Could children's memories just be their imagination?

[sensitive soul]

About a month or so ago I watched a special on The Learning Channel on children who claim to remember past lives. While all the children on the show were convincing, they did an experiment towards the end to see if children's past lives could just be their imagination.

They took a three year old girl and told her to tell them about an imaginary friend. This girl said the imaginary friend's name was Katie, she had red hair, was killed in a car accident (if i remember correctly). There were some other facts but I can't remember them.

The researchers went and found in a newspaper a name of a girl named katie ( i don't know if there was a last name or not) who had red hair and was killed in a car accident. They may have found the place she was killed as well, but I am not sure.

The researchers concluded that if this 3 yr old had referred to being this girl in another life, her parents and believers would have thought she was Katie in another life, when, in fact, she made this story up.

How do we know that verfied cases of children's past lives are not just coincidentally found and really are not who the children wre in another life?

 

[Chelle]

How do we know they aren't making it up? What are the odds of girls named Katie with red hair dying in a car accident? The more the story matches the truth, the smaller the odds. What does the child know or what have they experienced that would contribute to making up a story involving death. If the child has no experiences involving car accidents and death, where, at age 3, would they have gotten those ideas to put in a story? Did the study do a complete background check on the child to see if she had any experiences in those areas? Did her story change from one telling to the next or was it fairly consistent? According to child development experts, 3 year-olds are generally not consistent story tellers when they make something up, and will often change the story mid-telling, and three year-olds are not capable yet of describing or imagining something outside of their own life experience. Story telling and imagining things outside their experience (which includes what they see on TV or hear in stories) are skills most children don't master until around age 8, according to most of the child development guides I read. Lastly, did the study go in with the assumption the stories were made up? If so the study is biased, which unfortunately means the results are biased too.

How can you tell if a child is telling a memory or a made-up story? Trust your "gut" instinct. It's probably a more accurate indicator as to truth than any studies.

 

[deborah]

Several things

There are many indicators of a child's memories being a past life. Those that are past life related usually have one or more of the following -

1) The emotional feelings they express.

2) Night Traumas...and or separation anxiety,

3) Fear of loud noises -- water, cars, etc., - with no other explanation.

4) The insistence for example - that when "I was BIG" I put my "cig's" in this pocket. (Taken from RFH)

5) Detailed descriptions of the little things. For example, when a child is born back into the same family -- they remember things the family forgot -such as "Remember Grandma? When your windshield broke and we had to fix it for you?" Something that happened 10 years ago and the child is only three.

Sensitive Soul - have you read Carols' Books?

 

[Susie]

Too much detail for a 3 year old

The researchers concluded that if this 3 yr old had referred to being this girl in another life, her parents and believers would have thought she was Katie in another life, when, in fact, she made this story up.

Okay, I'm lost...if what the little girl said matched the facts in the newspaper, then she was not making anything up- it sounds like the girl gave too much information to just "hear" about the story, or to retain details. So, either this child was the little red head who died in the car accident or knew her OR the red head was indeed her "friend" (remember, kids can see spirits more readily then we can).

I agree with Deb, SS- Carol's books are EXCELLENT reads...

 

[fiziwig]

I would add one thing to the list that Deborah mentiond:

When children make things up they will make up something different every day and will not remember next week what they made up last week.

When children report past life memories they will tell the same story over and over, even years later. That psychologist who did the study on the TLC program made two serious mistakes. First, he assumed that the story the girl was telling was made up, and not a real past life memory. There is no justification for making that assumption. Second, he should have had all the same children back a year later and had them make up another story. Then he should have compared the facts to the two stories. If a child told the same story a year later and the facts do check out that means something. If a child told two different stories and neither of them checked out then that proves he was making them up.

What I'd like to see is the percentages for these four groups:

1. children who tell the same story and the facts do check out.
2. children who tell the same story and the facts don't check out.
3. children who tell different stories and the facts do check out.
4. children who tell different stories and the facts do not check out.

I believe that the biggest percentages will be found in groups 1 and 4, and that group 1 is possibly real past life memories while group 4 is random made up stories that don't fit any real event.

Until that researcher, or someone else, performs that study I am completely unconvinced by his claim that all the stories are made up and all the matching details are coincidence. That claim is too extrordinary, and requires extrordinary evidence.

