textfiles/ufo/UFOBBS/2000/2682.ufo

SUBJECT: PATIENTS REPORTING UFO ABDUCTIONS                   FILE: UFO2682






ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ
                       RIMA E. LAIBOW, M.D.
                    Child and Adult Psychiatry
                            Cerridwen
                        13 Summit Terrace
                     Dobbs' Ferry, NY 10522
                          (914)693-3081

CLINICAL DISCREPANCIES BETWEEN EXPECTED AND OBSERVED DATA IN PATIENTS
REPORTING UFO ABDUCTIONS: IMPLICATIONS FOR TREATMENT

ABSTRACT: IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT THIS PAPER MAKES NO ATTEMPT TO
ASSIGN OR WITHHOLD EXTERNAL VALIDITY RELATIVE TO UFO ABDUCTION
SCENARIOS.

Patients who believe themselves to be UFO abductees are a
heterogeneous group widely dispersed along demographic and cultural
lines. Careful examination of these patients and their abduction
reports presents four areas of significant discrepancy between
expected and observed data.

Implications for the treatment of patients presenting UFO abduction
scenarios are discussed.

                          INTRODUCTION

If a patient were to confide to a therapist that he had been abducted
by aliens who took him aboard a UFO and performed a series of medical
procedures and examinations on him it is not likely that the patient
would find either a receptive ear or a respectful and non-judgemental
response from the therapist. The material presented would lie so far
outside the confines of our personal and cultural belief system that
it would seem intolerably anomalous to most of us. We would probably
dismiss or repudiate it using a few comfortable and familiar
assumptions which hold so much obvious wisdom that they do not require
specific examination.

When events which are too anomalous to allow their incorporation into
our world schema are presented to us, we are likely to dismiss them by
using assumptions based in out currently operative world view. This
effectively precludes the open evaluation of the anomaly. Hence, the
"expressible" response of most clinical and lay individuals upon
hearing a UFO abduction account would be an immediate dismissal of
even the possibility that such an episode might occur. Close upon the
heels of that determination the rapid and complete pathologization of
the person offering such an account would follow. Dream states,
suggestibility, poor reality testing, outright dissembling or frank
psychosis are customarily offered and accepted as evident and
reasonable organizing models by which the production of this material
may be understood. These are typical maneuvers by which the
presentation of information which challenges schematic assumptions is
dismissed or screened out before the assumptions can be adequately
tested for predictive reliability and accuracy. Such testing is highly
desirable, however, because it offers us the opportunity to apply the
scientific method to our current level of theorital sophistication and
thereby refine our understanding of reality further still. Of course,
this process is severely impeded when the new data is excluded from
consideration strictly because it is too anomalous for assessment.

Westrum has offered a model by which events become "hidden" and
therefore remain anomalous to the perception of society in a circular
process: the hidden event is disbelieved and its disbelief helps to
keep it hidden. Citing the lengthy period during which battered
children and their battering parents remained hidden, Westrum states:

 "An event is hidden if its occurrence is so implausible that those
 who observe it hesitate to report it because they do not expect to be
 believed. The implausibility may cause the observer to doubt his own
 perceptions, leading to the event's denial or mis identification.
 Should the observer nonetheless make a report, he/she can expect to
 be treated with incredulity or even ridicule. Since the existence of
 a hidden event is contrary to what science, society, and perhaps even
 the observer believes, the event remains hidden because of strong
 social forces which interfere with reporting. The actual degree of
 underreporting is sometimes difficult to believe, a skepticism which
 itself acts as a deterrent to taking seriously those reports which do
 surface." (1)

But for the clinician who spends a moment before reaching these
"obvious" and "intuitive" conclusions, several fascinating and
potentially productive questions present themselves. If we refrain for
a short period from dismissing this material out-of-hand, we find that
there are at least four areas of puzzling and important discrepancy
between our intuitive sense of order and the data presented by the
patient. These discrepancies force us to re-examine our assumptions in

light of a demonstrated failure of the theory to account for the
observed phenomena. This process, while taxing and challenging, is
nonetheless, the way we systemize our understanding of human health
and pathology. Noting the previously un-noted and using it to refine
our conceptual framework leads to better prediction and therefore to
better treatment.

