‘A bit unique': MPs Josh Burns, Georgie Purcell are expecting a baby girl
The pair made social media announcements on Sunday, with Purcell revealing she was receiving weekly medical checks as her pregnancy was deemed high-risk due to Purcell's autoimmune disease.
Burns is a Labor Party member for the Melbourne seat of Macnamara and Purcell is an Animal Justice Party member and sits in the Legislative Council representing Northern Victoria.
Purcell also declared she would be running for re-election in the 2026 state election and planned to return to work in February.
She published a detailed Instagram post about the pregnancy, including thanking the couple 's closest friends for keeping the news private until they chose to make it public.
'This is obviously a vegan pregnancy (and baby) and I've been feeling good which has let me keep pace with sitting weeks, late nights, international travel, community events and the general silliness of the job,' Purcell wrote.
'But this new stage hasn't been without its challenges - some of you have seen me talk in the past about my autoimmune disease. It means I'm navigating pregnancy and a chronic illness and because of the range of antibodies I am positive for, I am officially in the high-risk category.'
She thanked the medical staff who have cared for her during weekly medical check-ups, calling them 'incredibly kind, reassuring and supportive.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sky News AU
an hour ago
- Sky News AU
Sydney Midwife who accused Melbourne obstetrician of ‘anti-Semitism' dragged to court for alleged stalking, harassment and doxxing
A long-running saga between an obstetrician and a midwife with different views on the Middle East has landed in court. Melbourne obstetrician Dr Miranda Robinson has applied for a personal safety intervention order in the Melbourne Magistrates Court against Sydney-based Sharon Stoliar, accusing her of stalking and harassment. But the former midwife-turned-maternity advocate has hit back with her own claims of 'racism' and 'anti-Semitism' against Dr Robinson, in an exclusive sit-down interview with Sky News. Dr Robinson made headlines 10 years ago when she delivered four sets of twin girls in one week, during a baby boom at St Vincent's Private Hospital in Melbourne. In the past year, she's restyled herself as something of a medical influencer, posting reels to her public Facebook page about maternity care and revealing her own personal struggles with neurodiversity. But it was a post Dr Robinson made to a Facebook group Australian and New Zealand Doctors for Palestine, which then boasted 1200 members, that began her stoush with Ms Stoliar in January last year. The specialist had posted about Ms Stoliar being a 'POC [person of colour] and married to a Jewish man' who'd 'been brainwashed' due to her support for Israel, adding, 'I'd be very worried if I were one of her patients.' Ms Stoliar was sent a screenshot of the comment and posted it to her own Instagram account, with the caption 'Post 1 of many where healthcare professionals have participated in making libellous statements against me.' She also obtained and reposted screenshots of a private message Dr Robinson had sent another Instagram user, in which the doctor describes Ms Stoliar as being linked to the 'Jewish mafia' and whose Jewish family comes from 'dirty, dirty money'. Ms Stoliar filed complaints about Dr Robinson's posts to the Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency (AHPRA) and the Royal Australian New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, and also contacted the obstetrician's employers at St Vincent's and Epsworth private hospitals, and Sage Women's Healthcare. The Australian reported last August AHPRA had backflipped on a decision to impose conditions on Dr Robinson, instead finding she had 'indicated that she never intentionally meant to cause harm to [Ms Stoliar] and appreciates that [she] may have found the comments to have been hurtful.' The agency said the doctor had completed 'formal education' on social media use and 'demonstrated her commitment to uphold the professional standards with respect to appropriate conduct on social media.' But Dr Robinson continued to publish offensive posts to social media, in November sharing another post titled 'Z!onism is a mental illness' and commenting she 'loves the Netherlands' on a post about the attacks on Jewish football fans in Amsterdam that month. Bizarrely, Dr Robinson also posted a comment in support of convicted mushroom killer Erin Patterson to LinkedIn, writing, 'I see someone yet again traumatised by a system that doesn't understand her.' Other pro-Israel activists started to reshare Dr Robinson's content online with their own commentary. Ms Stoliar then made a second complaint with AHPRA in March this year about the fresh posts, followed by a complaint to the Australian Human Rights Commission about the original post on the basis of racial discrimination against both Jews and people of colour, both sighted by Sky News. Spokespeople for both the regulatory body and the commission said they could not comment. In submissions filed with the court, Dr Robinson alleges Ms Stoliar's repeated complaints represented a 'pattern of targeted harassment and cyberstalking… [including] doxxing, catfishing, intimidation, threats