Critique of the Goodman study
Overview of what occurred after I requested a review of Characteristics and
Sources of
Allegations of Ritualistic child abuse by Dr. Gail Goodman, Phillip Shaver,
and Bette Bottoms - Diana Napolis, M.A. In December 2007 I reviewed the
pivotal research study .Characteristics and Sources of Allegations of
Ritualistic
Child Abuse,. by UC Davis. Dr. Gail Goodman, Dr. Phillip Shaver, and Bette
Bottoms, which had been funded by the National Center on Child Abuse and
Neglect in 1994. This body of work has been used throughout the United States
in
attempts to prove that the scientific community found no evidence to support
the belief that satanic ritual cult abuse of children was occurring in the
United States except in very rare instances. Regardless of the conclusions
reached, it appears that there was substantial and persuasive evidence provided
to
the researchers which indicated that ritual abuse was occurring on a grand
scale, despite what appears to have been repeated attempts made to minimize and
disguise these findings.
It will be difficult to understand my critique without accessing Dr.
Goodman's original study and the 1996 article titled, "An Analysis of
Ritualistic
and Religion-Related Child Abuse Allegations" by these same authors, so I urge
others to download this material. In an article published in the New York
Times titled, .Proof Lacking for Ritual Abuse by Satanists," by Daniel
Goleman,
he quoted Dr. Gail Goodman's representations of this study:
"In a survey of more than 11,000 psychiatric and police workers throughout
the country, conducted for the National Center on Child Abuse and Neglect,
researchers found more than 12,000 accusations of group cult sexual abuse based
on satanic ritual, but not one that investigators had been able to
substantiate. “ This is a false representation about what this study actually
revealed.
The researchers did not receive anywhere near that high of a return rate - it
was actually less than 2000 reports which were examined, which means there
was an intentional and blatant attempt to misrepresent their findings in this
news article. It was discovered that this propaganda is posted on numerous
web sites in efforts to prove that satanic crime does not occur.
On pg. 46 of .Characteristics and Sources of Allegations of Ritualistic
Child Abuse,. Dr. Goodman also wrote: "One respondent cited as evidence the
ritual abuse behavior checklist - a dubious diagnostic checklist which includes
many behaviors common to childhood." (Gould, 1986). Due to that statement, I
have posted a copy of Dr. Catherine Gould's checklist on my web site, and as
the
reader will see, these are clearly abnormal behaviors of children that are
being described and there is nothing dubious about it.
Dr. Goodman concluded by stating: Our research leads us to believe that
there are many more children being abused in the name of God than in the name
of
Satan.. I found that an odd and inappropriate remark to make given the fact
that Dr. Goodman received more reports of ritual abuse than she received about
religion-based abuse. In order to make her case Dr Goodman used as her
examples cases of child abuse or murder which were clearly committed by
Christians
who were mentally ill, not mainstream Christians, therefore I believe it was
inappropriate to suggest that these crimes were committed in the name of
God. The belief systems of mainstream Christianity do not condone criminal or
aberrant behavior but the belief systems of Satanists most certainly do and
the
ritual abuse crimes she was reviewing were in line with those satanic
beliefs. Therefore, it is obvious that there is much more serious crime
committed
by satanists in the name of Satan. Further, cases of Christian medical neglect
are not equivalent in severity to ritual abuse therefore I believe it was
inappropriate for these academics to argue against the enactment of ritual
abuse laws based on these arguments.
As further evidence which supports my opinion that there were purposeful
attempts to distort the facts, after the American Psychological Association
(APA) gave Dr. Goodman an award for Distinguished Professional Contributions to
Applied Research in 2005, Dr. Goodman's response was published in the American
Psychologist, November 2005 issue, in an article entitled Wailing Babies in
her Wake. She stated in reference to this study:
"Our survey revealed that there was essentially no hard evidence of
organized, child abusing, satanic cults that had infiltrated preschools or the
FBI or
that had kidnapped or slain babies. In contrast there was much indirect
evidence of clinical induction of false memories and plentiful evidence of
religion-related abuse, including sexual abuse by Catholic priests. Although
much
of my research indicates that children can have largely accurate memories and
can resist strong suggestions, they can, in contrast (as indicated by the
dramatic examples of ritual abuse claims) also tell wild tales, cave in to
misleading questions, and make important errors. The same is true of some
adults,
of course. All of the books about personal cases of SRA were written by
adults who seem to have believed their own stories."
This pseudo-analysis does not accurately recount the facts either. Dr.
Goodman has disseminated further propaganda in other publications and I have
updated my critique to reflect this information. These articles are:
"Children's
Eyewitness Memory: A Modern History and Contemporary Commentary,". Journal of
Social Issues, Vol. 62, No.4, 2006, pg. 818; and "Interviewing Children in and
out of Court,". The APSAC Handbook on Child Maltreatment, pg. 356.
_http://members.cox.net/court50/goodmanoverview.pdf_
(http://members.cox.net/court50/goodmanoverview.pdf)
Characteristics and Sources of Allegations of Ritualistic Child Abuse, 1994,
(Dr. Gail Goodman, Phillip Shaver, Bette Bottoms posted at
_http://members.cox.net/court50/goodmanstudy.pdf_
(http://members.cox.net/court50/goodmanstudy.pdf)
Critique of Characteristics and Sources of Allegations of Ritualistic Child
Abuse,. 2008, (Diana Napolis, M.A) posted at
_http://members.cox.net/dnap/goodmancritique.pdf_
(http://members.cox.net/dnap/goodmancritique.pdf)
The researchers claimed throughout this study that organized,
intergenerational, sexually molesting satanic cults did not exist, and that a
small number
of clinicians and agencies were responsible for the most reports of satanic
ritual abuse. I am contesting both of these conclusions. In my opinion, there
were too many methodological flaws, too much data was arbitrarily excluded,
the conclusions reached were unsupportable and not based on the data gathered,
and researcher bias, if not blatant manipulation, was prevalent throughout
this research study.
I believe that there were ongoing attempts by the researchers to
psychologically manipulate the reader into disbelieving that certain satanic
practices
existed by making value judgments about these practices from the start. The
researchers continued to categorize reports of torture, cannibalism and murder
as "bizarre" and "extreme," and by the continual usage of those "buzz words,"
it served as a "thought stopping" propaganda technique, intended to
influence the reader into agreeing with the researchers assessments and
conclusions.
As unfortunate as it is, these are the practices of satanists and black magic
practitioners world wide which a Lexis/Nexis search of "satan" "devil
worship" and "ritual" would reveal.
Overall, there were too many serious methodological errors and omissions in
this study to ignore and, in some instances, I believe, the researchers were
caught in outright fabrications.
An Analysis of Ritualistic and Religion-Related Child Abuse Allegations,
1996, (Bottoms, Shaver, Goodman) posted at
_http://www.uic.edu/labs/pll/Bottoms-Shaver-Goodman-1996-lhb.pdf_
(http://www.uic.edu/labs/pll/Bottoms-Shaver-Goodman-1996-lhb.pdf)
**************New MapQuest Local shows what's happening at your destination.
Dining, Movies, Events, News & more. Try it out!
(http://local.mapquest.com/?ncid=emlcntnew00000001)
