Reevaluating Shaken Baby Syndrome: Protecting the Innocent (Premium)

Sheila DeMare, MS

For many years, Shaken Baby Syndrome (SBS) was widely believed to be the cause of death whenever a baby showed three symptoms: brain swelling, bleeding around the brain, and retinal hemorrhages. Doctors and prosecutors were trained to treat this “triad” as almost certain proof of violent shaking, even when there were no external injuries or witness accounts.

Today, the picture is more complex—and much more hopeful for family members, caregivers, and others who are wrongfully accused. New terms are now being used when looking at infant brain injury: traumatic brain injury and abusive head trauma.

A firsthand view of the Yurko pivotal case 

The previously accepted “triad” mindset behind SBS began receiving public scrutiny with the case of Alan Yurko.

I learned of Alan’s case in 2000, when my dad, a physician, told me he thought I should get involved.

A young father, Alan had been sent to prison in 1999, accused of murder and aggravated child abuse in the death of his 10-week-old son. He was sentenced to life in prison plus ten years, purportedly for shaking his infant, “Alan Joe,” to death.

Heartbroken at the passing of his son, and horrified to be held responsible, Alan insisted he was innocent. He attributed the death to medical errors by hospital staff and multiple vaccines given while his premature son was ill.

My dad believed Alan was innocent. I already had my hands full with three kids, a full-time job, and other volunteer efforts. But after reviewing Alan’s situation, I joined other advocates who asserted he was wrongfully charged and sentenced. Over the next few years, I corresponded with Alan, promoted his cause through mailings and online, and visited him in prison.  

Advocacy efforts gained momentum when, between 2001 and 2003, a group of medical experts provided sworn statements asserting Alan was wrongfully convicted and that the infant’s death could be explained without blaming it on physical abuse.

Sorting out the truth

Alan had been in prison for several years when he was granted a new trial. While attending the publicized trial, I watched justice unfold and gained a better understanding of how medical evaluations can be twisted, intentionally or unintentionally, resulting in a false conclusion.

Independent medical reviewers concluded that the autopsy and medical findings were flawed, and the court agreed that the new evidence undermined the original SBS diagnosis.

Additional assessment of the case revealed that little Alan Joe was born prematurely, experienced birth complications, and was suffering from infection when he received multiple vaccinations. Additionally, there were blatant errors in the original forensic work.

An open resource for the evolving science 

When Alan was released from prison in 2004, his case became part of a broader movement to reassess SBS science. Although not the first disputed case, it was among the earliest to receive widespread public attention. When the Florida court overturned Yurko’s conviction and cited the new medical evidence, it signaled that these cases deserved closer scientific scrutiny.

The Yurko case has been frequently referenced in discussions about the need for more comprehensive medical evaluations, multidisciplinary review, and a deeper understanding of infant physiology. It helped open the door for courts to revisit other SBS convictions. And, it contributed to the shift toward recognizing that the “triad” alone cannot definitively determine the cause of an infant’s injury or death.

The Association of American Physicians and Surgeons has an extensive list of online documents and reports on SBS, including the Yurko case. See here for a listing. 

A new legal assessment process

Since Alan’s release, courts began reviewing old cases. Reportedly, more than 200 convictions worldwide have now been overturned or re-examined because earlier medical testimony had overstated the certainty of shaken baby syndrome.

Groups like the Innocence Network continue to identify cases where families were wrongly accused. Modern research shows that the three symptoms originally thought to be due to abusive shaking—brain swelling, bleeding around the brain, and retinal hemorrhages—can appear in many non-abusive situations.

These other situations include:

• Birth trauma that re-bleeds later
• Short accidental falls
• Infections like meningitis
• Genetic or metabolic disorders
• Bleeding or clotting problems
• Episodes of low oxygen
• Rare inflammatory responses
• Connective tissue disorders

Studies have also shown that shaking alone is unlikely to generate the forces needed for the damage noted, unless there are also signs of major external trauma. This doesn’t mean abuse never happens. It means the triad alone does not prove it.

What should someone do if accused of SBS? 

Dealing with false accusations of killing a baby while also grieving the loss of that child is emotionally overwhelming. It’s important to seek legal help, additional advice, and support.  Here are some key steps:

1. Seek out an experienced attorney immediately
2. Request a comprehensive medical review
3. Obtain the baby’s complete medical and birth records
4. Avoid discussing the case on social media or in public
5. Consider reaching out to support organizations

Get legal and case support

Organizations and select attorneys are experienced in this field. Take advantage of their expertise and don’t try to go it alone. 

• Innocence Network
• Center for Integrity in Forensic Sciences (CIFS)
•  National Child Abuse Defense & Resource Center
• Local defense attorneys experienced in SBS cases (Many Innocence Network affiliates can provide referrals.)

Reach out for help right away, or if you can’t manage that, have friends and loved ones start navigating the system. Even though the science is changing, innocent people are still being charged with murder using the original SBS criteria.