and online harassment' and a 'campaign to vilify and target [Dr Robinson] for her political views.' She claimed the initial post about Ms Stoliar was made on a 'private' Facebook group that had been created 'to share concerns about the humanitarian impact of the Gaza genocide'. Dr Robinson claimed her contracts with two of the healthcare providers had been terminated as a result of the 'targeted campaign', and that she has experienced 'ongoing fear for her safety and that of her children', 'professional isolation', and had been 'forced out of private practice and lost her admitting rights at the Epworth Hospital, resulting in the estimated loss of $80,000 per month in professional income.' An Epworth spokeswoman said the hospital 'does not comment on individual matters or proceedings before the court.' The doctor also claimed in the submissions that the 'reputational harm' she had suffered had led to the 'premature termination of a planned podcast series', losing her 'access to a growing audience and potential patient base.' She said since November last year, she had attended 'weekly psychological appointments' for 'ongoing distress' and 'significant anxiety and stress resulting from the Respondent's targeted campaign.' Ms Stoliar denies she was harassing Dr Robinson and questioned many of her claims. 'That's not harassment – that's me as a legal citizen of this country accessing my legal right to escalate concerns that I feel are justified,' she said. 'I wouldn't call it doxxing if something has already been posted online and I'm resharing. I don't have access to her personal information and as far as I'm aware, doxxing is about exposing personal, private information that is not publicly accessible. 'Maybe she's angry that I have chosen not to be silent about it, that I am actually someone who is speaking out about an injustice that I see needs to be dealt with. There needs to be accountability and I don't think she likes that.' Ms Stoliar says she, too, had received threats as a result of Dr Robinson's and other pro-Palestine activists' posts about her, some serious enough to force her to move home. In her second complaint to AHPRA, Ms Stoliar raised specific concerns about the safety of Dr Robinson's patients, writing: 'Dr Robinson's continued expression of hatred online is alarming, particularly in the context of her role in patient care.' 'I do have concerns for patients who are people of colour or patients who are Jewish, that if these are the views that she holds, where is the line between holding those views and acting on them, even subconsciously?' Ms Stoliar told Sky News. She says Dr Robinson's conduct is part of a much broader problem within the Australian healthcare industry of professionals openly sharing anti-Semitic views online. Sydney nurses Ahmad Rashad Nadir and Sarah Abu Lebdeh were stood down from their jobs with NSW Health and charged with various criminal offences after a video of the pair bragging about killing Israeli patients at Bankstown Hospital, in the city's southwest, went viral. Another Melbourne doctor, Mohamed Ghilan, last year resigned from Caulfield Hospital – in an area with a large Jewish population – after colleagues raised concerns over his 'racist and inflammatory' social media posts, which included praising Hamas and its former leader Yahya Sinwar. A dossier sent to Health Minister Mark Butler two years ago, compiled by 235 health professionals, detailed the pro-Hamas sentiment in social media posts by many of their colleagues but appears to never have been acted on. 'We have doctors celebrating what Hamas did on October 7, we have doctors celebrating what happened to Jews on the streets of Amsterdam,' Ms Stoliar said. 'Where is the outrage about that? 'Doctors, nurses, midwives openly sharing horrific views - anti-Semitic, Jew-hating views, quite disgusting comments on big social media [groups]… and there have been no consequences, there have been no repercussions, there have been no disciplinary action. 'They've been able to spew this unrestrained hate, this racism towards Jewish people. 'They're holding these biases within them and if we've progressed to the step where they're publicising it on social media - public platforms - when does that translate into clinical practice or subconscious mistakes when it comes to treating patients? 'This is my concern, not just about Dr Miranda Robinson, but about so many doctors who have high positions in Australia who have voiced comments online. 'We hold doctors to a higher standard in our society, something every doctor needs to come to terms with. That comes with the job, with the title, with the role and when you are celebrating the near-death of hundreds of Jewish people publicly [in the Netherlands], that is concerning, and I think that calls for an investigation into the emotional stability and the psychological stability of the person.' After Sky News began investigating this story, Dr Robinson's legal team made an offer to Ms Stoliar on Tuesday to 'withdraw' her application for the personal safety intervention order, citing 'media… enquiries'. The court confirmed the matter remained listed for Monday. 'I have refused to sign an undertaking based on the notion that I am harassing her by raising justified complaints with AHPRA,' Ms Stoliar said. 'I don't think I should be bullied into silence when there are things that need to be said or spoken and people need to be held accountable.' When Sky News called Dr Robinson to offer her an opportunity for an interview, she hung up. Her lawyer Bernadette Zaydan later sent a response to a series of questions, saying it was 'inappropriate for anyone to comment at this time, as the matter between the parties is before the court'. 'My client reserves all of her legal rights against Sky News, any journalist involved in their personal capacity and Ms Stoliar in relation to this matter,' Ms Zaydan warned.
