Meadow's law

Last updated

Meadow's Law is a now-discredited [1] [2] [3] legal concept once used to adjudicate cases involving multiple instances of sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS), also known as crib or cot deaths, linked to a single caregiver. Due to the rarity and often inexplicable nature of these deaths, the law posited that "onesudden infant death is a tragedy, two is suspicious and three is murder until proved otherwise." Now recognized as fundamentally flawed and based on misunderstanding of statistics, Meadow's Law has been heavily criticized for leading to wrongful convictions and accusations. [4]

Contents

History

The name is derived from the controversial British paediatrician Roy Meadow, who until 2003 was seen by many as "Britain's most eminent paediatrician" and leading expert on child abuse. [5] Meadow's reputation went into decline with a series of legal reverses for his theories, and in July 2005 he was struck off the medical register by the General Medical Council for tendering misleading evidence. Meadow's licence was reinstated in February 2006 by a London court.

Meadow attributes many unexplained infant deaths to the disorder or condition in mothers called Munchausen syndrome by proxy. According to this diagnosis some parents, especially mothers, harm or even kill their children as a means of calling attention to themselves. Its existence has been confirmed by cases where parents have been caught on video surveillance actively harming their children, [6] but its frequency is subject to debate as Meadow claimed to have destroyed the original data which he used to substantiate the law. [7]

As a result of the 1993 trial of Beverley Allitt, a paediatric nurse convicted of killing four children under her care and injuring five others, Meadow's ideas gained ascendancy in British child protection circles, and mothers were convicted of murder on the basis of his expert testimony. [8] Thousands of children[ citation needed ] were removed from their parents and taken into care or fostered out because they were deemed to be 'at risk'. From 2003, however, the tide of opinion turned: a number of high-profile acquittals cast doubt on the validity of 'Meadow's Law'. Several convictions were reversed, and many more came under review.

Attribution to the Di Maios

In a note to his mathematical analysis of the Sally Clark case, Professor Ray Hill endorses a claim that Meadow did not originate the rule:

Professor Meadow did not originate the law. It appears to be attributable to D. J. and V. J. M. Di Maio, two American pathologists who state in their book: [9] It is the authors' opinion that while a second SIDS death from a mother is improbable, it is possible and she should be given the benefit of the doubt. A third case, in our opinion, is not possible and is a case of homicide. It is clear that the statement is the authors' opinion. It is not a conclusion reached by analysis of their observations; no supportive data are presented and there are no illustrative case histories, or references to earlier publications. This is in striking contrast with the rest of the book which is replete with illustrative case histories and cites many references throughout. A recent examination of Meadow's own contributions to the medical literature has likewise failed to uncover supportive pathological evidence or references to it

— Dr Glynn Walters [10] , Letter to Professor Ray Hill, published in Multiple sudden infant deaths – coincidence or beyond coincidence? [11]

The precept was published in the United States by DiMaio and DiMaio in 1989, without mention of Meadow. In ABC of Child Abuse, first published in the same year, Meadow wrote his formulation:

'One sudden infant death is a tragedy, two is suspicious and three is murder until proved otherwise' is a crude aphorism but a sensible working rule for anyone encountering these tragedies

— Dr Roy Meadow, ABC of Child Abuse [4]

The formula is "clearly fallacious" according to Bob Carpenter, Professor of Medical Statistics at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, an expert witness in some of the trials where infant cot deaths were prosecuted as homicides. [12]

Criticisms

Critics of Meadow's law state that it is based on a fundamental misunderstanding of statistics, particularly relating to probability, likelihood, and statistical independence.

At the trial in 1999 of solicitor Sally Clark, accused of murdering her two sons, Meadow testified that the odds against two such deaths happening naturally was 73,000,000:1, a figure which he obtained by squaring the observed ratio of births to cot-deaths in affluent non-smoking families (approximately 8,500:1).

