Factors that could impact the timing of a divorce

Ending a marriage seems like a daunting task. On top of that, the media and the silver screen make it look like an extremely emotional, unpleasant, contentious and life-altering event. For some, this is there reality; however, others are able to navigate the process with more ease. No matter the situation, many couples take measures to avoid such fates, especially when law changes could make matters worse for them.

For couples contemplating divorce this past year, many of them decided to pull the trigger before the close of 2018, as changes in laws impact how taxes are handled. A major change this year impact alimony. There are no longer tax breaks for those required to pay alimony starting this year.

While alimony is often a concern when going through the divorce process, there are other areas of concern. Wealthy or not, a prenuptial agreement could be part of the marriage. If a couple decides to divorce, this document should be executed properly. Additionally, if a spouse is unsure about the terms, it is important to challenge them.

Another factor that impacts the timing of divorce is having a business involved. Business valuation is not straightforward and can be complex. Tax implications are involved, causing some spouses to find it difficult to reach agreeable terms. Finally, it is important to consider other assets involved in the divorce process. For example, one should weigh the difference between receiving the family home or a spouse’s retirement plan. Tax deductions and implications can impact one’s decisions.

While there is no perfect time to divorce, for couples positive that dissolving their marriage is the best step for them, it is vital to understand if it is best to proceed right away or postpone it. Even if a couple cannot make things work, they could make the process run more smoothly by understanding that timing can make a huge difference.


Go to Source
Author: On behalf of Katie L. Lewis of Katie L. Lewis, P.C. Family Law

The common, unusual and downright bizarre reasons for divorce

Addicted to running, bullying or controlling behaviour, theme park rides, and the lack of a bathroom door for two years are just some of the recent reasons given in divorce for “unreasonable” behaviour that we have encountered at Stowe Family Law.

There is only one legal ground for divorce in England & Wales: that the marriage has irretrievably broken down. This contention must be supported by one of five reasons: adultery, behaviour, 2 years separation with consent, 5 years separation without consent and the very rarely used desertion.

With no-fault divorce yet to be an option in England & Wales, behaviour is becoming increasingly used as an umbrella term for a wide range of different reasons, often very unexpected ones.

So, we asked over 70 specialist Stowe family lawyers: What are the most common reasons behind unreasonable behaviour in divorce?

Here are the ones they hear the most:

  • Addiction issues (alcohol, drugs or gambling)
  • Suspicion of affairs (To cite adultery you need to prove that your spouse has had sex with a member of the opposite sex) or inappropriate relationships with other people.
  • Interference from in-laws and a lack of support from the spouse
  • Not helping with the children or running the home
  • Sex – not enough, too much of or loss of interest
  • Money issues

Sometimes illnesses are the cause of certain types of behaviour including:

  • Post-natal depression
  • Partner’s illness

Whilst it might be hard to see how the other spouse’s illness is unreasonable, it is often the consequential behaviour that comes with illness, when everything just becomes too much, that is the cause of the relationship breaking down.

And what about some of the more unusual reasons our lawyers have encountered:

  • Unusual sexual practices/ fetishes
  • Spying and tracking partner
  • Spouse not completing DIY- no bathroom door for 2 years
  • Being bullied into going on theme park rides
  • Not buying a Christmas present
  • Going to the gym too much
  • Turning vegan
  • Addicted to cycling/running etc

Camilla Burton-Baddeley, a Senior Solicitor from the Stowe Altrincham office explains:

“We are definitely seeing a trend in the more imaginative use of unreasonable behaviour as a reason for divorce.

Previously it was money problems or drinking that would be cited frequently but it can be anything that an individual considers to be unreasonable, even if others do not.”

The number of divorces being granted on the grounds of unreasonable behaviour is steadily increasing. In 2017, unreasonable behaviour was the most common reason for opposite-sex couples divorcing with 52% of wives and 37% of husbands petitioning on these grounds.

Camilla explains:

 “Most people are not prepared to wait two years to get divorced, which is the closest option we have for a no-fault divorce. They have made the decision to move on with their lives and citing unreasonable behaviour means they can start the process quickly.

Until we have the option of no-fault divorce, I believe we will continue to see the definition of unreasonable behaviour stretched even further.”

