Hypnotherapist Discusses Hill Case and Hypnosis

The Hills

I recently had the much appreciated opportunity to guest on Podcast UFO hosted by Martin Willis. During the live show, a hypnotherapist and social worker, Donna Killeen, called to share her views on the lack of reliability in hypnosis as a memory enhancer as was being discussed. She also shared about her interactions with Dr. Benjamin Simon of the Betty and Barney Hill case, and how it led her to be quite doubtful of the reported alien abduction. 

Such sources as USAF Capt. Ben Swett, who interacted with the Hills and Dr. Simon, and the doctor himself (see file #21) stated that Simon did not subscribe to alien abduction as an explanation. Nonetheless, the issue continues to be obscured in some circles. 

Donna Killeen and I connected by email soon after the show. I was grateful for her call to Podcast UFO, and I feel she brings relevant contributions to the table. I requested she field a few questions for a blog post, and she agreed. Below are the items and her responses.

Donna Killeen

I understand you reside in Massachusetts, and that you are a Certified Hypnotherapist and Licensed Social Worker with a Masters in Counseling. Is that correct?

I am a resident of Massachusetts. I have been a Licensed Social Worker in Massachusetts since the early 1980's. I earned a Masters Degree in Counseling in 1984 from Suffolk University, Boston. I am a CHt (certified hypnotherapist).

You once had an opportunity to discuss the Hill case with Boston psychiatrist Dr. Benjamin Simon, who worked with the now legendary couple during their hypnosis sessions. What did you learn in your discussions with Dr. Simon?

In 1975-1976 I had an opportunity to speak with Dr. Benjamin Simon by telephone. I had contacted his office in Boston in an effort to assist my brother who claimed to have been "abducted by aliens" and was experiencing a great deal of anxiety as a result. I hoped that Dr. Simon might be able to evaluate and treat my brother or make a referral. 

Dr. Simon listened patiently to my story. He then told me that although he had been portrayed in books and in the media as having believed that Betty and Barney Hill had been abducted, Dr. Simon NEVER believed this to be the case. He stated that he did not believe in flying saucers or aliens. He did not believe the Hills were lying or hoaxing either. He suggested that there was stress in the Hill situation. He felt, after treating them, that they suffered from anxiety as the result of being in an interracial marriage in the late 50's and early 60's in a predominantly white part of the country. He identified Barney as having a great deal of anxiety and indicated that Barney may have exhibited persecutorial thoughts. He believed the dreams that each experienced had been shared over time between themselves, though the Hills denied it. He identified this as a condition called Folie à deux whereby a delusion or hallucination is transmitted from one individual to another. Since he was quite sincere in his stance that aliens did not exist... He strongly and compassionately suggested that I seek psychiatric assistance for my brother.

I interpret from our interactions, Donna, that your opinion of the Hill case changed significantly after you had the opportunity to talk directly with Dr. Simon, as compared to relying primarily on information circulated within the UFO community. Is that correct, and would you please elaborate on that a bit?

I had followed the Hill case with much interest since it was reported in the 1960's in Look Magazine. I was extremely impressed that a prestigious psychiatrist was apparently supporting the story. It was a crucial part of the Hill case! After speaking directly with Dr. Simon, I felt duped by the UFO community and media. There was misrepresentation of Dr. Simon's conclusions in the Hill case. These false conclusions were widely continued on in movies, books, etc. I was very disappointed and discounted the case as a result of hearing the truth from the practitioner.

Please describe your professional opinion on the use of hypnosis as a memory retrieval technique.

My thoughts/opinion about hypnosis as a tool for memory include the following.

A. The process of hypnosis is often regarded as a truth serum type therapy. It is NOT.

B. While hypnosis can bring about a state of relaxation and focus to possibly aid in memory, hypnosis is not a particularly reliable method of memory retrieval.

C. Everything stated with hypnosis is not necessarily factual. Corroborating evidence is needed to establish facts.

D. Subjects can distort and misinterpret "memories" and confabulation can occur.

E. Subjects in the state of trance can be in a highly suggestible state creating a situation where an unskilled therapist might lead the subject potentially creating "false memories".

If there is anything else you would like to add or address, please feel encouraged to do so.

In summary, it appears the UFO community has misrepresented the hypnosis process as some magical truth exposer. Regression hypnosis is at the core of the alien abduction phenomenon. All aspects of the process should be considered, i.e., confabulation, misinterpretation, etc. The Holy Grail, the Hill case, has omitted an important detail. The prestigious M.D., hypnotherapist did not believe the story was an alien abduction case! And that's a fact!

More Qualified Professionals

Thanks to Ms. Killeen for her willingness to share her perspectives. It is appreciated. 

The extents the UFO community is ignoring and misrepresenting the qualified opinions on hypnosis-related issues is a virtual phenomenon in itself. It is certainly painfully obvious and dated. 

Hopkins conducts hypnosis with
an alleged alien abductee

Clinical hypnotherapist and psychotherapist Judy Jaafar warned of the likelihood of confabulation during hypnotic regression and the potential for emotionally detrimental effects. Her statements were in support of the ban on the activity enacted in 1988 by the British UFO Research Association. Jaafar more recently commented at this blog, "I believe that David Jacobs and Budd Hopkins have done untold harm to thousands of Americans."

Qualified professionals such as psychologist Dr. Julia Shaw demonstrated the ways questions are asked substantially effects research subjects and their responses. All it takes to generate richly detailed false memories of significant events that never happened, Shaw explained, are three hours in a friendly interview environment, the introduction of a few wrong details, and the use of poor memory retrieval techniques. 

To try to be clear, I am directly suggesting, to those who argue hypnosis-induced narrations are valid because of similarities gleaned from one hypnosis subject to the next, a more likely explanation is that the hypnotist - and their specific use of language and interview techniques - is the shared common denominator, not the alleged experience. It could also be effectively argued that abduction lore is now so well known throughout the community that details commonly showing up in witness narrations are more apt to indicate preferences in writers and convention speakers than events occurring in objective reality. Moreover, it is obvious that when the hypnotist is tainting the well and intentionally leading the subject, the methods are extremely suspect, probably unethical, and the results are both unreliable as sources of information and potentially harmful to the hypnosis subject.

I could certainly go on with further citations of qualified professionals who have conclusively demonstrated that witness testimonies, with and without alleged memory enhancing techniques, cannot be accepted without reasonable question. The citations really don't matter, though, absent a sincere willingness to listen and weigh the information. After all, as far back as 1979, psychologist, hypnosis expert and CIA consultant Dr. Martin Orne reported that "actual memories cannot be distinguished from confabulations either by the subject or by the hypnotist without full and independent corroboration."

It's long past time for the community to start listening to the qualified professionals, else accept its rightful place as not a maverick of science, but an opposer.