Opinion ID: 1988843
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: The Battered Child Syndrome

Text: The battered child syndrome has an earlier origin and had a different initial purpose. It was first described by Drs. C. Henry Kempe, Frederic N. Silverman, Brandt F. Steele, William Droegemueller, and Henry K. Silver in The Battered Child Syndrome, 181 JAMA 105 (1962) as a clinical condition in young children who have received serious physical abuse. The syndrome, they argued, was relevant in establishing that certain kinds of injuries suffered by young children were the result of child abuse rather than being accidental, and they urged that the syndrome should be considered in any child exhibiting evidence of fracture of any bone, subdural hematoma, failure to thrive, soft tissue swellings or skin bruising, in any child who dies suddenly, or where the degree and type of injury is at variance with the history given regarding the occurrence of the trauma. Id. The syndrome posited by the authors had nothing whatever to do with a self-defense argument by a parent-killing child, but focused entirely on identifying child abuse. The authors state that [t]he BATTERED-CHILD SYNDROME is a term used by us to characterize a clinical condition in young children who have received serious physical abuse, generally from a parent or foster parent and that it is frequently not recognized or, if diagnosed, is inadequately handled by the physician because of hesitation to bring the case to the attention of the proper authorities. Id. at 105. They observed that [t]he battered child syndrome may occur at any age, but, in general, the affected children are younger than 3 years. Id, at 105. Clinical manifestations of the syndrome, they said, vary widely from those cases in which the trauma is very mild and is often unsuspected and unrecognized, to those who exhibit the most florid evidence of injury to the soft tissues and skeleton. Id. They advised that [p]sychiatric knowledge pertaining to the problem of the battered child is meager, and the literature on the subject is almost nonexistent. Id. at 106. We recognized that function of the syndrome in Bowers v. State, 283 Md. 115, 118, 389 A.2d 341, 343-344 (1978), a child abuse case. See also John E. Myers and Linda E. Carter, Proof of Physical Child Abuse, 53 Mo. L.Rev. 189 (1988). Application of this syndrome to a self-defense argument in parricide cases [9] would seem to be more a lateral extension of the battered spouse syndrome than a direct expansion of the battered child syndrome described by Dr. Kempe et al. in the JAMA article. [10] See Jahnke v. State, 682 P.2d 991, 996 (Wyo.1984) (noting that while cited cases involved homicides committed by women who were perceived as being victims of the battered spouse syndrome, there is no reason to distinguish a child who is a victim of abuse); State v. Janes, 121 Wash.2d 220, 850 P.2d 495, 502 (1993) (Given the close relationship between the battered woman and battered child syndromes, the same reasons that justify admission of the former apply with equal force to the latter.); Jamie H. Sacks, A New Age of Understanding: Allowing Self-Defense Claims for Battered Children who Kill their Abusers, 10 J. Contemp. Health L. & Pol'y 349, 351 (1994) (Courts are slowly recognizing that women and children should be treated similarly when they murder after years, or a lifetime, of family violence.); Steven R. Hicks, Admissibility of Expert Testimony on the Psychology of the Battered Child, 11 L. & Psychol. Rev. 103, 106 (1987); Diana J. Ensign, Links Between the Battered Woman Syndrome and the Battered Child Syndrome: An Argument for Consistent Standards in the Admissibility of Expert Testimony in Family Abuse Cases, 36 Wayne L.Rev. 1619 (1990); Joelle A. Moreno, Killing Daddy: Developing a Self-Defense Strategy for the Abused Child, 137 U. Pa. L.Rev. 1281 (1989); Kristi Baldwin, Battered Child Syndrome as a Sword and a Shield, 29 Am. J.Crim. L. 59 (2001). Support for this view comes not just from brief general statements declaring the two syndromes analogous, but also from ascribing to the form of battered child syndrome sought to be applied in parricide cases at least three of the elements found in the battered spouse syndromerepeated physical abuse, the learned helplessness that, in some circumstances, may account for the failure of the victim to strike back during a confrontation or to take other steps to avoid the problem, [11] and a heightened vigilance and sensitivity to signs of impending violence that would not likely be apparent to anyone else. Hicks points out: Battered children, unlike those children who are not abused, live in an environment where abuse is commonplace and may occur at anytime with or without warning. Battered children, therefore often appear to be what researchers have termed as `hypervigilant.' Such a hypervigilant child is acutely aware of his or her environment and remains on the alert for any signs of danger, events to which the unabused child may not attend. The child's history of abusive encounters with his or her battering parent leads him or her to be overly cautious and to perceive danger in subtle changes in the parent's expressions or mannerisms. Such `hypermonitoring' behavior as it has been termed, means the child becomes sensitized to these subtle changes and constantly `monitors' the environment (particularly the abuser) for those signals which suggest danger is imminent. Hicks, supra, 11 L. & Psychol. Rev. 103-04. This is virtually identical to the heightened awareness possessed by battered women, as described by Bochnak, supra, and recognized by the Oklahoma court in Bechtel v. State, supra, 840 P.2d at 12. There appears to be one important difference between battered spouse killings and battered child killings, however; whereas, as noted, most killings by women claiming the effect of battered spouse syndrome occur in confrontational settings, most killings by abused children occur in non-confrontational settings, in ways that suggest an ambush. See Paul A. Mones, WHEN A CHILD KILLS: ABUSED CHILDREN WHO KILL THEIR PARENTS 14 (1993). Mones writes: Despite the passivity that has marked these children's lives, the parricides are frequently carried out in a brutal, calculating manner. The homicides typically occur when the parent is in his least defensible position, thus increasing the child's chance of success. The circumstances of the killing, in fact, often suggest an ambush, with the parent sleeping, coming in the front door, watching TV, or cooking dinner with their back turned when attacked. Rarely is the parent ever killed while beating, or for that matter, yelling at the child. The vast majority of perpetrators concoct some plan and often discuss their intentions with friends days or weeks before the actual killing. A particularly disturbing characteristic of these homicides is what police refer to as the `overkill factor.' Only rarely is the parent killed with a single clean shot; most often the child will shoot, club, or stab the parent numerous times. Adolescents, in particular, Mones reports, are particularly susceptible to lashing out against abuse. See also Paul Mones, Parricide: Opening a Window Through the Defense of Teens Who Kill, 7 Stan. L. & Pol. Rev. 61, 63 (Winter, 1995-96). [12] As we shall discuss, this setting severely strains, and in many cases will rupture, the relationship between the syndrome and the defense of self-defense, perfect or imperfect.