Justin Glaze
Many mild cases of SBS go undiagnosed, because doctors don't want to infer that a baby was mistreated. Parents found guilty of shaking their baby sometimes slip through the legal system and are out of jail in no time. Let’s take a look at what goes on during SBS, as well as what happens to these innocent babies afterwards.
SBS is exactly what the name implies; when a baby is violently shaken, usually when they are crying, in order to get the baby to stop crying. Most of the time shaking a baby alone will not produce exterior bruises or signs of abuse.
Internally, three main things can and do occur. The first is a sub-dural hematoma, a bruise or bleeding inside the space between the skull and brain. Second, a baby can develop a retinal hemorrhage, which is bleeding along the back wall of the eye. Third, a baby can develop cerebral edema, which is a collection of fluid that swells inside the brain cavity. SBS is technically classified as a traumatic brain injury, but can also appear as a spinal cord injury if the whip lash effect of the shaking causes the brain stem to disconnect.
As far as prognosis goes, one third of SBS patients die immediately, one third live but with severe mental and physical limitations and one third live normal lives with no impairments. Those who live with mental and physical limitations suffer from seizure disorders, learning disabilities, paralyzation and speech and vision problems.
Again this is a very controversial subject which isn't easy to talk about, but it is important that we raise awareness of SBS so it can be prevented in the future. For more information visit dontshake.org.
Justin Glaze is an LPN and contributing columnist for the Walker County Messenger. He can be reached at 678-988-1011 or jglazelpn@yahoo.com.
Clearly, you are misinterpreting my post. I'm saying that to date, there is no proof that any baby who has ever been shaken has come down with these injuries. Does that mean that it is safe to shake a baby? No. Does that mean that shaking a baby CANNOT cause brain damage? No. But if it does, the mechanisms are not understood. Since the mechanisms are not understood, it is impossible (yes, impossible) for a doctor to claim that these three signs are diagnostic of shaken baby syndrome, even if all other known causes are ruled out (and, generally speaking, they are not).
Again, don't take my word for it. Take the word of the man who is generally credited with creating the theory. "I don't think that the famous triad [of injuries], however well some people think it's defined, can ever be so well-defined that you can say that and nothing else cause it — that meaning shaking."
To date, there have been no scientific experiments in animals (or humans, obviously) that have demonstrated that shaking, by a human, can cause a subdural hemorrhage or retinal hemorrhages. In fact the animal (piglets and lambs) and biomechanical experiments that do exist indicate that it would take far greater force than humans are able to produce. At best, these studies are inconclusive.
The man often credited as the father of shaken baby syndrome, who in 1971 wrote a paper describing how the process may work, is now generally testifying for the defense in these cases. In the last years of his life, he hopes to undo the terrible wrong that he feels responsible for creating. http://onsbs.com/2013/02/20/dr-norman-guthkelch-still-on-the-medical-frontier/
Quite recently, he has written a paper which is harshly critical of the way medical examiners are using these injuries to work backwards, and prove that someone shook their infant to death, when there is no other evidence other than the brain/eye injuries. http://globalwrong.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/guthkelch-an-preface-to-narang-hous-j-health-law-poly-2012.pdf As he discusses, many other conditions, most occurring naturally, can also produce the injuries described as being "consistent with shaken baby syndrome." What we do not know for certain, is if shaking a healthy baby can also produce these symptoms.