SBS: New Zealand: Backlash against Kahui twins book

Hayden Donnell and NZPA Jun 28, 2011

 

Amid an ongoing inquest into the twins' killing this week, mother Macsyna King has announced she is releasing a 'tell-all' book co-written with Ian Wishart. Photo / Brett Phibbs

More than 1000 people have signed up to a Facebook group urging the mass boycott of a book written in collaboration with the mother of murdered babies Chris and Cru Kahui.
Chris Kahui Snr was accused and acquitted of inflicting fatal injuries on the three-month-old Kahui twins in 2008.
His legal team contended Macsyna King, the boys' mother and Kahui's partner, carried out the murders.
Amid an ongoing inquest into the twins' killing this week, King announced she was releasing a "tell-all" book co-written with Ian Wishart.
It would give her version of circumstances surrounding the twins' deaths and name who she thought the killer was.
A Facebook group set up today said the book was King's attempt to "profit from her attrocious deeds".
It urged people to boycott it, along with all other Ian Wishart books, until it was pulled from shelves.
By 7:15pm, the group had attracted more than 7400 supporters, many of whom left angry messages accusing King of profiting from the death of her sons.
Author Ian Wishart previously told TV3 the book was a story of "horror from the streets of South Auckland".
He agreed to write the book after King approached last year asking him to tell her side of the story.
It would provide new information on a case that still provokes anger across New Zealand, he said.
"There's a huge sense of outrage that two twins could be killed and no-one could actually be pinned for their murder.
"The back cover of the book says it makes Once Were Warriors look like kindergarten - it really does."
Mr Wishart said he had already started getting hate mail for writing the book.
Health workers needed to stop similar cases
Meanwhile, one of the country's preeminent experts on child abuse says the child health workforce needs to be transformed so it is also a child protection workforce in order to prevent further cases like that of the Kahui twins.
Dr Patrick Kelly, clinical director of the child protection team at Auckland's Starship Hospital, was speaking at the inquest into the deaths of the babies.
He said the incidence of child abuse in New Zealand is "at least as high and in some cases higher" than other parts of the world.
"For example, if you look at cases of abusive head injuries, as were suffered by the Kahuis, our rates seem higher than in the United Kingdom. If you look at the World Health Organisation study on sexual abuse, the rates in New Zealand were among the highest in all the countries that were looked at.
"Although it's hard to be sure about prevalence figures, comparatively speaking, New Zealand's record is not good."
Dr Kelly said it was clear that there needed to be dedicated child protection teams working in every district health board in the country made up of staff from police, Child, Youth and Family, and the primary health sector. At the moment there were only teams in Auckland, Canterbury and Waikato.
"Currently, even when you combine information from all three agencies, because they didn't collect their data in any kind of uniformed, systematic way,.. we still can't answer the question: in New Zealand, what particular constellation of risk puts children in a hospital with a head injury?"
Healthcare workers also needed to be encouraged to ask the hard questions when confronted with possible cases of child abuse.
To illustrate this, Dr Kelly told the court of an eight-month-old boy who was admitted to hospital with severe head injuries.
His caregiver had told doctors the baby fell from a high-chair which had became entangled in a vacuum cleaner chord, and no investigation was conducted.
Two months later the baby was dead from multiple blows to the head. A clear diagnosis was that he had been murdered by his caregiver.
"I think in retrospect it's fairly clear that this first head injury was unlikely to have happened from a fall from a high-chair. It may have, but what was needed was a much more comprehensive assessment at the time of that first presentation."
There was also a lack of training for healthcare workers in identifying the subtle signs of abuse, he said.
"I think most doctors you can expect to manage the obvious things, but it's the subtle things that aren't missed. If a child comes in with a massive black eye and an obvious strap mark from being struck, most GPs aren't going to miss it, even if they've had no training. But most pre-verbal children don't present like that."
There should be a statutory requirement on the health, and also education, systems to make them responsible child protection, along with Child, Youth and Family, which had a "huge" workload, he said.
"I think if one had an entire health workforce committed to that degree of quality secondary prevention it would also have an affect on primary prevention because they would be working with families, talking to families about violence, hitting children, keeping children safe and all the other things that come out of good parenting practice."
The inquest will hear evidence from Mr Kahui's sister, Mona, tomorrow.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10735049

