|
         
|
 |
Shaken Baby Syndrome (SBS) is a term
used to describe a constellation of injuries and the
mechanism of abuse that causes these injuries. The major signs of
SBS are subdural and/or
subarachnoid hematomas(bleeding in the membranes that cover the brain),
retinal hemorrhages
(bleeding in the back of the inner surface of the eyes) and little
or no sign of external injury.
In some cases there are broken ribs and fractures of the skull. The
broken ribs are caused by the
manner in which the child is held around the rib cage during the shaking.
The fractured skull is
caused by the head striking an object during the shaking.
The brain injury is caused by an individual who shakes a an infant,
usually under the age of two
years, severely back and forth. Infants who are less than two do not
have fully developed neck
muscles and so the head can be whiplashes back and forth. Because
these young infants' brains
do not yet fill the entire brain cavity or skull, the brain becomes
bruised as it literally bounces
back and forth and rotates inside the skull as the baby is shaken.
The rapid acceleration,
deceleration and rotation of the brain also tears the bridging veins
that cover its surface, which accounts for hematomas, or bleeding
in the brain. The combination of surface bruising and the
hematomas ultimately lead to cerebral edema, or swelling of the brain.
Not all infants die from SBS but if the swelling of the brain cannot
be controlled, the brain tissue
deteriorates when it runs out of space to swell within the skull.
It is usually the cerebral edema or
brain swelling that leads to death. If the child does not die, brain
damage and mental retardation
are common as a result of the edema. The original medical research
article on SBS was written
by Dr. John Caffey and was entitled "The Whiplash Shaken
Infant Syndrome: Manual Shaking
by the Extremities With Whiplash-Induced Intracranial and Intraocular
Bleeding, Linked With
Residual Permanent Brain Damage and Mental Retardation",
Pediatrics Vol. 54 No 4 October 1974.
Battle Of The Experts
There rarely are witnesses to abusive shaking; therefore, the case
is usually a matter of
attempting to re-create what occurred by using medical descriptions
and analyses of the injuries.
The opinions of these professionals, however, can be contradictory
because no one has sufficient
scientific data in this area: it is not possible or ethical to create
a controlled study that measures
the effects of shaking on a real infant's brain. Unfortunately, opinions
are sometimes based on
personal biases when there is no scientific information available.
Such is the case with many child
advocacy experts.
Accidental Injury
Child advocacy experts claim that SBS injuries can never be caused
by a fall. This is based on
the idea that a short fall cannot create the necessary acceleration/
deceleration forces that bruise
and tear brain tissue. But this is not always the case. Studies on
artificial brains subjected to falls
have shown that the acceleration/ deceleration forces are forty times
greater when the head is
suddenly stopped by an object than when the head is shaken in mid
air. Government statistical
reviews of children who have suffered short distance falls show skull
fractures, sub-dural
hematomas and sub-arachnoid hematomas. In addition, autopsies of automobile
accident
victims have described some of these same injuries. It is possible,
then for the brain to be
damaged by an accidental fall or sudden, accidental impact.
For that reason, when a parent claims that an accident occurred, the
defense attorney must
place into evidence all research data showing that the injuries that
the child sustained are
consistent with the parent's version of the accident. One of the serious
problems with SBS is that
researchers have not actually seen a child being shaken and then done
an autopsy to study and
measure the injuries. Without scientific studies to guide child advocacy
experts, SBS is open to
exaggerated claims about how violent the shaking must be in order
to cause the injuries in any
given case. Descriptions of a child having to fall from a third story
window or having to be
slammed against a wall while swung by its feet have an enormous emotional
effect on a jury. Moreover, such unsubstantiated and unscientific
stories interfere with the jury's fair determination
as to whether or not the injury was an accident, caused by another
caretaker, and whether or
not the defendant is guilty of manslaughter, second-degree murder
or first-degree murder.