For advice on all aspects of divorce you contact Camilla at the details below or view her profile.

The post The common, unusual and downright bizarre reasons for divorce appeared first on Stowe Family Law.


Go to Source
Author: Camilla Burton-Baddeley

A week in family law: Online divorces, support for families, and more

The government has reported that 455 people made an online divorce application in the period between Christmas Eve and New Year’s Day, with 13 applying on Christmas Day itself. The figures were picked up by the national media as part of its ‘Divorce Day’ narrative, suggesting that more people issue divorce proceedings at this time of year than at any other time. However, the government’s agenda was actually to sing the praises of its online divorce service, which it says has attracted more than 23,000 applications since it was launched last April. I agree that figure suggests the service has been a success, but the figure for the Christmas week was nothing special, and does not indicate that we are presently witnessing an epidemic of people seeking a divorce, as some sections of the media would have you believe.

Justin Tomlinson, the Minister for Family Support, Housing and Child Maintenance, has announced a £2.7 million fund to increase support for disadvantaged families at risk of parental conflict. As a press release from the Department for Work and Pensions and Mr Tomlinson said: “Parental conflict can range from a lack of warmth and emotional distance, right through to verbal abuse. If children are exposed to this sort of distress over longer periods of time, their emotional and social development can be significantly affected. It may stop children from doing as well at school or even impact their career chances in later life. Children most at risk are those with parents who are out of work, on low incomes, or struggling with physical and mental health conditions.” The fund will be made up of 2 separate strands: £1.1 million will be for projects to support families at a greater risk of parental conflict, and £1.6 million for digital support to help parents find help online. Mr Tomlinson said: “Conflict between parents can have a devastating and long-lasting impact on children, and it’s often caused by external stresses. We want families experiencing problems to have easier access to help. This innovative fund will develop solutions for parents to repair their relationships, resolve any conflict and provide a safer environment for their children to grow up.” Let us hope it is successful.

It has been reported that the rise in the number of children taken into care has pushed 88% of councils over budget in the last financial year. Analysis by the Guardian newspaper and the Local Government Association (‘LGA’) found that 133 out of 152 councils responsible for children’s services overspent in 2017-18. Local authorities went over budget on children’s social care by an estimated £807 million, by far the highest area of overspending in council budgets. As the Guardian explained:

“The number of children being taken into care stands at a 10-year high. Government data published in November found that there were 75,420 looked-after children in England at the end of March, up 4% on the previous year. The number has increased every year since 2008, when the total was about 60,000.”

So the overspend is hardly surprising. There has apparently been a rise in funding for children’s services over the last ten years, but obviously it has not been enough. Councillor Anntoinette Bramble, chair of the LGA’s Children and Young People Board, is quoted as saying that the figures should act as a wake-up call to “the country-wide crisis we are facing in funding services to protect vulnerable children and young people”, and that: “The fact that the overwhelming majority of councils are now being forced to spend more than they had planned to on children’s social care highlights the urgent need for the government to provide new and long-term significant funding for children’s services.” Indeed.

And finally, in a piece of news that has got the media in a frenzy, and has no doubt attracted the attention of divorce lawyers around the world, Amazon founder Jeff Bezos, reportedly the world’s richest person, has announced that he and his wife, MacKenzie, are set to divorce, after a 25-year marriage. Last year Mr Bezos came top of the annual list of the world’s billionaires compiled and by the American business magazine Forbes. He also became the first ‘centibillionaire’ (i.e. having a net worth in excess of $100 billion) included in the list. Of course, as Phoebe Turner, Managing Partner at Stowe’s London Victoria office suggested, his net worth may be somewhat lower after the divorce…

Have a good weekend.

The post A week in family law: Online divorces, support for families, and more appeared first on Stowe Family Law.


Go to Source
Author: John Bolch

New Orleans Cemeteries

A cemetery in New Orleans

Cities of the dead

There are few cities with as great a reputation for decadence as New Orleans. If you want rich, fatty, and extravagant foods, you can hardly do better than the Crescent City. Alcohol flows freely, too, and almost any desire of the flesh can be indulged for a modest fee (sometimes payable in cheap plastic beads). But decadence in the original, non-metaphorical sense is also a regular fixture in this city whose past is littered with pirates, devastating fires, and horrific murders. There has been a lot of death and destruction in New Orleans, and the associated signs of physical decay—whether of buildings or of bodies—are everywhere. Particularly striking to many visitors are the city’s numerous old cemeteries filled with creepy-looking aboveground tombs. Whereas death is usually kept hidden, buried out of sight, New Orleans gives residents and visitors constant reminders of the impermanence of life.

