(3 of 3)
Since the Hoyt case and similarly suspicious ones form much of the evidence for Steinschneider's theory that SIDS runs in families, that theory is being called into question, and along with it, the value of so-called apnea monitoring in preventing SIDS. Steinschneider's findings have supported the idea that families who have lost one baby to SIDS can avoid losing subsequent children by hooking up sleeping infants to devices that set off an alarm when the gaps between breaths become too long.
Cases like Hoyt's and Tinning's, as well as the increasing awareness of child abuse in the U.S., have led law-enforcement and medical authorities to call for a more aggressive approach to investigating infant deaths. Most states now require an autopsy for all babies who die unexpectedly. Before a diagnosis of SIDS can be made, an examination of the scene of death and a review of the child's medical history are made. SIDS experts are calling for standardized protocols to guide such investigations.
While all this may serve the interests of justice, it will doubtless cause greater pain to parents already stunned by the loss of a child to crib death or some other natural cause. Now, in addition to enduring their grief, they will face more intense questioning from officials. But SIDS parents are among the most fervent supporters of stricter investigations. "The truth," notes Thomas Moran, president of the SIDS alliance, "is that bias and confusion will disappear only when people are really sure why every baby in this country dies."