In a decision that recognized some but not all of the problems with the judgement last spring against Dr. Waney Squier, the British high court has reinstated her right to practice medicine and refuted the tribunal’s findings that she had acted “dishonestly.”
The development has inspired a surge of coverage and commentary. If you want to show support for Dr. Squier, you can go give a thumbs-up to several on-line letters to the BMJ written in her defense:
- Two letters, from Michael Birnbaum QC and Dr. Jennian Geddes, at http://www.bmj.com/content/355/bmj.i5985/rapid-responses
- A letter from Dr. Irene Scheimberg and 250 other professionals, http://www.bmj.com/content/352/bmj.i1768/rr-6
- A letter from Dr. David Ayoub, http://www.bmj.com/content/352/bmj.i1768/rr-7
The story has also been covered by the BBC (“Shaken baby evidence doctor reinstated“), The Justice Gap (“High court finds “‘serious irregularity’ in decision to strike off Waney Squier“), and The Times (“Why I denied shaken baby syndrome“—you can access the entire story by registering your email address and some other information).
Meanwhile, as reported on the “In the News” page on this site, a panel of Swedish scientists has declared shaken baby syndrome unproven, generating a story in New Scientist. A New York state appeals court has reaffirmed the reversal of the murder conviction of child care provider René Bailey, convicted in 2001 by medical testimony that a child cannot die from a short household fall, but freed in 2014 after an appeal by pro bono attorneys.