Q: Do you think it's possible I have learned this behavior from him to some degree, and just have 'shadow-symptoms'?
A: No. Doesn't exist.
Q: Or do you think I could be repressing memories of some trauma that is lost to me now?
A: I know that theoretically this is a possibility. I also know that this possibility is EXTREMELY remote. Such instances are very rare.
Instead of suffering like this, why don't you ask your MD for a referral to see a shrink? You are most certainly clinically depressed and you are getting evidently getting WORSE as time passes. Clinical depression over the death of a family member is extremely common; the anger and irritability you fell is a symptom of clinical depression too. The longer you wait, the more deeply you will continue to sink down into the depths of that black hole; there is no reason this need be. Just talk to your MD so you can get yourself on a path to recovery.
EDIT:
"Waswisgirl" (below) is not entirely correct: the jury is still out regarding the existence of repressed memories. There are arguments either way BUT there is no scientific EVIDENCE. After all, how do you 'prove' a memory? It can't be amputated or scanned...it's IMPOSSIBLE to prove. Anyway, this blurb from Wikipedia provides a (relatively) brief discussion about this ongoing controversial topic:
Do repressed memories actually exist?
Repressed memories may or may not exist. Amnesia of traumatic events does appear to happen, as do false memories or pseudo-memories; however, the theory of repressed memories involves far more, as it theorizes not only that memories can become completely unavailable to the conscious mind (amnesia) but that those same memories could later be retrieved, and at the time of retrieval have the same (or greater) reliability as memories which were never unavailable to the conscious mind. Many theories of Amnesia, such as Dissociative Amnesia, involve recall.
However it remains true that one must distinguish general psychological repression, amnesia, false memories or pseudo-memories, and the theory of repressed memories. They all are different concepts, each building upon different theoretical conceptions.
There currently exists a great controversy among researchers, treating professionals, law professionals, and the general public as to whether repressed memories actually exist, and even more heated controversy over whether recovered memories are valid, especially in the absence of corroboratory evidence. This is particularly important as many controversial criminal cases have been based on a witness' testimony of recovered repressed memories, often of alleged childhood sexual abuse. In some instance, the presumed existence of repressed memories are used to extend the Statute of limitations of child abuse case. Abuses of the Repressed Memory Theory and of controversial therapies like Recovered Memory Therapy often cause false memories to be formed.[citation needed]
The Recovered Memory Therapy industry involved thousands of psychotherapists using hypnosis, group therapy and other means to help patients recover alleged "repressed memories". This industry was dismantled over a five year period by hundreds of malpractice lawsuits beginning with the Hamanne v. Humenansky trial of August of 1995. See, See, Gustafson, Paul. Jury awards patient $2.6 million: Verdict finds therapist Humenansky liable in repressed memory trial Minneapolis St. Paul Tribune, August 1, 1995. See also, Associated Press, Doctor Loses False-memory Suit, Chicago Tribune, Wed. Aug. 2, 1995, Sec. 1, pg. 12 "I think the effect is a stunning warning to therapists... and to insurance companies that they had better start obeying the informed consent laws and stop using experimental treatments like recovered memory treatments on patients…," attorney/psychologist R. Christopher Barden said. "This is a huge warning shot to them."
Subsequent cases produced similar results culminating in the Burgus v. Braun case which, at $10.6 million, remains the world record for a psychotherapy malpractice settlement. See, See, Belluck, P. Memory Therapy Leads to a Lawsuit and Big Settlement [$10.6 Million], The New York Times, Page 1, Column 1, Nov. 6, 1997. The next thing I think there will be is legislation to require informed consent from psychiatric patients for such [recovered memory] 'treatments', said Dr. R. Christopher Barden, a psychologist and lawyer [for the plaintiff]... I think insurance companies will stop reimbursing people for mental health treatments that are not proven safe and effective. This is the death knell for recovered memory therapy. And it was.
Recovered memory therapy today is considered a dangerous form of malpractice and a cause for license revocation.
Research and theories supporting repressed memories
All theories claiming support for so-called repressed memories are highly controversial and have little support among mainstream memory experts. One speculative theory on how repressed memories originate is that traumatic memories are stored scattered about in the amygdala and hippocampus but not integrated into the neocortex. Also, it could be possible the right brain stores the memory but does not communicate it to the verbal left brain. This may mean that there is a continual active effort by the unconscious to repress memories, which can be dropped at a moment's notice should the unconscious decide to. For example, one possibility might be the anterior cingulate actively inhibits the memory from reaching consciousness.
