Elizabeth Struhs Inquest: Missed Curiosity About Religious Beliefs 2026

The inquest into the death of eight-year-old Elizabeth Struhs has heard that a “lack of curiosity” about her family’s religious beliefs was a “missed opportunity” to save her life. Coroner Ainslie Kirkegaard is examining how multiple government agencies interacted with the Struhs family before Elizabeth died of diabetic ketoacidosis on 7 January 2022.

Elizabeth’s father had stopped providing insulin for her type 1 diabetes, and her family—members of a religious sect known as the “saints”—did not believe in seeking medical treatment. The case has raised serious questions about how authorities respond when parents’ religious views conflict with a child’s medical needs.

What Happened to Elizabeth Struhs?

Elizabeth died after her father ceased giving her insulin, leading to diabetic ketoacidosis—a preventable complication of type 1 diabetes. Instead of seeking medical help, her family and other sect members sang and prayed for her resurrection after her death.

The family had come to the attention of multiple government departments following a 2019 hospitalisation for the same condition. On that occasion, Elizabeth was extremely unwell because her parents delayed seeking medical help, and both were later convicted of child neglect.

The Inquest: Key Focus on ‘Lack of Curiosity’

Coroner Kirkegaard is sitting for the seventh day of the inquest and has previously heard that Elizabeth’s mother, Kerrie Struhs, repeatedly told police, healthcare workers, teachers, parole officers and child safety workers about her views—and said she would do the same thing again.

These views were also discussed at a formal interagency case management meeting by the suspected child abuse and neglect team. Yet the coroner noted that none of the professionals seemed curious about Kerrie’s religious beliefs or their implications for Elizabeth’s care.

Kirkegaard is now considering adopting recommendations from Victoria’s cults inquiry, which examined how cults operate and how authorities can better protect vulnerable people. The inquest is exploring whether a similar approach could prevent future tragedies.

Why This Matters: Religious Beliefs vs. Child Protection

This case highlights a fundamental tension between respecting religious freedom and protecting children from harm. When parents’ beliefs lead them to withhold life-saving medical treatment, authorities must intervene—but the inquest suggests they may be hesitant to challenge religious claims.

The “lack of curiosity” described by the coroner points to a systemic issue: professionals may avoid probing religious beliefs for fear of appearing discriminatory or overstepping. However, as this case shows, such hesitance can have fatal consequences.

• Religious exemptions for medical care vary by jurisdiction and can leave children vulnerable.
• Interagency communication is critical—multiple departments knew of Elizabeth’s situation but failed to act decisively.
• Cultural competence training should include understanding how extreme beliefs can endanger children.
• Mandatory reporting must be backed by thorough follow-up and investigation.
• Coronial recommendations can drive policy changes to prevent similar deaths.

What the Coroner Is Considering

Coroner Kirkegaard is weighing whether to adopt recommendations from Victoria’s cults inquiry, which likely include measures to improve how authorities identify and respond to cult-like groups. Such recommendations might involve training for child safety workers, clearer guidelines for intervening when religious beliefs conflict with medical care, and better coordination between agencies.

The inquest has also heard that Elizabeth’s mother was open about her views, telling professionals she would repeat her actions. This raises questions about why no one took decisive action to remove Elizabeth from the situation or ensure she received proper medical care.

Comparison of Agency Responses

The table illustrates that despite widespread knowledge of the family’s beliefs, no single agency took responsibility for ensuring Elizabeth’s safety. This fragmentation is a common problem in child protection cases.

What to Watch Next

The inquest is expected to continue, with Coroner Kirkegaard likely to hand down findings and recommendations later. These could lead to changes in how child safety workers are trained to assess religious beliefs as a risk factor. The background to this story is set out in Elizabeth Struhs: Doctor Warning Ignored Before Sect Death. A related thread runs through Elizabeth Struhs Case: Doctors Urged Involuntary Mental Health. Earlier coverage in Elizabeth Struhs Child Protection Case Not Prioritised Due to Workload shows how the argument developed.

Advocates for children’s rights will be watching closely to see whether the coroner adopts the Victorian cults inquiry recommendations. If she does, it could set a precedent for other states and territories. A closer look at the same subject appears in Inquest: Elizabeth Struhs' Mother Assessed as No Risk Before Death. Anyone following the wider picture can start with Child Safety Officer Incorrectly Assessed Elizabeth Struhs as Safe. The same theme surfaces in Teenage Mother's Death in Melbourne Prison Under Coroner's Inquiry, which takes a different angle.

For now, Elizabeth’s death stands as a stark reminder that curiosity—asking difficult questions about beliefs that may harm children—is not just good practice but a moral imperative. Context on how this played out before sits in Jesse Deacon Inquest: Police Shooting of Man with Schizophrenia. A companion piece, Belfast Teenager Noah Donohoe Failed by PSNI Inquest Finds, approaches the same subject from another angle.