y production, it has been argued that it is the nature of certain memory recovery therapies, for example hypnosis, rather than specific therapist interactions, which may inadvertently lead some adults to construct illusory memories (Lindsay & Read, 1994). However, there is, as yet, no evidence that any particular therapeutic approach may produce false memories (Mollon, 1996). Indeed, recent research suggests that it is the hypnotizability of subjects rather than hypnosis per se which is a factor in false recall (Brown, 1995). Recovered memory is not limited to sexual abuse, or to the therapeutic context, or to untrained therapists, and is a robust and frequent phenomenon (Andrews et al., 1995), and so neither therapists nor therapies can take the full responsibility for the recovery of such memories. One concern of those who argue against the concept of false memory is that genuine survivors of sexual abuse may not be taken seriously, and so may not receive adequate help. This highlights the fact that, throughout the debate, there has been an assumption that all those who have genuinely suffered from abuse should be made aware of the fact and receive some form of therapy. However, several authors have questioned the therapeutic value of uncovering events, even if they genuinely did occur, and of the extent to which a past experience of abuse can lead to present-day symptoms. The belief of some therapists that all symptoms have trauma as their primary etiology may be a possible factor that can lead to false recall (Brown, 1995). Berliner and Williams (1994) state that `some therapists make the mistake of attributing far too many current problems to a sexual abuse history' and that `the importance of the factor of sexual experience in the causation of disease has been greatly over-estimated by Freud' (Moll, 1913). It is well documented that people who have experienced trauma do not all react in the same way; for example, not everyone who ...