 

[kris0503]

ss

When my daughter remembered her past life, nothing was imagined. Only the pain was felt.

 

[Lenax]

Children's Past Lives-only imagination?

Hi,
I've got a little girl of four and she had a time when she constantly bombarded me and my husband with:'my other Mummy this, my other Mummy that...' She even told me that her other Mummy died when she found some mushrooms and she ate them. Then she told me her 'Other Mummy and Daddy's ' names and also siblings, and told me she was in China...Unfortunately I'm not sure wether I wrote these things down, but there was a lot of this happy little chatter at times!!! (At least she said she loves me more than her 'other' Mummy,hahaha.) I believe her, though, it's just that sometimes it's hard to distinguish between her fantasy and possible other life! She can see 'pretend lights' too, which I hope will stay with her...

 

[sensitive soul]

Deborah and Susie,

I have Carol's first book, "Child's Past Lives." I found this book to be quite interesting (as all books I read on the subject ), although I did have one question pertaining to the first chapter. If the children knew that this guy was coming over to hypnotize them to remember past lives, couldn't it have been biased and they could have made things up? The children were older, 7 or 9 or something like that, so isn't this a little old? I've just been wondering about this. Otherwise, the rest of the book was really good!

 

[Susie]

Good Question, but...

I don't think people can actually make up things under hypnosis... perhaps they could of before, but as far as I know, hypnosis brings out the truth....

(I am no expert, though)

 

[Chelle]

In the cases of the Bowman children, could a made up story have had the same healing effect as the "memories"? I think the healing effect is more important than whether or not the memories are made up stories, but I think the healing effect also lends credibility to the stories. Made-up stories generally don't heal thier creator unless the creator bases that story on their own experiences.

 

[peterb]

I'm confused. The researchers deduced that the story was made up because they think the little girl read about it in the newspaper/ I don't know many three year olds that can read. Great research. Biased? Obviously.

 

[anonyx]

Once again, I'd like someone to explain how "children's imagination" can account for the numerous documented cases.

The skeptics' methods are simple:

1) Ignore (and avoid like the plague) the entire body of strong cases of reincarnation;

2) Examine one, or a very small number, of the flimsiest, vaguest cases that you can quickly find; then

3) Offer any alternative explanation for those cases, no matter how flimsy or far-fetched; and

4) Subject your alternative explanations to a far lower standard of scrutiny, or none whatsoever; finally

5) Pat yourself on the back for having created the illusion of in-depth scientific investigative journalism, without having to undergo the inconveniences of actual research or thought.

 

[fiziwig]

Don't forget how they "debunked" the Bridey Murphy case by literally making up "facts" that weren't true to "disprove" the case. (I'm in the process of re-reading the Bridey Murphy book, which is why that came to mind.

An who debunked Bridey Murphy? The newspaper that wanted an exclusive on the story, but didn't get it. So they turned sour grapes and reported false facts to shoot it down.

Yup, that's "good science" al right. NOT!

 

[anonyx]

That's right. I've forgotten many of the details of the Bridey Murphy thing, but wasn't there some connection between one of the key debunking witnesses and the magazine or newspaper? Like, the neighbor who was supposedly the source of information for "Bridey's" (whatever her name was) memories about Ireland actually turned out to be the mother of the editor? Please refresh my recollection if you know what I'm referring to.

Anyway, it's too bad the journalists were never publicly cross-examined on the validity of their "evidence."

 

[anonyx]

Here, I've located the answer to my own question. It's in "Bridey Murphy Revisited" by C.J. Ducasse, which is chapter 9 in Martin Ebon's book "Reincarnation in the Twentieth Century."

Virginia Tighe was the woman who allegedly had past life memories as Bridey Murphy.

The publication exposing the Bridey Murphy case as a hoax was the Chicago American. They claimed that Tighe acquired in childhood her memories about Ireland from a neighbor named Mrs. Corkell. They claimed that Mrs. Corkell's maiden name was Bridey Murphy.

The Denver Post, which did an independent followup investigation, was never able to verify that Corkell's maiden name was Murphy; Corkell was not taking phone calls. But Mrs. Corkell did just happen to be the mother of the editor of the Chicago American! (I knew I'd read that somewhere.)

I think this suggests that children's imagination is no match for that of journalists.