This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow E-mail this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My File Cabinet
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via CrossRef
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Hall, D. E.
Right arrow Articles by Johnson, S. C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Hall, D. E.
Right arrow Articles by Johnson, S. C.
Related Collections
Right arrow Office Practice
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Facebook   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

PEDIATRICS Vol. 105 No. 6 June 2000, pp. 1305-1312

Evaluation of Covert Video Surveillance in the Diagnosis of Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy: Lessons From 41 Cases

Received Sep 2, 1999; accepted Jan 19, 2000.

David E. Hall*, Dagger , Laura Eubanks, LCSW*; Swarnalatha Meyyazhagan*, Richard D. Kenney*, Dagger , and Sherry Cochran Johnson*

From * Children's Healthcare of Atlanta at Scottish Rite, and Dagger  Emory University Department of Pediatrics, Atlanta, Georgia.

Objective.  In 1993, Children's Healthcare of Atlanta at Scottish Rite (formery Scottish Rite Children's Medical Center, Atlanta, GA) added facilities to perform inpatient covert video surveillance (CVS) of suspected cases of Munchausen syndrome by proxy (MSBP). Forty-one patients were monitored from 1993 to 1997. This study was performed to review our experience with these cases. How useful was video surveillance in making the diagnosis? What were the characteristics of families with children who were victims of MSBP?

Methodology.  Medical, social work, security, and administrative records of all children who underwent covert video monitoring at Children's Healthcare of Atlanta at Scottish Rite from 1993 through 1997 were reviewed retrospectively by a team of physicians, risk managers, and social workers.

Results.  A diagnosis of MSBP was made in 23 of 41 patients monitored. CVS was required to make the diagnosis in 13 (56.1%) of these 23, and supportive of the diagnosis in 5 (21.7%) cases. In 4 patients, this surveillance was instrumental in establishing innocence of the parents. MSBP was more common in Caucasian patients than in other ethnic groups seen at our hospital. Fifty-five percent of mothers gave a history of health care work or study, and another 25% had previously worked in day care. Although many of caretakers fit the profile of MSBP, such as excessive familiarity with medical staff, eagerness for invasive medical testing, and history of health care work, these characteristics were not sensitive indicators of MSBP in our study. Even when present, they were not sufficiently compelling to make the diagnosis.

Conclusions.  CVS is required to make a definitive and timely diagnosis in most cases of MSBP. Without this medical diagnostic tool, many cases will go undetected, placing children at risk. All tertiary care children's hospitals should develop facilities to perform CVS in suspected cases.  Key words:  child abuse, covert video surveillance, factitious illness, factitious illness by proxy, Munchausen syndrome by proxy.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Facebook Facebook   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
PediatricsHome page
J. Stirling Jr and and the Committee on Child Abuse and Neglect
Beyond Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy: Identification and Treatment of Child Abuse in a Medical Setting
Pediatrics, May 1, 2007; 119(5): 1026 - 1030.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
BMJHome page
P. Chandra and A. M Shankar
Detecting fabricated or induced illness in children: Are we ready for covert video surveillance?
BMJ, November 12, 2005; 331(7525): 1144 - 1144.
[Full Text]


Home page
PediatricsHome page
N. Yativ
Nanny, Lies, and Videotape: Child Abuse and Privacy Rights Dilemmas
Pediatrics, June 1, 2005; 115(6): 1791 - 1792.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
AAP Grand RoundsHome page
B. Mears
Covert Video Surveillance of Parents Suspected of Abuse
AAP Grand Rounds, March 1, 2003; 9(3): 29 - 30.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Arch. Dis. Child.Home page
D P Southall, M P Samuels, and M H Golden
Classification of child abuse by motive and degree rather than type of injury
Arch. Dis. Child., February 1, 2003; 88(2): 101 - 104.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Child MaltreatHome page
T. L. Truman and C. C. Ayoub
Considering Suffocatory Abuse and Munchausen by Proxy in the Evaluation of Children Experiencing Apparent Life-Threatening Events and Sudden Infant Death Syndrome
Child Maltreat, May 1, 2002; 7(2): 138 - 148.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med.Home page
C. E. HUNT
Sudden Infant Death Syndrome and Other Causes of Infant Mortality . Diagnosis, Mechanisms, and Risk for Recurrence in Siblings
Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med., August 1, 2001; 164(3): 346 - 357.
[Full Text] [PDF]