Gotta disagree. A best-researched article shouldn't just mention contemporary witnesses to one side of the story. Yes, she is aware enough of the Weide article, and sharp enough to dedicate one stanza of her piece to discredit it. That's a convenient way to get rid of some valid points he made, and she choose not to mention.
"Whether Mia Farrow has her own psychological issues has nothing to do with Dylan’s credibility."
But apparently Hollywood's obsession with youth, gender inequality and racial inequality all have to do with this.
And her stance on memory is just scientifically wrong. She doesn't flat out say it, but repeatedly implies that memories are something reliable, which they aren't. Our brain doesn't have a read only mode, every time we recall a memory it gets rewritten and every time it gets rewritten there's an opportunity to change. To mix fact with fiction. And we also make up memories, without even noticing.
From a scientific point there's just no way to tell if Dylan Farrow's memories are true. Or Mia Farrow's for that matter, cause even IF she lied on purpose, that lie could very well have turned into a memory by now. The saddest part of all this is that it doesn't matter for Dylan Farrow. Whether her memory is real or not, her pain is real and doesn't get smaller or bigger either way.