“Science” Behind Shaken Baby Syndrome Ruled Unreliable by NJ Supreme Court

Guest Opinion by Terri LaPoint, Investigative Journalist, Author, and Candidate for US Congress – District 3

A ruling¥ by New Jersey’s highest court on Thursday is a major victory for families. Shaken Baby Syndrome has been accepted medical dogma for decades, responsible in part for the formation of Child Protective Services agencies (DHR) and the rise of doctors known as Child Abuse Pediatricians in all of our Children’s Hospitals. Yet from the beginning, many parents accused of Shaken Baby Syndrome (SBS), or Abusive Head Trauma (AHT) as it is commonly called in medical circles, have maintained their innocence. Now the Supreme Court of New Jersey is the first in the nation to rule that expert opinions that rely on the "triad of symptoms" is inadmissible.

The evidence in the 157 page New Jersey Supreme Court case aligns with what I discovered during my time as lead investigative journalist for MedicalKidnap.com, where I investigated hundreds of stories of children removed from parents for medical kinds of reasons. I saw many cases of SBS. Most involved parents with no history of violence or other indicators of abuse. Yet parents accused of SBS often lose custody of their children. Many are charged criminally, and some face lengthy prison sentences or even death row – for something they may not have done.

Alabama’s DHR defines SBS as “severe internal injury to the brain of an infant or child (e.g., usually younger than 1 year old but may occur in children up to age 5) directly related to infant/child being violently shaken and often associated with one or more of the following medical conditions, bleeding at the back of one or both eyes (retinal hemorrhage), an accumulation of blood in the outer part of the brain (subdural hematoma), or swelling of the brain caused by an accumulation of fluid (cerebral edema).”

Doctors were taught that “the triad of symptoms" – brain bleeding, brain swelling, and retinal hemorrhaging – meant that the baby had been violently shaken and abused. When they see these symptoms, Child Abuse Pediatricians are quick to diagnose SBS, and law enforcement and DHR are quickly called in. Other doctors, the media, and the public became educated about “Shaken Baby Syndrome,” and the narrative seemed set in stone.

To the unsuspecting public, it appeared that there was only one way to see these injuries; there were no other perspectives to be had.

Meanwhile, innocent parents are blindsided. They just brought their baby in or called 911 because something wasn’t right. They had no idea they were about to become suspects in a crime, accused of something they did not do.

It is all based on unreliable science, and the NJ decision recognizes this. A few doctors, advocates, and attorneys have been speaking out for years, but they were largely ignored. Increasingly, however, the foundations for the SBS theory are being questioned, and they are crumbling under the scrutiny of those willing to examine the evidence.

The underlying study for the theory of SBS was conducted by Dr. Ayub Ommaya in 1968. It was a whiplash study – on monkeys. Every paper or study since then theorizing Shaken Baby Syndrome relied on Ommaya’s biomechanical study and made assumptions extrapolated to babies. More than 30 years later, Dr. Ommaya wrote that his study should never have been used in this way, and regretted that parents were accused based on his work. The assumptions and claims made over the years did not match the underlying data.

Over the years there have been many expert doctors and scientists who have challenged the theory, citing other medical conditions that cause the same symptoms as SBS. They were often silenced, bullied, and marginalized. About 1 in 4 healthy newborns have retinal hemorrhaging, and almost half of healthy newborns have subdural hematoma. That number increases with pitocin-induced or vacuum-assisted birth. Often the event of baby not breathing or symptoms which precipitate a call to 911 occur within 24 hours of baby receiving vaccines.

Yet the doctors who testify against parents in court in cases of SBS allegations, the Child Abuse Pediatricians, do not factor in these conditions, asserting instead that the symptoms can only be explained by abuse. These doctors are funded through the Dept. of Health and Human Services and tend to “find” abuse though none exists. They are a part of an organization called the Helfer Society, and they hold themselves up as “the experts.” They are not experts in anything. Over the years, I have covered many stories where doctors who are actually experts in the condition a child has have testified that what they saw was not abuse, yet the courts take the testimony of the Child Abuse Pediatrician and ignore the real experts.

Fortunately, the New Jersey Supreme Court has seen through this playbook. They found that there are credible doctors and biomechanical experts who dispute the dogma of SBS. They listened to those experts, refusing to participate in what is generally the rubber stamping of the Child Abuse Pediatrician narrative while ignoring all other experts. In doing this, the court recognized the questionable history of the SBS “science.”

The ruling is solid, and based on sound scientific and legal principles. This decision by the New Jersey judges validates what many parents, doctors, and advocates have been saying for years. It is hoped that the rest of the nation will follow suit.

Real child abuse is a crime, and those responsible must be held accountable. We must remember that it is also abusive and harmful to children to separate them from innocent, non-abusive parents. Proverbs 17:15 says, “Acquitting the guilty and condemning the innocent – the Lord detests them both.” This New Jersey ruling has the potential for a ripple effect across America that will help insure that innocent parents are not condemned. This ruling is truly a victory for families who should not have to fear becoming a criminal defendant fighting for custody of their children just for seeking medical care when they did nothing wrong.

Terri LaPoint is the President of the Republican Women of Trussville and the author of “Voices That Will Not Be Silenced”, an exposé of the dark underbelly of agencies that are supposed to protect children. An award-winning investigative journalist who has covered hundreds of cases of medical kidnapping, she is passionate about speaking out in support of unjustly separated families. She lives in Odenville, and is on Facebook.

LaPoint is currently a Congressional candidate in the Republican primary for District 3. To learn more about her campaign, visit her campaign website, TerriLaPointForCongress.com or follow her on social media.

Opinions do not reflect the views and opinions of ALPolitics.com. ALPolitics.com makes no claims nor assumes any responsibility for the information and opinions expressed above.