Given it’s the Federal Election and all, this story will probably be buried somewhere down the back of the newspaper. It probably won’t get a run on the TV news or in radio news bulletins either. But I think you should know about it because I think it’s a shocking case of injustice.
A man who was found guilty of violently shaking his baby has been given a suspended jail sentence so he can help care for his now severely-disabled son.
Philip Edward Clarke’s three-month-old son sustained severe brain damage in August 2006 while at home with his parents at Ingle Farm in Adelaide.
The court heard the boy’s injuries were caused by violent shaking or by shaking and throwing the baby with force. Judge Wayne Chivell suspended a three-year jail term in favour of a good behaviour bond.
In sentencing today, Judge Wayne Chivell said Clarke had lost his temper and either shaken his son, or thrown him onto a soft surface with a hard base like a couch, AdelaideNow reports. “It is clear … that it was your actions, whatever they were, that caused his injuries,” Judge Chivell said.”(The) trauma required to inflict the sort of injuries suffered by William in this case would not have been minor.”
William suffered bleeding in the space between his brain and skull, extensive brain damage and was blinded in both eyes.
It just so happens that I’m in the middle of reading a book about this subject. It’s journalist and author Caroline Overington’s 2nd novel, I Came To Say Goodbye and while it’s not released until October, I have a preview copy. It’s brilliant.
Caroline knows a lot about shaken baby syndrome. Last year, when I railed against retailer Cotton On for turning child abuse into a smart-arse baby t-shirt slogan with their size 00 jumpsuits featuring and the words “They Shake Me!” emblazoned on them, Caroline wrote this for The Punch:
The ‘funny’ baby suit by Cotton On
As the 8000-plus readers of Mia Freedman’s Twitter feed will already know, the clothing company, “Cotton On” has launched a new range of baby suits and T-shirts, bearing the amusing
slogan: “They Shake Me.’’
This baby’s shirt is harmless by comparison to Cotton On’s latest offeringThis baby’s shirt is harmless by comparison to Cotton On’s latest offering
Trouble is, all the babies in the ads for the “They Shake Me” range are bright and happy and smiling at the camera.
Surely, if Cotton On is going to make light of child abuse, they should use a real-life victim of child abuse to model the clothes?
I have the perfect candidate. In late July, the Australian newspaper published a story about a little boy called Lincoln.
He is 18 months old, and lives permanently in the Children’s Hospital in Sydney.
Lincoln can stand in a frame, and when his nurses go to feed him with a bottle, he’ll sometimes reach out and touch their hands.
Journalist & author Caroline Overington
But Lincoln is blind and partly deaf, and he won’t ever walk, and there are times when he can’t stop crying.
Pediatricians at the hospital believe Lincoln was shaken as baby. He was taken to the emergency ward at the age of two months, with a bulging skull and twitching limbs, and he’s been there ever since.
Staff at the hospital would be happy to keep Lincoln forever, saying he has grown into a “delightful little boy” but the real goal is to find him a family.
They hope there will be a nice couple out there, who could meet Lincoln in the hospital, get to know him and learn about his special needs, and eventually take him home.
But that’s not really exploiting Lincoln’s commercial potential, is it? He would be the perfect ambassador for Cotton On’s new baby range.
“They Shake Me!” No, it’s really too perfect.
I called Cotton On in Melbourne this morning, to ask whether they’d consider a real victim of child abuse in the ads for their oh-so-funny new clothes, but apparently, their media person is in meetings all day, and they have no statement to make.
This post has been republished here with full permission. To read the original click here
I am aghast at how someone who has been found guilty of injuring a baby so severely that he has brain damage and is partially blind could be considered by a judge as a suitable person to help take care of that baby. How is this possible?
Top Comments
Random picture :)
No different to all of the children born to drug addicted mothers who still incredibly remain in their care. When you think of how many wonderful couples are desperate to have just one baby to adopt and love its heartbreaking to think that these children can be left in the care of parents who are out of control. And even then if they lose custody they still hold the upper hand and usually wont allow for the child to adopted out, only fostered.
I agree it seems like these children would have such better lives if given brand new families - but current practices - woefully inadequate though they are thanks to the public wanting more and more taxcuts and not being prepared to pay for proper levels of care - are actually evidence-based. That means, kids do best with continuted contact with their birthparents, and getting a nice new family often doesn't translate to good outcomes. And, sadly, often those nice families can't deal with the problems that show up in these children's behaviour and just give them back to authorities.
There are lots of foster carers out there - long term ones, from whom the child can be taken at any time - who are doing a fantastic job. And more are needed. So if you are prepared to care for a child without the guarantees that they'll always be part of your life, then think seriously about finding out more.
P.S. to myself - I'm not talking about abusing parents, like the one in the story. I don't support continued contact with them.