It is not the purpose of this paper to ascribe relative reality to the
experience of abduction reported by some patients. Rather, precisely
because it lies outside the realm of clinical expertise to assess with
certainty whether these events actually occurred or if they are mere
fantasy, it is mandatory for the clinician to examine the impact of
these experiences, whatever their source, upon the patient. This must
be done in a clear sighted and open-minded fashion so that the impact
of the experiences may be dealt with rather than made into hidden
events.

                       AREAS OF DISCREPANCY

1. ABSENCE OF MAJOR PSYCHOPATHOLOGY: It is intuitively seductive (and
perhaps comfortable) for us to assume that psychotic-level functioning
will necessarily be present in a person claiming to be a UFO abductee.
If this level of distortion and delusion is present, a patient would
be expected to demonstrate some other evidence of reality distortion.
Pathology of this magnitude would not be predicted to be present in a
well integrated, mature and non-psychotic individual. Instead, we
would expect clinical and psychometric tools to reveal serious
problems in numerous areas both inter- and interpersonally. It would
be highly surprising if otherwise well-functioning persons were to
demonstrate a single area of floridly psychotic distortion. Further,
if this single idea fix were totally circumscribed, non-invasive and
discrete, that in itself would be highly anomalous. Well-developed,
fixed delusional states with numerous elaborated and sequential
components are not seen in otherwise healthy individuals. Prominent
evidence of deep dysfunction would be expected to pervade many areas
of the patient's life. One would predict that if the abduction
experience were the product of delusional or other psychotic states,
it would be possible to detect such evidence through the clinical and
psychometric tools available to us.

This points to the first important discrepancy: individuals claiming
alien abduction frequently show no evidence of past or present
psychosis, delusional thinking, reality-testing deficits,
hallucinations or other significant psychopathology despite extensive
clinical evaluation. Instead, there is a conspicuous absence of
psychopathology of the magnitude necessary to account for the
production of floridly delusional and presumably psychotic
material.(2)

In order to test this startling and anomalous information, a group of
subjects who believe they have been abducted by aliens (9, 5 male, 4
female) were asked to participate in a psychometric evaluation. An
experienced clinical psychologist carried out an investigation using
projection tests (Rorschach, TAT, Draw a Person and the MMPI) and the
Wechler Adult Intelligence Scale. The examining clinician was told
"the subjects were being evaluated to determine similarities and
differences in personality structure, as well as psychological
strengths and weaknesses". All of the subjects actively refrained from
sharing UFO-related experiences with the examiner and she was unaware
of this theme in their lives.

The investigator found that commonalties were not strongly present and
that:

 "while the subjects are quite heterogeneous in their personality
 styles, there is a modicum of homogeneity in several respects: (1)
 relatively high intelligence with concomitant richness of inner life;
 (2) relative weakness in the sense of identity, especially sexual
 identity; (3) concomitant vulnerability in the inter- personal realm;
 (4) a certain orientation towards alertness which is manifest
 alternately in a certain perceptual sophistication and awareness or
 in inter- personal hyper-vigilance and caution.... Perhaps the most
 obvious and prominent impression left by the nine subjects is the
 range of personality styles the present.... There is little to unite
 them as a group from the standpoint of the overt manifestations of
 their personalities.... They [are] very distinctive unusual and
 interesting subjects. [But] "Along with above average intelligence,
 richness in mental life, and indications of narcissistic identity
 disturbance, the nine subjects also share some degree of impair- ment
 in personal relationships. For [some] subjects, problems in intimacy
 are manifest more in great sensitivity to injury and loss than in
 lack of intimacy and relatedness. [Ad] "...The last salient dimension
 of impairment in the interpersonal realm relates to a certain mildly
 paranoid and disturbing streak in many of the subjects, which renders
 them very wary and cautious about involving themselves with others.