SBS: New Zealamd: End right to silence, Kahui inquest told

 Edward Gay  Jun 29, 2011

 

 

 Babies Chris and Cru Kahui died of head injuries at Starship in 2006. File photo / Supplied

The country's leading authority on child protection has questioned the right to silence for defendants in some child-abuse cases.
Starship hospital's director of child protection, Dr Patrick Kelly, told the inquest into the death of the Kahui twins yesterday that he was disappointed new legislation from the Government did not include some limitations on the right to silence.
"I know it is the Holy Grail in criminal law and I mention it with temerity."
Since the trial, the Government has drafted its new Crime Amendment Bill Number Two which could see extended family and close friends of child abusers face up to 10 years in prison if they turn a blind eye to abuse and do not report it.
Dr Kelly said the Law Commission in Britain had recommended that the right to silence be removed in child-abuse cases where the accused is a caregiver of the child.
The document Dr Kelly was referring to, Children: Their non-accidental death or serious injury, recommends that jurors should be allowed to make inferences when defendants remain silent in some cases.
Babies Chris and Cru Kahui died of head injuries at Starship in 2006. Their father, Chris Kahui, was acquitted of their murders two years later in the High Court at Auckland.
His defence lawyers said the injuries were caused by their mother, Macsyna King. She denied the killings.
Dr Kelly said it was difficult to cross the threshold of "beyond reasonable doubt" unless a healthy baby was left in the house with one person, or there was a confession.
"If the way the criminal system operates is the best it can be then the media outcry is unjustified. The outcome is to be expected and it is just unfair ... If, on the other hand, we could do better, then we should."
He was also asked how the new bill might have affected the Kahui case.
Dr Kelly said there were four adults in the house when baby Cru stopped breathing momentarily and none of them chose to call an ambulance.
He said that while the new bill was unlikely to have changed their actions, it could give police more ability to act.
Under cross-examination from Mr Kahui's lawyer, Michele Wilkinson-Smith, Dr Kelly confirmed that he was aware that Mr Kahui had spoken to the police before he was arrested.
University of Auckland law professor Warren Brookbanks said the right to silence was a part of New Zealand law but there had been talk about the Government removing it in child-abuse cases. He would not be surprised if the Government did "bend".
He said at present jurors were directed not to make inferences if an accused chose not to speak to police or give evidence at trial.
CHILD PROTECTION
Dr Kelly's recommendations:
* More training for family doctors to recognise signs of abuse. Currently they get only two hours during their five-year undergraduate degree.
* Mandatory reporting of suspected child abuse by health professionals.
* Specialist child protection teams set up in every District Health Board.
* A statutory requirement for health and education workers to treat child safety as part of their responsibility.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10735139

