Monday, October 11, 2010

Patrick and Emily Zimmerman / Part 336 / For Love and For Justice / Zabeth and Paul Bayne

I have been asked to tell the story of another couple whose situation has some strong parallels to Paul's and Zabeth's. This reality story has some wrenching aspects. The couple's names are Patrick and Emily Zimmerman and Emily has invited the disclosure of her situation. Once again shaken baby syndrome is integral to this disturbing story, a diagnosis which many bio-mechanics and pathologists dispute. Here is the story in Emily's own words.

In August of 2009, our lives changed forever. Our son, Tristan, was two months of age. He had begun smiling and cooing, becoming a very social little boy. On the 13th, Tristan had his two month check up. He received his two month immunizations that day. Tristan was sleepy that day and the next, as we were told he would be due to the shots.

On the 15th of August, Tristan awoke early morning for a feeding. He customarily ate every three hours. After his feeding that morning, I burped him and he vomited in a projectile manner. Tristan continued to projectile vomit that day, and being concerned and seeing no resolution to his vomiting, I took him in to the emergency room the following afternoon. He was assessed to be mildly dehydrated, was given IV fluids, and sent home without any explanation as to his vomiting. He had not been running a fever, and had no signs of any underlying illness.

Tristan continued his vomiting. He still ate every three hours at this point, but would vomit with every feeding. I tried everything I could to help him keep down his formula, even feeding him with a medicine syringe hoping smaller amounts would be better tolerated by him. On August 18th, I again took him into the emergency room. He was evaluated for pyloric stenosis. It was determined that wasn't the cause of his vomiting. The doctor again had no idea why he was vomiting, but suggested we switch his formula, that perhaps he was becoming intolerant to the formula. He had been eating 4 ounces every three hours since a week of age, and I didn't believe that was the problem, but nonetheless, we tried a different formula.

Tristan had become sleepier. He began sleeping longer stretches, there were times I had to wake him up to feed him. It was concerning because of his eating habits, he was a chubby little babe who liked to eat. He would cry more often when he was awake, seeming to be in pain. We were stumped as to what was ailing him.

One more appointment was made with his pediatrician on the 21st. He examined him and said he looked healthy. He had no reason why he would be vomiting, other than perhaps he was constipated and that was what was ailing him.

On August 24th, in the early morning, Tristan awoke his daddy with a high-pitched scream. I work 3rd shift and was at work. His father was later holding him when he had a seizure in his arms. 911 was called, and his father attempted mouth-to-mouth breathing while waiting for the ambulance.

Tristan was in grave condition. He was intubated when he made it to the hospital. He was not breathing well on his own, and his heart was not functioning properly. Due to the seizure activity, a CT scan was performed. Subdural bleeding was found in his head, both acute and chronic. Tristan was transferred to another hospital by helicopter.

He was suffering multiple seizures and was worsening by the minute. Subdural taps were performed to remove fluid that was accumulating in his head. He was in a coma.

Before we were allowed to see him, we were questioned by the police and the Department of Human Services. We had no idea what was going on with our son, yet we were questioned as to whether we had shaken him.

Tristan was not expected to make it through the night. We were told that he was harmed intentionally, that nothing else could have caused the bleeding in his head. The words "Shaken Baby Syndrome" were thrown at us.

Tristan had not one bruise anywhere on his body, no neck injury, no internal bleeding other than in his head and eyes, no injuries to his skull or scalp, yet we have been accused of violently shaking him. 

Tristan spent over a month in the hospital. We were told he would not be able to breathe on his own when the ventilator was removed. He came off of the ventilator without incident. He had suffered a stroke at some point and his brain began to die. He has suffered loss of about 80% of his brain.

Because the hospital determined that Tristan's condition was caused intentionally by malicious actions, my children were all removed from our care while he was in the hospital. Tristan has an older brother, Gabriel, and an older sister, Natalie, who were placed in the care of their biological father. Tristan was discharged to foster care.

We had visitation with Tristan for almost 9 months without any progression with our case. No charges had been filed. We were told that we were doing everything we were supposed to be doing.

