Case Histories & Stories
(This is an excerpt from a University Of Metaphysical Sciences course at www.umsonline.org, please feel free to visit the school website)
Dr. Ian Stevenson, the Carlson Professor of Psychiatry at the University of Virginia Medical School, has investigated reports of past-life memories. Not from hypnosis, but from spontaneous, waking memories experienced by very small children. These accounts often did include verifiable information, and the child’s knowledge, or “memories,” could be corroborated and verified by surviving family members and checked against reality, so to speak. The Journal Of The American Medical Association (1975) states that Stevenson “had collected cases in which the evidence is difficult to explain on any other grounds [besides reincarnation].”
Stevenson has done what others (previously) in the field failed to do. While it is almost impossible to use the word “science” in regard to proof of reincarnation, Dr. Stevenson has nevertheless endeavored to employ as much scientific method as possible in his investigations. He reports that he uses the methods of the historian, the lawyer and the psychiatrist, gathering testimony from as many witnesses as possible. It is not uncommon for Stevenson to interview up to twenty-five people regarding a case. He also checks such things as diaries, letters, certificates of birth and death, autopsy and hospital records and any such documents he can locate through investigation.
Stevenson is often contacted by or on behalf of puzzled parents whose children insist on having lived before and of having memories of such lives. Stevenson focuses on children as young as possible because when they begin speaking (between the ages of two and four) they are limited in the amount of peripheral information they may have picked up that would influence them or create “false memories.” He looks for such cases that are “rich in obscure detail,” that is, full of seemingly insignificant information that although it can be verified, it is likely to be unknown to persons other than the subject themselves. Such things as where a missing piece of jewelry or weaponry was hidden, the color of paint under the existing color and so on. These would not be the workings of a childish imagination, but rather significant facts that must be known and proved true.
Stevenson has in the neighborhood of 2000 cases on file which are deemed to be “reliable” in that there has been no evidence of tampering or fraud and that roughly ninety percent of the information remembered by the child has been verified.
Some of the objections that might be put forth as alternative theories disputing Stevenson’s “evidence” of reincarnation follow. It should be pointed out, however, that Stevenson began his career as a psychologist and psychiatrist and began the investigations with the intent of discovering what lay behind these memories and not with any belief in or disposition toward “proving” reincarnation. Even as of his last work he was reluctant to state his outright belief in reincarnation or to indicate that his work proved such a belief. Rather, he invited guests to read the studies themselves without predisposition. He himself would make no stronger statement than that he felt that the studies would seem to indicate reincarnation in absence of other explanation.
Alternative theories to explain the case studies include: fraud, conscious or unconscious; fantasy and personation; cryptomnesia; paramnesia; inherited memory and/or the collective unconscious; clairvoyance and telepathy; and, mediumistic possession. To each of these possibilities follows a brief statement about Stevenson’s evaluation of their potential as an alternative explanation to reincarnation.
Fraud, Conscious Or Otherwise: Stevenson says, “Small children are not easy to coach for the assumption of roles that do not seem natural to them.” Moreover, there is no “benefit” to any of the case study participants; no money or publicity is given. As to any unconscious deceit, Stevenson, as an expert specializing in the testimony of patients, is well equipped to detect psychological and other influences that could impeach a witness’ integrity.
Fantasizing And Personation: Daydreaming and fantasizing may be natural aspects of childhood, but the main problem with this argument is that such “fantasies” are woven around a nucleus of facts that can be verified independently. Stevenson points out that such “psychoses of any kind are extremely rare in children; delusional false identification with another person is even rarer.” In his correspondence with psychologists specializing in treatment of children and especially in delusional illnesses such as schizophrenia, none of the professionals had ever encountered a case of a child of these ages claiming to be someone else.
Cryptomnesia, Or An Illusion Of Memories: “A person afflicted with cryptomnesia thinks that what he is saying or writing is original with him. He has, however learned normally the content of his communication earlier, either from a person or [other] source.” The main argument against cryptomnesia is again the young age at which most of the subjects being to talk about the previous lives they claim to remember. Some subjects refer to their memories when less than two years old—hardly an age where such details can be unconsciously absorbed.
Paramnesia: This refers to incidents where the two families in question have met (one family belonging to the child having memories, and the other the family of the past life). In such a case, adults may attribute more to the child than the child actually recounted, or may have added information unwittingly. Either scenario fails to take into account the actual nature of such meetings, which are usually highly uncomfortable for both parties and not a “happy exchange of memories between old friends and family.” Also, there are many instances where the families have not met in advance, nor had knowledge of each other.
Inherited Memory And/Or The Collective Unconscious: Stevenson pays particular note to this argument in volume three of his case studies because of its frequent use in discussing his cases. While he particularly argues the case against “inherited memory,” that is some transmission of memories through families, he does not touch on the idea of “collective unconscious,” grouping it rather, with inherited memory. Inherited memory is disputed on the basis of its own paradox, that is that almost all of the reincarnations take place outside of any lineal descendancy.