SBS: New Zealand: Kahui twins inquest

27 Jun 2011  Dan Satherley

The final stage of the inquest into the deaths of South Auckland twins Chris and Cru Kahui continues this morning.
The three-month-old babies died five years ago this month after being admitted to Starship Hospital with head injuries. The babies' father, Chris Kahui, was acquitted of their murder in 2008. 
Testimony from family members and friends of the Kahui family has taken a significant amount of time, including testimony from Chris Kahui. There was hope that if new evidence came to light during the inquest police would reopen the case, but that hasn't yet happened.
Coroner Garry Evans has said he wants to make it mandatory for health professionals to report any signs of child abuse to the correct authorities.
3news.co.nz reporter Dan Satherley is in court today and will bring you live updates of the inquest.
-----------
3:18pm – “A baby who had one traumatic head injury in a particular social environment is at risk from another,” says Dr Kelly, referring to a previous head injury baby Chris had suffered prior to the blow that killed him, but says the evidence doesn’t show it was material in his death.
Dr Jenny says research has shown multiple occurrences of the same injury can lead to worsening complications, but believes in this case whatever was done to baby Chris the night before he died was enough to wholly explain the result.
Dr Kelly describes what physical process it was that killed the twins - bridging veins on the brain being torn. He says it’s hard to know exactly how much force is required for this to happen on any one particular person in any particular situation.
“It’s very hard to define that precisely - you can’t do experiments with babies where you apply force and see what happens.”
He says what is known is there needs to be very strong acceleration or deceleration to tear the bridging veins.
“Impact vastly increases the amount of deceleration.”
“It used to be known as ‘shaken baby syndrome’ but we know now not all of these babies are just being shaken – they’re being slammed, shaken and dropped. Mr Kelly says there were clearly impacts to Chris’ head, and though he admits Cru’s brain injuries could have been caused by vigorous shaking, he is almost certain Cru was also “slammed”.
The rest of the panel agreed with Dr Kelly’s opinions.
Dr Kelly says there was “extensive haemorrhaging” on both twins’ retinas, which was consistent with a deliberate attack.
“In about 80 percent of children with inflicted brain injuries in this age group, you will see bleeding onto the retina,” says Dr Kelly.
“It’s very uncommon in accidents,” says Dr Jenny - not without having a child’s head completely crushed.
“When you look in the eye and you see that blood everywhere, you go, ‘oh dear...’.” Extensive computer modelling of infant eyeballs and studies with crash test dummies back up this view, says Dr Jenny.
Dr Kelly was asked how easy it was to break a baby’s leg, whether it could happen accidentally, or more force was required.
“I have never done it, I’m glad to say,” says Dr Kelly. He says it would be easier to break a baby’s femur than an adult’s - it sometimes happens during labour but Dr Kelly says the kind of force required to break a baby’s leg is “well outside” what you’d apply in day-to-day interactions with a baby.
2:52pm – “My understanding of the evidence is that the twins were feeding four-hourly up until around a week before they were admitted [to hospital],” says Dr Kelly, who notes in that last week, they were feeding only every six hours - quite a long time for babies that young.
Dr Kelly says if the last feed before the incident was around 5 or 6pm, they should have been awake around 11am or midnight for their next. By 2am, the twins’ parents should have been “anxious” that they were yet to wake.
“If they didn’t rouse by two o’clock in the morning, it should have been obvious there was something very wrong. Most parents at this stage wake in anticipation of their baby feeding. “If it is correct they never fed again after five or six o’clock,” says Dr Kelly, the head injuries must have occurred between then and 2am.
If baby Chris’ last feed was the one his mother gave him at midday, he should have been awake by 6pm at the latest - if he was still sleeping at 8am, this would imply his injuries were received prior to then.
2:44pm – “In terms of inflicted head injury [on young children], we now see at least one a month,” says Dr Kelly.
In the five years since the Kahui case, Starship has dealt with about 60 cases of deliberately inflicted head injuries in children under three years of age, the “majority” of them under one.
2:25pm - The inquest resumes after lunch. Counsel Simon Mount asks the panel if they agree that a) Chris and Cru each received primary brain injuries, b) it was these injuries that killed them, and c) if Ms Saunders’ testimony that the babies seemed normal at the time she fed Cru - around 1pm - then they had not yet received the injuries that killed them.
The panel unanimously agrees.
1:00pm - Dr Jenny says kids who have been deliberately injured often have worse outcomes than those accidentally hurt, because in accidents, responsible adults generally get in touch with emergency services right away, but the Kahuis’”ates were sealed” because no one sought them care right away.
The night before they were taken to hospital, Cru had stopped breathing, but wasn’t taken to hospital because he began breathing again and Chris Kahui and his grandfather thought he looked “okay”.
“Humans have a tremendous inner drive to stay alive so I’m not surprised he started breathing again,” says Dr Jenny, but that this could happen even with serious brain damage.
12:51pm - All four of the panel agree that if Chris Kahui’s feeding of the twins around 5pm went fine, then the fatal injuries must still have been yet to come.
