Tag Archives: Shaken Baby Syndrome

New Research Questions Classic Model of Shaken Baby Syndrome

Kieran wired up and ready to jump

When Kieran Lloyd was seven months old, his favorite way to pass the time, right after eating and sleeping, was bouncing in his Fisher-Price Jumparoo.

He would bounce eagerly, smiling and laughing, several times a day if he was given the chance, apparently delighted with the upright posture and the kinetic results of his own kicks.

Then his father, head-injury researcher John Lloyd, PhD, realized that before him danced a chance to measure and record an important new data point in the accumulated knowledge about infant head-injury: A magnitude of repetitive angular acceleration that’s known to be safe.

He fitted his son with an accelerometer, like those used on crash-test dummies in the lab, and collected data while the boy played. By the time Lloyd was done, he had not only replicated the original 1987 research that first cast scientific doubt on infant shaking as a source of subdural hematoma but also refuted the hypothesis that repetition can make a benign acceleration injurious.

Kieran with the CRABI-12 biofidelic mannequin

In a paper published this winter in the Journal of Forensic Biomechanics, Lloyd and his colleagues reported that “angular acceleration of the head during aggressive shaking of the CRABI biofidelic mannequin is statistically indistinguishable from angular head kinematics experienced by a 7-month-old fervently playing in his Jumparoo.”

Lloyd’s paper joins a series of biomechanical studies that have all reached the same conclusion:  Shaking is unlikely to be the source of subdural hematoma in children with no signs of impact or neck injury, despite decades of courtroom testimony to the contrary.

Although the theory of shaken baby syndrome has enjoyed thirty years of general acceptance within the community of child-abuse experts, the diagnosis has been controversial from the beginning. Testing it of course was impossible.

In the mid-1980s, Dr. Ann-Christine Duhaime and her colleagues set out to investigate whether shaking without impact could cause the intracranial bleeding and swelling that defines the syndrome. They examined medical records and revisited autopsy slides, and they conducted laboratory experiments in which adult volunteers shook infant models wired with accelerometers.  They found that shaking without impact did not reach the presumed thresholds for the intracranial bleeding or neuronal damage that’s presumed to result from shaking.

Then the researchers asked their volunteers to throw the dummy down after shaking it, and learned that accelerations upon impact reached injury levels, as illustrated in Figure 2 from their paper (“The Shaken Baby Syndrome:  A clinical, pathological, and biomechanical study,” Journal of Neurosurgery 66:409-415, 1987). The shaking data are the cluster of points at the lower-left corner; the triangles are impact trials. DAI stands for diffuse axonal injury; SDH stands for subdural hematoma.

Duhaime and her team concluded, “Although shaking may, in fact, be part of the process, it is more likely that such infants suffer blunt impact. The most common scenario may be a child who is shaken, then thrown into or against a crib or other surface.”

Lloyd did not conduct impact trials, but his shaking data were in the same range as not only Duhaime’s data but also those of Prange et al., who replicated the original work in 2003  (“Anthromomorphic simulations of falls, shakes, and inflicted impacts in infants,” J Neurosurgery 99:143–150, 2003).

The NCSB demonstration doll and the CRABI-12 biofidelic mannequin

To help establish a base line for the forces commonly experienced by an infant, Lloyd also recorded acceleration data during what are called “activities of everyday living,” or ADLs. Adult volunteers rocked and burped the wired crash-test dummy, walked and ran on a treadmill with it, and took it for stroller rides over various surfaces.

Lloyd also had volunteers shake the demonstration doll sold by the National Center on Shaken Baby Syndrome. The doll is commonly used in trainings, and occasionally it’s allowed in court. The doll weighs only two pounds and volunteers were able to shake it longer and harder than the CRABI-12, producing higher angular accelerations—but still not high enough to reach projected injury thresholds.

Figure 7, below, from Lloyd’s paper summarizes the accelerations recorded during various scenarios. The entire article is available on line at this address.

8 Comments

Filed under abusive head trauma, AHT, SBS, shaken baby syndrome

Can We Help Win a Pardon for Shirley Ree Smith?

christmas cactus blossom

April 6 update:  Governor Jerry Brown has commuted Shirley Smith’s sentence.  Shirley thanks everyone who wrote on her behalf, and I add congratulations to that.