Timing Of The Injuries
The Shaken Baby Syndrome is one area of child abuse in which our office
does not detect bias
for accusing one gender over another. A mother or a female babysitter
is just as likely to be
charged with child physical abuse or murder as is a husband or male
babysitter. The person
that is charged is normally the individual who was caring for the
child when the symptoms first
became evident. Child advocacy experts believe that the SBS injuries
are so severe that the
symptoms of such trauma would be immediately apparent, making it impossible
for anyone to
claim that an injured child appeared normal when it came into his
or her care. In other words,
there is no time delay between inflicting the trauma and observing
it. Nothing could be further
from the truth. In the cases that our office has handled, prosecution
witnesses on cross
examination have attempted to claim that their research supports their
theory that there is no
time delay between injury and symptoms. When our researchers analyzed
the studies that the
child advocacy experts named, they did not find any evidence to support
the non-time delay
theory. In fact, the main study that we were directed to stated that
there could be a delay between
the time of the injury and the time of the symptoms due to the fact
that it takes time for a
two-year old's brain to swell and fill the cavity space. And still
a number of child advocacy
experts continue to make these unsubstantiated claims in published
papers, despite the lack
of any scientific evidence to support their opinions.
Our researchers have found numerous studies that strongly support
a delay between injury
and symptom, and not minutes, but many hours. And if there can be
a delay of numerous
hours between the time of injury and the time of the symptoms, then
it is also possible that
several people could have been involved in caring for the child. Therefore,
there are other
people who should be investigated-not just the individual who was
with the child at the time the
symptoms first appeared-in order to determine how and when the child
sustained such life-
threatening physical trauma.
The most important research supporting the delay of time between injury
and symptoms follows:
Delayed Deterioration Following Mild Head Injury in Children by J.W.
Snoek, J.M. Minderhoud,
and J.T. Wilmink, Department of Neurology and Neuroradiology, University
Hospital,
PO Box 30.01, 9700 RB Groningen, The Netherlands. published in Brain
(1984) 107, 15-36
Early detection of delayed traumatic intra-cranial hematomas using
near-infrared spectroscopy,
by Shankar P. Gopinath, M.D. and others, University of Pennsylvania,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania,
J. Neurosurg./ Vol. 83, September 1995
Head-Injury Patients who talk and deteriorate into coma Analysis of
211 cases studied with
computerized tomography, by Ramiro D. Lobanto, MD, and others, Complutense
University,
Madrid, Spain, J. Neurosurg./ Volume 75/August 1991
Patients Who Talk and Deteriorate, by Gaylan L. Rockswold, MD and
Paula J. Pheley, RN,
Annals of Emergency Medicine 22:6 June 1993
The National Traumatic Coma Data Bank, Part 2: Patients who talk and
deteriorate:
Implications for treatment by Lawrence F. Marshall, M.D. and others,
UC San Diego,
San Diego Medical Center, San Diego, California, J. Neurosurg./ Volume
59/ August 1983
The Time Interval Between Lethal Infant Shaking and Onset of Symptoms,
A Review of the
Shaken Baby Syndrome Literature, by Marcus B. Nashelsky, M.D. and
Jay D. Dix, M.D. , Am. Jur
Forensic Med and Path, Vol 16, No. 2, 1995
Conclusions
A Shaken Baby Syndrome case is extremely difficult to prepare and
present to a jury. The cost
for the necessary experts is staggering because most of the evidence
relies on medical expert
testimony and medical research papers. The most serious problems,
however, are 1) insufficient
research, and 2) the inaccessibility of supporting research. First
of all, one simply cannot shake a
baby in a lab with monitors on the baby to see what damage is done
to the brain and body.
And secondly, supporting studies are often difficult to find or sometimes
written in other languages
requiring translation. These two factors enable the child advocacy
expert to substitute his or her
own personal or political beliefs for fact. Even the educated public
is not familiar with head trauma
studies or the complexities of Shaken Baby Syndrome. Therefore, the
role of the defense team is
to teach the jury the difference between scientific research and the
opinions of an advocate.
Finally, the defense must educate the jury members on the actual state
of knowledge with regard
to brain trauma so they can determine the truth of the child's injuries-and
the innocence or guilt
of the defendant.
Top of Page
|
|