12:48pm – “It’s possible that his conscious state was normal,” says Dr Donald, but he isn’t entirely convinced Cru’s brain injury hadn’t already been delivered. The rest of the panel on the other hand, are fairly certain.
“It seems to me quite consistent with a one-week-old’ behaviour,”says Dr Kelly.
The Kahui twins were born 11 weeks premature, and were 12 weeks old when the incident occurred, so would be physically as developed as most one-week-olds.
Dr Jenny says it is clear baby Chris had not yet incurred the broken femur he would receive. She says the testimony from Chris Kahui that baby Chris fed just fine suggests he was still healthy and unhurt. Babies with a broken femur are best left lying still she says, as picking them up greatly increases the pain -the subsequent crying would have been a clear sign something was wrong, and this wasn’ supported by the evidence.
12:39pm - The panel believes when Chris Kahui’s cousin April Saunders gave Cru a bottle, around 1pm, the baby was unlikely as yet to have suffered any serious injuries.
His state is what it has been up until that point, and both his aunt and his father say his state had not changed, says Dr Jenny.
Dr Donald acknowledged Cru could have sustained a minor head injury without Ms Saunders noticing because she did not have a chance to interact with the infant, whom remained sleepy during the feeding. Cru had already had a feed administered by his mother only an hour or two before, and had been sleeping.
But it is unlikely to have been the injury that led to his death.
If he had a lesser head injury on the Monday, it would likely to have had an effect on his conscious state, which was not assessed,” says Dr Donald.
“If April could have been able to engage with him say ‘goo goo, ga ga’,” then Dr Donald says he could have come to a better conclusion.
“It sounds as though the feeding in the morning with both his mother and father, from what I’ve read, they were awake and interactive,” says Dr Donald.
“They were, as far as the severe primary head injury is concerned, they were normal in the morning,” but as Cru mostly slept through the top up feed with Ms Saunders, he can’t make a call on his state at that time.
Dr Jenny says she cannot see anything nothing unusual in the description of Ms Saunder’s feeding of Cru.
Dr Kelly says Ms Saunders was an experienced mother, and if she says Cru seemed normal, there is little reason not to assume that was the case.
12:09pm - Dr Kelly says in his experience, parents are the best judges of whether anything is wrong with their baby.
He believes Chris Kahui had enough hands-on experience bringing up the twins that it would be fair to believe him that nothing was wrong with Cru earlier that day.
“He fed them regularly, he changed them and he knew their normal behaviour. You also listen to the parent or caregiver or adult that knows the baby.
“If the parents say the baby is normal, they are the best judge of that... from the perspective of what happened that Monday, if Chris states that Cru was normal... I’d imagine that was a reliable observation.”
11:31am - The panel says they believe that Cru could not have sustained the primary brain injury prior to his lunchtime feed.
Dr Jenny says she has never seen a baby with a serious primary brain injury take a feed, not even for the first two weeks following the injury.
11:08am – Professor Jenny says she thinks it is very clear that the apnoea occurred after the serious head injury.
“There’s no doubt in my mind he was injured before that occurred.”
She says the evidence points to the injury to Cru occurring between the 2:30pm feeding session and the 8:30pm sleep apnoea incident. She says after the injury occurred, there’s no way Cru could have fed properly.
“Both of the boys had very high levels of sodium in the blood, Chris more so than Cru. That would indicate to me... they were really quite dehydrated, and that would be consistent with going for a very long time without feeding.”
She says they could sometimes go for 12-14 hours without feeding.
“They fact that they went for this prolonged time and no one seemed concerned that they hadn’t eaten for hours and hours, I find quite mystifying.”
10:59am – Professor Jenny says it is unlikely Cru would have been able to be fed after being injured to the degree he was.
“Often that’s how we realise a baby is brain damaged – the difficulty of taking a feed,” she says.
“The nature of Cru’s injury was that he had serious primary brain injury [immediate damage]. He had tears in the actual cortex of his brain, and I can’t imagine that a child with that level of damage would have been able to feed.”
She says the fact he could eat, and settled down just fine after feeding, suggests no serious brain injury at the time. If he had a concussion, it’s possible he still could have taken a normal feed, but as Cru was later found with serious primary brain damage, this is unlikely.
Both twins had severe retinal damage, which Prof Jenny says correlates closely with the force used in an attack.
10:49am - The members of the expert health panel have been sworn in – Dr Donald, Prof Jenny, Dr Biard and Dr Kelly.
Dr Kelly says the twins died of a severe head injury, which was non-accidental – “in layman’s terms; child abuse”.
The force “certainly involved impact to the head, probably from being slammed against a surface.”
Dr Kelly says Cru would have been injured in a similar matter.
“My view is that on the evidence available was that Cru was normal (at the time of feeding in the afternoon). With Chris, the evidence is a little unclear... it is of my opinion the twins were normal around midday on Monday and if they were normal at that time, the injury must have happened later that day.”
Dr Kelly can’t be certain, but suspects Cru’s troubled breathing happened immediately after being hurt.
http://www.3news.co.nz/Kahui-inquest-Live-updates/tabid/423/articleID/216611/Default.aspx

