Inflicted head injury: Future directions and prevention

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

6 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Although described only a quarter century ago, progress in this area is rapid and increasing at an accelerated rate. As a group, neurosurgeons, and particularly pediatric neurosurgeons, potentially have a lot to offer, both in the hospital, the courtroom, and the laboratory. As practitioners who see large numbers of brain injuries, both accidental and inflicted, they can provide a unique perspective to child abuse colleagues; unfortunately, neurosurgeons shy away from doing so for a variety of reasons: (1) they are too busy with clinical practice and cannot afford to devote the (largely uncompensated) time involved in keeping up with the literature on the subject, reviewing the case files in detail, and testifying in court; (2) they are reluctant to take the stand and potentially be subjected to the ridicule (and even abuse) hurled by attorneys in the defense of their clients; (3) they are uncertain in their minds about the validity of the evidence in some cases, especially when the evidence is not iron-clad; and (4) they perhaps fear later retribution from people they have helped convict for these crimes. Whatever the reasons, neurosurgeons need to be more involved in these cases and to be both knowledgeable and reasonable in assessments of the cause of injury. In no other area of neurosurgery is the truth so critical, because the lives of the infants for whom they care, and those who might be accused unjustly of perpetrating a crime that they did not commit, hang in the balance. Neurosurgeons must be unerringly accurate in obtaining and recording clinical information and physical findings. When asked, they must not shy away from providing an answer, but only if well enough versed in the literature to be capable of so doing, because to provide false or inaccurate information is a disservice; to do so may condemn an innocent person to prison, or an innocent infant to death. If there is uncertainty, it is probably in the best interests of the child to have the case analyzed and represented by an expert who knows the literature well; there are many excellent and objective child abuse experts who can do this. Finally, the author believes that this should be a much more active area of research for neurosurgeons. Although there has been much progress, there are also a number of uncertainties that remain to be answered, only a few of which have been touched on here. There is much to be done in this important field; neurosurgeons must concentrate on finding adequate answers for those questions that remain.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)247-257
Number of pages11
JournalNeurosurgery clinics of North America
Volume13
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2002

Fingerprint

Craniocerebral Trauma
Child Abuse
Crime
Uncertainty
Infant Care
Hospital Laboratories
Lawyers
Prisons
Midazolam
Neurosurgery
Direction compound
Neurosurgeons
Brain Injuries
Fear
Iron
Pediatrics
Wounds and Injuries
Research

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Surgery
  • Clinical Neurology

Cite this

@article{c6446042c5bb4249868e13de48b9581e,
title = "Inflicted head injury: Future directions and prevention",
abstract = "Although described only a quarter century ago, progress in this area is rapid and increasing at an accelerated rate. As a group, neurosurgeons, and particularly pediatric neurosurgeons, potentially have a lot to offer, both in the hospital, the courtroom, and the laboratory. As practitioners who see large numbers of brain injuries, both accidental and inflicted, they can provide a unique perspective to child abuse colleagues; unfortunately, neurosurgeons shy away from doing so for a variety of reasons: (1) they are too busy with clinical practice and cannot afford to devote the (largely uncompensated) time involved in keeping up with the literature on the subject, reviewing the case files in detail, and testifying in court; (2) they are reluctant to take the stand and potentially be subjected to the ridicule (and even abuse) hurled by attorneys in the defense of their clients; (3) they are uncertain in their minds about the validity of the evidence in some cases, especially when the evidence is not iron-clad; and (4) they perhaps fear later retribution from people they have helped convict for these crimes. Whatever the reasons, neurosurgeons need to be more involved in these cases and to be both knowledgeable and reasonable in assessments of the cause of injury. In no other area of neurosurgery is the truth so critical, because the lives of the infants for whom they care, and those who might be accused unjustly of perpetrating a crime that they did not commit, hang in the balance. Neurosurgeons must be unerringly accurate in obtaining and recording clinical information and physical findings. When asked, they must not shy away from providing an answer, but only if well enough versed in the literature to be capable of so doing, because to provide false or inaccurate information is a disservice; to do so may condemn an innocent person to prison, or an innocent infant to death. If there is uncertainty, it is probably in the best interests of the child to have the case analyzed and represented by an expert who knows the literature well; there are many excellent and objective child abuse experts who can do this. Finally, the author believes that this should be a much more active area of research for neurosurgeons. Although there has been much progress, there are also a number of uncertainties that remain to be answered, only a few of which have been touched on here. There is much to be done in this important field; neurosurgeons must concentrate on finding adequate answers for those questions that remain.",
author = "Mark Dias",
year = "2002",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/S1042-3680(01)00009-2",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "13",
pages = "247--257",
journal = "Neurosurgery Clinics of North America",
issn = "1042-3680",
publisher = "W.B. Saunders Ltd",
number = "2",

}

Inflicted head injury : Future directions and prevention. / Dias, Mark.

