By Dee McLachlan
I’m involved in many cases, but one continues to haunt me.
A young boy was seemingly or allegedly violently taken from his mother and has never been seen by her again. Like so many parents caught in the child protection system, she has been left in complete darkness. She doesn’t know whether her son is safe, whether he is healthy—or even whether he is still alive.
Some time ago, I tried to make enquiries simply to establish that he was okay. As I quickly discovered, however, almost everything surrounding children removed by the State is hidden behind a wall of secrecy.
I recently learnt that the South Australian Ombudsman was Emily Strickland. We had spoken some years earlier when she was Deputy, and I remembered her as someone who appeared willing to listen. The Ombudsman exists to ensure government agencies act lawfully, fairly and accountably, so I once again took to letter writing.
Below is an extract of my 6-page letter:
Dear Ms Strickland,
I hope you are well. I write concerning a mother whose case raises profoundly disturbing questions about the exercise of public power in South Australia. The legality of the extraordinary statutory powers exercised against her must stand or fall on the objective evidence that existed before her four-year-old son was forcibly removed, before she was detained, medicated and permanently separated from him. Subsequent diagnoses or later events—including those potentially arising from the trauma and grief of that separation—cannot retrospectively create a lawful foundation that did not exist at the time.
Our Discussion in 2018
I do not know whether you recall our conversation just before Christmas in 2018, when you were Deputy Ombudsman. We spoke for close to forty minutes about a mother whose eight-year-old daughter had been removed despite that mum having recently been awarded sole parental responsibility by the Family Court.
What I remember most was your genuine concern. You indicated that the matter would be referred to your most senior investigators. I was unable to reach you in 2019 and thereafter you were occupied in other positions in government. Although that investigation and my subsequent submissions came to nought, I never forgot the care and professionalism with which you initially reacted to my December 2018 complaint.
It marked the beginning of an eight-year journey advocating for countless parents across Australia—entirely pro bono—and working to expose these deeply troubling cases to public scrutiny.
It took considerable effort between late 2019 and 2021 to obtain the recorded police interview, police notes and other material. That material revealed that a police officer had deliberately concealed the child’s (innocently told) disclosures of sexual abuse, torture and r**e, and subsequently created notes that directly contradicted what was recorded during the interview… [details of that case redacted]
It is for that reason that I now respectfully ask you to consider this case personally.
The removal of her son
I have followed the mother’s case for several years. Having reviewed the documentary evidence, listened to recordings involving clinicians, and assisted her in some court submissions and I have formed the view that her case raises issues of profound public importance.
At its heart is a simple chronology.
The mother had previously worked as a court security officer in courts, hospitals and Parliament in Victoria, where she says she witnessed institutional misconduct. In 2019, when her son was about eight months old, Victorian Child Protection became involved after she escaped threats from a neighbour. Her son was removed for a short period before being reunified — and mother and child continued with their lives.
Four years later, in late April 2023, the mum was on holiday and travelling with her now four-year-old son after completing part of a pilot training course in Canberra, and on route to visit her mother in South Australia. In early May 2023, she attempted to report allegations of government corruption, together with concerns surrounding the alleged wrongful death of her infant nephew, to the Yoorrook Justice Commission.
Within hours, a notification was made from Victoria alleging that she had “fled” the State. If that allegation was knowingly false or recklessly made without regard to its truth, it fundamentally undermines the lawfulness of the decisions that followed. The following day, she was located and detained in a small town in South Australia. Her four-year-old son was violently and forcibly removed from her care, and she was detained under the Mental Health Act and immediately subjected to involuntary psychiatric treatment.
The extraordinary feature of this case is that the mum’s beliefs concerning government wrongdoing were treated as evidence of psychosis before she had even undergone an assessment. I have listened to a disturbing recording the next day when a clinician immediately informed her that she would be treated for psychosis. When she asked how that conclusion had been reached before any assessment had taken place, the clinician replied that an assessment would then be conducted.
The mother was administered olanzapine, an antipsychotic (Schizophrenia) medication, before any psychiatric assessment had been undertaken. She repeatedly informed clinicians that the medication was causing severe adverse effects, including suicidal thoughts, yet those concerns were not acted upon. She was released and later was then subjected to compulsory depot injections, despite reporting similar adverse effects.
The mother immediately sought reunification through the Youth Court proceedings. However, a litigation guardian was appointed to represent her despite her opposition, and the guardian supported the Department’s position rather than seeking reunification.
This mother subsequently informed the treating authorities that she had married and was pregnant with a baby girl. Despite being notified of the pregnancy, the compulsory treatment continued notwithstanding the recognized need to assess the risks of antipsychotic medication during pregnancy — because pregnant women are generally excluded from clinical drug trials for ethical reasons
Tragically, she lost the pregnancy. She has also remained separated from her son since then, and as of the time of writing this letter, she has had no contact for over 1,170 days.
This gives rise to a profoundly disturbing question:
Was a four-year-old child removed, and the bond between mother and son effectively severed, before any lawful evidentiary foundation existed, with subsequent events then relied upon to retrospectively justify that intervention?
It also raises a further question:
Was sufficient and lawful consideration given to the continuation of compulsory antipsychotic treatment, particularly after the treating authorities became aware of the mother’s pregnancy, having regard to the potential risks to her unborn child?
I have seen the photographs and videos of a happy child with his loving mother in early 2023. The contrast with what followed is profoundly distressing.
I am thus equally concerned that the profound grief and psychological trauma flowing from the forced separation have become the rationale for continuing the intervention and separation. If so, the State risks relying upon psychological harm created by its own actions to justify the continuation of those actions—a proposition that should concern every public authority entrusted with coercive statutory powers.
