This newsletter covers an update on the National Redress Scheme (the Scheme). It provides a list of accessible Redress Support Services for the Christmas period, a link to new video resources, an update on institutions and recent Scheme data.
The update contains material that could be confronting or distressing. Sometimes words or images can cause sadness or distress or trigger traumatic memories, particularly for people who have experienced past abuse or childhood trauma.
Redress Support Services available between Christmas and New Year
The Scheme recognises that the Christmas period can be a difficult time for some people. We would like to take this opportunity to advise you of the Redress Support Services availability throughout this period.
The Scheme is pleased to inform you that two videos designed to raise awareness and inform people of the Queensland Governmentâs participation in the National Redress Scheme have been completed and are now live.
The Scheme is continuously working with institutions that have been named in applications or identified by other means to encourage them to join and participate in the Scheme. To date the Commonwealth, all state and territory governments and 358 non-government institutions covering around 56,061 sites such as churches, schools, homes, charities and community groups across Australia are participating.
A total of 158 non-government institutions have committed to join and finalise on-boarding by no later than 31 December 2020.
For regular updates about the Department of Social Services and the Scheme, you can ‘like’ or ‘follow’ the Australian Families Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/FamiliesInAustralia/
From âWhen British Royals Are Pedophiles, Itâs Called Peccadilloesâ (Frank Report 2019), James Saville fronts the article (as follows).
James Saville
Through reading of this article, attention is drawn again and again by the following second paragraph:
Watch the deck being reshuffled over and over again as the âeliteâ take care of their own.
Despite receiving intense amounts of counselling, therapies, medications and distractions: many CSA Victims continue to speak about the intensity of their CARC Session and-or their NRS Submission, ripple effects within marriages and families whoâre reluctant to admit that these (unkown) Abuses âever happenedâ (âunder their responsibilityâ), disputes and victim-blaming that may result when the CSA Victim has to retell/relive these past experiences to uninvolved relations âfor interest sakeâ, splits that may often be blamed on the CSA Victim for âbeing the needle in the haystackâ of their family separation.
many CSA Victims continue to speak about the intensity of their CARC Session and-or;
their NRS Submission;
ripple effects within marriages and families whoâre reluctant to admit that these (unkown) Abuses âever happenedâ (âunder their responsibilityâ);
common descriptions of young victims being so targeted, that they did not even know of what parts of the human anatomy were involved: âbefore I had ever even heard of sex or knew what anatomy was usedâ (Shivani, 5th paragraph, 2019);
patterns of predators should always be reported + shared with others in that community type (just as this RCbbc.blog). this allows for cautious advice to be shared with others (previous, existing + potential);
disputes and victim-blaming that may result when the CSA Victim has to retell/relive these past experiences to uninvolved relations âfor interest sakeâl;
an earlier victim of a known CSA Predator has gone from being victim, to re-enacting these same behaviours on a new victim. these actions should not occurr + Police should be contacted ASAP;
splits that may often be blamed on the CSA Victim for âbeing the needle in the haystackâ of their family separation;
Hike these are only some of the potential âhaystack needlesâ, they do describe some of the experiences that some of the BBC Students had experienced, witnessed or ignored during their enrolment. These articles were never meant to make accusations, only to provide another POV in the often controlled world of âfree media exposureâ. Comments are welcomed, yet relevant threats will now be reported through applicable QPS CPIU channels (previous OCA comments included). As overlapping instances of Qld Baptistâs SDBC have been cited, these warnings are also made via SDBC_RC.
Prince Charles with Sir James, suspected of being a long standing pedophile.
For there are many unruly men, empty talkers and mind-deluders, whose mouths must needs be stopped, men who are upsetting whole houses, teaching the things which ought not to be taught – for the sake of base gain. Titus 1:10-11
To demonstrate their duty and submission to their spiritual overseer and pastor David Koresh, many “Christians” were willing to be transformed into human torches in the town of Waco, Texas.
To demonstrate their obedience and duty to âObey them that have the rule over you,” many “Christians” submitted to their spiritual overseer and Pastor the Rev. Jim Jones, and “partook of the communion of death” in the jungles of Guyana, South America.
Introduction
Many Christians will be quick to express the âextremenessâ of the examples mentioned above in regards to people following their leaders, yet nevertheless, there is a lot more relevance to what has just been said than most of us care to recognize â relevancy that lands itself right at our own doorsteps.
When someone joins themselves to an organization or an institution called the âlocal church,â the times that will be spent there are very formative.
These formative times give ample opportunities for the âreligious leadersâ or âspiritual overseersâ to brainwash the people by planting fears that will literally keep a person in bondage to their particular brand of religious system for life, or keep a person from looking at anything else for fear of being deceived.
These formative years provide an abundant opportunity as well for the âchurch leadersâ to implant concepts which will actually keep the person from ever seeing the truth, even though the truth may be right before their eyes! If a particular doctrine or practice is continually being implanted into oneâs mind time after time, using vivid graphic illustrations, a handful of Scriptures, add a little fear, and of course, throw in some âawesome respect for church authoritiesâ and then, when that person reads plain Bible texts which tells them something different, they will not be able to clearly see what is directly in front of them. They will see the text through the filters that were put on their mind. They will not see the text as it really is.
Itâs absolutely amazing how many times a Scripture is read in church that completely contradicts one of their main teachings and no one ever comments about the contradiction.
There was a time at the beginning perhaps when they asked those hard questions, but when they were rebuked or ridiculed and shamed for asking questions that caused division, they learned not to question anymore. They learned to go along with the crowd.
