- Email: [email protected]
Not all shaken baby convictions are sound
EDITORIAL
LOCATIONS UK Lacon House, 84 Theobald’s Road, London WC1X 8NS Tel +44 (0) 20 7611 1200 Fax +44 (0) 20 7611 1250 Australia Tower 2, 475 Victoria Avenue, Chatswood, NSW 2067 Tel +61 2 9422 2666 Fax +61 2 9422 2633 USA 225 Wyman Street, Waltham, MA 02451 Tel +1 781 734 8770 Fax +1 720 356 9217 201 Mission Street, 26th Floor, San Francisco, CA 94105 Tel +1 415 908 3348 Fax +1 415 704 3125 to SUBSCRIbe UK and International Tel +44 (0) 8456 731 731 [email protected] The price of a New Scientist annual subscription is UK £137, Europe €211, USA $154, Canada C$182, Rest of World $267. Postmaster: Send address changes to New Scientist, PO Box 3806, Chesterfield, MO 63006-9953, USA. cONTACTS Editorial Tel +44 (0) 20 7611 1202 [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Picture desk Tel +44 (0) 20 7611 1268 Who’s who newscientist.com/people Contact us newscientist.com/contact Enquiries Tel +44 (0) 20 7611 1202 Display Advertising Tel +44 (0) 20 7611 1291 [email protected] Recruitment Advertising UK Tel +44 (0) 20 8652 4444 [email protected] Permission for reuse [email protected] Media enquiries Tel +44 (0) 20 7611 1202 Marketing Tel +44 (0) 20 7611 1299 Back Issues & Merchandise Tel +44 (0) 1733 385170 Syndication Tribune Media Services International Tel +44 (0) 20 7588 7588 UK Newsagents Tel +44 (0) 20 3148 3333 Newstrade distributed by Marketforce UK Ltd, The Blue Fin Building, 110 Southwark St, London SE1 OSU Tel: + 44 (0) 20 8148 3333 © 2010 Reed Business Information Ltd, England New Scientist is published weekly by Reed Business Information Ltd. ISSN 0262 4079. Registered at the Post Office as a newspaper and printed in England by Polestar (Colchester)
Shaky diagnosis A rethink of shaken baby syndrome is long overdue NO ONE doubts that parents murders they did not commit. and babysitters can and do inflict Over the past decade, evidence horrendous and sometimes fatal has emerged to challenge the brain injuries on young children idea that the triad of symptoms by violently shaking them. constitutes unambiguous evidence Shaken baby syndrome is given as of death through violent shaking. the cause of death in around half In 2005 this magazine reported of child abuse fatalities. that doubts were surfacing But there is something badly over shaken baby syndrome. wrong with the way so many child A handful of convictions have fatalities are blamed on shaking. been quashed on appeal, yet the As we report on page 8, many dogma persists in the courts. infants who appear to have been If anything, things are shaken to death may simply have going backwards. In the UK, a tumbled, suffocated or met with pathologist who acts as an expert some other accident. witness for people who protest For 40 years, mainstream “Thousands of people may medical experts who give be in jail for child murders evidence in court have largely they did not commit” agreed that shaken baby syndrome can be unambiguously diagnosed by a triad of symptoms their innocence in shaken-baby at post-mortem: swelling of the cases has been banned from brain, haemorrhages at the back giving evidence in court. This of both eyes, and diffuse bleeding has made other doubters too at the rear of the brain. Murder frightened to give expert evidence convictions are often secured on lest they suffer the same fate. the basis of these alone, even in Thankfully, there is a surge of the absence of other signs of activity in the US to identify and abuse such as a severely damaged challenge unsafe convictions for spinal cord or obvious bruising. shaken baby syndrome. There are The result of this “medically also calls for an independent diagnosed murder”, as one senior re-evaluation of all the science lawyer in the US recently behind the triad. Given how described it, is that thousands of polarised the debate has become, people may be serving time for it will be difficult to find a
genuinely impartial broker who can focus solely on the reliability of the science. Ironically, the biggest block to research on shaken baby syndrome in the UK is the Human Tissue Act of 2004, which was passed in part to prevent researchers taking liberties with the bodies of dead children. The act makes it a criminal offence to retain tissues removed during a post-mortem without parental consent. That effectively blocks detailed research on exactly those brain tissues which will reveal the truth behind infant brain damage, as abusive parents are not likely to give their consent. We urgently need a reappraisal of all aspects of shaken baby syndrome. An estimated 1500 people are in jail in the US right now after being found guilty of causing death or injury by shaking; 200 more join them each year. Everyone wants child abusers to go to jail, but we must not allow unsound science to send the innocent there too. It has been clear for at least five years that shaken baby syndrome needs to be reassessed. It would surely be a crime to delay any longer. n
End dirty tactics in the climate war IF ONE of the aims of the persons unknown who stole thousands of emails from the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit (CRU) last November was to bring a fellow human being to his knees, they almost succeeded. As our exclusive interview on page 10 shows, Phil Jones, then the director of the unit, has suffered terrible personal torment as a result of the vitriolic campaign
against him and his colleagues. For years, ruthless climate sceptics have harassed scientists, drowning them in freedom of information requests and subjecting them to vicious personal attacks. Climategate was merely the public face of this insurgent war. In that hostile climate, some scientists fired off personal emails that occasionally lacked decorum. The CRU accepts
this. When will their opponents apologise for their own excesses? Yes, questions need to be asked. Healthy scepticism is vital. But the climate sceptics need to play by the rules. For all their bleating about being excluded, science is not a closed shop. If their criticisms of climate science have merit they will be heard. These issues will be resolved only by reasoned debate, not vitriol and harassment. n 31 July 2010 | NewScientist | 3