 It is significant that all but one of the subjects had modest
 elevations on the MMPI paranoia scale relative to their other scores.
 Such modest elevations mean that we are not dealing with blatant
 paranoid symptomology but rather over-sensitivity, defensiveness and
 fear of criticism and susceptibility to feeling pressured. To
 summarize, while this is a heterogeneous group in terms of overt
 personality style, it can be said that most of its members share
 being rather unusual and very interesting. They also share brighter
 than average intelligence and a certain rich- ness of inner life that
 can operate favorably in terms of creativity or disadvantageously to
 the extent that it can be overwhelming. Shared underlying emotional
 factors include a degree of identity disturbance, some deficits in
 the interpersonal sphere, and generally mild paranoia phenomena
 (hypersensitivity, wariness, etc.)" (3)

Her findings demonstrate a uniform lack of the significant
psychopathology which would be necessary to account for these
experiences if abduction experiences do represent the psychotic or
delusional states predicted by current theory.

When the examiner was informed of the true reason for the selection of
the subjects for this evaluation (i.e., their shared belief that they
had been exposed to alien abductions), she wrote an addendum to the
original report re- examining the findings of the testing in the light
of the new data. In it she states:

 "The first and most critical question is whether our subjects'
 reported experiences could be accounted for strictly on the basis of
 psychopathy, i.e., mental disorder. The answer is a firm no. In broad
 terms, if the reported abductions were confabulated fantasy
 productions, based on what we know about psychological disorders,
 they could only have come from pathological liars, paranoid
 schizophrenics, and severely disturbed and extraordinarily rare
 hysteroid characters subject to fugue states and/or multiple
 personality shifts... It is important to note that not one of the
 subjects, based on test data, falls into any of these categories.
 Therefore, while testing can do nothing to prove the veracity of the
 UFO abduction reports, one can conclude that the test findings are
 not inconsistent with the possibility that reported UFO abductions
 have, in fact, occurred. In other words, there is no apparent
 psychological explanation for their reports." (4)

2. CONCORDANCE OF REPORTED DATA: The second point of intriguing
discrepancy follows from this surprising absence of evidence of a
common thread of severe and reality-distorting psychopathology to
account for the patient's bizarre assertions. They claim that they
have been abducted, sometimes repeatedly over nearly the whole course
of their lives, by aliens who have communicated with them and carried
out procedures much like medical examinations. Persons reporting these
experiences are seen to be psycho-dynamically varied. They are also
demographically varied. Reports of this basic scenario, numbering in
the hundreds, have now been recorded. Even though the reporters range
from individuals as diverse as a mestizo Brazilian farmer(5),an
American corporate lawyer (6), and a Mid- Western minister(7), there
is a perplexing and intriguing concordance of features in these
reports. Certain details of the scenarios repeat themselves with
disturbing regularity no matter what the educational, national,
social, experiential or other demographic characteristics of the
reporter. In the production of dreams, reveries, poetry, fantasies and
psychotic states, while the general themes of concern may be
identified easily between individuals, the specific symbolization,
concretion, abstraction and representation of those themes is
relatively indiosyncratic for each individual. This of course
necessitates careful empathic and attentive listening on the
clinician's part to gather both the general flavor and specific
meaning of the elements of the fantasy state. This careful listening
often means that a personal symbolic representational system can be
unraveled and its contents can be rendered less mysterious to the
patient. In the abduction scenarios however, both specific details and
themes repeat themselves with surprising regularity: In general, the
appearance and modus operandi of the aliens, their effect and
procedures, their tools and interests, their crafts and physical
features all tally from report to report with a high rate of
concordance. (8,9,10) This intriguing fact seems impervious to the
socio-economic, educational, national, or cultural background of the
abductee. Similarly, whether the individual has had previous contact
with the literature of abduction seems to make little difference in
this vein since the reports of individuals who can be shown to have
had no exposure to abduction literature also contains these common
features. Skilled practitioners and investigators report in these
cases that they are convinced that each of these subjects was being
wholly truthful in his/her report.

The concordance of both content and event in these reports makes them
unlike any other fantasy-generated material with which I am familiar.