The scales over the eyes have become so thick that everything, including the concept of God Himself, becomes gross darkness. But they do not know it is darkness on account of the fact that they have been seeing that way for quite some time now. The âleadersâ have locked them in to their own little system. To stray into a different area of thought is almost unthinkable for many of them.
Yea, rather the âleadersâ view it as tantamount to heresy!
I say without intending offense that such exclusiveness differs little from the two extreme examples mentioned above or any other authoritarian groups.
Victims of such brainwashing have lost their personal autonomy and in some cases are reduced to almost a zombie-like state! A person who goes to their church Sunday after Sunday, and hears basically the same underlying message repeatedly for a lifetime, has little hope of ever understanding TRUTH as it is revealed in all of the Scriptures.
But these people will refuse to learn anything different from what they have been indoctrinated in. Why is that? The reasons are simple but very important to be aware of and understand â BRAINWASHING and FEAR.
Brainwashing 101
Brainwashing:
1) any method of controlled systematic indoctrination, especially one based on repetition or confusion; 2) inducing a person to modify their beliefs, attitudes, or behavior by conditioning through various forms of pressure; 3) the ability to apply procedures or methods so as to effect a radical change in the ideas and beliefs of a person.
Because brainwashing is such an invasive form of influence, it requires the complete isolation and dependency of the subject, which is why you mostly hear of brainwashing occurring either in a religious system of some kind or at prison camps.
The agent (the brainwasher) must have complete control over the target. (the brainwashee) Sound familiar? Everything pertaining to the targets life depends on the will of the agent. (your spiritual overseer) Every step the agent takes will result in advancing his own self-centered agenda.
In the brainwashing process, the agent will systematically break down the target’s identity to the point that it doesn’t work anymore.
These brainwashers will hone in on a personâs weaknesses by first making their target comfortable, then get personal and confidential information to exploit the person later. Many âchurch leadersâ for example will project themselves with false humility; posing as spiritual men. They take the place of the personâs physical father and successfully use this emotional leverage for the deep seated need for approval in order to motivate and control them.
The goal is to make the adult followers as much like their own children as possible. When people accept this, then they accept human authority in their lives to the point where they are hopelessly dependent on the authority, as children are with their parents. One technique the âchurch leaderâ will use to obtain this type of parental control is to keep them off balance to foster dependency, making it hard for them to make their own decisions.
When this kind of cunning craftiness is plotted to deceive the followers into functioning like children, they become much more manageable, being easily influenced by false doctrines and other tricks of deception.
From here on in, the targets (a.k.a: âchurch membersâ) willingly give up their minds and their souls at the institutional church doors; allowing themselves to be induced with the godless spiritual narcotic of “duly authorized rule” slowly and deliberately being administered by their “church overseers and pastors.” Having now been deprived and numbed to any sense of right or wrong, they mindlessly, and without any shame or twinge of conscience, follow and obey everything they are told to do within those institutional walls.
Even if it means destroying your own family “for the higher good,” the higher good of course being in conformance to the wishes of your spiritual overseer and his local church.
This is what happens when we follow the ways and the teachings of men. How many times in the Scriptures have we been warned over, and over, and over again concerning man’s ways and traditions; taking heed to what we hear; testing and proving the spirits, etc. But unfortunately, it is very rare today to see a “Berean”.
Remember that religious brainwashing can be extraordinarily powerful and dangerous to anyone, but especially to those who do not have the ability to withstand the religious pressure. With this kind of pressure and these kinds of fear tactics, is it any wonder that some Christians donât think for themselves?
The best thing to do regarding your professing Christian relatives and friends is to realize that, while they are well-meaning in their beliefs, they have been brainwashed. Brainwashed people cannot see the Truth that is right before their eyes and they will deny facts that do not agree with their beliefs. Brainwashing causes a disconnect in the mind of the Christian believer between demonstrable reality and religious fantasy. Reality is filtered out in favor of the religious dogma/fantasy.
âThanks Brother. You’re a great testimony to the Church!”
Enter: Elizabeth Smart
Remember the abduction and brainwashing of Elizabeth Smart back in 2002? The scary similarities are astounding.
Just to briefly recap: âUnder orders from God,â two religious abductors, a husband and wife team, took (kidnapped) Elizabeth from her bedroom and held her captive for nine months before she was finally rescued.
The effect of these religious abductors cannot be ignored. Normally, when you try to ensnare someone to a belief system, it requires a dense network of fellow believers to indoctrinate you on their values and rituals, as well as exert social pressure. In Elizabeth Smartâs case, there were only two people, a man and his wife. Yet the forcefulness of their beliefs and tactics was enough to sway this young girl, just mature enough to comprehend spiritual ideas but not experienced enough to judge them skeptically.
For quite a number of months, the trio traveled around the western United States and at no time did Elizabeth attempt to escape, even when wandering through a grocery store by herself, the brainwashing had so well taken effect. Someone has said that âunder stress, a person can go into survival mode…..you suddenly start to identify with your captors. Its called traumatic bonding, and people actually come to see their abductors as their saviors.â Elizabeth Smartâs failure to take advantage of opportunities to escape or call for help are all symptomatic of someone who has been brainwashed.
She was once photographed three months after her abduction at a party where she could easily have raised alarms, but instead showed no signs of needing help. One witness who supposedly saw Elizabeth Smart at the party with her captors said she âstood silently behind her captor submissively, robed in what some have called a berka.Asked why the women wore these garments and were veiled, the captor reportedly said, “To protect them from the sins of the world.”
Another witness stated that she seemed like she was part of the family.
One Salt Lake City resident told reporters he provided shelter for Mitchell, his wife, and Elizabeth for several days and that the girl never expressed fear, tried to escape, call police or sought his help.
