Safe behind the Screen of “Mass Hysteria”: A Closing Rejoinder to Benjamin Rossen

Abstract

The authors are concerned with continuing myths about the Oude Pekela incident which they believe are derived from and perpetuated by the misconceived and factually inaccurate allegations of Benjamin Rossen. In this rejoinder, Jonker and Jonker-Bakker attempt to sort out a few of the alleged errors of fact and misconceptions in Rossen's response. Rossen is charged with obscuring the important issues concerning the validity, manner of investigating, and evaluation and reporting of ritualistic abuse. In addition, the authors believe that Rossen came to his investigation with biases and a preconceived agenda. In the final analysis, the authors indicate that they chose to believe the children involved in the Oude Pekela incident while Rossen did not while attributing the whole incident to “mass hysteria.” The authors stress their customary level of objectivity and professionalism as physicians and scientists. They excoriate Rossen for his lack of familiarity with the language and customs of The Netherlands, his lack of proper credentials, and for having a preconceived agenda that led to a sloppy, incompetent, manipulative, and self-serving approach to his academic research. Jonker and Jonker-Bakker, having previously refused to respond to Rossen's allegations, accepted the invitation of the Journal of Psychology and Theology, and have broken their silence in the special issue on SRA/MPD.