Anatomy, as we were all taught, revealed the pitiful inadequacy of the newborn brain. It was unfinished and substandard, merely one-quarter of its ultimate weight. Myelination, neuronal growth, axonal growth, and cortical networks could not compare with adult brains. As anyone could see, babies were incapable of upright posture, locomotion, or coordination, has no language, and could do little move than sleep. Their senses were not developed, but, even if they were, the brain could not organize them into anything meaningful. Hence, in the name of science, infant cries were confidently described as "random sound", their smiles were "muscle spasms", their pain a "reflex", and their memories a "fantasy".
In reality, anatomy and brain science misled us. Although some of the facts were no doubt accurate, our assumptions and beliefs were erroneous. We were wrong in assuming that the brain parts that developed early were primitive and incapable of complex activity. Early parts do not lie idle until more important parts are added later. Myelin is not essential to nerve conduction, and never conduction is not the sole means of communication in the nervous system. Memory works regardless of the size and weight of the brain. And the muscle system, so obviously immature at birth, is no guide to what is going on in the mind.
Thus, many tradition beliefs about the brain have become myths. As long as we believed them, it was nearly impossible to recognize that newborns were cognitive. It took two decades and massive evidence from other disciplines to prove that infants have all their sense, coordinate and use them fluently, have keen perception, communicate with us emotionally, speak with body, hands, face, and voice, and learn in all the classic ways that learning is tested. Obviously, they could not do all this with inferior brains .
In newborns, memory supports all cognitive activity, such as learning and communications, that appears to be innate rather than developmental. Making use of such innate talents, newborns demonstrate both memory and intelligence as they discriminate novel from familiar stimuli, display self-awareness in reacting to cry sounds, adapt themselves to unfriendly conditions when necessary, select preferred alternatives when available, and vigorously shape the environment to meet their needs and interests ; ; .
Such modern perspectives provide a new context of credibility for the many signs of birth memory (and birth trauma) that have emerged again and again in the last hundred years. These include birth-related imagery and pathology discovered in psychoanalysis ; ; ; ; birth and womb memory in experiments with hypnosis ; ; ; ; in the practice of hypnotherapy ; ; ; primal therapy , , ; LSD-assisted therapy ; ;, in various forms of body work , ; yogic breathing ; ; and holding therapy ; .
My own introduction to birth memory came while I was working with a client in hypnosis who suddenly announces, "I see my birth! The doctor is holding me up, laughing, saying, ‘See, I told you it would be a girl’." Eventually I came to se that validity was demonstrated in the way the memories came up in hypnosis without solicitation, from persons who, like myself, knew nothing about them and did not have any belief in them. It also struck me that their memories were distinctly personal and original, un-influenced by any others, yet they had inner consistency, held up over time, and contained both facts not consciously known and technical details of labor and delivery not expected from laypersons.
Further validity was suggested by the way birth was remembered from the baby’s location and point of view and included things happening only to the baby which no one else could have known or reported in the baby’s hearing. Finally, the reports contained secrets: information about delivery-room accidents, violent acts of a parent, or offensive remarks that would not likely have been told to the baby by anyone involved.
The reliability of birth memory, an important consideration in knowing how to interpret these memories, is something in which I have had a special interest. In research with ten mother and child pairs, I compared memories of the same birth obtained in hypnosis , . Because this work has been reported elsewhere, I will only state here that the coherence and dovetailing of their independent reports led me to conclude that birth memories, gathered in a disciplined way, were genuine recollections of experience. Though memory is not always perfect, the birth memories of grown children in my study proved to be a realistic guide to what actually happened. For abundant examples of birth memory, I urge you to read my book Babies Remember Birth .
Another validation of birth memory is through learning because learning and memory go hand in hand. Birth-related fears and disturbed behavior are a type of learning where the memory is enshrined in the symptoms. I am indebted to Rima Laibow for this dramatic example. David, a ten-year-old, spent the first decade of his life constantly obsessing about sickness, spots on his skin, and a shadowy figure picking him up in the might. This involved years of the most extreme insomnia during which he would demand that his mother come every fifteen minutes to look at him. One day during holding therapy, David suddenly recalled a scene from his birth. He screamed that he couldn’t see through the blue haze but there were lights and shadowy figures. "I’m afraid, but you are coming to pick me up", he said. "I know it’s you".
Born with high bilirubin, David had been kept in the neonatal intensive care unit where he was given phototherapy, which required protective blue goggles. It was in this blue haze that he became phobic of shadowy figures coming to pick him up. He had reason to be afraid but he knew when his mother came to pick him up and then felt safe. Following this breakthrough in memory, his insomnia left.
In a second case that reveals learning at birth, a child of nine years, again in holding therapy, exploded with a memory . He saw his mother lying flat on her back partially covered by green cloths, her face masked, stomach cut open, and dead. He was being lifted up all bloody and believed that he must have killed his mother by cutting open her stomach. He had remembered his Caesarean delivery. Once home from the hospital, finding himself in an angry environment and afraid he might be killed himself, he quickly deduced that it would please his mother "if my min is dead", and he proceeded to be retarded. This is what he was fro nine years until his unconscious memories of birth suddenly burst forth in holding therapy. A short time after this revelation, he was placed in a class of normal children his own age, where he proceeded to act normally. This clinical report is a warning to us about newborn cognition.
Finally, proof of both the validity and reliability of birth memory is found in the conscious birth memories of two- and three-year-old children. Although still rare, these stories are multiplying now because parents are better prepared to listen and to know what to ask. I have gathered numerous examples of this type of memory in chapter seven of Babies Remember Birth .
Like the children themselves, these memories are innocent, unpredictable, and expressive. With limited vocabulary, children act out, point to parts of the body, draw pictures, provide motion and sounds, repeat conversations they heard, correctly report the actions of those present, and, with pertinent questions engage in astute criticism of how the birth was managed. Parents can easily validate these reports . I’m sure this remarkable body of evidence will row as parents realize that they must ask children about birth when they first start to talk. If they wait a year or two longer, the memories will slip into the unconscious memory bank.
A serious look at these conscious birth memories of very young children should end academic debate about whether memory at birth is really possible. The children are teaching us about memory. We must not rob them of their contribution.