SBS: New Zealand: Education Program

23 May 2011
Child abuse numbers show New Zealand is tracking towards another year of shame.
Despite the government's pledges to toughen the law, 2011 looks set to break new records of horrific abuse.
Figures obtained by ONE News show police have 6117 active child abuse cases before them. Of those, 2521 have been open for more than a year.


Last year Child, Youth and Family had more than 124,921 notifications, compared to 50,488 in 2005.
Figures from Starship Children's Hospital show more babies have already been shaken in this financial year than last, with more than a month to go until the year ends.
"When I started working in this area in the late '90s we were seeing two to three children a year with this kind of head injury. Now we're seeing one a month," said Starship Paediatrician Dr Patrick Kelly.

The Ministry of Social Development is pushing its new green paper, which is due out in August and will see at-risk children tracked. It will also make child abuse reporting mandatory .

Social Development Minister Paula Bennett said too often she has seen cases where a child has been killed or badly hurt, where two people have been present and one is responsible.
"There is an underbelly of intense violence in our community that is staggering and unanswerable quite frankly," said Bennett.
But Child Abuse Prevention Expert Anthea Simcock said time is running out and the proof will be in the pudding.

"As we roll it out will the people who are currently silent take any notice of this?"

Kelly said there is political pressure for the government to do something, but that is not achieving good results.
"People choose the latest good idea or the latest fashion to try and put it into place and three years goes by and another government comes to power and they have another good idea. So there's very little implemented and carried through over time."
From July, a graphic DVD showing the affects of Shaken Baby Syndrome will be shown to mothers who give birth in Auckland.
The DVD includes real stories of some New Zealand families who have shaken their own children.
"It wasn't easy to ask them to do this, because New Zealand is a small community and these are people who live among us, whose families live among us," said Kelly.
A similar education programme in upstate New York saw a reduction of 47% of Shaken Baby Syndrome.
http://tvnz.co.nz/national-news/2011-set-another-year-child-abuse-shame-4185132

SBS: New Zealand: Adam Lock

Sun, 19 Dec 2010

By Brook Sabin

A mother whose five-week-old baby was shaken to death by her former partner has spoken out - exclusively to 3 News - hoping her message will affect every parent and save lives.
It's estimated around 3000 New Zealand babies are shaken each year - a number officials are trying to reduce with a major new campaign.
Shannel Tata asked that we black out her face for the interview, it's a big thing for her to talk to us about her son Jayhris.
Six photos are all she has left of him after he was shaken to death by her former partner.
“My son was only five-weeks-old, he was innocent - he was helpless,” she says before speaking about her partner. “I hate - I just hate him.”
In October, 22-year-old Adam Lock was jailed for seven years for Jayhris's manslaughter.
Infants are so vulnerable to being shaken because their neck muscles are too weak to support their disproportionately large heads and their young brain tissue and blood vessels are extremely fragile.
It's a problem which experts say is grossly unrecognised.
“The most concerning fact is that in New Zealand, among Maori children particularly, the rate is arguably the highest in the world,” says Dr Patrick Kelly, a Paediatrician at Starship Children’s Hospital.
Around 20 shaken infants are admitted to hospitals with serious or fatal injuries each year.
But international research indicates the true number of New Zealand children being shaken is around 3000.
Dr Kelly says many parents don't seek medical help - thinking they haven't caused any damage.
“What people don't realise of course is the damage that they cause from that head injury might be still with the baby and have an affect on them for life,” he says.
Auckland Hospital is spearheading a major new campaign which involves a meeting of all new parents to educate them about the risks.
The programme has been a huge success in New York state, where it first started, reducing rates there by almost 50 percent.
It's welcome news for Mrs Tata, who never wants to see another parent go through the turmoil she has.
http://www.3news.co.nz/Shaking-babies-still-a-major-concern-for-NZ/tabid/423/articleID/191568/Default.aspx

SBS: Battle of the experts

TONY WALL - Sunday Star Times

28/11/2010

Photo: Dominion Post

Dr Patrick Kelly's approach has come in for criticism.

Medical evidence in child-abuse cases in this country has come down to a good old-fashioned stoush between Australia and New Zealand, with a couple of notable victories for the Aussies.  

