This Note analyzes the Court's decision in Nemeth. Part II presents a background of the battered child syndrome followed by a discussion of the admissibility of battered woman and battered child syndrome testimony in Ohio. In addition, it contains a brief overview of Ohio's ambiguous self-defense standard. Part III presents the facts, procedural history, and holding of Nemeth. Part IV analyzes the Court's holding.

This Note establishes why the Ohio Supreme Court should recognize the psychological equivalency of the battered woman and battered child syndromes and affirm the Nemeth holding on equal protection grounds. In doing so, the Court will ensure that abused children enjoy the same evidentiary right as abused women. Namely, the right to present expert psychological testimony to support their self-defense claims.