The Dead Shall Rise Again

Why aren’t the dead in New Orleans buried underground as they are in most of the rest of the country? Tour guides are fond of explaining (and sometimes embellishing) the practice to shocked tourists. The main issue, they explain, is that New Orleans is situated slightly below sea level. Because of this, the water table is quite high. When early European settlers put coffins under six feet of earth, they found that the water level would often rise above them, especially during the city’s frequent floods. Since the coffins were filled with air, the water sometimes pushed them up through the earth, causing both a gruesome sight and a health hazard. To keep the coffins underground, holes were drilled in the lid to let air escape, and the coffins were weighted down with rocks and sand. But this was only partially successful, and in any case the saturated corpses did not decompose properly, leading to unsanitary conditions. The only solution was to bury the dead above ground.

Tour guides seldom mention that above-ground burial was a common practice in both France and Spain, where many of the early settlers were from. Even without the resurfacing coffins—which, by the way, were the exception rather than the rule—this practice may well have been adopted simply to keep with tradition. In any case, this method is still widely used today, even though the water table has dropped considerably over the past two centuries as nearby marshes and swamps were drained.

A Bone in the Oven

The first cemetery in New Orleans designed for aboveground burial was the St. Louis #1 cemetery, which opened in 1789. Some accounts claim it was modeled after Paris’s famous Père-Lachaise cemetery, and there can be no doubt that the two bear a strong resemblance to each other. But Père-Lachaise wasn’t used as a cemetery until 1804, so that resemblance may be coincidental. Be that as it may, there is a significant difference that goes beyond the superficial similarities. At Père-Lachaise, the visible structures are, for the most part, just monuments; the bodies themselves are usually placed in vaults in the floors of the tombs. In New Orleans, however, bodies are usually placed inside the walls of the tombs. Because of the hot, subtropical climate, the tomb then effectively becomes an oven, and the high heat causes the body to decompose rapidly in a process that has been compared to a slow cremation. Within about a year, only bones are left.

Just as an oven would not be constructed to bake a single loaf of bread, the tombs in New Orleans cemeteries are used again and again. The specifics vary depending on the exact design of the tomb, but a typical scenario is that after a year, the bones of the departed are swept into an opening in the floor of the tomb, which is then ready for its next occupant. It is a common practice to bury all the members of a family—or multiple families—in the same tomb, with names and dates added to a plaque or headstone as necessary. This procedure is not only sanitary and efficient; it also avoids the problem of growing real estate needs as time goes on.

No Walk in the Park

St. Louis #1 (there are, by the way, a #2 and #3 as well) is the oldest and most famous of about 15 aboveground cemeteries in and around New Orleans. Just as Jim Morrison’s grave attracts visitors to Père-Lachaise, St. Louis #1 has its own star: Marie Laveau, the Voodoo queen. Or, I should say, it has a tomb that many people believe contains her remains—no one is quite sure. But this uncertainty doesn’t stop legions of admirers from leaving offerings and marking the tomb with X’s in a supposed Voodoo ritual that is in fact apocryphal. This is just one of the cemetery sites associated with Voodoo practices—some genuine, some not.

While you may not encounter any ghosts or Voodoo rituals in the cemeteries of New Orleans, you are very likely to encounter thieves, drug dealers, and other ne’er-do-wells. Every single brochure, visitor’s guide, and concierge will warn you, repeatedly and in the strongest possible terms, not to enter the cemeteries alone or at night. Some careless tourists have unwittingly become permanent residents—enough said. That’s not to say you can’t safely visit the cemeteries, just go in a group with a tour guide, during daylight hours.

The cemeteries of New Orleans are often called “cities of the dead.” Not only do the tombs look like buildings, but the cemeteries are organized with streets (and street signs) much like the cities of the living. And it seems somehow appropriate that in New Orleans the decay of death faintly mirrors the decadence of life. That continuity between this life and the next is strangely comforting.