BECAUSE STARSHIP'S child protection team, led by Patrick Kelly – considered New Zealand's leading child-abuse expert – appears only for the Crown, defence lawyers are forced to go elsewhere. Many turn to Terry Donald, a forensic paediatrician and senior consultant in child protection services at Adelaide's Women's and Children's Hospital, who most often gives evidence for the prosecution in Australia.
But he doesn't come cheap – his fee is around $20,000.
Donald gave evidence in the Kahui murder trial in 2008, challenging Kelly's evidence of the timing of the assaults on the twins. Their father, Chris Kahui, was acquitted. Last year Donald appeared for the defence in the trial of Abhinesh Sharma, charged with murdering his 16-month-old nephew by violently shaking him and slamming his head against a wall.
Kelly concluded it was child abuse and that the injuries could not have been sustained by a fall from a couch, but Donald testified they could have. Sharma was also acquitted.
In a similar case this year, Donald gave evidence in the trial of Famaile Lino, testifying that his baby daughter's injuries could have been sustained in a fall from a chair. The judge criticised Starship doctors who concluded abuse, saying they had not considered all the evidence.
Kelly declined interview requests, saying it would be inappropriate to debate information relating to a specific child, including evidence he had given in court, through the media. In a statement he said the health board had a complaints process and he welcomed feedback from it. "Formal complaints are treated with respect, and lessons learned are used to guide clinical practice."
Donald says it is worrying that there are not enough specialists in New Zealand prepared to help defence teams, partly out of deference to Starship. "It's an important issue that no one in New Zealand will give the defence any time. Defence lawyers risk going to people who are seen as extreme, who aren't even sometimes people who've ever assessed children clinically. I've tried to give them a balanced perspective."
He believes New Zealanders should be concerned that defence lawyers are having to look overseas for experts, not just for cost reasons.
"There's a lot of rivalry between Australia and New Zealand, and New Zealand would generally be regarded as an impressive country but what's it doing with child protection? It's having to defer questions to Australia."
He says there's a danger in rushing to judgement in child head injury cases. "The issue of inflicted head injury is a major problem. It's not a matter of identifying retinal haemorrhages in association with subdural haematoma (as in the Lino case) and then deciding the child has been shaken. It's much more complicated."
England's Appeal Court recently issued guidelines on how judges and juries should deal with expert evidence in shaken-baby cases. If there's a realistic prospect of an unknown cause for the injuries, judges must remind juries of that.

Some defence lawyers criticise Kelly for allegedly being unwilling to consider alternative explanations for injuries.

Kahui defence team member Michele Wilkinson-Smith says Kelly is a "wonderful" doctor who cares for the children he treats, but she wonders if that may sometimes prevent him being objective.
"In court you've got to be utterly objective and forget about your advocacy role for the child. That's where I have a problem with some of the evidence he's given."
She said in her view it appears that he "has definitely reassessed the way he gives evidence since Kahui. I've had more cases with him and his reports are less dogmatic."
Wilkinson-Smith says that because Australia has a much bigger peer group of forensic paediatricians, doctors are challenged more often, and are used to having to ensure their opinions stand up to challenge.
"Here, until Kahui, no one was challenging Dr Kelly."
Sharma's lawyer, Maria Pecotic, believes treating clinicians should not give expert evidence. "I don't think they are open-minded enough."
Auckland Crown Solicitor Simon Moore says a meeting was held with Kelly and his team after the Lino judgement. Recommendations included ensuring expert witnesses are provided with all the relevant evidence to help formulate their opinions, and considering engaging overseas experts to review the opinions of local experts.
"In a case like Lino, there are always going to be ramifications that arise out of that sort of judicial criticism," Moore says. "It means those agencies responsible for the prosecution need to take stock and review their processes."
He says it's important to note that most suspected abuse cases are referred to the child protection unit by other medical professionals. "This is not a stand-alone unit that's some kind of roving forensic paediatric police force."
Moore says it is notoriously difficult to prosecute child-abuse cases. "If you have an expert who comes along and is prepared to say: `I think it's possible the explanation could be something else', even if he doesn't favour it, then we haven't proven our case. That's why internationally only 20% of these cases succeed."
He says Kelly attends all the same conferences as Donald and other experts.
"He is internationally regarded as one of the most talented and able paediatricians in the world. We should be extremely proud of what that man has achieved."
http://www.stuff.co.nz/sunday-star-times/features/4395246/Battle-of-the-experts