The Advertiser
2 hours ago
- The Advertiser
Fears for vulnerable children as social media ban grows
Limiting children's access to social media could inadvertently harm marginalised children, an expert has warned, as YouTube is roped into Australia's ban. The federal government's decision to include the video-sharing platform in its social media ban for under-16s has renewed focus on the measure. While it has been broadly celebrated by the coalition and Labor, who say it will protect children from the harms of social media, youth mental health foundation Headspace disagrees. "This is seen as a solution and it may be helpful, we don't know. But it may cause harm as well," national clinical advisor Simon Dodd told AAP. "We've talked to young people and they value social media. They value the connections it gives them." This was particularly true for those who struggled to find physical community in parts of regional or rural Australia, and for LGBTQI youth, who use social media platforms to find support and stay safe, Mr Dodd said. Mental health is complicated as there are many factors that can impact it, including a person's social environment, and focusing on one measure as a solution risks missing opportunities to address young people's challenges . From December, people under 16 will no longer be able to create accounts on social media platforms such as Snapchat, Instagram, Facebook ,TikTok and now YouTube. Platforms that fail to conform with these rules face fines of up to $49.5 million. Eating disorder not-for-profit Hide N Seek warned YouTube could be home to harmful content such as extreme videos about body transformations or "what I eat in a day" media. "It can be extremely damaging, extremely damaging for children who are still developing their sense of self," founder Jaimee Krawitz told AAP. "But YouTube also hosts supportive, recovery-focused communities and educational content that can be part of a young person's healing journey." The changes will still allow children to access YouTube Kids or view videos accessible without an account. Though he recognised regulation was part of the answer to making online spaces safer, Mr Dodd has also urged the government to centre on young people's voices. "They have consistently told us they get the complexities of the social media environment and understand it better than many of the adults who are trying to legislate something that is difficult to manage," he said. "Without genuine consultation, this will result in young people feeling less trust in government and that is a real worry." Limiting children's access to social media could inadvertently harm marginalised children, an expert has warned, as YouTube is roped into Australia's ban. The federal government's decision to include the video-sharing platform in its social media ban for under-16s has renewed focus on the measure. While it has been broadly celebrated by the coalition and Labor, who say it will protect children from the harms of social media, youth mental health foundation Headspace disagrees. "This is seen as a solution and it may be helpful, we don't know. But it may cause harm as well," national clinical advisor Simon Dodd told AAP. "We've talked to young people and they value social media. They value the connections it gives them." This was particularly true for those who struggled to find physical community in parts of regional or rural Australia, and for LGBTQI youth, who use social media platforms to find support and stay safe, Mr Dodd said. Mental health is complicated as there are many factors that can impact it, including a person's social environment, and focusing on one measure as a solution risks missing opportunities to address young people's challenges . From December, people under 16 will no longer be able to create accounts on social media platforms such as Snapchat, Instagram, Facebook ,TikTok and now YouTube. Platforms that fail to conform with these rules face fines of up to $49.5 million. Eating disorder not-for-profit Hide N Seek warned YouTube could be home to harmful content such as extreme videos about body transformations or "what I eat in a day" media. "It can be extremely damaging, extremely damaging for children who are still developing their sense of self," founder Jaimee Krawitz told AAP. "But YouTube also hosts supportive, recovery-focused communities and educational content that can be part of a young person's healing journey." The changes will still allow children to access YouTube Kids or view videos accessible without an account. Though he recognised regulation was part of the answer to making online spaces safer, Mr Dodd has also urged the government to