{"title":"Shaken Baby Syndrome/Abusive Head Injury: The Role of Expert Witness Testimony and a Recent Case Development.","authors":"James Tibballs, Neera Bhatia","doi":"10.1007/s11673-025-10422-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The triad of clinical signs, (extensive bilateral retinal haemorrhages, subdural haematoma, and encephalopathy) is regarded by some expert witnesses as pathognomonic proof that an infant was deliberately shaken and head injured (shaken baby syndrome / abusive head injury). However, that view is controversial since scientific evidence does not support the diagnostic accuracy of the triad. In contrast to previous cases, a Victorian Supreme Court jury found an accused not guilty of homicide of a one-month-old infant afflicted with the triad. Prosecution witnesses were heavily criticized for failing to provide impartial testimony and to abide by Supreme Court expert evidence rules. We argue that there is a need to reassess the manner in which expert witness testimony is considered by the courts in shaken baby cases where injury has caused the death of the infant.</p>","PeriodicalId":50252,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Bioethical Inquiry","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Bioethical Inquiry","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11673-025-10422-x","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The triad of clinical signs, (extensive bilateral retinal haemorrhages, subdural haematoma, and encephalopathy) is regarded by some expert witnesses as pathognomonic proof that an infant was deliberately shaken and head injured (shaken baby syndrome / abusive head injury). However, that view is controversial since scientific evidence does not support the diagnostic accuracy of the triad. In contrast to previous cases, a Victorian Supreme Court jury found an accused not guilty of homicide of a one-month-old infant afflicted with the triad. Prosecution witnesses were heavily criticized for failing to provide impartial testimony and to abide by Supreme Court expert evidence rules. We argue that there is a need to reassess the manner in which expert witness testimony is considered by the courts in shaken baby cases where injury has caused the death of the infant.
期刊介绍：
The JBI welcomes both reports of empirical research and articles that increase theoretical understanding of medicine and health care, the health professions and the biological sciences. The JBI is also open to critical reflections on medicine and conventional bioethics, the nature of health, illness and disability, the sources of ethics, the nature of ethical communities, and possible implications of new developments in science and technology for social and cultural life and human identity. We welcome contributions from perspectives that are less commonly published in existing journals in the field and reports of empirical research studies using both qualitative and quantitative methodologies.
The JBI accepts contributions from authors working in or across disciplines including – but not limited to – the following:
-philosophy-
bioethics-
economics-
social theory-
law-
public health and epidemiology-
anthropology-
psychology-
feminism-
gay and lesbian studies-
linguistics and discourse analysis-
cultural studies-
disability studies-
history-
literature and literary studies-
environmental sciences-
theology and religious studies
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
