Munchausens Syndrome by Proxy

[Brian Morgan <brianmorgan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

My attention was drawn to this posting earlier today.

The details of this case are well known, as they have been researched by
myself, reported in the press in the UK, in a New Zealand TV3
documentary, and in a UK Channel 4 news item which I produced.

The child protection proceedings in the UK were highly complex and the
central issues were keenly disputed by two expert paediatricians who
were of opposite opinions.

The opinion of one of the experts, of Australian origin, was rejected by
the judge in favour of the British born expert, in terms which were
frankly xenophobic.

There were no findings of abuse against the two youngest of the
children, who were taken into care solely on the basis of the findings
in relation to the two oldest children, twins, on whom the controversy
was founded. The differences of opinion rested on whether the two twins
suffered brain damage at birth or were the victims of abuse.

The mother's other principal expert, an educational psychologist, who
has to this day protested the mother's innocence, travelled to New
Zealand to assist her at a family conference. A second eminent British
paediatrican now a professor in Australia also took part in the New
Zealand family conference by telephone link in order to defend the
mother, when the issue of the fifth child's care arose (the 19 month old
child of the previous posting).

A social worker from the mother's home town in the UK had pursued the
mother to New Zealand in order to try and have the fifth child taken
into care.

The New Zealand authorities examined the history of the case at length
and refused to take any further action - an NZ lawyer, in interview with
us, described the conduct of the British authorities who took the four
children originally as 'barbaric.'

I do not intend disclosing any new information about this family except
to say the Australian authorities themselves have also declined to take
any further action,  and that the original care proceedings in the UK
may shortly be the subject of an appeal in the UK.

I have followed this affair since before the care proceedings actually
began in the UK, and have kept in touch with the family ever since.

There is no doubt from my research that evidence was kept from the
court, other evidence was fabricated, and vital witnesses kept from
giving evidence.

This will all emerge one day I am confident, and a number of public
officials will have to explain their conduct.

I would appreciate it if this balancing report could be posted.

Brian Morgan

       To: Child Maltreatment Researchers
<CHILD-MALTREATMENT-RESEARCH-L@cornell.edu>
       Subject: MUNCHAUSENS BY PROXY SYNDROME
       From: Terence.Venning@dhs.vic.gov.au
       Date: Fri, 9 Oct 98 09:46:10 +1000
       In-Reply-To: <199810052231.AAA23723@ramses.alex.it>
       Reply-To: CHILD-MALTREATMENT-RESEARCH-L@cornell.edu
       Sender: owner-CHILD-MALTREATMENT-RESEARCH-L@cornell.edu



     I am seeking information about the MBPS where the mother has had
four
     previous children removed from her care in the UK.

     She has left the UK, remarried and now has a new child , currently
19
     months old.

     Does anyone have information about the likelihood of risk to this
new
     child.

     Terence Venning
     Teal Leader
     High Risk Crisis Response Team
     Department of Human Services
     Melbourne Australia
     email: Terence.Venning@dhs.vic.gov.au