"Shaken Baby Syndrome" is Scientific Bullshit - Expert
Mort Zuckerman
Listro's Defense Targets 'Syndrome'
March 12, 2010
VERNON —
Quantcast
The defense of Suzanne Listro, a Mansfield woman accused of
manslaughter and risk of injury to a minor in connection with the
death of a foster child placed in her care, has turned into an attack
on the existence of "shaken baby syndrome."
Dr. Janice Ophoven, a forensic pathologist from Minnesota hired by the
defense to examine the death of 7-month-old Michael Brown Jr. in
Listro's Mansfield home in May 2008, testified Thursday that there is
no scientific evidence to support the existence of the syndrome.
In cases in which there was no evidence of trauma to a child, but
there was intracranial bleeding, retinal hemorrhaging and brain
damage, the label was applied and the last adult to have custody of
the child was assumed to have committed abuse.
"Unfortunately, that theory was never tested, validated or confirmed
in any way, but it was embraced," Ophoven testified. Further, she
said, there is no evidence that shaking a child can cause the injuries
commonly associated with shaken baby. Retinal hemorrhaging can be
caused by other problems, such as increased intracranial pressure, she
said.
"No one knows the specifics of retinal hemorrhaging, the causation,"
she said. "No one has said you can look into the eyes of a child and
see murder."
— David Owens
Copyright © 2010, The Hartford Courant