centre on young people's voices. "They have consistently told us they get the complexities of the social media environment and understand it better than many of the adults who are trying to legislate something that is difficult to manage," he said. "Without genuine consultation, this will result in young people feeling less trust in government and that is a real worry." Limiting children's access to social media could inadvertently harm marginalised children, an expert has warned, as YouTube is roped into Australia's ban. The federal government's decision to include the video-sharing platform in its social media ban for under-16s has renewed focus on the measure. While it has been broadly celebrated by the coalition and Labor, who say it will protect children from the harms of social media, youth mental health foundation Headspace disagrees. "This is seen as a solution and it may be helpful, we don't know. But it may cause harm as well," national clinical advisor Simon Dodd told AAP. "We've talked to young people and they value social media. They value the connections it gives them." This was particularly true for those who struggled to find physical community in parts of regional or rural Australia, and for LGBTQI youth, who use social media platforms to find support and stay safe, Mr Dodd said. Mental health is complicated as there are many factors that can impact it, including a person's social environment, and focusing on one measure as a solution risks missing opportunities to address young people's challenges . From December, people under 16 will no longer be able to create accounts on social media platforms such as Snapchat, Instagram, Facebook ,TikTok and now YouTube. Platforms that fail to conform with these rules face fines of up to $49.5 million. Eating disorder not-for-profit Hide N Seek warned YouTube could be home to harmful content such as extreme videos about body transformations or "what I eat in a day" media. "It can be extremely damaging, extremely damaging for children who are still developing their sense of self," founder Jaimee Krawitz told AAP. "But YouTube also hosts supportive, recovery-focused communities and educational content that can be part of a young person's healing journey." The changes will still allow children to access YouTube Kids or view videos accessible without an account. Though he recognised regulation was part of the answer to making online spaces safer, Mr Dodd has also urged the government to centre on young people's voices. "They have consistently told us they get the complexities of the social media environment and understand it better than many of the adults who are trying to legislate something that is difficult to manage," he said. "Without genuine consultation, this will result in young people feeling less trust in government and that is a real worry." Limiting children's access to social media could inadvertently harm marginalised children, an expert has warned, as YouTube is roped into Australia's ban. The federal government's decision to include the video-sharing platform in its social media ban for under-16s has renewed focus on the measure. While it has been broadly celebrated by the coalition and Labor, who say it will protect children from the harms of social media, youth mental health foundation Headspace disagrees. "This is seen as a solution and it may be helpful, we don't know. But it may cause harm as well," national clinical advisor Simon Dodd told AAP. "We've talked to young people and they value social media. They value the connections it gives them." This was particularly true for those who struggled to find physical community in parts of regional or rural Australia, and for LGBTQI youth, who use social media platforms to find support and stay safe, Mr Dodd said. Mental health is complicated as there are many factors that can impact it, including a person's social environment, and focusing on one measure as a solution risks missing opportunities to address young people's challenges . From December, people under 16 will no longer be able to create accounts on social media platforms such as Snapchat, Instagram, Facebook ,TikTok and now YouTube. Platforms that fail to conform with these rules face fines of up to $49.5 million. Eating disorder not-for-profit Hide N Seek warned YouTube could be home to harmful content such as extreme videos about body transformations or "what I eat in a day" media. "It can be extremely damaging, extremely damaging for children who are still developing their sense of self," founder Jaimee Krawitz told AAP. "But YouTube also hosts supportive, recovery-focused communities and educational content that can be part of a young person's healing journey." The changes will still allow children to access YouTube Kids or view videos accessible without an account. Though he recognised regulation was part of the answer to making online spaces safer, Mr Dodd has also urged the government to centre on young people's voices. "They have consistently told us they get the complexities of the social media environment and understand it better than many of the adults who are trying to legislate something that is difficult to manage," he said. "Without genuine consultation, this will result in young people feeling less trust in government and that is a real worry."