One day, when police finally noticed the trio on a street corner, they pulled Elizabeth aside by herself. When initially questioned by police, Elizabeth Smart identified herself as “Augustine” and seemingly attempted to frustrate the efforts of officers to help her.
According to a report from Newsweek, Elizabeth told police, “I know you think I’m that Elizabeth Smart girl who ran away, but I’m not.” The report goes on to say that “even as the police took her in a car, she denied her identity.” According to another report from Time, “Three times she told them her name was Augustine and she insisted to them that she was traveling with her parents.”
When the police insisted that she was Elizabeth Smart, she replied with a non-committal phrase: “Thou sayest.”
After finally admitting her identity, Elizabeth repeatedly asked police what would happen to her companions, Brian David Mitchell and Wanda Ilene Barzee. Police said she showed concern only for their welfare, not her own.
How did Mitchell, a self-proclaimed “prophet” and supposed messenger called by God, change this Salt Lake City teenager into his willing follower? How did he hold Elizabeth within a “world” of his own creation?
One method he employed was to control her environment, and through brainwashing, Mitchell controlled Elizabeth’s completely! He also sought to isolate her from her familiar support system of family and friends. After gaining this environmental control, Mitchell then effectively could filter all information flowing to Elizabeth.
She became dependent upon him to interpret everything, from where she can go and what she can do, to Bible passages and their meanings and even to the meaning of life. He created for her a new language, giving her a new name and identity, inculcating her into his religious belief system. The young girl had no outside frame of reference or accurate feedback from others to oppose the growing influence of this âmessenger from God.â
Step-by-step this control led to the undue influence witnessed by those interviewed. Elizabeth gradually seemed to assume a cult identity, which included the new name “Augustine.” She became robotic; believing and doing whatever the messenger from God said.
Once Mitchell had Elizabeth, he immediately began to drive home his belief system, laid out in a dense 27-page manifesto in which he declared himself âGodâs man.â He knew the right words to say because he was a Mormon and she was Mormon. This connection between them, a shared knowledge of religious doctrine and reference points, allowed the hold over her to become that much stronger.
Paul Martin, a mental-health counselor, said:
“For every Elizabeth Smart out there, I can tell you there are probably hundreds of thousands a year that don’t go reported. There are many that join groups like that, maybe not as bizarre but equally destructive……. These are serial killers of the soul. It’s a national tragedy.”
Geraldine Stahly, a psychology professor at California State University at San Bernardino said:
“People who spend long stretches of time with their captors often begin identifying with them. This is called the Stockholm Syndrome. She said: If they are entangled in a group for a considerable length of time, they actually begin to have distortion in their thinking; to take the side of their abductors and see all outsiders as a threat.”
Coming Home To Roost
Have you been or are you, like Elizabeth, in a situation where some church authority figure threatened your life or family, and then, like Elizabeth, had managed to placate this overwhelming authority figure into NOT harming you, thus forming a close emotional bond?
Like Elizabeth, have you been or are you “in awe” of this âduly authorized being from God?”
Like Elizabeth, have you been or has your real identity been stripped away layer by layer and replaced with an artificial construct imposed from without, thus transforming you into a âdumb sheep?â
And like Elizabeth, did you or do you feel “warmth for your awesome spiritual overseer” which removes any desire to escape from your captivity?
Reading about the brainwashing of this poor young girl, with point after point of similarity jumping out, you begin to understand better why so many members of local institutional churches are so blinded and in bondage to their religious systems. They have been brainwashed, and when confronted with solid Biblical evidence and facts that goes against their religious babble, it just washes off them as water off a duck’s back.
Remember. Elizabeth continued to deny to the police that she was Elizabeth, even when facing a photo of herself on a wanted poster!
That is the power of religious brainwashing.
If she could look straight into a photograph of herself and not see that it was her in the photo, how much more could a Baptist or Presbyterian or Catholic look into more obscure facts and not see them as well! In a five minute discussion between a real Christian and a typical local institutional church member, what chance does solid Scriptural evidence have going up against years and years of intense daily brainwashing?
Once again, 1 Corinthians 2:14 speaks volumes:
Now the natural man receives not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot know them, because they are spiritually judged.
However blinded they are to their own brainwashing, many people have no problem seeing and pointing out others who are thus inflicted. A Seventh Day Adventist for example can easily see the brainwashing that has taken hold of a Baptist, and vice versa. A Reformed individual can easily see the brainwashing that has taken hold of an Armenian or a Roman Catholic, and vice versa. But neither can see it in himself.
Gather together into a room one hundred church members from one hundred different denominations, and each one can see in the 99 others the brainwashing; but they can’t see it in themselves. They all marvel at how blinded the 99 others are to admitting new facts even in the face of mountains of scriptural evidence, yet think themselves not brainwashed, but rather “steadfast and true” when themselves, faced with such scriptural evidence against their own peculiar beliefs, ignore it and continue believing whatever tripe they specialize in. They not only ignore it, they actually feel they deserve some kind of medal for having been brain-dead and stubborn enough not to be affected by the clear teaching of Scripture.
In their church view, being closed minded and thick-headed is a virtue, not a vice. “Look at me, ma! I spent an hour with a Presbyterian and learned nothing! Praise God!â
The problem with many Christians in our day is their attitude toward the Bible. They will read their Bible, not expecting to be taught of God from it, but will get their teaching from their pastors, preachers, and commentaries, and then go to the Bible only expecting to find proof for what they have already been taught! (The sad part is that many of these religious cult leaders will actually put their stamp of approval on such passivity).
