SHAKEN BABY SYNDROME DOESN'T EXIST OR THEY WOULDN'T HAVE CHANGED IT TO A NEW NAME.
USA
In a 1965 speech, Dr. John Caffey disagreed. He was
concerned about the possibility of wrongful accusations. “There
are many circumstances in which the parents are totally ignorant
of the cause of their child’s injury and in which they do not and
cannot give a history. The failure of the parents to give a history
of injury is, therefore, not necessarily proof that the parent has
willfully inflicted injury on the child.” Most trauma, he insisted,
was accidental and even short falls could lead to subdural
hematomas. “It cannot he emphasized too strongly,” he said,
“that [medical symptoms] tell nothing of the person who abused
the child or how it was abused.”
Dr. Caffey weighed in again in 1972, still concerned that
innocent persons might be erroneously convicted on the basis
of medical opinion alone. He complained that the media had
vigorously and repeatedly presented the more spectacular and
misleading aspects of battered child syndrome, and that very
name “battered child syndrome” sparked premature bias against
accused parents before adequate investigations were concluded.
Again, he stressed that medical findings can neither identify a
perpetrator nor his motive. He advocated abortion on demand
to reduce the problem of unwanted children and cautioned that
repeated minor shakings might be more dangerous than violent,
willful assault. He called metaphyseal fractures, small “bucket
handle” or “corner” fractures at the ends of growing bones of
children, especially at the knee, as characteristic of abuse.
It is fortunate in our situation the judicial process, while not perfect, is better than the outcome we see so many times in these circumstances. SBS is not a definitive science and I feel until those that support it and those that don't, come together, the knowledge we need will never be discovered. Maybe both sides could be right....depending on the case. I feel no external signs is definitive of non abuse but possibly am biased due to knowing in our case the theory doesn't exist.
There was a time that the "majority" of the "experts" felt the Earth to be flat and those that defied this we ridiculed and labled as idiots. We all know now that the Earth is really ROUND.
Thank you to all the doctors, vaccine reaserachers, parents, groups, politicians and all the others that have supported us and educated us and believes in us....Thank God for the our truth being heard and for Dalton being returned sooner than later. Thank God for Dr. Plunkett, an intelligent Judge and a great attorney...and thank God for God.
I still feel the effects of a year of hell. I left work today 7-6-10 thinking of the day my wife left to go to the hospital while I was at home holding Dalton and feeding him and I was numb and cameras were flashing and what I assume to be a senior detective said "that's enough boys" and I thank him for his kindness. I sometimes feel like I am still talked about or looked down upon and heard comments from coworkers when they were undeserved. We never got an apology but we got our remaining son back.
Before judging a situation we should all learn all the facts and not be judgemental and qucik to jump to conclusions. We are presumed innocent by law for this reason but we know you are really guilty until proven innocent. The land of more laws than any other place and with 5% of the world population we have 25% of the world's prison population.
A diagnosis of “non-accidental injury” or “abusive head trauma” is a legal, not a medical conclusion. If a physician states that abuse caused Cameron’s injury, he/she must specify how the injury occurred, and indicate the evidence to support the conclusion. It is insufficient to reiterate the radiographic and ophthalmologic findings, and state that abuse is the default diagnosis. The default diagnosis for signs and symptoms that a physician cannot explain with certainty is not “non-accidental injury”. It is “I don’t know”. ---Sincerely, John Plunkett, M.D.
The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie -- deliberate, contrived and dishonest, but the myth, persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic. Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought. John F. Kennedy 35th president of US 1961-1963 (1917 - 1963)
Sincerely,
John Plunkett, M.D.
JP:dp
Sincerely,
John Plunkett, M.D.
JP:dp
the injury occurred, and indicate the evidence to support the conclusion. It is insufficient to
reiterate the radiographic and ophthalmologic findings, and state that abuse is the default
diagnosis. The default diagnosis for signs and symptoms that a physician cannot explain with
certainty is not “non-accidental injury”. It is “I don’t know”.
Sincerely,
John Plunkett, M.D.
JP:dp
To know is one thing. Merely to believe one
knows is another. To know is science, but
merely to believe one knows is ignorance.
—Hippocrates
A diagnosis of “non-accidental injury” or “abusive head trauma” is a legal, not a medical
conclusion. If a physician states that abuse caused Cameron’s injury, he/she must specify how
the injury occurred, and indicate the evidence to support the conclusion. It is insufficient to
reiterate the radiographic and ophthalmologic findings, and state that abuse is the default
diagnosis. The default diagnosis for signs and symptoms that a physician cannot explain with
certainty is not “non-accidental injury”. It is “I don’t know”.
