek counseling to “uncover the memories.” It is also noteworthy that the first mention of ritual abuse was not introduced by either the accusers or the alleged perpetrators, but by psychologist Richard Peterson who launches an out of the blue inquiry as to whether Paul Ingram had ever been involved in black magic. Peterson also feeds into Ingram’s religious affinity over and over again in prompting memories.
Many of the techniques used by investigators throughout the case are ideal for prompting potentially fabricated of false memories. Both the children and parents are bombarded with suggestive questioning and imagery techniques, and dream interpretation is even utilized to illicit memories from Chad. Paul Ingram is continually assured by authority figures that “once he confessed, the repressed memories would come flooding back.” While no evidence was ever uncovered to validate any of the SRA claims, Olfshe did demonstrate that Paul Ingram was capable of generating false memories, which landed a devastating blow to a case which was under immense pressure to be the first proof of the occurrence of SRA.
While the SRA claims may have been false or even fabricated memories, they were perhaps based off of a modicum of truth. Based on Paul Ross’s memories, which were not revealed under the same circumstances as the rest of the family due to his distance, and were corroborated by his brother Chad, it seems likely that some level of sexual depravity did exist within the Ingram house. Investigator Thompson also expressed that Julie was “the most traumatized child she had ever seen,” and her teacher had noticed a significant personality change in the girl. It does not seem fantastical or unlikely that some level of abuse did occur within the Ingram home.
Along these lines, Paul Ingram was administered a standard sexual-deviation test which he took three times, based on his state of mind before the before arrest, before he was delivered of evil spirits by Pastor Bratun, and once for his current mindset (in custody, post-delivery). While the first of the scores was normal, the counselor judged him to have “significant sexual problems,” following his memory retrieval. (Wright, 61) One would wonder whether a truly depraved man has been forged through the formation of these memories.
Does anyone else find it a little suspicious that this whole thing happened in Washington when one of the leading researchers in false memory works at the University of Washington?
I do.
But anyway.
“Remember Satan” was an incredibly elaborative case study and incredibly real example for the disastrous implications false memory can have. Although this article was specific to one story, it revealed how “popular” allegations of Satanic Ritual abuse have become and other such “normal” abuse- enough for falsely accused parents to form an organization against its occurrence.
It really is amazing that this situation could get so out of hand, and encompass so many people. One would think that at some point the fact that so many outsiders were brought into the case would have eventually been able to curb the allegations. And yet every single accused person finally confessed and conceded, often offering information far beyond the original accusations.
To me one of the most persistent themes in this article shows the importance of authority in creating false memories. According to many false memory researchers, there are three steps to creating a false memory- accepting the information as plausible, attaching a visualization and narration to the memory, and finally making a source-misattribution error- mistaking the false memory for a true one.
Although some might argue (as I originally thought) that these situations seem to negate the idea of “plausibility” as the first step (because some extremely outlandish allegations have been accepted and ultimately recalled as true memories), I think authority plays a huge part in completing the first, “plausibility” step. To explain, authority may not be the only mitigating factor in the creation of a false memory- adding a narrative/visual and source-misattribution are still imperative as the final steps. I do think, however, that authority is necessary in, first and foremost, accepting information as plausible. It also seems to me that the higher the authority present, the loftier an imagination may be present in the false memory that is created.
While the “lost-in-the-mall” effect is likely to occur in the case of a narration by an older brother or experimenter, what happens when the “authority” is, well, God?
It is easy to look at the Ingram’s story in regards to the three steps:
The Ingram’s pastor is reported to have repeatedly told Paul Ingram that “God would not allow his memories to be anything but true.” This immediately passes the first step- Ingram is now likely to accept any memory that comes to mind as plausible, as there is technically no higher authority in his mind. Why would he have reason to doubt his memories if he believes they are truly led to him by God himself? The other steps follow easily- investigators urged Ingram to attach a narrative and visualization to the memories. They asked him to narrate what could or might have happened, asked him to pray and visualize the occurrence. Finally, despite hesitation, Ingram would accept these memories as his own instead of fanciful, wildly imaginative images.
As I read this article I became increasingly struck by the length to which false memories can extend. Toward the beginning, I suspected that, since the article had to do with false memory, some aspects of the memories would be false, but I was shocked at the extent to which these elaborate stories were constructed from hardly anything. I was particularly struck by the implications that false memory has. It’s interesting to me that psychologists, therapists, etc, often prompt supposed victims to recollect memories that are based on nonexistent experiences. The article explores the influence of such authority figures as therapists on patients “who used their authority to persuade vulnerable clients that the complex problems they experience in adult life can be attributed to a single, simple cause: childhood abuse” (70).
First of all, this over simplification of deep seated, complex problems is fascinating to me. It seems that for a while (which is slowly changing), recollected images are automatically assumed to be memories, often said to be repressed. Recalled false memories, even if heavily prompted by a therapist or some other kind of questioner, seem to have been taken at face value for so long, their validity rarely questioned. This leads me to speculate about all the factors that lead into the construction of memories, constructive mechanisms that seem so intricate that their separation from a true memory isn’t usually even questioned. But now that the concept of false memories is gaining more validity, and the mere explanation of repression in terms of “recovered” memories is losing ground, it seems so obvious that so called memories are not always guaranteed to be memories. Images and feelings about one’s supposed past can arise from a large number of factors. If images were to arise in one’s mind, it seems that it were once automatically accepted that these images, these supposed memories, were evidence enough alone that an experience had taken place. It’s about time that we start to take the concept of false memory as a valid one, especially since memory is now widely accepted as a reconstructive process. Not only that, but images can arise out of nowhere for a number of reasons, and don’t necessarily have to be linked to an experience. I’m curious as to why, besides the prompting of authority figures, certain images arise when they are not linked to a specific experience, and what these images can mean .
I think it’s important to do more research and try to take these images and supposed recollected experience for what they are. In that way, such images won’t be over simplified and placed into the assumed category of “memory.” Instead, their implications can be more deeply explored.
This article tells a story set in Washington. I grew up in Seattle, Washington. The mixture of dark and gloomy weather with depressed and isolated people seems to play a part in this strange story. So, I am familiar with the setting. I am not so familiar with Christian extremists. But, before Satan is brought into this narrative we begin with abuse, incest. Paul is accused of sexually abusing his children. He answers questions when pressed with phrases like: “I would’ve.” He imagines the possibility of his traumatic wrong doing when questioned by his colleagues. I felt that he must have been guilty when I began reading this article. His picture made him look so ominous and scary. I tended to believe the victim over the perpetrator especially in the case of children. Then satanic rituals come into play. I can think of two plausible explanations for this. One is that after a person has a traumatic experience it might be easier for them to fictionalize it and exaggerate it because the truth is much more painful to accept. The second is that there are many secret corrupt and covert operations in this country. It is possible that these horrific satanic rituals do truly occur under the radar and are carefully covered up. In the end all I can say is that this makes Washingtonians look like shit.
Post a Comment