This caused an uproar among professional statisticians, whose criticisms were twofold:

The prosecutor's fallacy

Firstly, Meadow was accused of espousing the so-called prosecutor's fallacy in which the probability of "cause given effect" (i.e. the true likelihood of a suspect's innocence) is confused with that of "effect given cause" (the likelihood that innocence will result in the observed double-cot-death). In reality, these quantities can only be equated when the likelihood of the alternative hypothesis, in this case murder, is close to certainty. Since murder (and especially double murder) is itself a rare event, the probability of Clark's innocence was certainly far greater than Meadow's figure suggested.

An equivalent error is to accuse anybody who wins a lottery of fraud.

Statistical independence

The second criticism was that Meadow's calculation had assumed that cot deaths within a single family were statistically independent events, governed by a probability common to the entire affluent non-smoking population. No account had been taken of conditions specific to individual families (such as a hypothesised "cot death gene") which might make some more vulnerable than others. The occurrence of one cot-death makes it likely that such conditions exist, and the probability of subsequent deaths is therefore greater than the group average (estimates are mostly in the region of 1:100).

Combining these corrections with estimates of successive murder probabilities by affluent non-smokers, Mathematics Professor Ray Hill found that the probability of Clark's guilt could be as low as 10% (based solely on the fact of two unexplained child deaths, and before any other evidence was considered). [11] In any case, a legal verdict is not to be rendered on the basis of statistics; Hill wrote, "guilt must be proved on the basis of forensic and other evidence and not on the basis of these statistics alone. My own personal view that she is innocent is based on my subjective assessment of all the aspects". [13]

See also

Related Research Articles

In a legal dispute, one party has the burden of proof to show that they are correct, while the other party has no such burden and is presumed to be correct. The burden of proof requires a party to produce evidence to establish the truth of facts needed to satisfy all the required legal elements of the dispute.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">SIDS</span> Sudden unexplained death of a child who is less than one year of age

Sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS), sometimes known as cot death or crib death, is the sudden unexplained death of a child of less than one year of age. Diagnosis requires that the death remain unexplained even after a thorough autopsy and detailed death scene investigation. SIDS usually occurs during sleep. Typically death occurs between the hours of midnight and 9:00a.m. There is usually no noise or evidence of struggle. SIDS remains the leading cause of infant mortality in Western countries, constituting half of all post-neonatal deaths.

Sally Clark was an English solicitor who, in November 1999, became the victim of a miscarriage of justice when she was found guilty of the murder of her two infant sons. Clark's first son died in December 1996 within a few weeks of his birth, and her second son died in similar circumstances in January 1998. A month later, Clark was arrested and tried for both deaths. The defence argued that the children had died of sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS). The prosecution case relied on flawed statistical evidence presented by paediatrician Roy Meadow, who testified that the chance of two children from an affluent family suffering SIDS was 1 in 73 million. He had arrived at this figure by squaring his estimate of a chance of 1 in 8500 of an individual SIDS death in similar circumstances. The Royal Statistical Society later issued a statement arguing that there was no statistical basis for Meadow's claim, and expressed concern at the "misuse of statistics in the courts".

Sir Samuel Roy Meadow is a British retired paediatrician who facilitated several wrongful convictions of mothers for murdering their babies. He was awarded the Donald Paterson prize of the British Paediatric Association in 1968 for a study of the effects on parents of having a child in hospital. In 1977, he published an academic paper describing a phenomenon dubbed Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy (MSbP). In 1980 he was awarded a professorial chair in paediatrics at St James's University Hospital, Leeds, and in 1998, he was knighted for services to child health.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Base rate fallacy</span> Logic error due to ignoring the base rate

The base rate fallacy, also called base rate neglect or base rate bias, is a type of fallacy in which people tend to ignore the base rate in favor of the individuating information. For example, if someone hears that a friend is very shy and quiet, they might think the friend is more likely to be a librarian than a salesperson. However, there are far more salespeople than librarians overall - hence making it more likely that their friend is actually a salesperson, even if a greater proportion of librarians fit the description of being shy and quiet. Base rate neglect is a specific form of the more general extension neglect.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Lindy Chamberlain-Creighton</span> Australian wrongly convicted of murder

Alice Lynne "Lindy" Chamberlain-Creighton is a New Zealand–born Australian woman who was falsely convicted in one of Australia's most publicised and notorious murder trials and miscarriages of justice. Accused of killing her nine-week-old daughter, Azaria, while camping at Uluru in 1980, she maintained that she saw a dingo leave the tent where Azaria was sleeping. The prosecution case was circumstantial and depended upon deeply flawed forensic evidence.

