by
Charles Pragnell
Child
protection services in Britain are once again facing a major crisis,
on this occasion brought about by the conduct of two eminent paediatricians,
Professor Sir Roy Meadow and Professor David Southall, who have
given evidence in child abuse and child murder cases throughout
the world, including America, Australia, and New Zealand.
Britain’s
child protection services have faced many similar crises in the
past thirty years from the infamous child sexual abuse scandals
in Cleveland in the north east of England in 1987 to the scandals
from allegations of satanic ritual abuse in the Orkney Isles,
Nottingham, and Rochdale in the early 1990s, when hundreds of
children and their families were devastated by allegations of
child abuse which proved to be completely ill-founded. However,
not only have there been these incidents of false allegations,
but there have been over 40 judicial inquiries into incidents
where children have died whilst under the care and supervision
of social workers.
The
current crisis arose from the evidence given to courts by Professor
Meadow and Professor Southall in cases involving allegations that
mothers had murdered several of their children.
The
first case involved a young mother, Sally Clark, who was a practising
solicitor and who was alleged to have murdered her two small children,
Christopher and Harry. Professor Meadow told the jury at Sally
Clark’s trial that the chances of two cases of Sudden Infant
Deaths [SIDS] or cot death occurring in the same family were “73
million to one” and also gave the opinion that the odds
of such an occurrence were similar to backing the winner of the
Grand National for four consecutive years at odds of 80 to 1.
Professor Meadow quoted his own theory that “One cot death
is a tragedy, two is suspicious, and three is murder”.
After
the trial, at which Sally Clark was found guilty, this evidence
was challenged by other child abuse experts and the Royal College
of Statisticians and was completely discredited.
After serving three years of her sentence, Sally Clark was released
on appeal and Professor Meadow’s evidence was described
by the Appeal Court Judges as “manifestly wrong and grossly
misleading”.
Another
mother, Angela Cannings, was also subsequently released on appeal
after serving eighteen months in prison and the U.K. Attorney
General ordered the cases of 298 other mothers convicted on such
evidence to be reviewed by the courts. Several other mothers have
already been released and other cases are under consideration.
The cases of many thousands of children removed into state care
and adoption over the last fifteen years on the basis of Meadow’s
theories are also being re-examined.
Other
paediatricians were encouraged by Meadow to ‘think dirty’
in regard to child deaths and that two or more deaths of infants
in a family was “murder unless proven otherwise” which
placed the onus on the defendant mother to prove her innocence.
Courts were told that denial by the mother of causing injury to
the infant was seen as proof of guilt so mothers faced a lose-lose
situation.
In
July 2005 Professor Meadow appeared before a disciplinary hearing
by the General Medical Council (GMC), the registration body for
doctors in the U.K., for serious professional misconduct and has
been struck off the medical register.
Professor
Southall also became involved in the Clark case when he alleged,
on the basis only of watching a television documentary concerning
the case, that the children had been murdered by Sally Clark’s
husband, Stephen Clark, and that their remaining child should
be removed into state care. Professor Southall has also faced
a disciplinary hearing by the GMC where his actions were described
as “inappropriate, irresponsible, and an abuse of his professional
position”. He was found guilty of serious professional misconduct
and barred from any involvement in child protection work for three
years. He faces seven other complaints to the GMC in coming months.
Another
of Professor Meadow’s child abuse theories, which he termed
Munchausen Syndrome By Proxy and which has been widely used in
Courts around the world, has also been totally discredited following
these court hearings and has been declared as non-existent for
legal purposes following the adoption by the English legal system
of a ruling by the Queensland Supreme Court earlier in 2005.
The
Appeal Courts in the U.K. are also re-examining several cases
of parents being imprisoned following allegations of child murder
based on the theory of Shaken Baby Syndrome [SBS] where it is
alleged a parent shakes a baby so violently that serious harm
is caused to the baby’s brain and internal bleeding occurs
and leads to the baby’s death. This theory was first advanced
in the 1970s and quickly gained credence among paediatricians
and child abuse experts although it was little more than speculation
and had no scientific basis. However, in the succeeding thirty
years it has led to many cases of allegations against parents
leading to their incarceration, probably the most well-known being
the case of Louise Woodward, the British nanny imprisoned in the
U.S.A following allegations of baby-shaking.
New
research has thrown serious doubt on the causes of these symptoms
and it is now believed by medial experts that a fall from a sofa
or table is sufficient to cause such injuries to an infant and
genetics, vaccines, severe allergies, environmental toxins and
certain prescribed medications may also need to be taken into
account as possible causes or contributory factors.
These
events in Britain have very considerable implications for many
other countries and the rulings of British High Courts regarding
these cases of alleged child murder and child abuse and the actions
of the British Government in ordering reviews of these cases indicate
that there are increasingly strong arguments for a review of such
cases in those other countries.
Charles
Pragnell is an Expert Defence Witness and Child Protection and
Child/Family Advocate.
Contact
Details :
816
Esplanade
Mornington
Victoria 3931
Australia
(03)
5975 6745
