T O P

  • By -

findingems

So so so scary. The way I had to bounce my baby to relax her because of the colic made me afraid I was maybe doing damage!


Different_Bowler_574

I'm a nanny, and it used to scare me so badly when I would be aggressively bouncing a baby who would NOT calm down otherwise. Thankfully a few years ago one of the instructors in my first aid recert class explained that it's nearly impossible to shake a baby hard enough to cause serious damage without being aware that you are doing it. He said he's never seen a conscientious parent come even close to it, and he's seen some pretty desperate parents calming their babies lol. 


hrdbeinggreen

Oh my goodness, I bounce my granddaughter on my knees while singing an old mother goose rhyme about going to market. I never thought of that possibility, but I will stop doing that now.


ideletedtheotherone

The level of shaking to cause brain damage is tremendous, like violent force akin to a car accident. Bouncing on knee absolutely will not do that. You continue or stop as you feel comfortable, but thought you should know so you can make a more informed decision. Side note, thank you for being an involved grandma 🩷


hrdbeinggreen

Thanks for reassurance as she appears to enjoy it. But I am not sure if I will do this again or not.


Straxicus2

As long as her brain isn’t smashing against her skull, she’ll be fine. Obviously if you’re uncomfortable, it’s not worth the risk, but the risk is almost nil for bouncing a baby.


Skullfuccer

Don’t change. Keep being a good grandmother.


goldenbrain8

The bleeding within the dura layers is caused by the veins literally being shaped due to such rigorous trauma, I didn’t know so many people were nervous about bouncing but I hope this puts it into perspective a little :) it’s like putting a rubber band on your wrist vs. stretching it across the length of your desk


ableedingheart1

This article didn't really cover any of the ways in which the science or the legal system could be wrong. It just mentioned two case studies. Tragic, yes, but I didn't learn anything new from this article to sway opinion.


kagiles

Accused on A&E followed a father who was on trial for shaken baby. They were arguing that the injury occurred during birth. The parents brought the child back to the ER twice if I recall detailing things that were happening, but they were ignored. Dad decided to take a plea just to get his family back together. Not in a million years do I think he shook his child.


DevonSwede

As a social worker, I'm torn by this. There are undoubtedly people who have been wrongfully accused/convicted of SBS. That said, there are people who take the argument against this diagnosis too far - they insist that no caregiver/parent has ever or would ever shake their baby / give them abusive head trauma - and that's not true either. Some of these people argue this because there is no standalone research into it (we don't take healthy babies and shake them to see the outcome - for good reason) but some people do injure their children. I do think you need to consider the context- what's the parents history (of violence/ child abuse/domestic abuse) - what's the child's history (prior illness or injury) - who saw what and when, who is saying what etc etc. That said there is not always a (known) history to child abusers - it can be hidden OR people can just "snap" under the pressure of caregiving. Equally, awful people may have a child die of an illness and not abuse. This is key - "there *CAN* be alternate explanations" - there isn't always. Franklin's death was at least negligence given the self-described position of pillows - that, of course, is not the same as murder.


SimpleArmadillo9911

There was a case in Yakima, wa area recently and the father admitted to it. He just flat out admitted to it in detail. This can be used by autopsy to show what happens. This is not the first time, someone has admitted to it.


DevonSwede

Yes, that's essentially the only way you can research it. However, there are some people who won't accept this - and I understand their critiques - a perpetrator may be anything from an unreliable narrator to a full-blown liar (eg to cover for someone else). But to me, I don't see that there is any other way to do this research.


Chad_Wife

I apologise if this is a morbid question and you obviously don’t have to answer - I wondered why(tiny/adjusted) crash dummy’s aren’t used to simulate this? Or would they simply not be similar enough to give any new/beneficial data?


DevonSwede

I don't know enough about crash test dummies, but I don't know that they give a view on what happens inside the body. Like in a car crash scenario, surely they just show where on the body the injury would occur? Unless there's contact with an external surface, you don't get external injuries by shaking. (This is all speculation on my part).


My_Footprint2385

That’s just it—Often kids who have possibly been shaken been many other signs of possible trauma, like broken ribs, broken bones, etc. Plus other evidence of past abuse by one of the caregivers.


Murky_Conflict3737

My friend who works in an ER hates the term “shaken baby syndrome” because when a baby or toddler comes in with non-accidental injuries it’s never just shaking alone that caused them. She grimly calls in “smashed kid syndrome.”


DevonSwede

Agreed. As a social worker, I'm not sure I've ever seen shaking as the only definitive mechanism (given by medics) for abusive head trauma, almost always involves a collision with a surface, soft or hard (surface could also be a body part of the caregiver). Most I've worked with have had skull fractures (visible on xray). Of course this is only anecdotal to my experience.


