Are facial bruises in babies ever accidental?

Sir, In Aviemore in April 1982, I presented to the British Paediatric Association's meeting the concept of the 'gently battered child'. The numerical results quoted at that time have since been published as part of a paper in this journal.' Because of the nature of the concept, the paediatricians present were asked by means of notices on the screen and Chairman's comments to treat this session and other communications in that session as confidential. About a month ago, the Editor of World Medicine telephoned me at home to say that he had received an article from a paediatrician who had been present at the Aviemore meeting and that he intended to publish it. The name of the paediatrician was refused me. Several sentences from the article were read to me over the telephone and I protested that the statements were misleading, and that such a report would cause great and unnecessary distress to many parents and other people. I tried to put the situation in perspective. I heard nothing more until I was told by a friend, of an article in World Medicine. The information was presented in such a way that people have construed that the whole article had arisen from an interview with me. The article was accompanied by an evocative drawing and was unsigned. That article was taken up by other papers and while it perhaps caused only transient annoyance to me, it resulted in great distress to many innocent cot death parents and those who attempt to help them. Most of us are well aware of the extent that the press can distort information for effect, but members should also be aware that just as in hospital wards where there are 'moles' prepared to report on the treatment of patients, so there appear to be equivalent people among us prepared to report to the non-specific medical press things presented in confidential plenary sessions of the British Paediatric Association.