The problem begins when one comes across a passage of scripture which would seem to contradict what they have been taught. How many of us at times such as these reach for our commentaries or run back to our âpastorsâ or âeldersâ and ask them to explain the verse to us rather than calling out to God for help and wisdom. What do you think your âpastorâ will tell you?
You already know what answer they will give. Thatâs why you run to them!
This is NOT how it should be. Each Christian has a command from God to “Study to show yourself approved unto God, a workman that needs not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.” 2 Timothy 2:15.
Every Christian needs to ask themselves if they know for sure why they believe what they profess to believe, and to “be ready always to give an answer to every man that asks you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear.” 1 Peter 3:15
The fact that so many in our day accept a teaching or practice just because it comes from my church or âmy pastorâ is very troubling in light of the apostle Paul’s words:
For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock. Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them. Therefore watch, and remember, that by the space of three years I ceased not to warn every one night and day with tears. Acts 20:29-31
The Spirit says clearly that some people will abandon the faith in later times; giving heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of demons. 1 timothy 4:1
The apostle Peter warns of the same:
“But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction. And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of.” 2 Peter 2:1-2
How many times has the Lord Himself warned over and again of false prophets and wolves in sheepâs clothing.
They all knew that apostasy would creep into the church very shortly after their departure. Even a rudimentary study of church history will show that this is exactly what took place. Christianity absorbed more and more from its surrounding cultures and religions until the pure stream of Truth was thoroughly polluted.
What is most troubling about this is the average Christianâs reluctance and ambivalence in asking questions about the issues of some of their teachings and practices. This satanic brainwashing and buffoonery has deceived, and IS deceiving millions of unknowing, often unthinking people into actually believing that:
– Obeying your Pastor is the same as obeying God!
– That âgoing to Churchâ is the highest form of worship and is commanded by God!
– That all of your spiritual leaders are clothed with divine authority!
– And that when it comes to a marital issue, a wife is to listen to and follow her Pastorâs counsel, rather than her own husband!
Indeed, the wolves have been placed in charge of the hen house, and are doing their best to keep the hens ignorant of the slaughter of Truth that is going on.
CONCLUSION
Once we have been programmed with a belief, be it true or false, we will act as if it is true! We then instinctively seek to collect facts to support that belief no matter how false it might be!
This is brainwashing in action; the same kind of brainwashing that inflicted Elizabeth Smart.
Brainwashing feeds off of human pride and a lust for control. Those in âpositions of church leadershipâ have literally commandeered what God gave through His Son, a simple, direct, unencumbered relationship with Him, and have fashioned unto themselves their idol, their golden calf, their own little kingdoms in which they can rule, control, and exercise dominion, unfettered!
But even as Isaiah cried, “Lord, who has believed our report?” (Isaiah 53:1; Romans 10:16), even so, who has believed us? Yes, who?
It is almost frightening to see how few professing Christians truly believe and understand whatâs going on, and how fewer yet will believe and obey the Scriptures! The brainwashing has taken full control.
Christ’s sheep have been brainwashed, corralled, and then mistreated by thieves and robbers for many, many centuries. The feelings, the thoughts, and the questionings of the average âChristian church memberâ today have been squelched by their authoritarian, law-mongering overseers.
Whenever the mind of a Christian is stirred and begins to see the false teachings and practices that are occurring in his church, silence and fear begin to take over and envelope him. He knows that if he speaks up, his life and the life of his family would be endangered by the very institution that claims to “care for them.” This is brainwashing at its best.
The words “disaffection“ and “heretic“ will keep him silent, for all of the members know of the result.
Many of these Christians will continue to just settle into their pews week after week, not even knowing whatâs really going on. Calm, quiet, and with their hollow, far-away look in their eyes, there they stay; totally brainwashed into believing that this is whatâs best for them; slothfully satisfied in their captivity, being captivated by their captors! Even the thought of having to “hunt for their own food” sounds too much like work. Many wouldn’t even know where to begin. But why leave? The âcaptors” have convinced them that THEIR CAPTIVITY IS THEIR FREEDOM!
This doping of the mind; this brainwashing is perhaps the most heartbreaking of all. Many just assemble upon the command of their âchurch leaderâ without having the slightest clue of what Christ and His Ecclesia is all about.
What a sad and pathetic state of affairs is todayâs local institutional churches. Indeed, as Paul Martin said earlier, the Elizabeth Smartâs are being multiplied today many times over. These people are serial killers of the soul.
When brainwashing gets to the place where âchurch leadersâ will literally turn wives against husbands and brethren against brethren, then it is time to speak loudly and clearly. When brainwashed believers are taught to actually hate another believer simply because they dared to challenge the pastor, or dared to expose a long standing cherished tradition, the cult and its leaders must be exposed.
When a church tyrant uses his anti-scriptural âofficeâ and âministerial dignityâ to get control of an individual’s mind and conscience, personal revolt is nearly impossible.
The poor sheep become scared of everything and everybody especially when they are cut off from asking or sharing the questions and difficulties in their heart.
Like it or not, this is the description of the brainwashing that is occurring in many churches today encompassing a wide spectrum of denominations.
It is a man-made, man-sustained system of indoctrination that is fueled by pride, greed, lust, power, money, and control; an indoctrination which has gone far, far âbeyond the things which are written.â
Many have been deeply scarred through these diabolical practices and misapplications of men. The brainwashers that occupy these pulpits are smart and clever, and they understand human nature. They know how to deceive and they know how to destroy. There are no words too strong to demonstrate this horrible deception used by this self-serving, hierarchical team of spiritual monsters!