Note: This is an updated version of an article that originally appeared on Interesting Thing of the Day on July 31, 2003, and again in a slightly revised form on February 7, 2005.


Go to Source
Author: Joe Kissell

National Hot Toddy Day

A hot toddy

Although I’d heard the expression “hot toddy,” I had only a vague idea of what it referred to until one evening when I had a cold and my wife offered to make me one. Her version involved hot tea, lemon, honey, and some type of spirit—I can’t recall whether that first one was rum, whiskey, or something else. In any case, it was delicious and soothing. Hot toddies can be made from any of numerous combinations of ingredients, but they’re invariably hot, alcoholic, and at least a bit sweet. And you can even consume them when you’re not sick! They’re just the thing to warm up on a cold winter night.

Image credit: Patrick Truby [CC BY-SA 2.0], via Wikimedia Commons


Go to Source
Author: Joe Kissell

Father liable for cost of child conceived without his permission

Modern technology can throw up all sorts of new conundrums for the law to grapple with. IVF treatment, for example, has raised the possibility of a child being conceived without the permission of either one of its natural parents. We have seen cases of this before, such as where a widow has sought to use her dead husband’s frozen sperm to conceive a child, or even where a woman has wanted to use her late daughter’s frozen eggs to give birth to her own grandchild.

But what if the child is conceived as a result of a deception? What if a mother conceived a child via IVF after deceiving the IVF clinic into believing that the father consented, when she knew he did not? Would the father then be liable for the costs of the child’s upbringing?

This was the situation in the recent Court of Appeal case ARB v IVF Hammersmith & Another.

The facts of the case were as follows. In 2008 the parents, who were in a relationship, attended an IVF clinic for the purpose of investigating and subsequently undergoing fertility treatment. As part of that treatment a number of embryos were created using the mother’s eggs and the father’s sperm. One of those embryos was implanted into the mother, and she subsequently gave birth to a healthy boy, in the autumn of 2008. Five other embryos were frozen, with the parents’ consent, to await the possibility that they would decide to undergo further treatment.

However, following the birth of the son the parents’ relationship deteriorated, and they separated in July 2010.

Despite this, the mother attended the clinic again in 2010, with a view to using one of the frozen embryos to have another child. In the course of this process a consent form was required to be signed by both parents, confirming that they consented to the procedure. The form was completed by the mother in October 2010. However, the father did not consent – his signature on the form had been forged by the mother.

The procedure went ahead and the mother gave birth to another child, a daughter, in 2011. Family court proceedings took place in relation to the children, and an order was made “confirming parental responsibility and shared residence in respect of both children.”

The father issued proceedings against the clinic for breach of contract, seeking damages for the cost of the daughter’s upbringing. As neither breach of contract nor the law of tort, which was also referred to in the case, is a family law matter, I will not go into the details. Suffice to say that the High Court found that the clinic had committed a breach of contract by thawing and implanting the embryo. However, the judge held that the father could not recover damages for the cost of the daughter’s upbringing, for reasons of legal policy.

The father appealed, to the Court of Appeal.

The primary question for the Court of Appeal to answer was whether the legal policy objection to the father recovering damages for the cost of the child’s upbringing applied. The reasoning behind the policy is essentially twofold: firstly, that it is inherently impossible to quantify how much it costs to bring up a child, and secondly that it is morally unacceptable to regard a child as a financial liability.

Giving the leading judgment of the Court of Appeal, Lady Justice Nicola Davies DBE found that the legal policy did apply. Again, I will not go into the legal details, but those two essential reasons behind the policy were applicable here: that it was not possible to calculate the father’s loss for breach of contract, and that it was morally unacceptable to regard a child as a financial liability. In any event, as Lady Davies said, the father had accepted his share of responsibility for his daughter’s upbringing, and wished to treat her in the same way as his other children.

Having found that the policy did apply, Lady Davies dismissed the appeal. Lord Justice David Richards and Lady Justice King DBE gave concurring judgments.

If you wish you can read the full report of the case here.

The post Father liable for cost of child conceived without his permission appeared first on Stowe Family Law.