Another theory is that the cortisol, a chemical released during trauma, may induce forgetting.[1][2] Cortisol appears to have the ability to erase details and possibly induce amnesia. One anecdotal study done by ABC News showed military personnel who were put through an extremely traumatic situation were unable to properly identify details of the memories, even remembering the perpetrator as someone of a different sex or with a different skin color.[citation needed]
Some people believe that people just force themselves to forget. Some studies have shown that people can force themselves to forget non-traumatic facts. Other researchers say that this might be explained by normal forgetting and normal recall experienced with all memories.[3]
A review of these theories has been published by Professors Harrison Pope and James Hudson of Harvard Medical School. See, Pope HG Jr, Oliva PS, Hudson JI. Repressed memories. The scientific status of research on repressed memories. In: Faigman DL, Kaye DH, Saks MJ, Sanders J, eds. Science in the law: social and behavioral science issues. St. Paul, MN: West Group, 2002, pp 487-526.
Research and theories critical of the theory of repressed
memories
Competent studies of more than 10,000 trauma victims found none that repressed or recovered memories of trauma. See Pope HG Jr, Oliva PS, Hudson JI. Repressed memories. The scientific status of research on repressed memories. In: Faigman DL, Kaye DH, Saks MJ, Sanders J, eds. Science in the law: social and behavioral science issues. St. Paul, MN: West Group, 2002, pp 487-526
Similarly, studies of thousands of abused children found no evidence at all for so-called repressed or recovered memories. Coupled with laboratory studies and other naturalistic investigations, most prominent researchers in the field agree with Harvard University's Richard McNally and consider the notion of repressed memory to be a pernicious bit of psychiatric folklore. See McNally RJ. The science and folklore of traumatic amnesia. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice 11:29-33, 2004
In addition, recent research demonstrating the relative ease of deliberately implanting false memories has been cited as evidence for this hypothesis. Hundreds of people who went through therapy and were convinced that they had been abused by their family members have recanted and no longer believe they were abused.[4]
Repressed memories also may be mistaken for a normal form of amnesia of early childhood experienced by all humans. Memories before age 2 are almost always false or at least inaccurate, and few adults remember anything before age 3. This does not mean the individual was not abused, just that they do not have any memory of it and should not be expected to recall it.
Recovered memory therapy
Main article: Recovered memory therapy
The recovered memory therapy (RMT) movement peaked in the mid-1990s with tens of thousands of patients annually reporting new so-called recovered memories. Thousands of patients’ families were torn asunder by allegations of abuse produced in therapy. The recovered memory movement was ultimately decimated by a wave of successful malpractice lawsuits. The first multi-million dollar verdict against a recovered memory therapist was the 1995 case of Hamanne v. Humenansky case in the U.S.[5] The final crushing blow to the RMT movement came in 1997 with a $10.6 million legal award to the Burgus family.[6] "The next thing I think there will be is legislation to require informed consent from psychiatric patients for such so-called 'treatments'," said Dr. R. Christopher Barden, a psychologist and lawyer [for the plaintiff], "This (case) is the death knell for recovered memory therapy."
World-wide attention on the Burgus case exposed the glaring scientific, methodological and ethical errors inherent in recovered memory therapy and the underlying theory of so-called repressed memories. Following a series of high profile litigation losses, many of the professional leaders of the RMT movement suffered licensing prosecutions, license revocations, disciplinary actions and even criminal prosecutions. The leading journal in the field, Dissociation, ceased publication. By 2000, the "memory wars" were largely over and it is rare in 2005 to find a therapist who will admit conducting any form of therapy to recover so-called repressed memories. International experts in memory, research procedures and ethics continue to document how and why such an odd form of quackery became so widespread. The definitive work on the subject to date is "Remembering Trauma" by Prof. Richard McNally, Harvard University Press (2003). Prof. McNally summaries the relevant scientific research and concludes that the notion of repressed memory is nothing more than psychiatric "folklore".
Body memory
A form of repressed memory is supposed to be Body memory. Body memory is a claim that the body itself (rather than the brain) remembers something - typically abuse. This is characterised by a pain in a body part where there appears to be no present day physical reason for the pain, so this is seen as evidence of the body remembering a past pain, similar to phantom limb syndrome.
Some psychologists and social workers use the term body memory to refer to physical symptoms that accompany trauma. Studies have shown that survivors of trauma, specifically with PTSD, have a predisposition to illness and injuries. Stress headaches would also be an example of a "body memory" when you use this definition. However, these symptoms are not only trauma induced and do not prove or disprove memories or trauma.
There currently is no scientific evidence of body memory corresponding with either of these two definitions.