Andrea Dunlop

And Dr. Golosnyk is a well-known defense expert.

In fact, he exclusively testifies for the defense.

Though Dr. Golosnyk appears to be a board-certified pediatrician, he has treated college students in the Student Health Clinic for the past 30 years and has not actually treated an infant or young child since 1980, despite the fact that he nearly always testifies in cases involving physical abuse of children under the age of two.

Importantly, not only has Dr. Golosnyk never evaluated a case of suspected abusive head trauma as a physician, he's never evaluated a child with a head injury.

Period.

Dr. Golasnik's CV includes just two peer-reviewed studies.

The first is a case report based on the observation of a single subject, and the second is a lab experiment featuring infant mannequins and a live infant wearing motion sensors.

The latter study was published in the Journal of Forensic Biomechanics, whose publisher has been widely criticized and lost a $50 million lawsuit against the FTC for its lax review standards and deceptive publication practices.

In a 2010 court deposition, Glasnick also notes that he's done many, quote, home experiments on his own.

In this same court deposition, Glasnick explains that his interest in child abuse medicine was inspired not by his clinical practice, but by an experience he had serving on a jury in 1999.

He is well known for opining in court that medical findings typical of abusive head trauma could have instead been caused by minor accidental household injuries.

He frequently posits that you can't diagnose AHT based on medical findings because another explanation could always be possible.

This is well outside the prevailing medical opinion on abusive head trauma, which is, by the way, the subject of extremely broad consensus in the medical community, including the American Academy of Pediatrics.

Golaznyk is not a credible expert, and his opinion is frequently disregarded in court.

His testimony was the subject of a Dober motion, which is used to exclude or limit expert testimony, in a New Mexico case just within the last month.

In this case, the judge ruled that Golaznyk, quote, will not be permitted to testify about any controversy regarding abusive head trauma or shaken baby syndrome.

Even when the quote second opinions come from defense experts like Glasnick, the media often portrays them on a par with people with decades of experience evaluating these injuries.

A quick Google search will come up with innumerable articles about the questions around the very robust science of abusive head trauma.

It's a manufactured debate, but it doesn't stop people like Neary from framing child abuse pediatricians, the actual experts, in the worst possible light.

Reproductive care is so important.