Many need to heed the admonitions of Paul and James: “Neither give place to the Devil” Ephesians 4:27
âBe not deceived my beloved brethren.â James 1:16
Until the people’s eyes are opened and they finally come to realize and act upon the fact that there is a pompous, manipulative, and deceitful ruling class of âchurch leadersâ who will stop at nothing to advance their destructive agendas, they will be doomed to a lifetime of bondage and darkness.
But it will only be done by and through the aid of the Spirit of God Himself. Then and only then will you be convinced to STUDY and be READY to change. Then and only then will you have the mind to comprehend and the courage and bravery to stand up and say ENOUGH!
Without God’s Spirit; without the One of whom it is written, âHe shall guide you into Truth,â all the time in the world will not bring one to the knowledge of the Truth.
May you find the faith and courage to do what God would have you to do, because doing it will bring you the peace, joy, and freedom that Jesus died to provide.
âŤď¸ Neuroscientific and other research confirm that memory is not a single entity and that different kinds of memory are stored in different parts of the brain. âŤď¸In broad terms there are two types of memory. Explicit memory is conscious and can be expressed verbally, while implicit memory is largely unconscious and non-verbal. âŤď¸Explicit memory requires focused attention to consolidate while implicit memory is encoded outside of awareness. âŤď¸Both explicit and implicit memory also include subcategories. For explicit memory, these include declarative (also called `semanticâ) and episodic (also called `autobiographicalâ or `narrativeâ) memory. âŤď¸Declarative memory (i.e. explicit memory type 1) is the only subcategory of memory that can be deliberately called up, i.e. consciously remembered. It conveys pieces of information to others and has been described as `coldâ for this reason (Levine, ibid: 15-16). âŤď¸By contrast, episodic (i.e. explicit memory type 2, also called `autobiographicalâ and `narrativeâ) memory can be described as `warmâ and textured (Levine, 2015: 16). Episodic memory `emerges somewhat spontaneouslyâ, and can be `infused with feeling tones and vitalityâ (Levine, ibid: 16-17). E.g. `I remember when I first saw the lakeâŚâ It is less conscious than the `shopping listâ type of declarative memories but `more consciousâŚthan implicit memoriesâ. It forms `a dynamic interface between the `rationalâ (explicit/declarative) and `irrationalâ (implicit/emotional) realmsâ (Levine, ibid: 16-17). âŤď¸The subcategories of implicit memory can be described as `emotionalâ and `proceduralâ. Emotional memory ( i.e. implicit memory type 1) puts us in touch with what we are feeling, helps us signal our feelings and needs to others, and is `experienced in the body as physical sensationsâ (Levine, 2015: 22; emphasis added). It may also be elicited by an environmental cue such as a smell, sight or sound.
âŤď¸Procedural memories (i.e. implicit memory type 2.)`are the impulses, movements, and internal body sensations that guide us through the how to of our various actions, skills, attractions, and repulsionsâ (Levine, 2015: 25). They help us carry out tasks automatically. Procedural memories may be further subdivided into three groupings of learned motor actions, hardwired emergency responses, and response tendencies of approach or avoidance and attraction or repulsion. âŤď¸Everyday use of the word `memoryâ (but also in psychology textbooks; Brand & McEwen, 2014) generally refers only to conscious, explicit memory which ignores the ongoing importance and various forms of implicit memories (Levine, 2015).
MEMORY, BRAIN DEVELOPMENT, AND PROCESSES
âŤď¸Implicit memory develops before explicit memory, as conscious recall depends on development of the hippocampus in the second year of life. âŤď¸Conscious (explicit) memory, conscious thought and verbalisation are privileged both by health professions and by society in general (Levine, 2015). âŤď¸Implicit, pre-verbal memories do not `disappearâ when the hippocampus develops but are stored in different neural networks and can manifest across the life cycle. âŤď¸Memory is not `a discrete phenomenon, a fixed construction, cemented permanently onto a stone foundationâ (Levine, 2015: 2). Rather it is complex and involves different types and subcategories which function in different ways. âŤď¸Memory is impacted by the processes of encoding, consolidation, and retrieval. Encoding (or formation) describes the original neural laying down of memory. Consolidation (or retention) describes the stabilisation and storage of memory (a process involving the hippocampus) after encoding. Retrieval (or recall) describes the remembering, revival or restoration to consciousness of memory first encoded and then consolidated.
âŤď¸`When memories are retrieved, they are susceptible to change, such that future retrievals call upon the changed informationâ (Rydberg, 2017:94). Research substantiates that `[m]emory is a reconstructive processâ, and that `no memory is a literal account, nor an exact replica, of an experience or eventâ (Goodman-Delahunty et al., 2017: 46).
TRAUMATIC MEMORY
`REMEMBERING BY RELIVINGâ: TRAUMA, REPETITION & BEHAVIOURAL REENACTMENT
âŤď¸Current neuroscientific research confirms that trauma is often remembered through behavioural enactment (van der Kolk, ibid). Traumatised people are frequently unable to speak about their experiences and are `compelled to re-enact them, often remaining unaware of what their behaviour is sayingâ (Howell, 2005: 56-57).
âŤď¸Remembering `in the form of physical sensations, automatic responses, and involuntary movementsâ (Ogden et al, 2006: 165) is characteristic of trauma: `Traumatic memories may also take the form of unconscious `acting-outâ behavioursâ (Levine, 2015: 8).
âŤď¸The need to resolve traumatic experience can fuel repetitive and compulsive actions and behaviours (`Unresolved experiences tend to haunt us until they can be finishedâ; van der Hart et al, 2006: 246). âŤď¸The relationship between repetitive, problematic behaviour and unresolved trauma needs to be recognised so that trauma survivors can be better supported towards recovery.
