Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Child Death Review topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Child death review panel flags growth‑faltering diagnoses, caregiver bias and need for medical outreach

Joint Standing Committee on Health and Human Services · January 8, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Child Death and Serious Injury Review Panel reported a thematic level‑2 review on growth faltering (formerly 'failure to thrive'), finding diagnostic variability, evidence of caregiver bias in reporting and opportunities for referrals to clinics and public health nursing.

Erica Simonson, chair of Maine's Child Death and Serious Injury Review Panel, updated the committee on October–December 2025 reviews and a level‑2 thematic review focused on growth faltering.

Simonson said the panel reviewed multiple cases and found a pattern: variability in how providers diagnose growth faltering, evidence that caregiver bias can affect reporting decisions, and examples where added caregiver supports and community referrals led to weight gain for infants. "We viewed evidence of judgment being passed on to caregiver caregivers in growth faltering cases, and we observed a pretty significant impact that judgment and bias can have on medical professionals' determination to make reports to mandatory reporters to OCFS," the chair said.

The panel described three case files in its thematic review: two infants who improved after caregiver supports and a third adolescent case still under investigation; panelists recommended outreach and education for medical providers about clinical resources (for example, clinics and public health nursing) and greater coordination so families receive consistent guidance.

Simonson said the panel will add at least five more growth‑faltering cases to the review and expected to include further recommendations in its 2026 report. She emphasized confidentiality of case reviews and framed the recommendations as system improvements rather than individual judgments.

Committee members asked whether the uptick in diagnoses reflects a single provider or systemic change; panelists said further case‑level analysis is needed and that the panel will return with consolidated findings.