Indeed, investigators like Hopkins and others claim they have
intentionally withheld dissemination of certain important, frequently
reported aspects of the abduction scenarios in order to provide a
"check" on the material being presented to them by individuals who may
have had access to this literature since abductees may have been
influenced at either the conscious or the unconscious level by it. In
these cases as well, the features which have previously been published
as well as those withheld are both produced by the abductee (11). In
instances in which the patient has read some of the abductee
literature, this previously withheld material may be offered to the
investigator with a sense of personal invalidation, apology and
embarrassment. He often expresses concern that this information is
less likely to be believed than the other material with which he is
already familiar. (12)

Jung and others have written widely about the use of archetypes and
the collective awareness of themes and images which are asserted to
present themselves in a world-wide and multi-personal way. The amount
of individual variation and creative latitude demonstrated within the
closed system of archetypes and collected creativity is vast. Those
who pose such universals detect their presence in the complex and
highly idiosyncratic presentations and guises which they are given by
the unconscious mind of the patient and the artist. This disguise is
idiosyncratic, they hold, precisely because a set of available images
is being used to work and rework the personal realities of the
individual against the background of the collective. But the abductee
does not seem to be involved in the reworking of personal mythologies
against the canvas of the race's mythology. The details and contents
of the scenarios seem, upon extensive investigation, to bear little
thematic relevance to the issues inherent in the life of the abductee.
Intensive follow up investigation frequently yields no thematic,
archetypical, primary process symbolic meaning to the shape or
activities of the abductors and the scenario of the abduction itself.
Instead, therapeutic work in these cases centers around the issues
inherent in the powerlessness and vulnerability of the individual even
is this were not a prominent theme in his life before the putative
abduction. In other words, the customary richness of association and
creativity found in the examination of dreams and other fantasy
material is lacking with regard to the scenario and presentation of
the aliens who abduct and manipulate the patient in the abduction
story.

If the abduction material is indeed archetypal or fantasy generated in
nature, this is a new class of archetypes. These archetypes demand
rather exact representation and mythic presentation since the
activities and behavior of the aliens is rather invariant within a
narrow latitude regardless of the other dream and fantasy themes of
the patient.

3. ABDUCTION SCENARIOS AND HYPNOSIS. Members of both the lay and
professional communities frequently assume that material referring to
UFO abduction scenarios is retrieved under hypnosis. Since it is
generally believed that people under hypnosis are open to the
implantation of suggestions through the overt or covert influence of
the hypnotist it is concluded that this material reproduces the
hypnotists' expectations or interests. It is further concluded that
since the hypnotist "put it there" the abduction could not be
accounted for as material which emerges solely from the patient's end
of dyad.

Thus, the abduction scenarios are commonly dismissed as merely
representing the production of desired material by compliant subjects.
The abductees strong sense of personal conviction that this really
happened to him during the session itself and upon recall of the
session is similarly dismissed as an artifact of the process by which
the fantasies were generated.

Several compelling factors mitigate against the facile dismissal of
data in this way. Firstly, about 20% of these highly concordant
abduction scenarios are available spontaneously at the level of
conscious awareness prior to hypnosis. (13,14) These accounts may be
enhanced or subjected to further elaboration through the use of
hypnosis or other recall enhancement techniques, but in a significant
number of people producing abduction scenarios the recall is initially
produced without recourse to such techniques. If their stories were
substantially different from the concordant abduction scenarios
produced under regressive hypnosis, a different phenomenon would be
taking place.

However, given the perplexing clinical presentation of similar stories
from dissimilar people who are uninformed about one another's
experience, this presents another highly interesting area of
discrepancy.

Hopkins has classified patterns of abduction recall into five categories:

Type 1. patients consciously recall parts of the full abduction
scenario without hypnotic or other techniques designed to aid recall.
The emergence of this material may be delayed.

Type 2. patients recall the UFO sighting, surrounding circumstances
and/or aliens, but do not recall the abduction itself. Only a
perceived gap in time indicates any anomalous occurrence.

Type 3. patients recall a UFO and/or hominids but nothing else. There
is no sense of time lapse or dislocation.

Type 4. patients recall only a time lapse or dislocation. No UFO
abduction scenario is recalled without the use of specific retrieval
techniques.

Type 5. patients recall noting relating to UFO or abduction scenarios.
Instead they experience discrepant emotions ranging from uneasy
suspicions that "something happened to me" to intense, ego-dystonic
fears of specific locations, conditions or actions. They may also
exhibit unexplained physical wounds and/or recurring dreams of
abduction scenario content which are not fixed in their experience as
to place and time. (15)

Examination of the transcripts of hypnotic sessions which yield
abduction material reveals that although subjects are sufficiently
suggestible to enter the trance state as directed by the therapist,
they resist having material "injected" into their account. They
customarily refuse to be "lead" or distracted by the therapist's
attempts to change either the focus or content of their report. The
subject characteristically insists upon correcting errors or
distortions suggested or implied by the hypnotist during the session.
Hence it is difficult to account for the similarities and concordances
of these scenarios through the mechanism of suggestibility when these
subjects so steadfastly refuse to be lead by hypnotists.