REMEMBERING & `FORGETTINGâ
âŤď¸While our brains are wired to remember experiences important to survival, under some circumstances survival may be assisted by `forgettingâ (Levine, 2015; Freyd & Birrell, 2013; Silberg, 2013). âŤď¸As children depend on adult caregivers, `forgettingâ traumatic experiences can have survival value in preserving the attachment bond: `[F]orgetting abuse is a way to preserve the attachment relationship when the abuser is someone the victim is dependent onâ (Freyd & Birrell, 2013: 58); `Disruptions in memory may be adaptive⌠if trauma and caregiving emanate from the same sourceâ (Silberg, 2013: 12).
âŤď¸The impacts of stress on the brain, the different neural networks in which memory is stored, the differences between conscious, explicit and unconscious, implicit memory, and the capacity of the mind to compartmentalise and/or detach from experience (`dissociateâ) help explain the phenomenon of `recoveredâ memory (i.e. delayed onset memory recall).
RECOVERED MEMORY (DELAYED ONSET MEMORY RECALL)
âŤď¸The term `recovered memoryâ describes sudden intrusion of memories which were previously unavailable: `[r]ecovered memories are those memories that have been forgotten for a period and then rememberedâ (Barlow et al, 2017: 322).
âŤď¸Research confirms that trauma can disrupt memory in numerous ways and at any one or more of its various stages (âIf recovered memory experiences appear counter-intuitive, this is in part due to misconceptions about trauma and memoryâ;Brewin, 2012:149). âŤď¸Delayed recall of traumatic, implicit memory usually occurs spontaneously, without warning, triggered by a prompt or cue. In trauma, these recovered memory/ies were previously dissociated (i.e. unassimilated and unintegrated) because they were too overwhelming to process. âŤď¸The phenomenon of traumatic amnesia and subsequent delayed conscious recall of traumatic events is well documented in diverse populations (e.g. war veterans, Holocaust survivors, and survivors of natural disasters) as well as adult survivors of childhood trauma (van der Hart et al, 1999; Elliott, 1999). âŤď¸Largely because of the founding of the so-called False Memory Syndrome Foundation in 1990 -on the premise that people were wrongly accused of sexual abuse on the basis of recovered memories -the term `false memoryâ has come to apply solely to the context of recovered memories of child sexual abuse rather than other contexts as well. âŤď¸Research establishes that recovered memories are no less likely to be reliable than explicit consciously recalled memories which were never forgotten (Barlow et al, 2017,ref. Chu et al, 1999; Williams, 1995; Dalenberg, 2006). âŤď¸In the current period there Is a contrast between the `fantasyâ or `sociocognitive modelâ (which proposes that recovered memories result from cultural/environmental influence and/or therapist suggestion) and `the trauma modelâ (which notes the intrusion of memories unable to be assimilated because the experiences were too overwhelming (Vissia, Giesen., et al. 2016). The `trauma modelâ contends that traumatic implicit memory/ies were dissociated or `split offâ from conscious memory and are recovered when they intrude. âŤď¸Memories recovered in therapy represent a small proportion of the total recovered memory reports (Eliott, 1997; Wilsnack, Wonderlich, Kristjanson, Vogeltanz-Holm, & Wilsnack, 2002 cited in Dalenberg et al, 2012) Recovered memories tend to occur without warning and can certainly occur outside of psychotherapy or in its absence.
âŤď¸Strong, recurrent, and/or disabling, traumatic memories, including delayed onset recall (recovered) memories, may lead the person to become conscious of what they signify. While this experience can be destabilising at first, it can subsequently enable integration of the previously split off (dissociated) memory and pave the way for trauma recovery.
`BETRAYAL BLINDNESSâ
âŤď¸âBetrayal blindnessâ, or âunawareness and forgettingâ has survival value. It stems from the concept of `betrayal traumaâ, which assists understanding of how the `forgettingâ of early life abuse serves to preserve the attachment bond to caregivers on which children depend (Freyd, 1991) It also has wide application to a range of contexts: `Although there are various ways to remain blind to betrayal, perhaps the most effective way is to forget the event entirelyâ (Freyd & Birrell, 2013: 58). âŤď¸The `survival strategyâ of betrayal blindness applies to relationships in which dependence of some kind fosters the need to preserve the relationship and can `trump the need to take protective actionâ (Freyd & Birrell, 2103, p.56) âŤď¸âNot seeingâ, `not knowingâ and `not rememberingâ traumatic experience is not confined to children (`Adults are also prone to a kind of magical thinking âŚto gain a sense of control over overwhelming eventsâ (Chu, 2011: 34).
âŤď¸While `forgettingâ the trauma of betrayal (i.e. conscious explicit absence of recall as distinct from implicit memory of traumatic experience) potentially assists survival it can also threaten health if the trauma is not resolved.
THE DYNAMICS OF DISCLOSURE
âŤď¸The process of disclosing traumatic memory (i.e. when able to be spoken about, which involves a different area of the brain and depends on a number of contingencies) `is highly dependent on the reactions of othersâ (Freyd & Birrell, 2013: 126). âŤď¸`{M]ost people who experience childhood sexual abuse do not disclose it until adulthood, and many may never tell at allâ (Freyd & Birrell, 2013, p.123). âŤď¸Disclosure is often not a single event, but rather a process affected by social context, issues of safety and the potential for adverse repercussions.
âŤď¸âNondisclosure, delayed disclosure, and retraction are particularly likely in cases in which the perpetrator is close to the victimâ (Freyd & Birrell, 2013, p.123).
