Introducing: Nobody Should Believe Me — The Catalyst | EP 1

Summary

---

Podcast Summary: Betrayal Season 5

Episode: Introducing: Nobody Should Believe Me — The Catalyst | EP 1
Host: Andrea Dunlop
Date: May 25, 2026
Produced by: iHeartPodcasts | Glass Podcasts

---

Overview & Main Theme

The debut episode of the new season explores the aftermath of the high-profile Kowalski v. Johns Hopkins All Children’s Hospital case, dissecting both the legal battle and the media firestorm that followed the Netflix documentary Take Care of Maya. It scrutinizes how clear cases of documented child abuse can become widely misunderstood and mythologized in public discourse, fueling conspiracy theories like “medical kidnapping” and undermining confidence in child protection systems. The episode also introduces this season’s broader theme—a deep examination of who gets believed when child abuse is alleged, the societal fixation on parental rights, and the complex tension between protecting children and respecting family autonomy.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

The Maya Kowalski Case: Facts vs. Media Narrative

• Case Background: Maya Kowalski, under her mother Beata’s care, received 55 ketamine infusions (including a dangerous coma in Mexico) for complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS), despite being diagnosed by reputable hospitals with conversion disorder or factitious disorder. Her mother continued to push for more radical treatments, contemplating hospice for her young daughter (06:06).
• Hospital Involvement: Johns Hopkins All Children’s Hospital, compelled by state law, reported suspicions of Munchausen by proxy (medical child abuse). Maya was sheltered at the hospital under court order.
• Media Spin: The family’s lawsuit and the emotional Take Care of Maya documentary reframed the case as a saga of “medical kidnapping” rather than intervention in medical child abuse.
  • Quote (Andrea Dunlop, [03:36]): “You don’t get to the truth by accepting what’s in front of you without questioning it… this was bigger than just the Kowalskis.”

The Legal Battle and Its Implications

• Expert Commentary: Attorney Ethan Shapiro explains the legal complexities and societal stakes (09:26):
  • The hospital was sued for medical malpractice, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and the suicide of Maya’s mother, Beata.
  • There’s rare but growing litigation against mandatory child abuse reporters.
    • Quote (Shapiro, [10:35]): “The attempts to hold healthcare providers liable for mandatory reporting under Chapter 39 are rare, but not unheard of… We’ve seen a spate of these lawsuits more in frequency since the Kowalski case and the movie.”
  • The verdict (initially $261 million against the hospital) was vacated on appeal, reaffirming legal protections for mandatory reporters (36:10).
• Concerns About Precedent:
  • Quote (Dunlop, [10:18]): “One is the potential legal precedent set by allowing a family to claim damages against an institution for a suicide. And the other… was holding the hospital liable for reporting abuse.”

Rise of the “Medical Kidnapping” Conspiracy Theory

• Internet’s Role: The term “medical kidnapping” originated in parents’ rights forums online and spread to mainstream outlets. It’s leveraged by families and advocates to frame child abuse investigations as systemic attacks on innocent parents (11:56).
• Media Coverage: Coverage often omits crucial details, enabling abusers to pose as victims. High-profile, emotionally charged documentaries and news features frequently reinforce this distorted narrative, amplifying distrust in doctors and CPS.

Tension: Parental Rights vs. Child Protection

• Ethical and Legal Standards:
  • Hospitals and courts wrestle with granting parents the right to make medical decisions and prioritizing child safety, especially when parents request non-standard, dangerous treatments (24:15).
    • Quote (Shapiro, [22:50]): “Hospitals are not Burger King. You can’t walk into a hospital and have it your way and demand medical care that is wildly outside accepted medical standards.”
  • The legal standard allows parents to direct reasonable medical care, but not to demand dangerous experimental treatments for children (24:29).
    • Quote (Shapiro, [24:29]): “Society has decided… your rights to direct medical care end when it’s going to jeopardize the life of a child. Not a new concept.”
• Societal Ramifications:
  • Quote (Shapiro, [41:06]): “Had this verdict remained, this would have continued to be a massive chilling effect on the ability of mandatory reporters to report their suspicions of medical child abuse, physical child abuse, mental child abuse or neglect…”

Courtroom Storytelling & Asymmetry

• Trial Limitations:
  • The court restricted defense testimony about Munchausen by proxy mid-trial, allowing plaintiffs to advance their narrative unchallenged (25:26).
    • Quote (Shapiro, [32:03]): “It was frustrating… that report [Dr. Sally Smith’s] felt necessary to rebuttal insinuations… But ultimately, the court made the decision… the court certainly had their reasons.”
  • Plaintiffs used dramatic tactics—videos, photos, emotional calls—to sway the jury, while the defense was limited in presenting context and evidence (32:12).
• Resulting Impact:
  • The initial verdict against the hospital was emotionally charged and swayed by an incomplete picture.

