Elizabeth Struhs inquest: police had no 2019 protocol to share information
Representative image: QuinceCreative / Pixabay
The Elizabeth Struhs inquest heard on 20 October 2026 that Queensland police had no 2019 protocol to share charge information with child safety.
What Happened
A Queensland coroner examining the death of eight-year-old Elizabeth Struhs has asked whether a "lack of curiosity" by authorities about her family's religious beliefs was a "missed opportunity" to protect her. At the inquest on Tuesday, 20 October 2026, a senior Queensland police officer, whose name is suppressed, told Coroner Ainslie Kirkegaard that in 2019 there was no protocol for police and child safety officers to share information about criminal charges. Elizabeth died in January 2022 from diabetic ketoacidosis after her insulin was stopped by her father; her parents and other members of the small religious group the family belonged to were later convicted of her manslaughter.
Key Facts
- The inquest, led by Coroner Ainslie Kirkegaard, is examining whether state authorities could have better protected Elizabeth. It is expected to hear from about 30 witnesses, mostly staff of government departments that had contact with the family.
- Elizabeth, from Toowoomba in Queensland, had type 1 diabetes. She died in January 2022 after her insulin injections were stopped.
- On 20 October, the police witness said there was no protocol in 2019 for sharing information about criminal charges between police and child safety services, and was unsure whether behavioural specialists had been consulted at the time.
- Asked about a "lack of curiosity" over her mother Kerrie Struhs's beliefs, the officer said that "the motivation behind the beliefs are not as important as the risks posed by those beliefs".
- Queensland police introduced measures in June 2026 to flag people who hold an "Ideology of Concern", a category that includes religious, racist and anti-government beliefs, according to evidence reported from the inquest.
- Earlier, on 16 October, a child safety officer told the inquest she had not fully understood the religious group's influence and had not anticipated that Elizabeth's father would join it.
- The parents and 12 other members of the group were convicted of manslaughter by a judge in an earlier criminal trial.
Why It Matters
Elizabeth's death drew wide attention in Australia, and the inquest is now asking a different question from the criminal trial. The trial decided who was legally responsible. The inquest is looking at the system: what police, child safety staff, doctors and schools knew, whether they talked to each other, and whether a different response could have saved her.
The evidence so far points to a familiar weakness. Several agencies had contact with the family, and the mother spoke openly about her beliefs to a range of professionals, yet the information does not appear to have been brought together, and few asked what those beliefs meant in practice for the children. The police officer's answer, that the risk created by beliefs matters more than the reasons behind them, sums up the shift the inquest is likely to push for: assessing what a family's views mean for a child's daily safety, such as access to medicine, rather than debating the views themselves.
For families everywhere, including in India, the case raises a hard balance. Parents have the right to their faith and to raise children in it, and most religious families care for their children well. But when a belief leads to stopping essential medical treatment, the child's right to life and health has to come first, and the systems around the family need to notice early and act together. Clear information-sharing between police, health workers, schools and child-protection services is the practical lesson.
| Date | Inquest evidence |
|---|---|
| 12 October 2026 | Inquest opens, about 30 witnesses expected |
| 16 October 2026 | Child safety officer says the group's influence was not fully understood |
| 20 October 2026 | Police officer says no 2019 protocol for sharing charge information |
Impact
Short-term: The inquest continues with more witnesses from government departments. Its hearings are adding public pressure on Queensland agencies to explain how they assessed the risk to Elizabeth.
Long-term: The coroner's findings and recommendations, expected after the hearings end, could change how Queensland police and child safety services share information and assess risks linked to a family's beliefs.
Who is affected: Children at risk in families that reject medical care, the police, child safety and health staff who work with such families, and lawmakers deciding how to balance religious freedom with child protection.
Key Takeaway
The Elizabeth Struhs inquest heard on 20 October 2026 that Queensland police had no 2019 protocol to share charge information with child safety, as the coroner asked whether a lack of curiosity cost a chance to save her.
Questions and Answers
Who was Elizabeth Struhs?
Elizabeth Struhs was an eight-year-old girl from Toowoomba, Queensland, who had type 1 diabetes. She died in January 2022 from diabetic ketoacidosis after her insulin was stopped by her father.
What is the Elizabeth Struhs inquest examining?
Coroner Ainslie Kirkegaard is examining whether state authorities, including police and child safety services, could have better protected Elizabeth before her death. About 30 witnesses are expected to give evidence.
What did the police officer tell the inquest on 20 October 2026?
The officer said there was no protocol in 2019 for police and child safety services to share information about criminal charges, and that the risks posed by beliefs matter more than the motivation behind them.
Has anyone been convicted over Elizabeth's death?
Yes. In an earlier criminal trial, a judge convicted her parents and 12 other members of the religious group of manslaughter.
Disclaimer: Prepared by the Peepals newsroom from publicly available sources with AI assistance. Information is accurate to the best of our knowledge at the time of publication and may change. Images may be representative. Not professional advice. Report an error via our contact page.
Sourced and fact-checked by the Peepals Global Editorial Team
Reported, fact-checked and published by the Peepals Global Editorial Team.