THE RELIABILITY OF MEMORY AND THE ROLE OF SOCIAL CONTEXT
âŤď¸Depending on the context and conditions, both remembering and `forgettingâ (i.e. in the explicit, conscious sense because `the body remembersâ [Rothschild, 2000] at an implicit level) can be healing and/or destructive âŤď¸Social contexts and power disparities, as well as neurological factors, affect the encoding, retrieval, and reliability of memory: `[s]ocial power not only dictates what is appropriate to say out loud, but even what it is appropriate to rememberâ (Barlow et al, 2017: 320). âŤď¸âBoth internal and external processes operate to keep us unawareâ (Freyd & Birrell, 2013: 95); `To the extent that it is not safe to disclose externally, it is not safe to know, or disclose internally, to oneselfâ (ibid: 116).
âŤď¸âContrary to the widespread myth that traumatic events are seldom if ever forgotten, much trauma is not remembered until something happens to bring it to mindâ (Brewin, 2012: 165). âŤď¸Current research establishes that memory is not fixed and unchanging and that all memory -implicit and explicit -undergoes a degree of reconstruction. This does not mean that either is necessarily unreliable. âŤď¸Research has shown that recovered (implicit) memory can be as accurate as continuous i.e. (explicit, conscious) memory (Dalenberg et al. 2012): `Memories that are recovered â those that were forgotten and subsequently recalled-can often be corroborated and are no more likely to be confabulated than are continuous memoriesâ (Chu, 2011, p.80 citing Dalenberg, 1996; Kluft, 1995; Lewis, Yeager, Swiza, Pincus & Lewis, 1997); also Dalenberg et al, 2012). âŤď¸Numerous legal cases in various parts of the world have demonstrated that recovered memories have been verified and corroborated by independent evidence, admissions of guilt by perpetrators, or findings of guilt by courts. https://blogs.brown.edu/recoveredmemory/case-archive/legal-cases/
âŤď¸âThe cognitive processes that underlie everyday memory are the same processes that lead to errors in processing traumatic memoriesâŚLike any memory , the availability of memory for traumatic events depends on how it is assessedâ (Barlow, 2017: 323, referencing Sivers, 2002). âŤď¸Assessment of the reliability of memory must take account of a range of factors. These include the social context of memory, the possibility of betrayal trauma, the survival value of (explicit, conscious) `forgettingâ, the impact of power disparities, and the centrality of emotional and physical safety around recall and disclosure.
To read the full paper The Memory of Truth and the Truth of Memory â Different Types of Memory and the Significance of Trauma; click here
To read our four summary Fact Sheets on Memory â Classification, Understanding Memory, Understanding Traumatic Memory, Recovered memory, click here
The government claims payments so far point to âa more even spread of applicationsâ over the schemeâs 10-year life
Linda Burney says 60,000 child sexual abuse survivors are estimated to be eligible for the national redress scheme, but just 2,250 had been paid by June. Photograph: Joel Carrett/AAPElias Visontay@EliasVisontaySun 26 Jul 2020 06.00 AEST
Labor is accusing the Morrison government of framing issues with the national child abuse redress scheme as budget âsavingsâ, after the government revealed it expects to spend $610m less on payments to victims over the next two years.
The financial figures indicating the National Redress Scheme for survivors of institutional child sexual abuse has not delivered as previously expected come as the scheme falls about 12,500 applications short of the amount the royal commission believed would have been lodged by now.
In its budget update released last week, under the âmajor decreases in paymentsâ section, the government explains the $610m decrease in payments to the fiscal year 2020-21 âlargely reflects a re-profiling of expenditure due to slower than expected uptake by survivors accessing redressâ.
The government said there had also been âan associated downward re-profiling of the expected receipts received from the institutions liable for the paymentsâ, noting that once redress offers are accepted by victims, payments are generally made to them within a week.
Burney said that while the royal commission into institutional child sexual abuse had estimated 60,000 survivors would be eligible for the scheme, just 2,250 applications had been processed and victims paid out by the end of May.Advertisementhttps://tpc.googlesyndication.com/safeframe/1-0-37/html/container.html
âAt this rate it will take around 50 years for the total estimated number of survivors to receive redress,â Burney said.
âThis is the latest insult for survivors who have already waited too long for redress.â
She said that in the more than two years the scheme had been operating, âsurvivors have been reporting poor processes, unfair and inconsistent decision making, inadequate payments and chronic delaysâ.
âThe National Redress Scheme is meant to deliver justice for survivors, not savings for governments and institutions.
âThe scheme simply isnât working as planned â thousands of people who deserve justice simply arenât coming forward and the government needs to fix it,â she said.
However, the minister for social services, Anne Ruston, said âthis is not a budget savingâ, and the $610m reduction in spending on payments was instead an indication there would now be âa more even spread of applications lodgedâ over the 10-year life of the scheme.
âWhen the scheme was first set up we believed, based on the advice of the royal commission, that in 2019-20 and 2020-21 we would have received about 20,000 applications. However, we instead received about 7,500 applications.
âOur original forecasts estimated that there would be a large number of applications received in the first few years … This is why the budget papers refer to reprofiling.
âImportantly, this is not a budget saving. The way the scheme works is that the commonwealth pays out redress payments once a survivor has accepted their offer and then the commonwealth recoups the payment from the relevant institutions later.â
Ruston said the government had ânot shied away from the fact that the scheme is not perfectâ, but said there were âvarious reasons applications may have come in more slowly than first assumedâ.
âThis may include that fact that it has taken some time to get all relevant institutions on board as well as the changes that have been made to the statute of limitations related to child sexual abuse in most states and territories since the scheme commenced,â she said.
The Guardian understands that at the end of June, 2,726 victims had received payments, while 350 cases had been processed in the first year of the scheme.