Go to Source
Author: John Bolch

The world’s richest man to divorce

So, the media went into a frenzy yesterday as the richest man in the world announced he was getting a divorced on Twitter.

Jeff Bezos and his wife, MacKenzie, are set to divorce after a 25-year marriage and the initial reports indicate that it is amicable. Let’s hope it stays that way. Keeping things civil ensures that you can complete the divorce with less stress and less time. Not to mention this is better for their four children.

Divorce in America has very different rules. If the divorce took place in England, the starting point would be 50:50 division of all the assets. As Amazon was built up during the marriage, and any other assets such as their substantial property portfolio would very likely be split 50:50.

After such a split will Jeff Bezos still be the richest man in the world?  And will MacKenzie become one of the richest women in the world?

Of course, any division will depend on how the companies and assets are structured, and what assets are in whose names.

High-net-worth divorces can be very complicated: Trusts could have been set up for their children, money gifted to charities, and there may be offshore interests.  In which case a court may struggle to enforce an order against those offshore assets.

Perhaps they had a pre or postnuptial agreement setting out what would happen to their finances upon a divorce?

It is not uncommon for high-profile people to have a non-disclosure agreement in place, so we may never know.

One thing, however, is certain, it will be a very complicated divorce.

Phoebe Turner

Managing Partner at London Victoria

The post The world’s richest man to divorce appeared first on Stowe Family Law.


Go to Source
Author: Phoebe Turner

I shall name him Superman: An international comparison of baby naming law reform by Alex May

Late last year we worked with the University of Winchester’s brightest law students to submit articles for our blog. This was a chance for them to be published online and boost their online profiles. We received some strong submissions but, in the end, we narrowed the field down and this article, written by Alex May is the winning entry.

Naming a baby

What should we call our baby? The first question for every new set of parents when they discover the amazing news of being pregnant. However, many parents will not know the laws involved in naming their new baby. In most circumstances, the chosen name would not endure any legal consequences.

What is the law in England & Wales?

So, what is the law on baby names in the UK? The short answer… there is not any.

Superman… Gandhi… Arsenal… Bear… they have all been accepted as baby names in Britain.

Registrations of births in England and Wales are made under the Births and Deaths Registration Act 1953 and the Registration of Births and Deaths Regulations 1987, however, the legislation does not set out any guidance on what parents may name their child.

So, how do our relaxed and non-existent naming regulations compare against other countries on an international stage? In Britain, third parties can only become involved in the baby naming process in extreme cases, as long as a name is not offensive and fits in the box on the form it will be accepted. How can this be right when that name becomes a child’s label until they are of a riper age to make a change?

In the age of social media, bullying is now not only practice within schools, but cyber-bullying occurs far too often leaving children isolated and alone, it should then be questioned as to why Britain has little regulation on something that could define a child’s early life from the day they are born.

It must then be said that the judgement of Lady Justice King in Re C (Children) (Child in Care: Choice of Forename) should become an efficient and well use practice to regulate this area. She looked in relation to the child’s sense of identity and self-worth and to her day-to-day life as a child. The name, in this case, would potentially expose the child to treatment which goes far beyond acceptable teasing and therefore she ruled against it.

This judgement demonstrates exactly where the law should develop to, there should be more weight put on the child’s welfare over paternal rights, it should be the child’s future that should decide the acceptance of a name, not the parents right to call their child anything they want.

The law internationally

When compared with the international stage, Britain’s naming laws demonstrate a need for reform. In New Zealand the Births, Deaths and Marriages Registration Act of 1995 s.18 states that it is undesirable in the public interest for a person to bear a name or combination of names if it might cause offence to a reasonable person or it is unreasonably long; or it is without adequate justification.

In contrast, Sweden’s Naming Act 1982 s.34 a first name may not be accepted as being liable to offend or likely to cause discomfort to the person who is to bear it or name which, for some other reason, is obviously not suitable as a first name.

France, the most child friendly naming laws, states in their Civil Code of Persons Chapter 2, Section 1, Article 57 Where first names or one of them, alone or combined appears to be contrary to the welfare of the child the officer of civil status shall give notice thereof to the government procurator without delay [or…] refer the matter to the family causes judge. Where the judge considers that the first name is not consonant with the welfare of the child… he shall order its removal from the registers of civil status.