Sydney Morning Herald
2 hours ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
Even for less than honourable professions, this was way out of bounds
It is a serious allegation which, if proven under Victorian law, would make Sam Groth, a parliamentarian with ambitions to lead his party and the state, guilty of a sex crime against a minor. The Herald Sun investigation did not substantiate the allegation, which on Wednesday was denied by Groth. Instead, it has created a likely test case for Australia's strengthened privacy laws, which include a new statutory tort for serious invasion of privacy. The paper's interest in the Groths' sexual history was piqued by the Groths' comments in previous interviews when they said the first met in 2011 at the Templestowe Park Tennis Club. This would make Brittany 16 or 17 years old and Sam Groth either 23 or 24. Drill reported that unnamed Liberal Party colleagues raised the issue with Groth amid concerns it could be weaponised by his political opponents. This suggests Groth's enemies within the Liberal Party fuelled this grubby exposé. Groth says the matter was never raised with him by a colleague. He also says neither he nor Brittany – the only two people who know the circumstances of when their sexual relationship started – spoke to the Herald Sun about the story before publication. The Groths' lawyers, defamation expert Patrick George and barrister Sue Chrysanthou, SC, are the team which successfully sued former Liberal leader John Pesutto on behalf of colleague Moira Deeming. On Wednesday morning, their legal letter landed in the inbox of Herald Sun editor-in-chief Sam Weir. Loading If this case progresses to trial, it will be nervously watched by rival media organisations including Nine, the publisher of this masthead, which lobbied for years against the introduction of a statutory privacy tort. The concerns notice seen by this masthead makes clear that while the defamatory imputations are against Sam Groth – the most serious being that 'he sexually assaulted Brittany when she was under 18' and 'committed a crime of sexual assault against a minor in his care or supervision' – the most egregious invasion of privacy was against Brittany Groth. Any woman, even one married to a politician, should be safe in thinking their teenage sexual history is off-limits to political skulduggery and newspaper snooping. The concerns notice describes the decision to 'name and shame' Brittany Groth as an alleged victim of child sexual assault as a 'grotesque act'. 'There was no basis to allege that any relevant sexual misconduct took place merely because our clients are said to have met when Mrs Groth was 17,' the notice read. 'Mr Groth has not been charged with any crime, or even investigated or questioned by police.' The privacy laws recognise media freedom as a countervailing public interest. The Herald Sun, which is standing by its reporting, will seek to test the strength of this provision. The outcome of any trial could have far-reaching implications for journalism and the politicians we report on. But at its heart, this story turns on questions that, frankly, feel wrong to ask. Are any of us entitled to know when and in what circumstances a politician and their partner consummated a loving, ongoing relationship? To return to Ferguson's observation about journalists, we're not awful people, really.