I was expecting to hear by now from California Governor Jerry Brown about a possible pardon for Shirley Ree Smith (case summary), but there’s been no word yet.

Over the weekend, Shirley’s daughter Tomeka Smith told me they’re hoping to hear soon, because in a few weeks her mother will be taken back into custody—-but there’s still time for individuals to contact the governor’s office encouraging the pardon, as detailed below.

The Smith case continues to pop up in the press.  On the bright side:

Distressingly, a bereaved grandmother in Fresno, California, has launched a campaign against the pardon, on the theory that Ms. Smith is guilty. You can read the press coverage here.

Meanwhile, the governor’s office makes it easy for individuals to voice their opinions on these questions.  One click takes you to the contact page, at http://gov.ca.gov/m_contact.php

To make sure your comment is received in time, use the electronic form, which first asks for four pieces of information:  Your first and last name, your email address, and the subject of your comment.  Open the drop-down subject menu and select the “Pardon” item.  The user interface is odd, because you then have to click the “Submit” button before you’re given a text box for comments, but if you soldier on, you can get there.

1 Comment

Filed under abusive head trauma, AHT, SBS, shaken baby syndrome

Pardon Possible in Smith Case

It’s too early to celebrate, but the Sacramento Bee reports that Governor Jerry Brown is expected to pardon Shirley Ree Smith, the grandmother whose conviction in a shaking case was recently reaffirmed by the Supreme Court:

http://www.sacbee.com/2011/12/29/4150363/calif-gov-brown-weighs-clemency.html

Leave a comment

Filed under abusive head trauma, AHT, SBS, shaken baby syndrome, Uncategorized

Surviving Justice

IMG_4464Among the stream of new accusations and disappointing appeals comes an encouraging piece of news:  A Vermont jury has found 29-year-old Russ Van Vleck innocent of manslaughter in the 2009 death of his 5-week-old son Colin.

The press reports are already archived, so I’ll have to summarize here from the Bennington Banner and Manchester Journal coverage:

Van Vleck called 911 at about 10 pm on October 2, 2009, for help with his son Colin, who he said had stopped breathing while lying next to him on the couch. Van Vleck attempted CPR while waiting for the ambulance, following the instructions of the operator. He later told police the technique was different from what he’d learned in the National Guard. “I felt like I ate up 10 minutes of his life by not being able to do the CPR right for him,” Van Vleck said in a taped interview played at his trial, “I just wanted to get him to somebody who knew what they were doing.”

Colin had no bruises, fractures, or other signs of battering, and he’d been sick in the days before the incident—the doctor had diagnosed flu. Colin’s birth five weeks earlier had been complicated by a prematurely fused skull suture, a congenital defect that gave his head an odd shape. Still, State Medical Examiner Steven Shapiro, who performed the autopsy,  and his colleague at the ME’s office, neuropathologist Elizabeth Bundock, testified that the boy’s death could only have been caused by abusive shaking shortly before he stopped breathing. In opening remarks at the trial, Deputy State’s Attorney Christina Rainville was quoted:

“The evidence is going to show that Russ caused Colin’s death in a moment’s rage, a moment’s loss of control, and that Colin died of massive internal injuries consistent with being violently shaken, or being thrown into a soft object like a couch, a crib mattress, a bassinet, or a padded chair.”

Van Vleck enjoyed the support of friends and family throughout the 2-year ordeal. Attorneys William D. Wright and Joyce Brenner brought in neurosurgeon Ron Uscinski—a veteran of the Louise Woodward trial—and two Florida pathologists, who argued that the combination of birth trauma and skull defect had spawned the deadly bleeding and swelling.

The jury found Van Vleck innocent, but supporters report that social services has now targeted him as an abuse threat: He is allowed only supervised contact with his baby daughter, born in March of this year.

And of course he and his family are left with the cost of the defense and their new, notorious status in a community exposed to years of news coverage that assumed the father was guilty. Van Vleck’s National Guard deployment was delayed in 2009 because of his son’s death—I’ve seen no word yet on whether he will be heading out now.

The good news is that Van Vleck was able to fight the charges, with the support of his family and friends and help from a few doctors willing to weather the scorn that comes with testifying for the defense in a child abuse case. My next posting will tell a different, more common story.