In fact, it is even more striking that while these patients feel the
material which they are producing both in and out of hypnosis as
experientially "real", nonetheless they frequently seek to discount or
explain away this bizarre and frightening material. This remains true
even though sharing it regularly results in a significant remission of
anxiety- related symptoms and discomfort. These abduction scenarios
are so ego-alien that they have frequently not shared the material
with anyone at all or with only a highly select group of trusted
intimates. In the vast preponderance of cases patients are reluctant
to allow themselves to be publicly identified as having had these
experiences since the perceive that the abduction scenario is so
highly anomalous that they expect to experience ridicule and
repudiation if they become associated with it publicly. It therefore
functions like a guilty secret in the way that rape has (and,
unfortunately still does in some cases).

After the material is produced and explored, these subjects often
experience a marked degree of relief. This is true with reference both
to previously identified symptomatic behaviors and other anxiety
manifestations not noted on initial assessment. These other symptoms
may remit after enhanced recall of the scenario and its details takes
place. It is interesting to note that while the scenarios may contain
a good deal of highly traumatic material specifically related to
reproductive functioning, these episodes are nearly uniformly free of
subjective erotic charge when either the manifest or latent contents
are examined.

4. POST TRAUMATIC STRESS DISORDER (PTSD) IN THE ABSENCE OF EXTERNAL
TRAUMA: PTSD was first described in the content of battle fatigue
(16). Although it may present in a wide variety of clinical guises
(17) PTSD is currently understood as a disorder which occurs in the
context of intolerable externally induced trauma which floods the
victim with anxiety and/or depression when his overwhelmed and
paralyzed ego defenses prove inadequate to the task of organizing
unbearably stressful events. In the service of the patient's urgent
attempt to still the tides of disorganizing anxiety, fear or guilt<18>
which accompany the emergence of cognitive, sensory or emotional
recall of these traumatic events, the trauma itself may be either
partly or completely unavailable to conscious recall. <19>...Both
physical and psychological responses to the trauma are profound and
pervasive. PTSD follows overwhelming real-life trauma and is not known
to present as a sequel to internally generated fantasy states.<20>

This fourth area of discrepancy between predicted and observed data is
perhaps the most striking and challenging. Patients who produce alien
abduction material in the absence of psycopathology severe enough to
account for it often show the clinical picture of PTSD. This is
remarkable when one considers that it is possible that no traumatic

event occured except that rooted only in fantasy. These trauma are, in
large measure, split off, denied and repressed as they are in other
occurrences of PTSD.

As discussed above, these scenarios frequently appear in individuals
who are otherwise free of any indication of significant emotional and
psychological instability or pre-existing severe psycopathology. On
careful clinical assessment, these memories do not appear to fill the
intrapsychic niches usually occupied by psychotic or psycho-neurotic
formulations. The abduction scenarios do not encapsulate or ward off
unacceptable impulses, they do not define <or defend against> split
off affects, they are not used either to stabilize or to divert
current or archaic patterns of behavior nor do they provide secondary
gain or manipulative control for the individual.

Instead, this material, experienced by the patient as unwelcome and
totally ego-dystonic, seems quite consistently to be woven into the
fabric of the patient's internal life only in terms of his reactive
response to the stress inherent in these experiences and the contents
of the repressed material related to the stressful memories. But the
extent of this secondary response can be extensive. It should be noted
that PTSD has not previously been thought to occur following trauma
which has been generated solely by internally states. If abduction
scenarios are in fact fantasies, then our understanding of PTSD need
to be suitably broadened to account for this heretofore unexpected
correlation.

