A Queensland coroner has begun an inquest into the death of Elizabeth Struhs, examining whether government agencies could have intervened more effectively to protect the eight-year-old girl before she died in January 2022.

The hearing opened in Brisbane on 12 October 2026. Coroner Ainslie Kirkegaard is examining the involvement of several government departments and whether opportunities to identify and respond to risks to Elizabeth were missed.

Elizabeth died from diabetic ketoacidosis after her insulin injections were stopped. The inquest follows the criminal proceedings against members of her family and a fringe religious group who rejected conventional medical treatment and believed in the healing power of God.

Her parents, Jason and Kerrie Struhs, were convicted of manslaughter in 2025. The criminal trial heard that the group opposed the healthcare system and the use of medication. The new inquest is not a retrial of those convictions; its focus is on the actions and responsibilities of public agencies in the period before Elizabeth’s death.

At the opening of the hearing, the coroner acknowledged Elizabeth’s older sister, Jayde Struhs, who had been estranged from the family at the time of the child’s death. The coroner recognised the pain of losing a family member while facing intense public scrutiny and said the proceedings would explore whether Elizabeth could have been better protected.

Thirty witnesses are expected to give evidence over approximately two weeks. They include representatives from Queensland’s child safety, health, education, corrective services and police agencies. Most witnesses have had their identities legally suppressed.

One of the first issues examined was a report made to child safety authorities in 2013, several years before Elizabeth’s death. The report raised concerns about the family’s religious environment, including possible controlling beliefs, isolation and restrictions affecting the children.

A witness from the child safety department explained that the information was recorded as a Child Concern Report. This was a lower-level response and did not automatically trigger a formal investigation. A more serious Child Safety Notification was required to initiate that process.

The witness told the inquest that, even with hindsight, the information in the report did not meet the threshold for escalation because it did not establish that a child had been harmed or was at risk of harm. The hearing is examining how such decisions were made and whether the relevant procedures were adequate.

The inquest is expected to consider the communication between agencies, the information available to officials and the ways child protection concerns were assessed. Its findings may help identify whether changes are needed to prevent similar tragedies.

The proceedings are also an opportunity to hear how Elizabeth is remembered by her family, beyond the circumstances of her death. The coroner welcomed her sister’s contribution and acknowledged the importance of recognising Elizabeth as a child whose life had meaning beyond the legal case. The inquest continues, and no final findings have yet been made about whether government agencies could have prevented Elizabeth’s death.