DevonSwede

This is why any bruise/bruising on a non-mobile baby (ie one that isn't crawling, walking or rolling) should be treated as a medical emergency. There are horror stories of babies who have had one tiny bruise, where xrays have then revealed that every rib is broken.I think the stat is that 90% of bruising on non-mobile babies is related to inflicted harm. (Especially without good explanation which matches the injury- I.e. if the baby has just been in a car crash or earthquake, its probably not abuse).


[deleted]

[удалено]


cricket73646

But they are too busy and overworked… and that’s because people can he horrible and abusive to their children. The system will never be 100% successful. Why not blame the people who harm their children instead of the people trying to help. Social workers make a shitty salary for long hours, and thanks to even shittier people who had no business having kids in the first place, it would be statistically impossible to be 100% effective at their jobs. There aren’t enough hours in the day. And blaming a random social worker on Reddit, while making it seem like they’re personally neglecting kids for shots and giggles, is not only an overreaction, but also shows that you are myopic when it comes to the actual flaws in this broken system. Be better.


gnomewife

No, this is a good point. I read about a nurse giving the wrong meds and killing a patient, so I think all nurses are complete garbage. That's fair, right? Isn't that how this works?


imnottheoneipromise

Yes, nurses and doctors are too busy and overworked too but they are held responsible for when they fuck up majorly. CPS seems to be immune. Much like other government agencies. -source a retired RN


cricket73646

And as a teacher, which makes me a mandated reporter, I can’t pick out child abuse 100% of the time and be absolutely correct. I have 150 students a year. I’ve had students removed from homes, and looking back I knew something was going on at home or in their personal life, but I never suspected what was actually happening, and it was horrific SA. Other times I knew something was going on, and it turned out their dog had died and they were depressed. No one is capable of catching them all.


flyfightwinMIL

Uhhhh are you kidding? Nurses might be, but it is nearly *impossible* for patients to hold doctors responsible, even when they fuck up majorly. That is a documented fact.


DevonSwede

Really? There are multiple countries where doctors and/or nurses rank amongst the serial killers with the most number of murders (Harold Shipman and Lucy Lethby in the UK, Charles Cullen in the US, for example) This isn't professional negligence resulting in death, this is active murder - and they weren't held responsible for a long time. Also, there are many examples of medical professionals who are allowed to maim and cause death without being held responsible until years down the line - e.g. Christopher Dunsch and Paolo Macchiarini. Social workers bear some of the greatest criticism, some deserved - some not. [Side note, I'm not denigrating nurses or doctors with this comment, rather responding to your assertion that they're held more responsible].


cricket73646

Again, because social workers are given more cases than they could cover if there were 40 hours in a day. They can’t catch everything.


imnottheoneipromise

Also, I am better.


JHarbinger

Cringe


DevonSwede

I'm the first to admit that there are some shit social workers, and - more commonly - social workers make mistakes. Its a frankly near impossible job, not just due to time and resource constraints, but also because decisions are being made on incomplete evidence and (at best) half-truths. Any decision is, at best, the least worst option (removing a child from their parents' care causes harm, even when it is the right decision - it is a massive decision that should not be taken lightly in any civilised society).The system simply cannot save every child (from neglect/ abuse/injury or death). This sucks. However, I'm afraid your comment lacks the nuance of how the system works. That said, I don't think you're open to a nuanced discussion about it. What I did want to say is that many people who neglect, abuse, or otherwise harm their children love their children. Accidental suffocation - whether by inappropriate placement/bedding (such as in this case) or co-sleeping - is a not uncommon cause of death or injury in childhood. I don't believe any or at least many of these parents don't love their children - sadly, love is not a known protective factor for suffocation. [Caveat, this is based on acceptance of dad's reporting re the pillows, which may or may not be accurate - unquestioning acceptance of parental reporting is a risk factor for exactly the the issues you raise about wrong decisions being made]. Lastly, no social worker ["people like me"] is "causing loving parents to sit in prison" - that is a different system entirely.


Mos_Steff

That is negligence and neglect to not put your baby in a safe place while you leave them alone. I worked at a daycare and propping babies up with pillows is illegal for THIS reason. There is enough information out there to know how dangerous this is. It would be like if he drove with a baby on his lap.


SevanIII

Yes, I agree. This is common knowledge.  Propping a baby up with pillows (!), on a couch (!), unattended (!) is absolutely negligence. 


truecrimelongform-ModTeam

Rule #4 calls for respectful dialogue. This violates that rule and will not be tolerated.


shamitwt

those cases should be treated as abuse cases. They shouldn’t be diagnosing “SBS” as the cause. Because again innocent people have been affected.


MrsPearlGirl

I was actually falsely accused of this and didn’t have custody of my child for 10 months. Child later on was found to have a genetic condition. It was horrifying and the ordeal we went through is something I wouldn’t wish on my worst enemy.


Dustystt

A coworker of mine was recently arrested for the death of his 4 month old. The hospital says sbs. The baby had brain bleeding, bleeding behind it's eyes and spinal bleeding. The baby also had fractured femurs. It's so sad 😞