The average payment under the scheme has so far been $82,000.
The change in expected spending on the scheme comes after the federal government banned federal funding and threatened the charitable status of six groups that refused to notify of their intention to join the two-year window that ended on 30 June 2020. Since then, the number of institutions has reduced to four.
On Friday, 27 November 2020, the Minister for Families and Social Services, Senator the Hon Anne Ruston, hosted the Ministersâ Redress Scheme Governance Board (Board) meeting of relevant Ministers with responsibility for the National Redress Scheme for Institutional Child Sexual Abuse (the Scheme) in their state or territory.
Ministers acknowledged the significant improvement made by the Scheme to process applications, and agreed that finalisation of applications for survivors must continue to be expedited.
As at 20 November 2020, 4,260 applications had been finalised, including 4,221 payments made, totalling around $350 million, with an average payment of around $83,000. There are 303 non-government institutions covering more than 54,050 sites.
There were 158 institutions named in applications or in the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse that committed to join the Scheme by 31 December 2020 and most are on track. Ministers agreed that on 4 January 2021, the Commonwealth would publicly name those institutions which had failed to join by 31 December 2020. This would be the second group of institutions publicly named following the initial naming, which occurred on 1 July 2020. The Board noted the ongoing work of Minister Ruston and the department in working with institutions to join the Scheme before 31 December 2020.
As agreed by the Board in April 2020, any institution that does not join the Scheme by the relevant deadline may face financial consequences applied by State, Territory or Commonwealth governments. The Board is committed to taking necessary steps to maximise institutional participation so survivors can access redress.
Ministers supported the work underway by the Commonwealth to remove the charitable status of those institutions who have been named as failing to join the Scheme. This includes introducing legislation this year, which amends the definition of a basic religious charity in the Australian Charities and Not-for-Profits Commission Act 2012 to remove a religious institutionâs eligibility to be classified as a basic religious charity if it has been named in an application but refuses to join the Scheme.
Ministers welcomed the update provided by Ms Robyn Kruk AO, the Independent Reviewer of the second anniversary review of the Scheme. Ms Kruk advised the meeting on the progress of the review. More than 70 consultations have been undertaken with stakeholders, including with survivors and survivor advocacy groups, states and territories, non-government institutions and support services. A number of these consultations have included discussions with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander survivors. The review called for written submissions between July and September and 177 submissions have been received to date. Ms Krukâs final report is due by the end of February 2021.
Ministers agreed the future priorities for the Board will include considering the recommendations from the second anniversary review, implementing improvements to the Scheme for survivors and on-boarding institutions to the Scheme as quickly as possible.
For many of the CSA Victim-Survivours and their families, the misconception of âjustified manipulationâ is making a major part of the bigger picture. In experiences of multiple forms of âonly our student/family has to deal with thisâ, the similar deny-deny-deny veil has been used repeatedly throughout the different institutions (i.e. churches, schools, clubs & teams) to use fake-news to hide the truths.
Ron Miller. (2016).
Catholic, other denominations (e.g. Anglican, Baptist, Presbetarian, Methodist), Private Schools (e.g. GPS: ACGS, BBC, BGS, GT, NC, TGS, TSS; ), lawyers, justice dept., police (state + federal), schools (Private – notably same-gender), journalism (online, paid and social) and other interested bodies have each increased their POV.
PRAYBOY satire of iconic Playboy media
While broad scale requests were sent to noted Private Schools (SEQ-GPS & NSW), Legal Bodies and Institutions already mentioned – there has (expectedly) been minimal feedback. Although there have been relevant leaps in Blog statistics, countries and articles – relevant ABC and SBS News contact has been included:
Perhaps they are too busy adjusting for these earlier exploits;
the hand of god has sent a messenger;
they each promise their sorrow, never to repeat it again (again);
Tassos Kouris (2008)
These âdifferent piecesâ are being combined in RCbbcâs posts, to explain to readers that their repeated use + reuse is all too common. While reuse of positives may be understood for âcompetitive gainâ, âacademic prowessâ and âscientific understandingâ, the often (silent đ¤ ) ânegative gainsâ are also swept-under-the-carpet:
As harmful as this may be to our individual children,
itâs also gravely hurtful – when taking a step back,
realise one action leads to another (influence),
tweeks-adaptions made to allow greater deception +
Unsurprisingly (or suprisingly), depending from which POV it is viewed. These leaps in reviews may often indicate that there is greater interest in the topics covered. This melds well, with compared with 2020âs yearly stats (as follow). Notable leaps in âStatementsâ (comments from other âOld Boysâ/past BBC students) have a majority of comments, from either past students-family-relations. Through these, a consistent pattern of implicit learning to inherently have the occurrence of ongoing CSA remaining âhiddenâ in targeted victims often remaining silent. As those who dared raise any objection were indirectly un-enrolled/removed-from-the-system, the multi-layered, hegemonic CSA structure continued. Ironically (?) it was our first female PM Julia Gillard (as pictured), who was able to call the essential Royal Commission (CARC 2013-17), from which weâre now in a ten year NRS.
Taking an ongoing interest in AK Buchanan, out of the moment, 2020âs current stats already show that there is a core interest in:
Taking an ongoing interest in AK Buchanan, out of the moment, 2020âs current stats already show that there is a core interest in:
We are pleased to add in âDarkness to Lightâs âChild Sexual Abuse Statisticsâ, to our Library. Following is also a link to their website, celebrating 20 Years (2 decades) of preventing child sexual abuse. Please enjoy your viewing + post any of your comments/suggestions here …
20th AnniversaryPrevious D2L logo (from CSA Statistics)
