Washington Post Publishes Revealing Report on SBS

After more than a decade of vicious debate, Shaken Baby Syndrome or SBS (now referred to as Abusive Head Trauma or AHT in the medical community) is receiving increased media attention. Earlier this month, The Washington Post published an investigative series written by Debbie Cenziper on the controversial topic of SBS titled: Shaken Science: Prosecutors build murder cases on disputed SBS diagnosis.

The report takes an in depth look at SBS while telling the stories of several individuals who have been falsely accused or convicted of abusing babies in their care. The -report is lengthy but well worth the read. Readers will come away with a deeper understanding of the problems surrounding the diagnosis of SBS as well as an increased awareness of the pain and suffering that is experienced by those who are falsely accused or convicted of child abuse after SBS is misdiagnosed. The report includes several extensive diagrams, graphs and video interviews .

For those of you who do not have time to read the entire article, we offer this summary, which will help followers of the Burns family become better equipped at raising awareness about the devastating effects of misdiagnosed SBS and the subsequent false accusations of child abuse that are tearing apart families and wrongly imprisoning people across the country.

Cenziper opens up section one of her report with a brief history of SBS, a 40 year old diagnosis defined by a triad of symptoms including retinal hemorrhage, bleeding in the brain and swelling of the brain. She states that SBS:

[well type=””]
“Gave a generation of doctors a way to account for unexplained head injuries in babies and prosecutors a stronger case for criminal intent when police had no witnesses, no confessions and only circumstantial evidence.”
[/well]

The past decade or so has given rise to a fierce debate within the medical community about the scientific evidence that backs up (or fails to back up) the diagnosis of SBS. Testing cannot prove that shaking causes the triad and research shows accidents and other diseases or medical problems can trigger identical conditions in babies. The report also points out that courts in Great Britain and Sweden have challenged the diagnosis of SBS based on the triad alone as being uncertain or flawed.

Cenziper goes on to explore data on SBS accusations compiled by the Medill Justice Project from Northwestern University. According to the project:

[well type=””]
Approximately 1600 convictions related to SBS have been obtained since 2001. This is a higher rate of conviction than seen with other violent crimes. But, approximately 200 SBS cases have been dropped, dismissed or the accused have been found not guilty or a guilty conviction has been overturned since 2001.
[/well]

Among these 200 cases that ultimately ended with no conviction, Cenziper references several specific cases including:

[well type=””]
A 39-year-old software developer; a 13-year-old babysitter charged with second-degree murder; and a 46-year-old grandmother. In 4 of these cases doctors later revised their diagnosis and in 4 other cases new medical examiners found apparent mistakes that previous medical examiners had made when diagnosing cases of SBS. George Nichols is among the doctors who has diagnosed SBS/AHT in the past but no longer believes in the hypothesis. Nichols states, “Doctors, myself included, have accepted as true an unproven theory about a potential cause of brain injury in children… My greatest worry is that I have deprived someone of justice because I have been overly biased or just mistaken.”[/well]

Cenziper moves on to address the defenders of the widely typical way SBS is diagnosed:

[well type=””]
Supporters of how SBS is routinely diagnosed, such as Dr. Desmond Runyon and prosecutor Leigh Bishop, flippantly dismiss scientific challenges claiming doctors who testify for defense are on the fringes of mainstream medicine and are just making money off their testimony. They claim SBS diagnosis is supported by years of clinical work, research and confessions. Defenders also claim that doctors do not rely on the triad alone when diagnosing SBS but look for external signs, take into account caregiver stories, and rule out natural causes or accidents before diagnosing abuse. Despite these claims, some judges are overturning convictions which they rule where based on unsound science. Trying to appeal a conviction, however, is very expensive. Innocence projects around the country are currently working on at least 100 wrongful convictions associated with misdiagnosed SBS.
[/well]

Cenziper continues her report by exploring several problematic SBS cases bringing an emotional aspect to the topic. She tells the story of:

[well type=””]
Brandy Briggs who couldn’t afford to pay medical witnesses in her murder trial and was forced to plead to a lesser charge which resulted in a 17 year prison sentence. Later, a new medical examiner discovered mistakes had been made by the hospital including a 20 minute time period during which the baby had experienced oxygen deprivation due to a misplaced oxygen tube. Briggs spent five years in prison before her conviction was overturned. In another case, David Long was charged with murdering his daughter. After Long’s case lingered for 3 years a new medical examiner determined the actual cause of death was pneumonia complicated by a premature birth. The charges were dropped. Long tells Cenziper that he was not even able to mourn the death of his daughter.
[/well]

Other stories of dropped or reversed cases are told, with none being dropped before the accused and their family suffered incredible emotional trauma and financial ruin.

