Letter: Offended by denial of shaken baby syndrome

Saying that Shaken Baby Syndrome is an unproved theory is not the same as saying that child abuse does not exist.  Children can be violently shaken and killed, but the “triad” of subdural hematoma, retinal hemorrhage and cerebral edema without a history of significant trauma is not DIAGNOSTIC of shaking.  Just yesterday on FOX2now St. Louis, there was a special: Rare Genetic Disorder Could Lead to Shaken Baby Type Injuries.  Two families could easily have been destroyed because pediatricians diagnosed abuse without bothering to check for the KNOWN natural alternative of GA1.  It has been known for YEARS that GA1 causes the same symptoms as SBS, yet doctors won’t CHECK for it because they “believe” the child was shaken.  Hundreds of people have been sent to prison without even a simple test being done to rule out GA1 because it is considered “rare.“  It’s rare in the general population, perhaps not so rare in children who display its characteristic symptoms!  How can anyone know how rare it is when doctors don’t bother to to check for it?  Menke’s disease is another known alternative and there may be unknown natural causes in cases where no evidence of abuse outside a few invisible symptoms. 

Shaken baby syndrome theory also says that the last person with the child is the perpetrator, when it has been KNOWN for years that children who were indeed abused by parents have been in hospital for 16+ hours before displaying labored breathing or other alarming symptoms (read Dr. Huntington’s letter in the March 2002 edition of American Journal of Forensic and Medical Pathology, p. 105). 

Many people who are accused and convicted of shaking infants pass polygraphs, refuse to plea bargain, and refuse to admit guilt after conviction even though it then would benefit them (earlier parole).  Many of them have perfect histories and character references.  Not all, of course.  Child abuse DOES exist.  The problem is diagnosing abuse solely on a couple of symptoms and ignoring all evidence to the contrary.

Child advocates should be very concerned that they get this right.  Children suffer when wrongly deprived of loving parents and breadwinner.  A problem is that too many child advocates care more about SBS theory, which purports to be an easy answer to puzzling circumstances, than they care about CHILDREN.  Children DO die of causes other than abuse!  Shaking is dangerous, but you cannot be certain a child has been shaken (especially by the last person who took care of him) based on invisible symptoms ALONE. 

One can indeed contract lung cancer without being exposed to cigarette smoke, because genetic factors can be involved in that, too.  It takes more time and circumspection, but child protection workers who care more about children than pet theories, and there are many, must invest the extra effort to make such distinctions.  Children’s futures are at stake when mistakes are made EITHER WAY.  It is imperative that those who care about children get this RIGHT.