Doctors from all over the country read the Oct. 2 article about "The Syndrome," the documentary that premiered last weekend challenging the validity of shaken baby syndrome, written and produced by Meryl Goldsmith and Susan Goldsmith.
{mprestriction ids="1"}One of those was Scott Olitsky, M.D., the section chief of ophthalmology at Children’s Mercy Hospital (CMH) and a professor of ophthalmology at the University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Medicine. Dr. Olitsky and his colleagues believe there is absolutely nothing to dispute when it comes to shaken baby syndrome.
"Shaken baby syndrome is a disorder that is recognized around the world. It is backed by both clinical and basic science research. There are no credible clinicians who do not believe this entity exists," Dr. Olitsky wrote in an email to The Chronicle.
"Contrary to what the filmmakers state, these children undergo testing and examination for the disorders that could potentially mimic SBS, even though few actually can."
Dr. Olitsky and his partners at CMH are consulted on most suspected cases of head trauma caused by abuse in the area because of the findings that may be seen inside the eye. He estimates he or his partners see one case every one to two weeks, where the findings of abuse are positive. That means they see patients with eye problems related to abuse approximately 25 to 50 times each year.
Doctors at CMH evaluate between 2,000 and 3,000 cases of suspected child abuse each year, according to James Anderst, M.D., director of the division on child abuse and neglect at CMH and associate professor of pediatrics at the UMKC School of Medicine.
"Probably a half to a third of them we find is non-abusive," Dr. Anderst said.
"It’s actually very common that we find that the injuries are due to an accident or we find medical conditions that explain the injuries. We evaluate kids where there are allegations of abuse and neglect and it’s mostly forensic in nature regarding diagnostic things," Dr. Anderst explained.
Dr. Anderst doesn’t personally like to use the phrase shaken baby syndrome because, he said, "When you use the word syndrome it makes it seems like it’s magical and not understood."
"I think pretty much everyone understands that if your head undergoes violent trauma, that there’s a pretty good chance that your brain might be damaged and other bad things might happen. Some people want to call it shaken baby syndrome. I just call it head trauma," Dr. Anderst said.
Both doctors noted that studies have shown that a significant percentage of children who are abused will be abused again, and a significant number of those children will die as a result of it.
Dr. Olitsky, who is a member of Congregation B’nai Jehudah, takes several days off each year, for which he is not paid, to provide testimony in cases of suspected child abuse, as do his colleagues. He wanted to make sure any comments he made in this article about the film were actually based on the film and not simply what he suspected was reported, so he attended the showing on Oct. 12. The 90-minute film did not change his opinion of the validity of shaken baby syndrome.
Before the film began, Dr. Olitsky said there was even a disclaimer of sorts. He doesn’t know the man’s name, or whether he was employed by the theater or representing the film festival committee, but the man told the audience the film is one of the more controversial films they had shown at the festival.
"He went on to say he thought the film was a good opportunity to start a discussion because he had screened it and thought it was a balanced view."
After seeing the film, Dr. Olitsky does not feel the film presented a balanced view.
"There were no opposing views discussed. In my opinion that was more of a propaganda film than it was anything else.
"Even the way they portrayed the individuals on the different sides of the argument was mindboggling that you could even think that this was a well investigated and fair piece," Dr. Olitsky said.
He said those who believe shaken baby syndrome is a real thing were called profiteers and promoters of untruths.
"The child abuse advocates were clearly defamed in this film. They were personally ridiculed. … I would say their character was defamed and clearly pieces of statements from conferences and testimony were taken out of context in order to portray them as incompetent and self-serving," he said.
In fact, Dr. Olitsky said the documentary described the people who back up the claims that head trauma/shaken baby syndrome does indeed exist as working in a "dark hole" while describing those who don’t believe in shaken baby syndrome as "shining the light on truth in that dark hole."
He disputes the fact that child abuse advocates are profiteers.
"For the physician advocates against child abuse, this is a money losing part of our career," he said.
Because the handful of people who dispute the existence of shaken baby syndrome are paid thousands of dollars a year for their testimony, Dr. Olitsky said they may actually be the ones with a conflict of interest. He has faced "these so-called experts" in court on many occasions.
"They spin half-truths by citing only portions of research that, when edited, support their claims but knowingly omit portions of the very same research which prove the disorder exists. Recently one of these experts cited a study on retinal hemorrhages and said the research shows that shaking does not cause hemorrhages in the eye," he said.
"However, the specific study he quoted actually has been used to prove the shaken baby hypothesis but by neglecting to quote the entire findings of the study he knowingly mislead the jury," the doctor continued.
Following the film’s premier showing, a discussion took place. Dr. Olitsky said someone in the audience said that doctors come to outlying cities and put innocent people in jail.
"Doctors don’t put anybody in jail," said Dr. Olitsky. They treat patients, they don’t determine who the perpetrator might be.
"I don’t know the suspect," he said. "All I know is what happened to that baby. I never know who did it. I can’t necessarily tell an exact time frame. So is it possible that somebody who is not involved is blamed? I don’t know. But I know what the mechanism of injury was to that child."
Do innocent people get charged? The doctor can’t answer that question.
"In any system I’m sure there are mistakes made, but that is very different than saying this entity doesn’t exist and it is impossible to harm a child by shaking them."
Dr. Olitsky noted that in areas of the country where prevention campaigns have been mounted, doctors see fewer of these cases."Now theoretically if these were all due to accidents or illnesses, the things those who deny the existence of shaking injuries claim cause these problems, that shouldn’t change. We shouldn’t see a decrease in the findings that we typically see," he said.
Dr. Olitsky reiterates that backed by clinical and scientific evidence, there is no doubt in the medical community that shaken baby syndrome exists.
"In the movie they made it sound like there are many people who are rethinking this. That is not the case. So either the entire medical and scientific community is wrong about this or there’s a few people in the fringe community that have some motive for stating their claims."{/mprestriction}