Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A journey into the shaken baby syndrome/abusive head trauma controversy

cambridgeblog.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 639 posts

Re: A journey into the shaken baby syndrome/abusive head trauma controversy

#61

Post by froggertoaster »

Waterluvian wrote: post #52
ClumsyPilot wrote: post #24

trully unbelievable, i lose faith in thr justice system day by day

Nothing shook my faith in the medical system more than having kids. Holy cow is modern medicine still as smugly wrong as it’s always been. Every generation laughs at all the stupid stuff the previous generations believed, and then acts so confident that they’ve got it right this time. And as a result you get unworthy nurses making moms feel intense shame for not “trying hard enough” to somehow magically produce milk.

After 5 kids in 10 years, you come to realize that the standards aren't agreed upon, and best practices/recommendations change YEAR TO YEAR without fail.

Breastfeeding is one of the worst things hoisted upon mothers who are told "you must try no matter what" - seemingly ignoring the mental and physical health of the mother and the father all the while.

Re: A journey into the shaken baby syndrome/abusive head trauma controversy

#62

Post by dylan604 »

sneak wrote: post #46
parl_match wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The justice system does the best it can with the information it has. It is far from perfect. It makes horrible mistakes all the time. The problem, of course, is improving it without knock-on effects making it worse. There are huge swaths of people doing the work required to make it better, every day. It's not as easy as turning a dial from "bad" to "good"

If the current functioning is it doing "the best it can", the whole thing should be burnt to the ground.

to be replaced with what? i'm all for making changes that are an improvement, but just burning it to the ground for the sake of it with no end game is not an improvement

Re: A journey into the shaken baby syndrome/abusive head trauma controversy

#63

Post by arp242 »

> Very often, abuse is diagnosed “by default”, because no known alternative explanation was found (or even actively sought). This is extremely dangerous, as it seems to indicate that no further medical discovery need ever be made in the future.

Well, "dangerous" for who? For a lot of people involved in "child abuse" – from medical professionals to child services to the police – a false positive carries basically no consequences: you report it, or follow up, or do whatever your task is, "to be sure", and that's it.

But a false negative can have a lot more consequences, including losing your job, lawsuits, becoming the centre of a media circus, becoming the target of an investigation yourself, etc. etc.

Also see: most Amber Alerts should not have been sent, and are just simple cases of runaways, miscommunications, or family drama. But the official "pushing the button" to send out an alert has the same incentives as above.

The incentives are pretty obvious.

Re: A journey into the shaken baby syndrome/abusive head trauma controversy

#64

Post by sarchertech »

bombcar wrote: post #26
SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems to me that this rumor is just an alternate framing of the original commenter's assertion that "a minor bump in the head for a baby could be life threatening, but we just mark it as SIDS". I think it's fair to be skeptical of both, but it's worth reflecting on how the same factual assertions can come across as either "science-informed speculation" or "crazy unsubstantiated rumor" depending on how you say them…

Exactly. And imagine you’re a doctor, and you have a dead child in front of you, crying parents, and a form to fill out. No possible way of filling out the form brings the child back to life, and one way makes it as easy as possible for everyone, and another results in potentially up to jail time. Now do this repeatedly during your long and illustrious career.

My wife is a pediatric ER doctor. That’s not how that works. If suspected SIDS case/unexplained death comes in, it would be handed over to the child abuse team and the medical examiner would determine cause of death. The medical examiner is detached from crying parents.

What you’re talking about would require a lot more than just one well meaning doctor.

Re: A journey into the shaken baby syndrome/abusive head trauma controversy

#65

Post by hcrean »

huytersd wrote: post #50
sneak wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not insane. Genetic lineage is the least important factor in whether or not a given kid is "yours".

It’s by far the most important factor. Who are you to say it isn’t?

[flagged]

Re: A journey into the shaken baby syndrome/abusive head trauma controversy

#66

Post by arp242 »

cm2012 wrote: post #38
itsmemattchung wrote: post #16

> As a precautionary measure, the hospital followed mandatory reporting statutes and my wife and I temporarily lost custody of David. Thanks to our incredibly effective defense lawyer, we were cleared of all charges within two months, during which we stayed at the hospital 24/7 with David until we sorted out the legal procedures. Holy shit. Parents bring baby to ER ... results reveal that baby was shaken (article lat…

Not surprised it happened in France, they are much more of a nanny state (in good and bad ways) when it comes to parenting. Like the fact that paternity tests are banned unless you have a court order, etc.

reason.com has an entire long-running series of stories like this happening in the U.S. I've heard quite a few stories from the Netherlands. It probably happens in other countries as well.

It's an issue in many Western countries, where we've seemingly become risk-averse to the point where it's causing more harm than good.

Re: A journey into the shaken baby syndrome/abusive head trauma controversy

#67

Post by germinalphrase »

DoreenMichele wrote: post #55
ceejayoz wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Abusers sometimes take their victims elsewhere - new doc, new town, new state - when people start getting suspicious. The victim may also be retaliated against; accused of trying to get help. There’s a risk to consulting someone you suspect might be the perpetrator.

If the parent is abusive, trying to get their cooperation in fixing the problem may be an effective means to out them. They had absolutely no reason to believe I was abusing him. Most likely, they were just trying to cover their own butts and err in that direction rather than in the direction of "what's best for this child?" That's without getting into larger concerns of "What on earth is wrong with the world that a…

I’m not questioning anything about your story. I’m just curious: what types of “junk food” were they recommending?

Re: A journey into the shaken baby syndrome/abusive head trauma controversy

#68

Post by huytersd »

hcrean wrote: post #65
huytersd wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s by far the most important factor. Who are you to say it isn’t?

[flagged]

The welfare of someone else’s child doesn’t register very highly on a majority of people’s radars beyond basic humanitarian considerations. How about government provided daycare and forcing the mother to work.

Re: A journey into the shaken baby syndrome/abusive head trauma controversy

#69

Post by lmm »

huytersd wrote: post #42
cm2012 wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not surprised it happened in France, they are much more of a nanny state (in good and bad ways) when it comes to parenting. Like the fact that paternity tests are banned unless you have a court order, etc.

Can’t you just get a paternity test online? Otherwise that’s an insane situation, do they expect a dad to raise a kid that is not his?

> Can’t you just get a paternity test online?

You can, but it's a crime, much like buying banned drugs etc.

> do they expect a dad to raise a kid that is not his?

Yes.

Re: A journey into the shaken baby syndrome/abusive head trauma controversy

#70

Post by sneak »

huytersd wrote: post #68
hcrean wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

The welfare of someone else’s child doesn’t register very highly on a majority of people’s radars beyond basic humanitarian considerations. How about government provided daycare and forcing the mother to work.

Possession is nine tenths of the law. It's not someone else's child if it's in your house and you need a genetic test to deny responsibility.

This idea that bloodlines are relevant is anachronistic superstition. Several of my friends are not genetically related to their children. It's simply not relevant.

Post reply on HN