David Southall is a retired British paediatrician who specialised in international maternal and child hospital healthcare and in child protection. He worked in Bosnia and Herzegovina in 1993-1995, for which he received an OBE in 1999. In 1995 he set up the charity Maternal and Childhealth Advocacy International (MCAI), of which he remains a trustee as of 2023. His child protection work and research into Munchausen syndrome by proxy attracted controversy and led to conflict with the General Medical Council.

The misuse of Statistics can trick the observer who does not understand them into believing something other than what the data shows or what is really 'true'. That is, a misuse of statistics occurs when an argument uses statistics to assert a falsehood. In some cases, the misuse may be accidental. In others, it is purposeful and for the gain of the perpetrator. Often, when the statistics are false or misapplied, this constitutes a statistical fallacy.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Angela Cannings</span> British woman, wrongfully convicted of murder

Angela Cannings was wrongfully convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment in the UK in 2002 for the murder of her seven-week-old son, Jason, who died in 1991, and of her 18-week-old son Matthew, who died in 1999. Her first child, Gemma, died of Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS) in 1989 at the age of 13 weeks, although she was never charged in connection with Gemma's death.

Factitious disorder imposed on another (FDIA), also known as fabricated or induced illness by carers (FII) and first named as Munchausen syndrome by proxy (MSbP) after Munchausen syndrome, is a mental health disorder in which a caregiver creates the appearance of health problems in another person – typically their child, and sometimes (rarely) when an adult falsely simulates an illness or health issues in another adult partner. This might include altering test samples, injuring a child, falsifying diagnoses, or portraying the appearance of health issues through contrived photographs, videos, and other ‘evidence’ of the supposed illness. The caregiver or partner then continues to present the person as being sick or injured, convincing others of the condition/s and their own suffering as the caregiver. Permanent injury or even death of the victim can occur as a result of the disorder and the caretaker’s actions. The behaviour is generally thought to be motivated by the caregiver or partner seeking the sympathy or attention of other people and/or the wider public.

Kathleen Megan Folbigg is an Australian woman who was wrongfully convicted in 2003 of murdering her four infant children. She was pardoned in 2023 after 20 years in jail following a long campaign for justice by her supporters, and had her convictions overturned on appeal a few months later.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Lucia de Berk case</span> Dutch miscarriage of justice case

The Lucia de Berk case was a miscarriage of justice in the Netherlands in which a Dutch licensed paediatric nurse was wrongfully convicted of murder. In 2003, Lucia de Berk was sentenced to life imprisonment, for which no parole is possible under Dutch law, for four murders and three attempted murders of patients under her care. In 2004, after an appeal, she was convicted of seven murders and three attempted murders.

Trupti Patel is a qualified British pharmacist from Maidenhead in Berkshire, England, who was acquitted in 2003 of murdering three of her children, Amar, Jamie, and Mia.

Donna Anthony is a British woman from Somerset who was jailed in 1998 after being convicted of the murder of her two babies. She was cleared and freed after having spent more than six years in prison.

<i>Cherished</i> (film) 2005 British TV drama

Cherished is a single British true crime drama, written by acclaimed screenwriter Gwyneth Hughes, that first broadcast on BBC One on 22 February 2005. Starring Sarah Lancashire as protagonist Angela Cannings, the drama is based on Cannings' wrongful conviction for the deaths of two of her infant children, Jason and Matthew. Directed by Robin Sheppard, the drama also stars Timothy Spall as Angela's husband Terry, Emma Cunniffe as Angela's sister Claire; and Ian McNeice as her defence barrister; Bill Bache. The drama was a joint production between the BBC's drama and current affairs wings. 5.18 million viewers tuned in for the initial broadcast. Similarly to other true-life BBC productions of the time; Cherished has never been released on DVD.

