Fertile Fem

As someone who firmly believes that many of the alleged psychological differences between the male and female sexes can be attributed to cultural reinforcement of popular myth, bad or ethically-questionable science and a healthy dose of plain ol’ sexism, it’s hardly surprising that I am instinctually repelled by claims that girls are ‘hard-wired’ to like pink things and be terrible drivers or that pregnant women and new mothers have diminished mental capacity and memory, otherwise known as ‘baby brain’.

On the other hand, as an advocate for mothers and someone who acknowledges and has experienced first-hand the powerful effect of hormonal changes on a woman’s mind and body, I do not deny that biology and its many processes may play a role in shaping who we are and how we live.

But just how much credence should we give to the idea that having children brings with it an overwhelming and inevitable shift in how we think? Is the psychology of motherhood subconsciously learned and culturally-ingrained or is it simply a case of biological design, wherein mothers are destined to expend more brain power on their offspring than on themselves or the world around them? Is ‘baby brain’ part of human evolution or a convenient theory to explain why women still undertake the psychological burden of parenthood, making them supposedly more naturally suited to be caretakers than professionals?

If you ask a group of mothers whether they felt less sharp or had bad memories while pregnant and within the first several months of each of their children’s lives, many will answer with a resounding ‘Yes!’ Anecdote after anecdote about forgetting a phone number known for decades or struggling to remember what that large rectangular thing in the kitchen that chills the perishable food is called soon follow. Mothers who work outside the home also sometimes report not being able to focus on their jobs because they are so busy thinking of and organising all the many things that need doing in relation to the household and children.

While I’m sure these things are true and that many women do indeed experience some element of memory loss in pregnancy and in the early years of parenting, I have to wonder if there isn’t another (series of) explanation(s) other than a decrease in mental acuity. After all, some women report not experiencing this phenomenon at all.

So is ‘baby brain’ just a stereotype perpetuated to remind women that their focus should be on their foetus or child, or an inescapable truism? Let’s look at the evidence.

First, there’s a question of whether our brains literally shrink during pregnancy. According to this news report and associated study (though a very small one, with only 9 participants), the late stage of pregnancy does seem to cause individual brain cells to decrease in volume, though not in quantity. One theory is that this may be because the body is busy pumping extra blood and other fluids around the body and to the foetus and the associated reproductive organs. Another study found that pregnancy “adversely affects ability to recall previously seen spatial locations” due to hormonal changes and concludes that pregnant women will likely have diminished capacity to perform certain cognitive tasks because of said changes.

However, this does not necessarily explain anecdotal reporting of memory loss or lack of focus. The authors of the above studies themselves conclude that their findings are speculative and the sample sizes were very small.

A much larger, more comprehensive study performed in Australia earlier this year concluded — after studying 1,241 women both before and after they had children (and comparing them to those who never had children at all) — that having a baby does not adversely affect memory or cognitive abilities. The head researcher said:

“Part of the problem is that pregnancy manuals tell women they are likely to experience memory and concentration problems — so women and their partners are primed to attribute any memory lapse to the ‘hard to miss’ physical sign of pregnancy.

Pregnant women may also shift their focus away from work issues to help them prepare for the birth of their new baby, while new mothers selectively attend to their baby.

But she said this shift should not be labelled a ‘cognitive deficit.’”

In the same article, a senior midwife notes that the physical and emotional stresses of pregnancy, coupled with lack of sleep and the shock of a major life change, are the more likely explanations for any reported memory lapses or concentration difficulties.

Moving on from pregnancy, we have also generally accepted the idea that women’s abilities for systematization and concentration decrease (even if only marginally) in the months and years after birth. Couple this with the oft-spouted stereotype that women are hard-wired for empathy and we go from the idea of a brain-addled new mummy as dubious myth to a widely accepted cultural norm, in the form of ‘Men Are From Mars, Women Are From Venus’, et al.

Dr. Cordelia Fine, a cognitive neuroscientist and author of “Delusions of Gender: How Our Minds, Society and Neurosexism Create Difference,” hits back at what she believes is the perpetuation of old sexism with new science. Dr. Fine attributes many of the studies’ stated outcomes to researchers using their own biases and belief in gender differences to influence not only the way the studies are conducted but how they are written. Knowing that the media do not generally dissect scientific studies at their core and instead take the best ‘plain English’ tidbits to create sensational headlines, some of these studies authors may be (wittingly or unwittingly) contributing to the idea that men’s and women’s differences can be explained by nature, not nurture.

In this New York Times review of Dr. Fine’s book, we see previous examples of biological differences used as rationale for all sorts of discrimination against women.

Experts used to attribute gender inequality to the “delicacy of the brain fibers” in women ; then to the smaller dimensions of the female brain (the “missing five ounces,” the Victorians called it); then to the ratio of skull length to skull breadth. In 1915 the neurologist Dr. Charles L. Dana wrote in this newspaper that because a woman’s upper spinal cord is smaller than a man’s it affects women’s “efficiency” in the evaluation of “political initiative or of judicial authority in a community’s organization” — and thus compromises their ability to vote.

Dr. Fine also examines the popular opinion that new mothers are ill-suited to return to work full-time and, if they do, how challenging they find it due to their hearts and minds remaining firmly in the home, even when they are at work. Her article in Neuroethics magazine, entitled “Will Working Mothers’ Brains Explode? The Popular New Genre of Neurosexism” is a must read for those interested in or concerned with the way women’s abilities are viewed upon returning to work after having a child.

So if we know that science is not always reliable and is, indeed, subject to societal influence, how do we know which studies to trust and which to throw out with the bathwater? When can we be sure that a woman self-reporting memory loss and a general feeling of being ‘a bit stupid’ is a neurological truth instead of an internalised stereotype?

The short answer is that we don’t and we can’t. If someone’s experience confirms previously-held views or theories, they will be hard-pressed to view it any other way. The longer answer is that we have to scrutinise these studies before accepting them as fact and learn to examine not only the source of the study and the possible motivations behind it, but what personal prejudices may influence the outcome. We must also question the use of anecdotes (even when they are numerous) that fly in the face of evidence-based research.

Having said that, I am not a proponent of telling other women how to rationalise their experiences or how to feel their feelings. If a woman thinks she’s hard-wired to look after her baby and to put the milk in the cupboard instead of the fridge when she is expecting, that is her truth and her prerogative. Likewise, I wouldn’t discount a woman who insisted she had zero cognitive dissipation and zero doubts about her abilities to perform her job or other duties just as well after she’s had children as she did before.

In my view, the prevailing idea of ‘baby brain’ is likely a combination of factors, some biological but mostly cultural. I’ll likely never know for sure if I’m right or not, as when it comes to nature versus nurture there are no cut-and-dried answers.

So what do you think? Or have you forgotten what we were talking about?

Photo credit