The need for reform

Subsequently, when looking at Britain on a global scale our stance on baby naming laws is weak and should be reformed. New Zealand is the closest to Britain in terms of its requirements, the welfare of the child is not mentioned at all, but they still have legislation. Sweden and France have the most child-friendly laws and Britain should follow suit, or at the very minimum pass legislation clarifying our exact stance on baby names.

A baby name is one of the most important things in the start of a child’s life as it will be their name for at least 16 years until they can choose to change it by deed poll, but during those first years a child will enter education and be exposed to playground teasing, and an obscure and unique name could lead a child to receive teasing far beyond what is acceptable.

Quintessentially, if something as simple as a stronger emphasis on the welfare of the child eradicates the celebrity-led culture of ‘I want my baby to be different and have a unique name’ then reform should occur. As a unique name may be welcomed by the parents, but in terms of the welfare of the child, some names could have a massive impact on their baby’s future.

The post I shall name him Superman: An international comparison of baby naming law reform by Alex May appeared first on Stowe Family Law.


Go to Source
Author: Stowe Family Law

Synesthesia

An example how a synesthetic person might associate a color to letters and numbers

Making sense of shared senses

I have always enjoyed finding (or making) connections between things that don’t seem to go together. So I have a special fondness for metaphor—especially when it’s indirect and novel. A number of years ago, a friend suggested we go out to dinner together. I asked what kind of place he had in mind, and he said, “Oh, I was thinking we’d go to a green restaurant.” I didn’t know what relevance a restaurant’s color could have, and the usual metaphorical meanings of green (“environmentally sensitive,” “inexperienced,” “nauseated,” etc.) didn’t seem to apply. Noticing my confusion, my friend explained his unusual usage of the term. “There’s a class of restaurants,” he said, “whose décor consists mainly of antiques hung on the walls and brass railings. There’s always a central bar, a lively atmosphere, pub-style food, and an excessively cheerful wait staff. You know the type—T.G.I. Friday’s, Chili’s, Bennigan’s, Applebees…” I nodded. I knew the type. He continued, “These restaurants also typically have green awnings. Thus: ‘green restaurants.’” Ever since then, I’ve referred to this class of restaurants as “green,” even when the awnings are red-and-white striped, when there are no awnings at all, or when other details differ from the canonical example. I like that description, because it’s the most compact way I can think of to describe that type of restaurant.

That Name Rings a Bell

For some people, though, the word “restaurant” may literally cause them to experience the color green—or a particular texture, smell, or taste. This is just one example of a phenomenon known as synesthesia, in which senses blend together or trigger each other in one way or another. In one of the more common forms of synesthesia, a given letter or number invariably appears to be a certain color. In other cases, a certain kind of sound may cause someone to see a color or experience a tactile sensation, or a texture or color may provoke the experience of a taste.

There are at least 50 different types of synesthesia, involving various combinations of senses both as the triggering stimulus and the secondary response. Some forms of synesthesia are experienced as multiple modalities of a single physical sense. For example, seeing a number might evoke a certain color for one synesthete, while in another person the same number might cause a different visual sensation, such as a pattern or shape. One sense may also trigger another, as in a tactile sensation that has a taste. But not all synesthetic experiences are restricted to the five senses. In some synesthetes, a word or sound might evoke a sensation of motion, or even a kinesthetic response, inducing the person to assume a particular physical position. There are also cases in which abstract concepts, such as days of the week or months of the year, cause the sensation of shapes, colors, or other experiences.

Survey Says…

Estimates vary widely as to what percentage of the population experiences synesthesia. I’ve read claims that as few as 1 in 25,000 or as many as 1 in 300 people have at least one pair of overlapping senses (in rare cases, all five senses are blended together), though everyone seems to agree that it’s more common among women and left-handed persons than the rest of the population. Synesthesia is always referred to neutrally as a “condition”—neither a “defect” nor a “gift”—because even though it’s abnormal in the sense of being rare, no one can seem to work out whether it’s advantageous or disadvantageous from an evolutionary point of view. It’s simply a trait, like having blond hair or being able to curl one’s tongue, that some people have and others don’t. There are cases in which synesthesia acts as a memory aid, and it is also associated with higher-than-normal levels of creativity. On the other hand, there are a few cases where the blending of senses is so pronounced that almost any stimulus produces a disturbing state of sensory overload.