In: Neurosurgery clinics of North America, Vol. 13, No. 2, 01.01.2002, p. 247-257.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

TY - JOUR

T1 - Inflicted head injury

T2 - Future directions and prevention

AU - Dias, Mark

PY - 2002/1/1

Y1 - 2002/1/1

N2 - Although described only a quarter century ago, progress in this area is rapid and increasing at an accelerated rate. As a group, neurosurgeons, and particularly pediatric neurosurgeons, potentially have a lot to offer, both in the hospital, the courtroom, and the laboratory. As practitioners who see large numbers of brain injuries, both accidental and inflicted, they can provide a unique perspective to child abuse colleagues; unfortunately, neurosurgeons shy away from doing so for a variety of reasons: (1) they are too busy with clinical practice and cannot afford to devote the (largely uncompensated) time involved in keeping up with the literature on the subject, reviewing the case files in detail, and testifying in court; (2) they are reluctant to take the stand and potentially be subjected to the ridicule (and even abuse) hurled by attorneys in the defense of their clients; (3) they are uncertain in their minds about the validity of the evidence in some cases, especially when the evidence is not iron-clad; and (4) they perhaps fear later retribution from people they have helped convict for these crimes. Whatever the reasons, neurosurgeons need to be more involved in these cases and to be both knowledgeable and reasonable in assessments of the cause of injury. In no other area of neurosurgery is the truth so critical, because the lives of the infants for whom they care, and those who might be accused unjustly of perpetrating a crime that they did not commit, hang in the balance. Neurosurgeons must be unerringly accurate in obtaining and recording clinical information and physical findings. When asked, they must not shy away from providing an answer, but only if well enough versed in the literature to be capable of so doing, because to provide false or inaccurate information is a disservice; to do so may condemn an innocent person to prison, or an innocent infant to death. If there is uncertainty, it is probably in the best interests of the child to have the case analyzed and represented by an expert who knows the literature well; there are many excellent and objective child abuse experts who can do this. Finally, the author believes that this should be a much more active area of research for neurosurgeons. Although there has been much progress, there are also a number of uncertainties that remain to be answered, only a few of which have been touched on here. There is much to be done in this important field; neurosurgeons must concentrate on finding adequate answers for those questions that remain.

AB - Although described only a quarter century ago, progress in this area is rapid and increasing at an accelerated rate. As a group, neurosurgeons, and particularly pediatric neurosurgeons, potentially have a lot to offer, both in the hospital, the courtroom, and the laboratory. As practitioners who see large numbers of brain injuries, both accidental and inflicted, they can provide a unique perspective to child abuse colleagues; unfortunately, neurosurgeons shy away from doing so for a variety of reasons: (1) they are too busy with clinical practice and cannot afford to devote the (largely uncompensated) time involved in keeping up with the literature on the subject, reviewing the case files in detail, and testifying in court; (2) they are reluctant to take the stand and potentially be subjected to the ridicule (and even abuse) hurled by attorneys in the defense of their clients; (3) they are uncertain in their minds about the validity of the evidence in some cases, especially when the evidence is not iron-clad; and (4) they perhaps fear later retribution from people they have helped convict for these crimes. Whatever the reasons, neurosurgeons need to be more involved in these cases and to be both knowledgeable and reasonable in assessments of the cause of injury. In no other area of neurosurgery is the truth so critical, because the lives of the infants for whom they care, and those who might be accused unjustly of perpetrating a crime that they did not commit, hang in the balance. Neurosurgeons must be unerringly accurate in obtaining and recording clinical information and physical findings. When asked, they must not shy away from providing an answer, but only if well enough versed in the literature to be capable of so doing, because to provide false or inaccurate information is a disservice; to do so may condemn an innocent person to prison, or an innocent infant to death. If there is uncertainty, it is probably in the best interests of the child to have the case analyzed and represented by an expert who knows the literature well; there are many excellent and objective child abuse experts who can do this. Finally, the author believes that this should be a much more active area of research for neurosurgeons. Although there has been much progress, there are also a number of uncertainties that remain to be answered, only a few of which have been touched on here. There is much to be done in this important field; neurosurgeons must concentrate on finding adequate answers for those questions that remain.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0035990637&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0035990637&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/S1042-3680(01)00009-2

DO - 10.1016/S1042-3680(01)00009-2

M3 - Review article

C2 - 12391709

AN - SCOPUS:0035990637

VL - 13

SP - 247

EP - 257

JO - Neurosurgery Clinics of North America

JF - Neurosurgery Clinics of North America

SN - 1042-3680

IS - 2

ER -