Amicus Brief: Shu Feng Hsu
Commonwealth of MASSACHUSETTS v. Shu Feng Hsu
Filing Date
March 30, 2026
Charge
Manslaughter
Jurisdiction
Commonwealth of Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Partners
Interested Physicians and Scientists
Summary
CIFS and interested physicians and scientists filed this amicus brief in the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court in Shu Feng Hsu’s case to educate the court on issues surrounding shaken baby syndrome. We ask the court to vacate and enter judgment as SBS/AHT is not a reliable foundation on which to base a criminal conviction.
PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
The Shaken Baby Syndrome/Abusive Head Trauma hypothesis (SBS/AHT) lacks a reliable scientific basis and is fraught with error. Relying on this outdated concept to prosecute criminal cases risks wrongful convictions and other harmful judicial outcomes. Historically, when infants and young children presented to health care providers with a particular set of medical findings (specifically, subdural hematoma (bleeding between the brain and its coverings), retinal hemorrhage (bleeding at the back of the eye), and cerebral edema or encephalopathy (brain swelling or dysfunction)), those children were classified as having been abused, often without additional evidence. The hypothesis that this set of findings resulted from abusive shaking was proposed beginning in 1971 and adopted thereafter, without adequate testing and indicia of reliability. While testing of this hypothesis is a complicated proposition, where it has been tested, research shows that shaking is an unlikely mechanism for the findings often attributed to it. Diagnoses related to this flawed hypothesis have severe and far-reaching effects on children, families, and the criminal legal system. Amici have serious concerns about the validity and reliability of the SBS/AHT hypothesis and its application and encourage this Court to reject its use in Ms. Hsu’s case.