Summary: The repressed/false memory debate is marked by sharp polarities of what Loftus terms firm believers and skeptics who “point to the reconstructive nature of memory and ask for evidence and corroboration”. The debate is far from theoretical since individual’s reputations and futures are at stake. While the claims and arguments on both sides of the controversy will be discussed, the purpose here is to explore the nature of memory, repression and dissociation to determine if therapists can distinguish between true and false memories of childhood trauma.