Sincerely,
John Plunkett, M.D.
JP:dp
A diagnosis of “non-accidental injury” or “abusive head trauma” is a legal, not a medical
Twins and Sudden Infant Death Syndrome by Marla Courtney Wood (Mother of two Twins that both died of SIDS)
Each year, an estimated 7,000 babies die of Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS), in the United States alone. More children die of SIDS than Aids, Cancer, Heart disease, Child Abuse, Cystic Fibrosis and Muscular Dystrophy combined (Holcher 1). It is by far the deadliest and the most mysterious syndrome known to effect children. Very little is known about SIDS, however, statistics show that 95 percent of SIDS deaths happen between 2 and 4 months of age. The death rate for SIDS nearly doubles in winter months, when the weather turns colder (Spiers 1).
SIDS is defined as the sudden death of an infant under one year of age that remains unexplained after a thorough investigation, including a complete autopsy, examination of the death scene, and review of the clinical history (Holcher 11). Any baby can die of SIDS, there are no exceptions, although males are 50 percent more likely to succumb to SIDS, and death rates are higher in African American babies than Caucasian babies. SIDS is silent, sudden and unpredictable. SIDS babies appear to be healthy and normal prior to death, victims usually show no symptoms except for signs of a slight cold. SIDS is not caused by choking, vomiting, illness or child abuse (7).
For many years doctors and scientists have studied the mystery surrounding SIDS. Through the years, doctors have compiled a list of "risk-factors" that when avoided could greatly reduce the chance of a SIDS occurrence. These factors include: maternal smoking when pregnant, smoking near the baby, maternal drug use, poor pre-natal care, premature birth, SIDS siblings, young maternal age, short intervals between pregnancies, infants sleeping in a prone position (on their stomach) and multiple births. Losing a child to SIDS is the most bewildering, horrific experience for parents. The only thing worse than losing one child to SIDS, is losing two children to SIDS. It can and it does happen, especially with twins.
The rate for SIDS deaths in singleton babies is 1 baby per thousand births. The rate for SIDS deaths in twins has been as high as 9 babies per thousand births, but is usually documented as 4 deaths per thousand babies. (Beal 1039). These rates seem to keep rising as more couples use fertility drugs to help conceive. The drug Chlomid especially increases the chances of conceiving multiples. Some speculate that the risks are higher in twins because of premature birth and low-birth weight. Some studies have shown that the second-born twin is more likely to die of SIDS. A sample study conducted from 1973 until 1988 revealed that out of 37 twin infants who died of SIDS, 15 were first-born twins, and 22 were second-born twins (2). Studies in Europe do not support this theory, stating that first-born twins are just as susceptible to SIDS as second-born twins are.
http://sids-network.org/fp/wood_marla10.htm This link will show you the complete story of the above
A diagnosis of “non-accidental injury” or “abusive head trauma” is a legal, not a medical
conclusion. If a physician states that abuse caused Cameron’s injury, he/she must specify how
the injury occurred, and indicate the evidence to support the conclusion. It is insufficient to
reiterate the radiographic and ophthalmologic findings, and state that abuse is the default
diagnosis. The default diagnosis for signs and symptoms that a physician cannot explain with
certainty is not “non-accidental injury”. It is “I don’t know”.
Sincerely,
John Plunkett, M.D.
JP:dp
A diagnosis of “non-accidental injury” or “abusive head trauma” is a legal, not a medical
conclusion. If a physician states that abuse caused Cameron’s injury, he/she must specify how
the injury occurred, and indicate the evidence to support the conclusion. It is insufficient to
reiterate the radiographic and ophthalmologic findings, and state that abuse is the default
certainty is not “non-accidental injury”. It is “I don’t know”.
Sincerely,
John Plunkett, M.D.
JP:dp
A diagnosis of “non-accidental injury” or “abusive head trauma” is a legal, not a medical
conclusion. If a physician states that abuse caused Cameron’s injury, he/she must specify how
the injury occurred, and indicate the evidence to support the conclusion. It is insufficient to
reiterate the radiographic and ophthalmologic findings, and state that abuse is the default
certainty is not “non-accidental injury”. It is “I don’t know”.
Sincerely,