In addition, there are significant clinical implications to the
finding of abduction scenario material in a patient who shows PTSD but
is otherwise free of significant psychopathology. Since abduction
scenario material presents several crucial areas of anomaly and
discrepancy between what is known and that which is observed. It is
very important for the therapist to refrain from the comfortable (for
the therapist, at least) description of psychotic functioning to the
patient who produces this material until such disturbance is, in fact,
demonstrated and corroborated by the presence of other signs beside
the UFO-related material. It is imperative for the therapist to adopt
a non-judgemental stance. He can attend to the distress of the patient
without attempting to confirm or deny possibilities which are outside
the specific area of his expertise. The clinician should adopt as his
therapeutic priority the alleviation of the PTSD symptomology through
the use of appropriate and acceptable methods specific to the
treatment of PTSD. In addition, the therapist must remember that while
he may have strong convictions pro or con the abduction actually
having occurred, it is not within either his capability or expertise
to make such a judgement with total certainty. Furthermore, as the
clinical psychologist who evaluated the nine abductees pointed out in
her addendum, the sophistication of the psychotherapies has not
advanced to the point at which this determination can be made on the
basis of currently available information (21), although the treatment
of post traumatic symptomology is currently understood. Hence, it is
important for the therapist to retain the same non-judgemental and
helpful stance necessary to the successful treatment of any other
traumatic insult. When a therapist labels material as either
unacceptable or insane, the burden of the patient is increased. If the
therapist is reacting out of prejudices which reflect his own
closely-held beliefs rather than his complete certainty, he unfairly
increases the distress of the patient.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS: Although it has long been the "common wisdom"
of both the professional and lay communities that anyone claiming to
be the victim of abduction by UFO occupants must be seriously
disturbed, thoroughly deluded or a liar, careful examination of both
the reports and their reports calls this assumption into question.
Clinical and psychometric investigation of abductees reveals four
areas of discrepancy between the expected data and the observable
phenomena and suggests further investigation. These discrepant areas
are:

1. ABSENCE OF PSYCHOPATHOLOGY - An unexpected absence of severe
psychopathology coupled with the high level of functioning found in
many abductees is a perplexing and surprising finding. Psychometric
evaluation of nine abductees revealed a notable heterogeneity of
psychological and psychometric characteristics. The major area of
homogeneity was in the absence of significant psychopathology. Rather
than consulting a subset of the severely disturbed and psychotic
population, there is clinical evidence that at least some abductees
are high functioning, healthy individuals. This interesting
discrepancy requires further investigation.

2. CONCORDANCE OF REPORTS - Highly dissimilar people produce
strikingly similar accounts of abductions by UFO occupants. The basic
scenarios are highly concordant in detail and events. This is
surprising in light of the widely divergent cultural, socio-economic,
educational, occupational, intellectual and emotional status of

abductees. Further, the scenarios themselves do not seem to show the
same layering of affect and symbolic richness present in other fantasy
endowed material. Instead, symbolic and conceptual complexity centers
around the meaning of the experience for the individual, not around
the shape, form, activity, intent, etc., of the aliens and their
environment. This is in stark contrast to the expected complexity and
diversity of thematic and symbolic elaboration found in our fantasy
material.

3. RESISTANCE TO SUGGESTION UNDER HYPNOSIS - Abduction scenario
concordance is frequently attributed to the introduction of material
into the suggestible mind of a hypnotized patient. Examination of
abduction reports indicates that a significant percentage of these
reports emerge into conscious awareness prior to the use of hypnosis
or other techniques employed to stimulate recall. Furthermore
abductees resist being lead or diverted during hypnosis and regularly
insist on correcting the hypnotist so that their report remains
accurate according to their own perceptions.

4. PTSD IN THE ABSENCE OF TRAUMA - Post Traumatic Stress Disorder
(PTSD) has not been previously reported in patients experiencing
overwhelming stress predicted only in internally generated states such
as psychotic delusional systems or phobias. But patients reporting
abduction frequently show classic signs and symptoms of PTSD. Like
other kinds of PTSD it is subject to clinical intervention which
frequently leads to substantial clinical improvement. But in order for
this improvement to occur, the patient must be treated for the PTSD he
exhibits rather than the psychotic state he is presumed to display by
virtue of his abduction report. If the abduction scenarios represent
only a fantasy state, then it is worth investigating why (and how)
this particular highly concordant and deeply disturbing fantasy is
involved in the pathogenesis of a condition otherwise seen only
following externally induced trauma. Further, if this is found to be
the case, the nature of PTSD itself should be re-examined in light of
this finding. Alternatively, it may be that the trauma is, in fact, an
external one which has taken place and the post traumatic state
represents an expected response on the part of a traumatized patient.