In May of 2010, criminal charges were filed against Tristan's father, Patrick. It was then revealed by the state that they were going to press to terminate our parental rights. Patrick was then not allowed to have visitation with Tristan, though he had been allowed to see him for the entire 9 months previous to charges being filed.

In July of this year we had our termination trial. Patiently we waited for a verdict for two months.

We had been expecting a baby girl, due to arrive the beginning of October. 6 hours after her birth, the police came to the hospital with DHS and made Patrick leave. We were served with a removal order for our daughter. We were also so cruelly told that the verdict had come back in regards to our rights to Tristan, and that they were terminated. We were not told this by our counsel, but rather by the DHS worker.

Patrick's criminal trial is set for the end of November. Our parental rights have been terminated before Patrick has been given a chance to defend himself against his charges. He has been blamed as the perpetrator because he was home with Tristan at the time of his collapse.

We are now in the process of filing an appeal for our parental rights. We have also been informed that since our parental rights were terminated for Tristan, the state can file a waiver of reasonable efforts to return our daughter.”
http://tristansjourney.webs.com/

12 comments:

  1. The story certainly does have parallels. There is not much context in the information present, ages of the older children (7, 3, 1 and baby) and parents, location, jobs, any prior history with MCFD, economic status etc.

    Not finding anything in Google, I searched Facebook (which appears to be immune to having its content made available to Google searches).

    See http://www.facebook.com/home.php?#!/profile.php?id=528661799

    I wonder if I would be correct in assuming this couple did not have ten doctor opinions disputing the original doctor's diagnosis. It certainly does seem as if child protection follows a universal script associated with SBS cases.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Heartbreaking, and outrageous. Thank you, Patrick and Emily Zimmerman for going public. Thank you, Ron, for making this public. There are no doubt many, many more similar accounts yet to be told to the public. Secrecy is the key to this form of oppression, which is why it is so important that the public read and hear these stories. The effect of reading these stories, is that more parents will have the courage to come forward.

    The more parents that come forward, the more who will feel comfortable coming forward. Eventually, things will snowball, and the public will see that MCFD is a very unjust ministry, causing great harm.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I have to wonder how many parents have lost their children to MCFD and other child protection agencies merely because the medical system can't properly diagnose their children?

    This case above, like so many cases, shows that there is no due process when it comes to what has been termed "the death penalty for parents," that is, termination of parental rights.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Is it just me, or is Anon at October 11, 2010 1:11 AM trying to slyly cast doubt on the Zimmerman's story?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Anon 10:14 AM
    I didn't pick that up in the comment. I discerned an attempt to locate info online and the only result was a Facebook page. I understand that another Facebook page may soon appear specifically focusing upon this Child Protection issue.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Anon 1:11 AM
    A Zimmerman website appears to have been established to tell the baby's story before the father's arrest and charge and trial.
    http://tristansjourney.webs.com/

    ReplyDelete
  7. Well, the comment of Anon at October 11, 2010 1:11 AM mentions that the Zimmerman's didn't note whether they had 10 doctors to refute the finding of abuse. But how many people have the resources to get the opinions of 10 doctors? Not too many, I would imagine. And as I understand it, the Baynes were only able to do this (get the opinion of 10 doctors) because they have financial assistance from parental rights groups or a group.

    So I don't really understand why this comment was made by October 11, 2010 1:11 AM. Was it to draw attention to the fact that the Zimmerman's don't have anyone contesting the abuse accusation? Not to many people who are victims of MCFD have any resources at all to fight back. Lawyers and experts are extremely expensive and would quickly bankrupt parents, unless they have sizeable assets or funding from parental rights groups.

    My reaction, when I read the blog today, was to think, "Another situation like the Baynes, it doesn't surprise me, thank goodness these people have come forward, thank goodness this blog exists." So I wonder when I see a comment that is solely about the lack of information that would corroborate the Zimmerman's story. I know how child protection supporters operate, they cast doubt and draw attention to things that make the parents look like they are hiding something. At the same time, they often pretend to appear to mildy criticize child protection (but in reality they would never do anything to really alter the power of child protection).