Vincent Joseph Martin Di Maio was an American pathologist and an expert on the subject of gunshot wounds. Born in Brooklyn, New York, he was a board-certified anatomic, clinical and forensic pathologist, and a private forensic pathology consultant.

Carola Garcia de Vinuesa is a Spanish doctor, scientist, and professor. She is Royal Society Wolfson Fellow and Senior Group Leader at the Francis Crick Institute in London, and at the John Curtin School of Medical Research in Canberra. She is a winner of the Australian Science Minister's Prize for Life Scientist of the Year and the Gottschalk Medal.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">John Emery (paediatrician)</span>

John Lewis Emery was a British-born paediatric pathologist and emeritus professor at the University of Sheffield. Emery was most notable for being one of the founding fathers of paediatric pathology in the country, and for conducting research into haematology, developmental anatomy, congenital deformities, particularly hydrocephalus, and was probably Britain's leading scientist in the subject of unexplained infant deaths, or cot death.

Math on Trial: How Numbers Get Used and Abused in the Courtroom is a book on mathematical and statistical reasoning in legal argumentation, for a popular audience. It was written by American mathematician Leila Schneps and her daughter, French mathematics educator Coralie Colmez, and published in 2013 by Basic Books.

Maxine Robinson is an English woman who murdered all three of her children between 1989 and 1993. Convicted of murdering two of the children in 1995, Robinson unsuccessfully appealed against her convictions, claiming their deaths had been natural. However, in 2004, she admitted killing them and further revealed that she had, in 1989, murdered her first-born child, whose death until then had been considered a SIDS. Her trial judge observed that Robinson's case was a "timely" reminder that "not all mothers in prison for killing their children are the victims of miscarriages of justice."

References

  1. ↑ Mitchell, Joshua (2 May 2021). "The Prosecutor's Fallacy: How flawed statistical evidence has been used to jail innocent people". Cherwell.
  2. ↑ Ritchie, Hannah (7 June 2023). "Kathleen Folbigg: Misogyny helped jail her, science freed her". BBC News.
  3. ↑ Lane, Isabelle (5 June 2023). "Kathleen Folbigg: Inside the case that gripped the nation". SBS News. Retrieved 30 November 2023.
  4. 1 2 Gene find casts doubt on double 'cot death' murders. The Observer; 15 July 2001
  5. ↑ Knight, Sam (15 July 2005). "Professor Sir Roy Meadow struck off". The Times. London.[ dead link ]
  6. ↑ Samuels, M. P.; McClaughlin, W.; Jacobson, R. R.; Poets, C. F.; Southall, D. P. (1992). "Fourteen cases of imposed upper airway obstruction". Archives of Disease in Childhood. 67 (2). BMJ Publishing Group: 162–170. doi:10.1136/adc.67.2.162. PMC   1793411 . PMID   1543373.
  7. ↑ Daily Telegraph [ dead link ]
  8. ↑ "Timeline: Sir Roy Meadow". The Guardian. 15 July 2005. Retrieved 12 January 2019.
  9. ↑ Dominic J. DiMaio and Vincent J. M. DiMaio, Forensic Pathology, Elsevier, St. Louis MO, 1989, p. 291
  10. ↑ Brown, A. (30 April 2010). "Top doctor casts doubt on conviction of waiter Mohammad Ullah for killing baby stepson". The Daily Record . Retrieved 2010-06-12.
  11. 1 2 Hill, R. (2004). "Multiple sudden infant deaths – coincidence or beyond coincidence?" (PDF). Paediatric and Perinatal Epidemiology. 18 (5): 322–323. doi:10.1111/j.1365-3016.2004.00560.x. PMID   15367318.
  12. ↑ The Health Report: 24 January 2005 - Repeat Sudden Unexpected and Unexplained Infant Deaths
  13. ↑ Hill, R. "Cot Death or Murder". www.docstoc.com. p. 6. Retrieved 2010-06-13.
  14. ↑ Hollingsworth, Julia (March 20, 2021). "Genetics may free a woman convicted of killing her 4 babies and help other parents explain the unexplainable". CNN. Cable News Network. Archived from the original on 2021-03-20. Retrieved 2021-03-20.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.