Neuroscientist Dr. Tara Swart says she taught herself to 'communicate' with her late husband and outlines a method in new book
Swart, an Oxford-trained neuroscientist and author, describes visions and recurring signs after her husband's death and offers steps she says helped her receive them
Neuroscientist and author Dr. Tara Swart told readers she has been communicating daily with her late husband since his death and published a guide describing how others might seek similar “signs.” Swart, who has a PhD in neuroscience and has written on visualization and manifestation, framed the experiences as a mix of personal practice, focused attention and interpretation of recurring sensory and symbolic events.
Swart described her husband, Robin, as having developed myelodysplastic syndrome that progressed to acute myeloid leukaemia; he died in June 2021, two days before the couple's fourth wedding anniversary. In accounts published by Swart, she said that in the months after his death she experienced a vivid apparition, then began to notice what she interpreted as repeated signals: sightings of robins in the garden, recurring numbers and symbols, songs tied to memories, flickering lights and other events she framed as confirmations of continued presence.
Swart, who trained at Oxford and has previously written about the psychological effects of visualization, said she combined the scientific literature on consciousness and near-death reports with personal practice to “open channels” to her husband. She told readers she consulted research on topics such as near-death experiences and terminal lucidity, interviewed psychiatrists and psychologists, and drew on traditions that use sensory withdrawal and focused attention to alter consciousness.
She said she initially tried a professional medium and found some statements credible but many items that could be researched or guessed. After that, she described a deliberate set of practices she said helped her receive clearer signs: sit quietly and summon a specific memory of the deceased; pick a distinct and detailed sign tied to that memory (a colour, object, number or location); set a timeframe and number of occurrences to reduce coincidence; document the sign by photographing it; and share the experience with friends or family so others can help interpret it. Swart framed sharing as both a way to validate signs and to create a community that helps people recognise patterns they may have already been experiencing.
Swart also recounted vivid anecdotes intended to illustrate her claims. In one, she said she was awakened at 4 a.m. by a physical sensation and saw an apparition of her husband at the bedside that dissolved before she could fully register it. In another, she described a coincidence while filming a documentary in which she picked a number from a hat that matched her husband's age and later found his initials on the back of the paper.
Her new book, The Signs: The New Science Of How To Trust Your Instincts, expands on these accounts and on the methods she promotes. Swart has told audiences and readers that, since publishing some of her experiences, she has received thousands of messages from others reporting similar events.
Swart presented her approach as a combination of intentional attention and interpretation. She wrote that specifying a sign and a short timeline reduces the likelihood that a later occurrence will be dismissed as coincidence, and she recommended documenting and sharing signs to create supportive social context that can help people reframe grief and uncertainty.
Independent scientists note that experiences people interpret as contact with the dead are widely reported and that explanations vary. Cognitive scientists and grief specialists generally describe such experiences as subjective and often influenced by expectation, memory, pattern recognition and cultural beliefs. Studies of near-death experiences and terminal lucidity explore complex neurological and psychological mechanisms, but there is no consensus that such episodes constitute empirical proof of continued consciousness after death.
Swart acknowledged that people will interpret signs differently, writing that for some they may be attributed to religious belief or the universe rather than a deceased individual. She emphasised that, in her view, what matters most is the personal meaning people derive from the events and how those meanings help them cope.
The accounts and recommendations come amid broader public interest in bereavement practices and the ways people seek comfort after loss. Clinicians who work with grieving patients typically recommend a range of approaches, including psychotherapy, peer support and rituals, and they caution that experiences interpreted as contact can be distressing for some and may warrant clinical attention if they interfere with daily functioning.
Swart's narrative blends personal memoir, selective review of relevant literature and practical advice for people seeking signs after bereavement. Her claims remain personal testimony rather than scientific proof, and experts urge that anyone drawing on such experiences also consider established mental-health resources if grief becomes overwhelming.