March 2012.  More good news:  The State of Vermont has dropped family court proceedings against the Van Vleck family.

If you are not familiar with the debate surrounding the diagnosis of shaken baby syndrome, please see the home page of this site, at https://onsbs.com/

-Sue Luttner

12 Comments

Filed under abusive head trauma, shaken baby syndrome

Ripples Follow Smith Decision

Emily Bazelon, the author of last winter’s New York Times Magazine piece questioning SBS, has published a gratifying criticism of the recent, unfortunate Supreme Court decision in the Shirley Ree Smith case. Her new article is on slate.com, at:

A Vindictive Decision

As usual, the posted comments are especially interesting:  Most responders are focused on the legal issues, especially whether or not the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals should be allowed to reverse a jury’s decision.

For those with personal experience in the arena, following Ms. Bazelon’s link to the November 2011 Posner decision is well worth the time.

A number of attorneys have also posted what read to me like critical analyses of the Smith decision, including:

Sherry F. Colb, The Supreme Court Preserves the Chain of Command by Returning a Grandmother to Prison

and

Vikram David Amar, The First Supreme Court Ruling of the Year.

I’m encouraged by the overall feeling I get of discomfort with the Smith decision.  Please do let me know if you have a different take on it.

-Sue Luttner

Leave a comment

Filed under abusive head trauma, shaken baby syndrome

Supreme Court Disappoints

For the Good News,
Start With the Dissent

The Supreme Court this week reinstated the 1997 conviction of grandmother Shirley Ree Smith, in the first shaken baby case I’m aware of to have reached the high court.

After following the Smith case for some years, I’m discouraged. The conviction has never made sense to me, logically, medically, or legally.

First, the argument for a motive was especially thin. Shirley Smith was not an isolated caretaker alone with a fussy infant: She was a grandmother on a trip from Illinois with her daughter and grandchildren, staying at her sister’s apartment in Van Nuys, California. Smith was sleeping in the living room with her grandson Etzel, 7 weeks old, and two other children. She claimed she found Etzel limp and unresponsive at 3:20 am, after she was awakened by another child’s nightmare. Panicked, she carried the baby to the next room, where her daughter dialed 911. Everyone in the apartment that night said that Etzel had gone to sleep peacefully on the couch the previous evening. No one remembers hearing him cry during the night.

At autopsy, though, doctors found fresh subdural and subarachnoid bleeding. The boy’s brain was not swollen, his retinas showed no hemorrhages, and everyone agreed the amount of blood was very small. Still, presenting a model of SBS I’ve never heard outside of this case, Dr. Eugene Carpenter and Dr. Stephanie Ehrlich from the Los Angeles County coroner’s office testified that the child’s instant death—caused by the tearing of his brainstem during the assault—had left no time for the other symptoms to develop. The brainstem was not autopsied for signs of shearing because, Dr. Ehrlich explained, “we wouldn’t have seen anything anyway.” Aging subdural blood was also present, but the doctors said that old subdural collections would not rebleed, so the old injury was not relevant.

Shirley Ree Smith was described by her family as a devoted mother and grandmother, always patient with children. Still, she was convicted on only one leg of the triad. One.

Smith was released from prison in 2006, after the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed her conviction, declaring the evidence against her “constitutionally insufficient.” A few days ago, the Supreme Court reversed that reversal, with the message that the Ninth Circuit had overstepped its bounds. “It is the responsibility of the jury—not the court—to decide what conclusions should be drawn from evidence admitted at trial,” the justices wrote.

Still, there’s some reason for hope, as the text of the decision includes an insightful minority opinion written by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who quoted papers by Ferris Bandak, Jan Leestma, Waney Squier, and others to support her observation,  “It is unlikely that the prosecution’s experts would today testify as adamantly as they did in 1997.” Before returning Smith to prison, Ginsburg wrote, “I would at least afford her a full opportunity to defend her release from a decade’s incarceration.”

A New York Times blog post presents the decision in its political context—as a slapping down of the Ninth Circuit Court, which is perceived as activist—at The Loyal Opposition.

The Christian Science Monitor has a balanced treatment, of course, at Supreme Court Rebukes Ninth Circuit.

To see the full written opinion, including the minority opinion at the end, go to The Decision.

I’m hoping there will be more to post on this case. If you see or hear coverage in your local media, please consider posting a comment or writing a letter to the editor.