END OF EXTRACT FROM LETTER
The letter goes on to discuss the Ombudsman’s response.
In it, I ask Ms Strickland to secure the body-worn camera footage of the alleged violent removal of the child, together with the records relating to the notification that the mother had allegedly “fled” Victoria, and any medical assessments or other material that existed at the time which purportedly justified such extraordinary intervention.
During the past eight years, I have encountered numerous cases in which deeply held beliefs about government conduct have been characterised as evidence of mental illness, with devastating consequences for the individuals and families involved.
To be clear, the mother maintains that elements within government are corrupt. She says this belief arose from her own experiences. Whether she is right or wrong is a matter that should be determined by evidence, not by psychiatric assumption. Australia has established anti-corruption commissions, integrity bodies and ombudsmen precisely because governments and public officials are capable of misconduct. The existence of those institutions is itself an acknowledgment that corruption does occur.
If a person’s political or institutional beliefs can become the basis for compulsory psychiatric intervention or the removal of a child, we enter profoundly dangerous territory. It evokes the dystopian warning of George Orwell’s 1984—not because disagreement with government is itself proof of oppression, but because the freedom to question authority without fear of being labelled mentally ill is fundamental to a democratic society.
During Dee’s ordeals over that period i discussed on many occasions the horrible response and attitudes by
bureaucrats and government and can attest to the concerning matters and reactions placed upon her and parental parties.
So for an ombudsman and the costs!
So for the bastards in parliaments!
I had a matter in NSW, the ombudsman did a thorough job and a law was amended by the NSW government.
As with persons appointed to the office, if they are crooked and just a government protector, then the office by losing all credibility and the staff should be replaced.
Btw, following my complaint in NSW the report was published. Did the S hit the fan on some press front pages.
So where is the SA report?
607
Just for the record.
I had a problem with NSW LEGISLATION NOT BEING applied and PROSECUTEDi.
I had the time AND HAD READ ABOUT 95 council files
So happens, I was in the lift elevating to our chambers with our NSW ombudsmen.
In short I asked him, have you a staffer who you can trust who will take up my analysis of 95 council files and bring the government to apply the ‘disorderly premises act’.
There you go; the right people in the same ascending lift.
Is that not funny Sandra.?
Somewhere one finds a angel if you
1007
these things disgust me, you would think Emily could sniff children out. Hot sauce for your pizza, Emily, its all funny till your sat on your sore ass
https://www.facebook.com/guardian4children/videos/hot-sauce-confessions-our-guardian-shona-reid-took-on-ombudsman-emily-strickland/1687900402375579/
wonder how much freedom of information costs these day, your first born. They are gatekeepers and some of us know, these idiots just have not realized we know shtick
“Please! Save Yourself And Your Family…” – Douglas MacGregor
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZYAr3J1UWzA
It will take an ombudswoman with mammoth integrity to support a whistleblower and go against the psychiatric profession. It is totally protected by APHRA and is a cartel that can label anyone anytime with one unsupported word of two.
Most common are “she’s delusion” or
suffers from “persecutory delusions” or
a “form of psychosis”.
Once labelled, good luck. It is almost impossible to challenge, because they say “of course a delusional person will dispute they are delusion.” (And so will a sane person dispute that diagnosis)
The whole thing is disgusting.
Jillionaire part 1 of my Mass Occultic Deception article series.
https://paranormaldailynews.com/secret-knowledge-isnt-secret-anymore/8543/
Governments cannot do anything that goes against the Jewish owned Central Banks self interest.
“Banking was conceived in iniquity and born in sin. Bankers own the earth. Take it away from them, but leave them with the power to create credit, and with a flick of the pen they will create enough money to buy it all back again. Take this power away from them, and all the great fortunes like mine would disappear, and they ought to disappear, for then this world would be a happier and better world to live in. But if you wish to remain the slaves of bankers and pay the cost of your own slavery, then continue to let bankers control money and control credit.”
https://www.islamicparty.com/satvoices/carved.htm
“Some even believe we (the Rockefeller family) are part of a secret cabal working
against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as
‘internationalists’ and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more
integrated global political and economic structure – one world, if you will. If that’s the
charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.”
– David Rockefeller, Memoirs, page 405
https://archive.org/stream/FOUNDATIONSTHEIRPOWERANDINFLUENCERENEA.WORMSER26/Famous%20Quotes%20about%20Government%20%20Banking%20Control%20%20and%20the%20New%20World%20Order-10_djvu.txt
Dee:
1. You have done a perfect job of reporting a history.
2. What do you mean by ‘depot injections’?
3. It seems to me (without my researching it) that administering anti-psychotic drugs to someone, sans testing, is criminal
4. This is a stretch but the miscarriage could perhaps be viewed as a murder. (The crime of murder requires ‘intention’ but I can read intention into the story you have told us.)
5. I send sympathy to the mother. And to the child who was removed.
6. Now here’s an item seemingly unrelated to your article. Because of my reporting of gov’t corruption, which began circa 2005, I got generally silenced. In some cases I’m only guessing that I am blacklisted, but in some cases it is very evident.
Presently, whilst I am running for office (US Senate, no less), I can see certain people ignoring this candidate (me) while giving ink to other candidates. My guess is that they simply know who is on a blacklist and they give that person (e.g., me) no further thought.
Regarding your case of the removal of the child however, actions more than ‘ignoring’ were present. By the way, I know two cases of Australian moms who have not seen their kid in over 7 yrs — FATHOM IT! — where they had done nothing wrong (not even reporting corruption) to deserve it.
You have been the champion for 8 years. I am going to nominate you for Order of Australia.
Thank you. Not sure if OA cures the mustard.
Murder…. yes. Interesting to see what they would say
But yes I’d say you’ve been on a list fir 2 decades.