    I don't know what Anon at October 11, 2010 1:11 AM is suggesting, so if they can give me reasons why they would ask, for example, about the 10 doctors that might be supporting the Zimmermans (and whether that is supposed to be indicative of guilt if they have not), I'd appreciate it.

    ReplyDelete
  8. For Anon 8:40 PM
    This is my last comment related to your query.
    The 1:11 AM writer is not a social worker or an MCFD sympathizer.

    I am not assuming I understand the writer's motivation but I am saying this is my interpretation of the sentences that were communicated. This 1:11 AM writer was making the point that the Baynes' case is that much more convincingly an case of injustice with the strength of 10 experts' opinions which the Zimmermans unfortunately do not have. And the writer is making a point that SBS is too frequently a way of messing up lives. And all the writer was saying at the start was that there weren' many specifics by which to track any other online data. I hope that is enough to diffuse the concern.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Ron's last comment correctly assesses my 1:11 comment. I can see how portion may have been misinterpreted.

    I am used to seeing the higher level of detail, such as is available in the Baynes' case materials, so my main point was there is a lot of information missing. I need this information in order to get a better understanding of what was going on. If a CCO was issued, there would be a judgment posted online.

    By commenting on the omissions, there is more liklihood the parents / originators will fill in the details. I gathered from the relative speed of the CCO, the family did not have a particularly strong defence, ie. did not have the same dozen or so experts the Baynes have. Alternatively, it suggests they may live in an area where an SBS diagnosis automatically means a CCO would be the result.

    There is a reference to "many biomechanics and pathologists" but doesn't say if this family was overwhelmed with these experts on the child protection side, or if they produced their own experts contradicting the evidence and it did not work.

    The website and facebook presentation, as is the accounting of the story is of low journalistic quality, and even less legal value. Remember there are other parents in similar circumstances that need more details to understand how these parents failed.

    There is not enough information posted for readers to use to fight back. For those of us working on figuring out how to correct the system, this is vital information to have.

    To start with, I don't know where this story takes place, it doesn't sound like B.C. The first thing I do is look up the city, the population, the removal statistics, other similar stories from the area, judgments on similar cases from that area, especially the specific judge. What was the name of the diagnosing doctor? Social workers? Judge? Child protection lawyer?

    Conversely, if the case is still in progress with an appeal pending, even the text of the story already posted online may harm their case.

    Was there prior history with child protection / welfare that was used against the parents? These are examples of some questions I ask. Is there anything this couple can observe on the Baynes case that they derived any help from?

    My first thought is, did any physician say anything about a chance of some sort of reaction due to the shots. It seems rather coincidental the close proximity of shots to the initial problems.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Thank you for clarifying, Anon at October 12, 2010 12:06 AM.

    You are right - Information is vital, in order that other parents may also fight back.

    You seem like you have a lot of knowledge - could you post info on how to get the info you refer to above (e.g., removal statistics). Thank you.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I am a long time mom 36 years, and foster mom 18 years, adopted mom 20 years, I have adopted siblings of Pat's. I CAN not believe in my heart knowing him the kind hearted person he is could harm any one, I have seen both sides of the coin. Know one know's what go's on behind closed doors. But knowing both side's of the coin as well as knowing him and his life story, I just can't see it happening.I feel the shots had to have something to do with the baby's health, never the less why is the rights terminated before the case is with out a dout settled? I am in totle heart acke for this family. Where is the support for them and now there brand new daughter taken a way. Are they ever going to have a life again? Please return there children money is not every thing so don't make it so. I know of two shaken baby cases one the child is brain dead the other one the child died. I will never believe this of this Father. Heart broken

    ReplyDelete
  12. Debbie thanks for writing. It's good to hear from someone who knows this couple personally.

    ReplyDelete

I encourage your comments using this filter.
1. Write politely with a sincere statement, valid question, justifiable comment.
2. Engage with the blog post or a previous comment whether you agree or disagree.
3. Avoid hate, profanity, name calling, character attack, slander and threats, particularly when using specific names.
4. Do not advertise