I am a typical American citizen. I knew little about what is known as Shaken Baby Syndrome (SBS)
until our family became entangled in the bureaucracy known as the
Department of Human Services (DHS). Across the USA there is a need to
educate doctors and specialists about the medical science that has
basically reversed some research identified as specific to physical
child abuse. As long as the myths remain, and until the correct science
reaches everyone, doctors will be doing what they think is the right
thing. This starts a trickle down effect, allowing DHS to separate
babies from innocent loving parents.
Few pediatric issues conjure up as much tension as a doctor's diagnosis of SBS. The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) is in the middle of this fray. At one point the AAP identified it as "The act of shaking, leading to shaken baby syndrome is so violent that individuals observing it would recognize it as dangerous and likely to kill the child. Shaken Baby Syndrome injuries are the result of violent trauma." In 1971 Dr Norman Guthkelch coined the phrase "Shaken Baby Syndrome". Recently the AAP compromised on the actual identifier of the condition. The AAP published an article in 2009 by Dr. Christian and Dr. Block changing SBS to the more specific identifier of "Abusive Head Trauma" (AHT). Abusive forces listed as contributory to abuse like spinal, cerebral and cranial should be diagnosed as AHT. Research has established that forces not related to abuse can cause these types of injuries. Meaning there is an overlap in how a condition could have occurred. They also point out that the legal applications begin with the diagnosing physician. It is the physician's duty to interpret medical information to non medical investigators such as DHS. AFTER, all medical data has been evaluated they need to make it understandable to the investigators. The physician also has a responsibility to the child's family. The AAP compromised, yet still attributed AHT injuries as an identifier of inflicted injuries. The Academy's article explains that not all forces that cause the triad of injuries are from abuse. Unfortunately, at the same time they reassured their base supporters that SBS and AHT is basically the same thing. I do not accept that.
SBS in the minds of many is associated with any form of physical child abuse. My grandson had no head, spine or brain injuries. The District Attorney used the terminology SBS to conjure up a mental picture .My grandson had an unexplained femur fracture. Later after a thorough skeletal survey some ribs were found to be healing in various stages (No investigation was done as to his rough Shoulder Dystocia delivery). Fractured ribs are suspicious for abuse. Especially, Posterior ribs. Notably, Shoulder Dystocia is a condition that can cause rib injuries during delivery.
My point is that DHS offices all across this country are falsely accusing some innocent parents of physically abusing their children. When a doctor's diagnosis is wrong it manifests itself into a dilemma of epic proportions. As in our case where an unexplained injury was identified, confirmation bias kicked in. As pointed out in an article by Attorney Justin McShane "What really is Shaken Baby Syndrome?". There are many myths surrounding SBS / AHT. Such as, the myth that retinal hemorrhaging is specific to abuse. No one knows exactly what causes that. Classic Metaphyseal Lesions(CML) are another example of a myth pointed out in Dr David Ayoub's article in the American Journal of Reontgeneology. His research has concluded that CML's are not specific to abuse as referred to in Dr Klienman's research.
It is human nature to want to protect innocent babies. However, like the witch hunt days of the past. The common explanation of what has been passed down from generation to generation is not necessarily correct. Everyone hated witches. Once a finger was pointed at certain individuals the verdict was predetermined. A trial would only validate what everyone already new. Our society wants justice served. Was it served during the witch trials? Remember, only those that would not admit guilt were hung at the gallows. Today, some of the most adamant about their innocence are convicted. They are unjustly tried and persecuted because of outdated research. Compound that with unethical practices utilized in our courts by some District Attorneys wanting only to win their case.
For more information on our case see "X-ray Images determining abuse in dispute", in another yahoo voices article.
Few pediatric issues conjure up as much tension as a doctor's diagnosis of SBS. The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) is in the middle of this fray. At one point the AAP identified it as "The act of shaking, leading to shaken baby syndrome is so violent that individuals observing it would recognize it as dangerous and likely to kill the child. Shaken Baby Syndrome injuries are the result of violent trauma." In 1971 Dr Norman Guthkelch coined the phrase "Shaken Baby Syndrome". Recently the AAP compromised on the actual identifier of the condition. The AAP published an article in 2009 by Dr. Christian and Dr. Block changing SBS to the more specific identifier of "Abusive Head Trauma" (AHT). Abusive forces listed as contributory to abuse like spinal, cerebral and cranial should be diagnosed as AHT. Research has established that forces not related to abuse can cause these types of injuries. Meaning there is an overlap in how a condition could have occurred. They also point out that the legal applications begin with the diagnosing physician. It is the physician's duty to interpret medical information to non medical investigators such as DHS. AFTER, all medical data has been evaluated they need to make it understandable to the investigators. The physician also has a responsibility to the child's family. The AAP compromised, yet still attributed AHT injuries as an identifier of inflicted injuries. The Academy's article explains that not all forces that cause the triad of injuries are from abuse. Unfortunately, at the same time they reassured their base supporters that SBS and AHT is basically the same thing. I do not accept that.
SBS in the minds of many is associated with any form of physical child abuse. My grandson had no head, spine or brain injuries. The District Attorney used the terminology SBS to conjure up a mental picture .My grandson had an unexplained femur fracture. Later after a thorough skeletal survey some ribs were found to be healing in various stages (No investigation was done as to his rough Shoulder Dystocia delivery). Fractured ribs are suspicious for abuse. Especially, Posterior ribs. Notably, Shoulder Dystocia is a condition that can cause rib injuries during delivery.
My point is that DHS offices all across this country are falsely accusing some innocent parents of physically abusing their children. When a doctor's diagnosis is wrong it manifests itself into a dilemma of epic proportions. As in our case where an unexplained injury was identified, confirmation bias kicked in. As pointed out in an article by Attorney Justin McShane "What really is Shaken Baby Syndrome?". There are many myths surrounding SBS / AHT. Such as, the myth that retinal hemorrhaging is specific to abuse. No one knows exactly what causes that. Classic Metaphyseal Lesions(CML) are another example of a myth pointed out in Dr David Ayoub's article in the American Journal of Reontgeneology. His research has concluded that CML's are not specific to abuse as referred to in Dr Klienman's research.
It is human nature to want to protect innocent babies. However, like the witch hunt days of the past. The common explanation of what has been passed down from generation to generation is not necessarily correct. Everyone hated witches. Once a finger was pointed at certain individuals the verdict was predetermined. A trial would only validate what everyone already new. Our society wants justice served. Was it served during the witch trials? Remember, only those that would not admit guilt were hung at the gallows. Today, some of the most adamant about their innocence are convicted. They are unjustly tried and persecuted because of outdated research. Compound that with unethical practices utilized in our courts by some District Attorneys wanting only to win their case.
For more information on our case see "X-ray Images determining abuse in dispute", in another yahoo voices article.
No comments:
Post a Comment