It is not within the area of expertise of the clinician to make an
accurate determination about the objective validity of UFO abduction
events. But it is certainly within his purview to assist the patient
in regaining a sense of appropriate mastery, anxiety reduction and the
alleviation of the clinical symptomalogy as efficiently and
effectively as possible. This is best accomplished through an
assessment the patient's *actual* state of psycho-dynamic
organization, not his *presumed* state. In other words, in order to
make the diagnosis of a psychotic or delusional state, findings other
than the presence of a belief in UFO abduction must be present. In the
absence of other indications of severe psychopathology, it is
inappropriate to treat the patient as if he were afflicted with such
psychopathology. It lies outside the realm of clinical expertise to
determine with absolute certainty whether or not a UFO abduction has
indeed taken place. Patients should not be viewed as demonstrating
prima facie evidence of pervasive psychotic dysfunction because of the
abduction material alone nor should they be hospitalized or treated
with anti-psychotic medication based solely on the presence of UFO
abduction scenarios. Instead, they should be assessed on the basis of
their overall psychologic state. Unless otherwise indicated, treatment
should be focused on the PTSD symptomatology and its repair.

The areas of discrepancy which arise from the examination of UFO
abductees between the expected clinical finding and the observed ones
highlight interesting questions which require further investigation
into the nature and impact of fantasy on psycho-dynamic states and
symptom formation.

-!------------------------------------------------------------------

(1)Westrum, R., Social Intelligence About Hidden Events,
Knowledge:Creation, Diffusion, Utilization, Vol 3 No 3, March 1982,
p.382

(2)Hopkins, B. Missing Time: A Documented Study of UFO Abductions. New
York, Richard Marek 1981.

(3)Slater, E., Ph.D. "Conclusions on Nine Psychologicals" in Final
Report on the Psychological Testing of UFO Abductees" Mt Ranier, MD,
1985

(4)Slater, E., Ph.D. Addendum to "Conclusions on Nine Psychological"
in Final Report on the Psychological Testing of UFO "Abductees",
op.cit.

(5)Creighton, G. "The Amazing Case of Antonio Villas Boas" in Rogo,

D>S>, ed., Alien Abductions. New York, New American Library, pp.

51-83, 1980.

(6)Hopkins,B. Missing Time: A Documented Study of UFO Abductions.
op.cit.

(7)Druffel,A. "Harrison Bailey and the 'Flying Saucer Disease'" in
Rogo, S.D., ed., op.cit. pp. 122-137

(8)Strieber, W. Communion. New York, Avon, 1987

(9)Fowler, R. The Andreasson Affair. New York, Bantam Books, 1979

(10)Fuller, J. The Interrupted Journey. New York, Dell, 1966

(11)Hopkins, B. Intruders: The Incredible Visitation at Copley Woods.
New York, Random House, 1987

(12)Hopkins, B. Personal communications with the author about the more
than 200 abductees whom Mr. Hopkins has investigated both with and
without the use of hypnosis.

(13)Westrum, R. personal communication with the author.

(14)Hopkins, B. personal communication with the author.

(15)Hopkins, B. "The Investigation of UFO Reports" in The Spectrum of
UFO Research. Proceedings of the Second CUFOS Conference (September
25-27, 1981), Hynek, M. ed., pp 171-2, Chicago, J. Allen Hynek Center
for UFO Studies, 1988.

(16)Kardiner, A., The Traumatic Neuroses of War. New York, P. Hoeber,
1941

(17)van Der Kolk, B.A., Psychological Trauma. Washington, DC, American
Psychiatric Press, 1987

(18)Horowitz,M.J., Stress Response Syndromes. New York, Jason
Aronson,1976

(19)van Der Kolk, op.cit.

(20)American Psychiatric Association: Diagnostic and Statistical
Manual of Mental Disorders, 3rd ed. Washington, DC, American
Psychiatric Association, 1980

(21)Slater, op.cit.



**********************************************
* THE U.F.O. BBS - http://www.ufobbs.com/ufo *
**********************************************