Log In | Register
A PATHOLOGIST in the UK who argues that the trademark triad of symptoms of "shaken baby syndrome" (SBS) can have an innocent cause has been prevented from testifying in court as an expert witness. The restriction could stand until January 2012.
Yet, according to researchers and lawyers contacted by New Scientist, there are serious doubts about the safety of many shaken baby convictions. This is despite the fact that the triad of symptoms has been taken as evidence of murder for 40 years.
Doctor gagged for doubting shaken baby syndrome
Seeded on Thu Jul 29, 2010 12:08 PM EDT
Article Source: newscientist.com- Enjoy this article? Help vote it up the 'Vine.
- Public Discussion (3)
The three markers for a shaken baby diagnosis are retinal haemorrhages in both eyes; subdural haemorrhages between the fibrous dura layer that protects the brain and the brain surface beneath; and swelling of the brain. Subdural haemorrhages are said to arise from ripping and shearing of so-called bridging veins. New lines of evidence challenge this hypothesis with the discovery that subdural bleeds are much more common in babies than generally appreciated, and for a host of innocent reasons (see "Anatomy of a murder?").
#1 - Thu Jul 29, 2010 12:08 PM EDTI'm not a doctor and I have not done the research so I can't base any of this on facts.
But, shaking a baby is NEVER a good idea. No situation exist where it can be justified, there is not moral ground to stand on. It's kinda sad that it happens enough where we actually have a defined "syndrome".
Just don't do it.
#2 - Fri Jul 30, 2010 8:07 PM EDTThe doctor is not saying that shaking baby syndrome does not exist or that it is ok to do such a thing.
He thinks it is over diagnosed. As a result parents could face jail time.
Because he is not gung ho about giving that diagnoses and offers evidence about how SBS-like trauma can occur otherwise, the UK courts have barred him from testifying.
No one doubts that frenzied shaking could cause the triad of symptoms, but only after severe accompanying damage to the neck. A baby's head striking a solid surface would also cause such damage but then there would be other evidence of an impact. For these reasons, there is increasing pressure for the triad not be used as evidence of guilt in the absence of any other evidence of child abuse. The American Academy of Pediatrics last year called for the phrase "shaken baby syndrome" to be replaced with "abusive head trauma". In the UK, the Royal College of Pathologists last December cautioned againstviewing the triad as "absolute proof of traumatic head injury in the absence of any other corroborative evidence".
No independent witness has ever seen a shaken baby with such symptoms, the only evidence has come from confessions. Of 54 cases globally in which defendants admitted shaking a baby, only 11 had no signs of other injuries (The American Journal of Forensic Medicine and Pathology, DOI: 10.1097/01.paf.0000164228.79784.5a).
- 1 vote
You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead. |
As a new user, you may notice a few temporary content restrictions. Click here for more info.
