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

481–490 of 639 posts

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

#481

Post by nonethewiser »

noodlenotes wrote: post #466
seszett wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I remember one classic one is the "no coffee when pregnant", the study says this causes problems, the test was performed on rats and by feeding them coffee in the amount of 3/4 of their body weight. We can agree that with this amount, it's reasonable it could cause problems. Very different from one cup of coffee though. Honestly I don't know which study you're talking about, and I'm not trying to question what you'…

I'm a light sleeper and I feel like I have an awareness of everything nearby when I'm asleep (like I used to fall asleep with an open laptop in bed during college without knocking into it). I have a feeling co-sleeping wouldn't be an issue for me, but with all the dire warnings I'm afraid to risk it.

> I'm a light sleeper and I feel like I have an awareness of everything nearby when I'm asleep

You absolutely don't have awareness of everything nearby when you're asleep. You are inherently incapable of even determining this because you're sleeping. I'm sure you react to some stimuli but that doesn't mean you can expect yourself to react to every potential stimuli that you would want to.

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

#482

Post by dang »

12345hn6789 wrote: post #434
DoreenMichele wrote: post #14

My oldest son has special needs. He's 2e -- gifted and learning disabled -- and has a serious medical condition associated with being very underweight. I put him in preschool to get him to talk. He could use sentences but wasn't. At the start of kindergarten, first, second and third grade, I spoke with the teacher, explained he was difficult, let them know I welcomed communication on any issue. They were thrilled and…

[flagged]

I'm not sure if this is personal attack, trolling, or both, but posting this way will get you banned here, so please don't do it again.

If you'd please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules, we'd appreciate it.

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

#484

Post by nonethewiser »

lqet wrote: post #282
cjrp wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Has SIDS been linked to co-sleeping? I thought the risks of co-sleeping were more around accidentally rolling on or suffocating the baby.

That is also what we were told after birth. My personal opinion is that the advantages of co-sleeping far outweigh the risks. It is much less stressful for both the parents and the baby. My wife simply slept topless, turned (half-sleeping) to our baby whenever it was crying, and immediately fell back asleep.

works for dad too

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

#485

Post by ryandrake »

P_I_Staker wrote: post #366
gwd wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's another factor in this, which makes it hard to change: For the people in child welfare organizations, for social workers, for doctors, for police, for judges to change their mind about current and future decisions requires them to change their mind about past decisions. The necessary implication is that many of the people they have persecuted in the past were, in fact, innocent. It requires them to admit that…

Interestingly enough, no bigger offender then the psychiatric and mental health community. There's a very sophisticated system for shutting down criticism and lashing out at patients that have civil rights concerns. They do a lot of mental gymnastics trying to run from the idea that their main function is to imprison and take away peoples rights, often without due process. Medical industry is rife with abuse. They ro…

Your comment reminds me of the Rosenhan Experiment[1]. "The first part involved the use of healthy associates or "pseudopatients" (three women and six men, including Rosenhan himself) who briefly feigned auditory hallucinations in an attempt to gain admission to 12 psychiatric hospitals in five states in the United States. All were admitted and diagnosed with psychiatric disorders. ... The second part of his study involved a hospital administration challenging Rosenhan to send pseudopatients to its facility, whose staff asserted that they would be able to detect the pseudopatients. Rosenhan agreed, and in the following weeks 41 out of 193 new patients were identified as potential pseudopatients, with 19 of these receiving suspicion from at least one psychiatrist and one other staff member. Rosenhan sent no pseudopatients to the hospital."

1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosenhan_experiment

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

#486

Post by dang »

robbiep wrote: post #332
Fire-Dragon-DoL wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the article it clearly states that shaking does not cause the hemorrhage that's currently considered "shaken baby syndrome". It literally says there aren't documented cases where the shaking was captured on tape/testified and the symptoms present at the same time. It's more likely that a fall (or being thrown) would cause the symptoms.

You need to work on your comprehension

Please don't cross into personal attack. You can make your substantive points without that.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

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

#487

Post by nonethewiser »

pcblues wrote: post #233

There is a problem with responsibility. Do you want to never let a perp go (i.e. jail innocent people in order to catch every guilty person) versus let some baddies slip through the net while not imprisoning innocent people. My own life found itself on the nexus, where I lost loved ones with a false accusation, but wasn't charged for it from (obvious) lack of evidence. Although the legal system worked somewhat, it wa…

> Do you want to never let a perp go (i.e. jail innocent people in order to catch every guilty person) versus let some baddies slip through the net while not imprisoning innocent people

Isn't the latter the official standard most places? Innocent until proven guilty. It's just not really a dilemma if you ask me. If you have authority to do something based on some event, then you have to prove that event happened.

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

#488

Post by nonethewiser »

tru1ock wrote: post #326

This made me think of Handmaid's Tale. Scary to know how easily we will trade away liberty to an illusion of safety for the sake of the children.

I would say it's for the sake of safety. Children may be the topic here, but it applies much more widely to safety in general.

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

#489

Post by mensetmanusman »

Chris2048 wrote: post #477
mensetmanusman wrote: post #341

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its tongue in cheek. Germany is developed, but you will get arrested if you try to homeschool your children.

b/c it's seen as a basic right, and issue of equality to have access to the same level of state education. The concept of "your" children is something of the problem.

It could be a problem, but usually isn’t.

The (darkly) funny thing in the case of Germany is that this lack of diversity in education has created a generation with the fertility rate of South Korea (ie dying).

In this case, the state creating a monoculture that results in the ‘destruction’ of the existing state goes to show why evolution values diversity far more than monocultures.

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

#490

Post by hn_version_0023 »

mabcat wrote: post #314
rossant wrote: post #271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is spot on. This psychological barrier is probably the number one obstacle to a wider recognition of the existence and extent of this problem. People like me who challenge the science behind the diagnoses of SBS face an absolutely unprecedented and unreasonable pushback, like I've never seen in any other area. Basically everyone who has worked on this side has faced threats, insults, personal attacks, cancellati…

Closest name I can think of is "commitment and consistency". People tend to behave as they have behaved in the past, doing so is both a cognitive shortcut and a source of positive emotion. We go to great lengths to maintain consistency (see also: confirmation bias), and being consistent even in the face of conflicting evidence feels better than being inconsistent but right. From Cialdini: "Once we have made a choice…

In my head -- and I'm no doctor, believe you me! -- I call this "emotional inertia", which is a phrase I've borrowed from one of the many doctors who has treated me for depression.
Post reply on HN