Mediumistic Possession: In this case it refers to the mind of an individual being “taken over” by a deceased person, whose memories then become those of the living person. Observational evidence recounts that the children in no time exhibit any signs of mediumship or possession (which is extremely rare in children of this age), and that aside from occasionally and sporadically talking about the past life memories they are otherwise “normal” children. Sometimes an event or phrase or object will remind them of some previous life event which will stimulate a brief flow of talk that is otherwise normal except for the subject matter.
Some frequently recurring characteristics of the “reincarnation” type cases are as follows.
Age When Memories Appear: The typical case starts when the child is between two and four, but occasionally older. Often it becomes apparent as the child begins to speak and feels a need to communicate the memories. In such cases, the first words of the child are often names or places the child knew previously.
Age When Memories Fade: Universally, an almost invariable tendency is for the memories to disappear between the ages of five and eight, at the time when the child begins to venture out of his home circle and experience a wider participation elsewhere. Stevenson suggests that this is logical as the new experiences and memories begin to overlay the other memories until they gradually become inaccessible.
Characteristics Of Behavior: Unusual behavior usually coincides with the expression of memories of a past life. Not only might mannerisms or speech patterns uncharacteristic of the child and the child’s family emerge, but also an attitude of gravity, from the conviction on the part of the subject that he is still an adult, not a child.
Strangeness Of The Body: Subjects frequently “have commented on the strangeness of the physical bodies in which they find themselves…the small bodies in which they feel confined.”
The Most Vivid Events Remembered: Invariably the most vivid remembrances are connected with the physical death of the previous personality.
Incidence Of Violent Deaths: In a large percentage of cases, the children exhibiting such memories claim to have died a violent death. The incidence of violent death in these cases far exceeds the normal ratios of the general population. It may suggest that when the shock of death is so severe and intense that the memories more easily penetrate into the new personality.
Phobia For Objects Or Circumstances Causing Death: Another common feature in the cases of violent death is a strong phobia for events or objects related to the death. For instance, one girl moved from a bridge to avoid a bus and fell into the water and drowned. As a child, she was intensely afraid of water, bridges and buses. It took four people to hold her in order to administer a bath.
Changes In People And Surroundings Detected By Children: In meeting people or arriving at certain locations from the former life, the child frequently makes comments in the changes.
Announcing Dreams: An occasional phenomenon is that of one or two members of the family experiencing dreams toward the very end of pregnancy, in which is some foretelling of an individual who lived before returning to incarnate.
Abnormal Appetites During Pregnancy: This is a usual occurrence in many pregnancies; however, when the child exhibits past life memories, the food cravings or aversions are invariably found to be associated with the personality of the past life.
Possessing A Skill Not Taught Or Learned: children often show skills in early childhood that they could not have learned through instruction or imitation. In each case, the skill in question was one which the previous personality was known to have had.
Birthmarks And Deformities: Stevenson notes that in cases of violent death in the past life, such as accidents, gunshots or knife wounds and such, the child many times exhibits a birth mark or deformity corresponding to the wounds sustained during the previous personality’s death. One dramatic case involved a young boy who remembered having been a bandit in his previous life. Rather than be captured by police, he had committed suicide by wedging his rifle under his chin and firing. The boy had been born with an open gash under his chin. Upon hearing the boy’s story, Stevenson discovered a small birthmark on top of the head. Using photos and x-rays, Stevenson determined the trajectory of the bullet to exactly match the corresponding marks on the child.
Reincarnation Cases
The following “scientific proof” (as it is labeled among reincarnationists) is exclusively from Dr. Ian Stevenson’s case studies. Though others also attempt the undertaking, they all imitate Stevenson’s methods for making contact, verifying information and safeguarding the integrity of the source as much as possible. In most cases, such field operatives have worked closely with Dr. Stevenson and in most cases they have apprenticed and trained under him. Though the singularity of approach from all field operatives offers a certain taint to the research as it remains biased toward the methods of one particular individual, it nevertheless remains that Stevenson’s work is as definitive as one can get at this point, and his objectivity of approach is unrivaled in this field. For that reason, as he is the originator of the method and no others have contributed a better or rival approach, it seems best to use his own material as example.
While a certain abbreviated cross section is included here for reference, the studies offered are by no means complete in themselves, nor do they offer the whole scope of Stevenson’s research. Much varied and additional material is to be found in Stevenson’s own volumes of case study history. Though mentioned elsewhere, it is prudent to remind the reader again of a certain logistic truism of philosophy and science. “When searching for the white blackbird, one needs only find one to prove the truth of its existence.” In the contemporary words of Jeffrey Iverson, author of More Lives Than One? 1992; “It needs only one case to be ‘real’ for many accepted ideas about life to be turned upside down (or right side up!).” It is that search that moves all research into reincarnation.