Meanwhile, her attorneys have filed a clemency petition with Governor Jerry Brown.

April 6, 2012 update:  Governor Brown has commuted Shirley Smith’s sentence.  See the April 6 posting.

-Sue Luttner

12 Comments

Filed under abusive head trauma, shaken baby syndrome

Can Hospitals Be Held Accountable?

MarkFreeman

Attorney Mark Freeman

Like so many of us, attorney Mark Freeman in Pennsylvania was drawn into the shaken baby arena by chance. A close friend was accused of shaking his own child, and Freeman saw a quick and inaccurate diagnosis turn into a personal nightmare for an innocent family.

Freeman was not a litigating attorney.  He still specializes in elder law: estate planning, wills, long-term care provisions. After working on his friend’s defense, however, he’s not only become a courtroom resource for criminal attorneys faced with shaking cases, but he’s started fighting the battle on a new front. He’s filing civil rights suits against hospitals and their child protection teams, counties and their social service agencies, and individuals at these institutions on behalf of innocent families accused of infant abuse.

As those who follow this blog know, accused parents routinely miss out on their children’s infancies and can lose their jobs, their life’s savings, their freedom, and any semblance of a normal family life. Freeman’s suits ask the hospitals and counties to change their policies, or, in some cases, to enforce the policies ostensibly in place, to protect against hasty prosecutions and vindictive foster placement.

In two of Freeman’s civil-rights cases, prominent child-abuse specialists attributed multiple anterior rib fractures to abuse, but without ordering the blood tests that would have revealed vitamin D deficiencies—rickets—in both patients. One doctor at Penn State Hershey Medical Center testified inaccurately that the child’s fractures were posterior: Posterior rib fractures in an infant are believed by some experts to result almost exclusively from abuse, while anterior rib fractures are known to result from bone diseases, like rickets.

Even though exonerating medical evidence was available early on, the infants in both rickets cases spent months of their young lives in the care of strangers. Even with the accused fathers out of the house, the mothers were denied custody because they refused to believe that their husbands were guilty. One father spent a year in jail before being exonerated. Social services and police were depending entirely on the reports from the hospitals’ child protection teams.

Another commonality in the two rickets suits is a discriminatory policy at the Penn State Hershey Medical Center regarding expert testimony by faculty members. Hershey doctors testifying for the prosecution in child abuse cases are free to reference their faculty affiliations and conduct their correspondence on Penn State letterhead, and their activities are covered by the school’s liability insurance. At the same time, the school prohibits doctors testifying for child-abuse defendants from citing their faculty affiliations or corresponding on Penn State letterhead, and excludes their legal activities from coverage by the school’s liability insurance.

The most recent suit also questions the objectivity of both Hershey Medical Center and pediatric neurosurgeon Dr. Mark Dias, a leading proponent of shaking theory who has brought to his institution millions of dollars in federal grant money, to educate parents about the dangers of shaking.

For a news story about Freeman’s recent filing, see

http://www.courthousenews.com/2011/10/03/40229.htm

For the text of that suit, which includes an entertaining sequence for anyone who’s ever tried to get an answer from a prestigious specialist at a children’s hospital, go to

http://www.courthousenews.com/2011/10/03/rickets.pdf

2015 update:  Mark Freeman helped an accused family win compensation from the county that pressed their case.

copyright 2011, Sue Luttner

If you are unfamiliar with the debate surrounding shaken baby syndrome in the courtroom, please see the home page of this blog.

4 Comments

Filed under abusive head trauma, shaken baby syndrome

The Distant Sound of Presses Turning

The shaken-baby story is breaking, but the public is reluctant to believe.

This week the San Antonio Express-News published a balanced and thoughtful piece by reporter Melissa Fletcher Stoeltje, under the provocative title Does ‘shaken-baby’ syndrome exist?  The article examines the case of infant-care provider Aritzaid Santiago, who remains in prison.

When I emailed my praise to Ms. Stoeltje, she replied with thanks for my words of support, adding, “I am being otherwise excoriated.”

After joining the on-line conversation about the article, I’ve gotten a glimpse of what she’s talking about.