The second section of the investigative report begins with an exploration of several doctors who routinely diagnosed SBS in the past, but now find themselves testifying for defense in many cases. These doctors find their old beliefs have been challenged by more than a decade of research that shows how diseases, genetic conditions and accidents can, in some cases, produce the conditions long attributed to violent shaking. One of these doctors is forensic pathologist Jonathan Arden who told the Washington Post:

[well type=””]
“A lot of people in this field, especially many of the pediatricians, make statements that are absolute and dogmatic and do not allow for the exceptions that we know exist… Do you want to be involved in somebody’s wrongful conviction because you had this dogmatic approach that it must be trauma, it must be shaking?”
[/well]

Another doctor is Dr. Patrick Barnes, a neuroradiologist out of Stamford University. Cenziper references one case Dr. Barnes worked on where he stated:

[well type=””]
“All of the treating physicians simply assumed trauma and stopped looking for alternative explanation. That is not sound science and cannot be the basis of a reliable prosecution.”
[/well]

Cenziper goes on to discuss the origins of the Shaken Baby hypothesis by describing the work of Dr. Norman Guthkelch who is known as the “father” of SBS:

[well type=””]
In the 1970’s Guthkelch came up with the shaken baby hypothesis that connected bleeding and swelling of the brain to the violent shaking of an infant. Later, the presence of retinal hemorrhages was added to form the famous “triad” associated with SBS. His hypothesis became accepted science for diagnosing SBS. A couple decades later, a group of doctors began to question the largely accepted diagnosis. The trial of British Nanny, Louise Woodward, brought the disagreement in the medical community into the public eye. Neuropathologist Jan Leetsma was one doctor who testified for the defense in the Woodward case. Leetsma, who had previously written in support of the SBS hypothesis in a book he authored on the brain, told the Post, “I was wrong. The original papers that espoused Shaken Baby were basically opinion papers with essentially no science applied to them.”

The years following the Woodward case saw an increase in skeptical doctors who began presenting research that poked holes in the SBS hypothesis and provided other explanations for the presence of the triad including obstructed air passages, stroke, congenital heart disease, genetic disorder, infection, birth trauma and more. Biomechanical engineers then entered the debate and ran tests with crash test dummies which showed short falls resulted in more acceleration to the head than shaking.[/well]

Cenziper outlines the results of a biomechanical test the Washington Post commissioned itself:

[well type=””]
The test shows that a dummy falling from a couch and hitting its head resulted in 112 Gs of force compared to the 6-8 Gs experienced by a dummy that was violently shaken. Doctors who support the SBS hypothesis say these test are of little relevance because they aren’t on infants. They also argue that there is research showing that bleeds in short falls occur in a different area of the brain. The back and forth debate goes on and on.
[/well]

Cenziper points out that one of the highest profile doubters of the diagnosis is Guthkelch himself:

[well type=””]
In 2011, Guthkelch reviewed the medical records of a baby who died of supposed SBS. After seeing the baby had struggled from birth with dehydration, pneumonia and seizures, Guthkelch concluded there was not enough evidence to justify a SBS diagnosis. The conviction of Drayton Witt in the case was eventually overturned and he was released from prison after serving 10 years. Guthkelch has said, “I am doing what I can so long as I have a breath to correct a grossly unjust situation. I think they’ve gone much too far.”
[/well]

Cenziper concludes her investigative report with the story of Damien Marsden, a father accused of murdering his 4 month old son by violently shaking him:

[well type=””]
Arden, the forensic pathologist who had previously only testified for prosecutors, began to study newer research showing that short falls and even birth could cause the type of bleeding he had previously thought could only be attributed to SBS. He testified in Marsden’s trial that the bleeding on the baby’s brain had likely been caused by two short falls the baby had recently had. Arden told the Washington Post, “My thinking has definitely evolved over time. I haven’t joined the camp that says there is no such thing as Shaken Baby, but I am much more cautious and circumspect about invoking it. What could be right about getting it wrong?”
[/well]

Cenziper’s extensive report helps shed light on Josh and Brenda Burns’ own case. The Burns find themselves in the middle of this vicious battle in the medical community, their family torn apart and left in great emotional stress and financial ruin. As more research comes forth exposing the shaky ground that SBS stands on, our hope is that the ground will eventually crumble and babies with valid and scientific explanations for the “triad” will no longer be misdiagnosed with SBS and their parents and caretakers will no longer be torn from their families and forced to serve a punishment for a crime that was never committed.