A PUZZLING CASE 



■63 



physiological nexus does not prove its non-existence. Thus, as in 

 regard to the transmission of acquired characters and telegony, 

 we may be scientifically sceptical and give a verdict "non- 

 proven," without dogmatically saying " impossible." 



We can understand how contact with a puzzling case gives the 

 observer pause. A medical practitioner of keen scientific intelli- 

 gence told me of a patient who, during pregnancy, had seen her 

 husband suffer a serious accident. His arm was cut open by a 

 falling block. As the impression seemed to weigh on the woman's 

 mind in its relation to the unborn child, the doctor was asked to 

 reassure her— which he did, with confidence and no doubt with 

 skill. He was rather startled, however, when the time came, to 

 find that the child he ushered into the world had a mark on the 

 arm suggestive of the father's wound, and on the same arm. 



We must remember that for a prolonged period the unborn 

 child is part and parcel of the mother — almost an integral part 

 of herself — and we are beginning to know enough of the influence 

 of mind upon body to make us cautious in dogmatising as to 

 the possibilities of what Ballantyne * finely calls " the mysterious 

 wireless telegraphy of ante-natal life." 



* While expressing his disbelief in the potency of maternal impressions 

 to cause conditions in the foetus resembling the impression, Dr. J. W. 

 Ballantyne cautiously adds (" Discussion on Heredity in Disease," Scottish 

 Med. and Surg. Journ. vi. 1900, p. 3 10) that " to whatever extent we believe 

 the mind capable of influencing the state of a part of the body, to that same 

 extent, or to a degree rather less, the mother's mind might influence her 

 parasitic growth— i.e. the foetus in utero. But this amount of belief 

 would of course vary very much in accordance with the elasticity of our 

 belief regarding the influence of the mind over the body." 