The Express-News ranks its on-line comments by their popularity with readers, who can push little thumbs-up and thumbs-down buttons on each posting.  The three top vote-getters are displayed with the story, the others on a jump page. I just took this unsettling screen shot:

I take comfort that my own comment has received four thumbs-ups and only one thumbs-down, for a total popularity of 3—still behind, alas, “She should face the death penalty and nothing less,” which was at 5 until it occurred to me I could give it a thumbs-down, so now it’s at 4.

All of which reminds me of a recent quote from radiologist David M. Ayoub, MD, who received a chilly response to his presentation “Congenital Rickets Misdiagnosed as Child Abuse” at last month’s Pediatric Abusive Head Trauma conference in San Francisco. When a member of the audience asked whether it bothered him that most people think he’s wrong, he answered, “The truth is not a popularity contest.”

But public relations is. If you have the time, and are willing to create an account with a random media outlet, please consider joining the conversation that accompanies the San Antonio article, which you can get to by clicking here.

September 2011 update:

Thanks to those of you who took action.  The tone of the comments page changed dramatically over the few days after I posted this entry.  For details see “Texas Update” at the end of a different the post, An Evolving Theory, A Tragic Tale.

2 Comments

Filed under shaken baby syndrome

To the Battlements

Exciting times for those of us following the ongoing controversy around SBS.

NPR, Frontline, and Pro Publica have completed their investigation into infant deaths, and yesterday they reported “an alarming pattern of people accused of killing children based on flawed medical evidence.”

You can find the story in a variety of media and versions:

  • Pro Publica has published its story on-line, with many clickable links to supporting documents: Pro Publica story
  • The full Frontline episode is still available on video: The Child Cases
    (for a handy transcript, click Transcript at the bottom of the page, or click here: transcript)
  • NPR offers both a print version of the story and urls to the Morning Edition and All Things Considered clips: NPR story page

Heather Kirkwood, working instead of eating after a long conference day in Atlanta

If you missed the stories, please check out the sites, and consider leaving a message of your own.

If you’ve ever met Heather Kirkwood (the pro bono attorney in one of the cases covered), you will know the kind of thorough, focused commitment that went into finding the evidence, recruiting the medical experts, and pushing Ernie Lopez’s case with the courts. Heather is also rumored to have opened the doors to today’s broadcast interview with Norman Gulthkelch on Morning Edition.

Alas, I didn’t quite know about it in time to participate in this morning’s on-line chat on the subject.

Here’s to finding a path to justice through careful thought about difficult subjects.

6 Comments

Filed under shaken baby syndrome

From Across the Herring Pond

BBC Radio has run its second feature in four months on the controversy surrounding SBS.

“Shaken baby syndrome was once believed to be virtually a medical diagnosis of murder—clear-cut and convincing beyond a reasonable doubt,” the promo opens, “but in recent years there’s been growing disquiet about miscarriage of justice after infant deaths.”

Reporter Linda Pressly has prepared a compelling and balanced treatment, including educational exchanges with Dr. Ron Uscinski—a Maryland neurosurgeon who began doubting classic SBS theory in 1997 while reviewing the literature in preparation for the Louise Woodward trial—as well as touching moments with the grieving family of a 2-1/2 year old Midwest girl believed shaken to death in 2006.

Pressly’s interview with Julie Baumer, freed on appeal in 2010 after four years in prison for the presumed shaking of her nephew, reveals a calm, articulate woman showing grace under fire. Baumer had taken on her nephew’s care at birth because of her sister’s drug use. Her deep sadness, she says, is that the parents who adopted him cannot believe she’s innocent and so she has no part in his life. “There’s nothing legally stopping me from approaching him,” she says, but “out of respect I’ll wait for the denial to break away.”

You can hear this excellent program at:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p00h1q6r/Assignment_Shaken_Babies/

In February, the BBC also ran a story about police tactics in England intended to discredit medical experts who question classic SBS theory.  The print version, for quick reading, is at:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_9389000/9389553.stm

The 8-minute radio treatment is at:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_9390000/9390698.stm

Julia Baumer’s case was featured in an article about SBS published this winter in The New York Times Magazine, on line at http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/06/magazine/06baby-t.html.

If you’ve stumbled on this post without knowing more about my work, please explore my SBS site:

https://onsbs.wordpress.com/

(c)2011 Sue Luttner

1 Comment

Filed under shaken baby syndrome