LOCATIONS UK Lacon House, 84 Theobald’s Road, London WC1X 8NS Tel +44 (0) 20 7611 1200 Fax +44 (0) 20 7611 1250 Australia Tower 2, 475 Victoria Avenue, Chatswood, NSW 2067 Tel +61 2 9422 2666 Fax +61 2 9422 2633 USA 225 Wyman Street, Waltham, MA 02451 Tel +1 781 734 8770 Fax +1 720 356 9217 201 Mission Street, 26th Floor, San Francisco, CA 94105 Tel +1 415 908 3348 Fax +1 415 704 3125 to SUBSCRIbe UK and International Tel +44 (0) 8456 731 731 [email protected] The price of a New Scientist annual subscription is UK £137, Europe €211, USA $154, Canada C$182, Rest of World $267. Postmaster: Send address changes to New Scientist, PO Box 3806, Chesterfield, MO 63006-9953, USA. cONTACTS Editorial Tel +44 (0) 20 7611 1202 [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Picture desk Tel +44 (0) 20 7611 1268 Who’s who newscientist.com/people Contact us newscientist.com/contact Enquiries Tel +44 (0) 20 7611 1202 Display Advertising Tel +44 (0) 20 7611 1291 [email protected] Recruitment Advertising UK Tel +44 (0) 20 8652 4444 [email protected] Permission for reuse [email protected] Media enquiries Tel +44 (0) 20 7611 1202 Marketing Tel +44 (0) 20 7611 1299 Back Issues & Merchandise Tel +44 (0) 1733 385170 Syndication Tribune Media Services International Tel +44 (0) 20 7588 7588 UK Newsagents Tel +44 (0) 20 3148 3333 Newstrade distributed by Marketforce UK Ltd, The Blue Fin Building, 110 Southwark St, London SE1 OSU Tel: + 44 (0) 20 8148 3333 © 2010 Reed Business Information Ltd, England New Scientist is published weekly by Reed Business Information Ltd. ISSN 0262 4079. Registered at the Post Office as a newspaper and printed in England by Polestar (Colchester)
Shaky diagnosis A rethink of shaken baby syndrome is long overdue NO ONE doubts that parents murders they did not commit. and babysitters can and do inflict Over the past decade, evidence horrendous and sometimes fatal has emerged to challenge the brain injuries on young children idea that the triad of symptoms by violently shaking them. constitutes unambiguous evidence Shaken baby syndrome is given as of death through violent shaking. the cause of death in around half In 2005 this magazine reported of child abuse fatalities. that doubts were surfacing But there is something badly over shaken baby syndrome. wrong with the way so many child A handful of convictions have fatalities are blamed on shaking. been quashed on appeal, yet the As we report on page 8, many dogma persists in the courts. infants who appear to have been If anything, things are shaken to death may simply have going backwards. In the UK, a tumbled, suffocated or met with pathologist who acts as an expert some other accident. witness for people who protest For 40 years, mainstream “Thousands of people may medical experts who give be in jail for child murders evidence in court have largely they did not commit” agreed that shaken baby syndrome can be unambiguously diagnosed by a triad of symptoms their innocence in shaken-baby at post-mortem: swelling of the cases has been banned from brain, haemorrhages at the back giving evidence in court. This of both eyes, and diffuse bleeding has made other doubters too at the rear of the brain. Murder frightened to give expert evidence convictions are often secured on lest they suffer the same fate. the basis of these alone, even in Thankfully, there is a surge of the absence of other signs of activity in the US to identify and abuse such as a severely damaged challenge unsafe convictions for spinal cord or obvious bruising. shaken baby syndrome. There are The result of this “medically also calls for an independent diagnosed murder”, as one senior re-evaluation of all the science lawyer in the US recently behind the triad. Given how described it, is that thousands of polarised the debate has become, people may be serving time for it will be difficult to find a
genuinely impartial broker who can focus solely on the reliability of the science. Ironically, the biggest block to research on shaken baby syndrome in the UK is the Human Tissue Act of 2004, which was passed in part to prevent researchers taking liberties with the bodies of dead children. The act makes it a criminal offence to retain tissues removed during a post-mortem without parental consent. That effectively blocks detailed research on exactly those brain tissues which will reveal the truth behind infant brain damage, as abusive parents are not likely to give their consent. We urgently need a reappraisal of all aspects of shaken baby syndrome. An estimated 1500 people are in jail in the US right now after being found guilty of causing death or injury by shaking; 200 more join them each year. Everyone wants child abusers to go to jail, but we must not allow unsound science to send the innocent there too. It has been clear for at least five years that shaken baby syndrome needs to be reassessed. It would surely be a crime to delay any longer. n
End dirty tactics in the climate war IF ONE of the aims of the persons unknown who stole thousands of emails from the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit (CRU) last November was to bring a fellow human being to his knees, they almost succeeded. As our exclusive interview on page 10 shows, Phil Jones, then the director of the unit, has suffered terrible personal torment as a result of the vitriolic campaign
against him and his colleagues. For years, ruthless climate sceptics have harassed scientists, drowning them in freedom of information requests and subjecting them to vicious personal attacks. Climategate was merely the public face of this insurgent war. In that hostile climate, some scientists fired off personal emails that occasionally lacked decorum. The CRU accepts
this. When will their opponents apologise for their own excesses? Yes, questions need to be asked. Healthy scepticism is vital. But the climate sceptics need to play by the rules. For all their bleating about being excluded, science is not a closed shop. If their criticisms of climate science have merit they will be heard. These issues will be resolved only by reasoned debate, not vitriol and harassment. n 31 July 2010 | NewScientist | 3