Synesthesia is an inherited trait, although researchers have not identified the responsible gene (or genes) or the exact parameters that determine how it is transmitted. In any case, people with synesthesia experience the sensations involuntarily and consistently. There have been some reported cases in which children with synesthesia lose the multisensory associations as they grow older, but for the most part, a given stimulus always produces the same secondary response in a given person—if the number 5 is red, it will always be red; if the word “groovy” tastes like mint, it will be just as minty 10 years from now. That said, though, there is little consistency from one synesthete to the next in what sensations are triggered by what stimuli. No one has yet determined exactly how the specific associations form.

It’s Not Easy Hearing Green

Although synesthesia has been known and documented in medical literature since 1880, it was largely ignored as a field of serious inquiry until late in the 20th century. Many people believed that those who reported synesthesia were “just imagining things,” which is a strange accusation considering that all sensory perception is, by definition, in one’s head. But if someone reported that the letter R felt cold, it was easy to conclude that the person was just speaking metaphorically, or remembering a childhood association of some kind—not really experiencing the sensation of cold. Recently, though, researchers have used several clever techniques to prove conclusively that the secondary sensations are actually experienced in the brain, not simply memories or a poetic way of speaking.

In one experiment, for example, scientists filled a page with nearly identical monochrome 2s and 5s, asking subjects to tell them what pattern was formed by the 2s. Nonsynesthetes had great difficulty in picking out any pattern, because they had to look at each individual character. But for synesthetes who perceived 2s and 5s in different colors, the pattern (say, a triangle) formed by the 2s immediately jumped out.

Light Me Up

Having learned that synesthesia is a genuine sensory experience, researchers concocted more elaborate tests to determine what may be going on in the brain when such experiences occur. One such technique is a Functional MRI (magnetic resonance imaging) test, in which subjects are placed in a machine that can display a dynamic, real-time, 3D representation of blood flow in the brain. The parts of the brain that are activated in response to specific stimuli “light up” in distinctive colors. So in the case of someone who hears colors, showing the subject a color will cause the parts of the brain that handle auditory information to be activated, just as they would be if the person had actually heard the sound.

When discussing what happens in the brain in synesthesia, it’s common to talk about “crossed wires,” and of course the phenomenon does suggest communication between parts of the brain that do not normally interact. But the image of crossed wires is probably misleading; strictly speaking, synesthesia does not appear to require a different or more elaborate set of neural connections than in a normal brain. Instead, the prevailing belief is that existing connections are simply used in a new way, or that chemicals that ordinarily inhibit this type of cross-communication are not released. This notion is supported by the fact that phenomena similar to synesthesia sometimes occur in otherwise normal people who suffer seizures, have brain injuries, or use certain kinds of drugs. But apart from physical or chemical trauma to the brain, there is no evidence that synesthesia is a trait that can be learned or acquired deliberately.

A recurring theme among people with synesthesia is that they have learned by experience not to share their unusual sensations; painful tales of childhood ridicule are common. This is a great pity, because one person’s scary mutation is another person’s super power. With any luck, the combination of more generous cultural attitudes and really expensive scientific equipment will open all new doors for understanding and appreciating the unusual abilities of synesthetes.

Note: This is an updated version of an article that originally appeared on Interesting Thing of the Day on August 27, 2003, and again in a slightly revised form on July 8, 2004.

Image credit: User:Mysid [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons


Go to Source
Author: Joe Kissell

National Oysters Rockefeller Day

Oysters Rockefeller

We’ve covered Oysters Rockefeller previously here on Interesting Thing of the Day—it’s a baked oyster dish with a secret recipe—often imitated but never precisely replicated. If you want the original version, I’m afraid you’ll have to visit Antoine’s in New Orleans—the same restaurant that declared January 10 to be National Oysters Rockefeller Day starting in 2017. Today, however, if you are inclined to make Oysters Rockefeller yourself, or buy them at another restaurant, I hereby authorize you to use any recipe that tastes good. (Offer expires at midnight, sorry.)

Image credit: Larry Hoffman [CC BY-SA 2.0], via Flickr


Go to Source
Author: Joe Kissell