Aftermath, Chilling Effect, and Legislative Threats

• Professional Risks:
  • Doctors now hesitate to report suspected abuse due to fear of being sued, stigmatized, or attacked in the media (41:06).
    • Quote (Shapiro, [41:06]): “If it happens in a case that’s that obvious, then what happens on the cases that are more on the margins… the chilling effect was very real.”
• What’s Next?:
  • While the appeal restored statutory protections for reporters, Dunlop and Shapiro caution that societal debates may shift to legislative arenas, with potential moves to narrow the definition or duty of mandated reporting (45:23).

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• Understanding “Reasonable Suspicion” in Reporting
  • Shapiro, [49:57]: “After a call is made… there are as there were in Maya Kowalski’s case, there’s an investigation… judges are very reluctant to start interfering with parents rights unless they have to. But if you don’t call in something that’s setting off your alarm bells, how do you know that’s not the fourth or fifth time that child’s confided in somebody?”
• Doctors’ Commitment to Children
  • Shapiro, [53:28]: “If it helped a child get onto a road where they detox from drugs that could have potentially killed them… I would do it again.”
• Role of Media in Shaping Victim/Perpetrator Narrative
  • Dunlop, [39:42]: “But I think Biota’s absence from this story is what really allowed it to take off. Biata Kowalski was a complicated person… in the retelling, Beata is flattened into an archetypal, self-sacrificing, heroic mother, the one people want to believe in.”
• Chilling Effect Example
  • Shapiro, [41:54]: “Her question was: if I call this, do I have to attach my name to it?… Can I be sued? And the answer to all of these questions are yes, yes, and yes.”
• Danger of Delay
  • Dunlop, [44:08]: “While cases of false accusations of Munchausen by proxy often make big headlines… we don’t have to guess what happens when doctors start ignoring warning signs of abuse. The deaths of Olivia Gant and Colin McDaniel tell us how that story ends…”

---

Critical Timestamps

| Time | Segment / Content | |:-------:|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | 02:23 | Content warning: child abuse, resources (shakenbaby.org) | | 03:44 | The question of journalism: who gets believed and why—beginning to unpack the core theme | | 06:06 | Clear statement of medical child abuse in Maya’s case—the “well-documented” evidence | | 09:26 | Attorney Ethan Shapiro explains lawsuit details and aftermath | | 10:35 | Legal precedent and implications—threats to mandatory reporting | | 11:56 | Rise of “medical kidnapping” and internet conspiracy framing | | 14:43 | Hospitals’ legal/moral obligations; court-ordered shelter and hospital’s lack of discretion | | 22:50 | “Hospitals are not Burger King”—limits to parental rights in demanding treatment | | 24:29 | Blood transfusion example for overriding parental consent for the child’s safety | | 25:26 | Evidence restrictions at trial; impact on defense and narrative asymmetry | | 32:12 | How courtroom theatrics and storytelling favor the plaintiff’s narrative | | 36:10 | The $261 million verdict, later vacated | | 39:42 | How media/Netflix documentary reframed the case, making Maya a “true crime Disney princess” | | 41:06 | Shapiro explains the “chilling effect” on mandatory reporting | | 44:08 | Dangers of delay in reporting—children die when warning signs are not acted on | | 45:23 | Policy moving forward—appeal’s outcome and legislative risks for protection statutes | | 49:57 | Explaining the thorough due process after a child abuse or neglect report is made | | 53:28 | Doctors’ motivations in reporting—case for professional integrity despite personal/professional risk | | 55:17 | Shift in media attention and blurring of Munchausen by Proxy with other abuse stories | | 56:15 | Reporter Daphne Chen on the broader impact and inflow of similar cases | | 59:39 | John Stewart’s confrontation with Dr. Sally Smith; toxic repercussions of the narrative reversal in the public sphere |

---

Conclusion and Season Preview

The episode sets the stage for a season focused on the myth of the “perfect victim,” exploring the complexity of child protection, the dangers of false media narratives, the rise of parents’ rights movements, and the core legal and moral dilemmas at the intersection of family autonomy and child safety. The coming episodes will investigate other families highlighted in sensational coverage, dissect patterns in abusive head trauma cases, and examine how class, race, and media framing affect outcomes in child welfare and justice.

---

Transcript

[Podcast Announcer]

This is an iHeart podcast.

[Andrea Dunlop]

Guaranteed Human what's up y'?

[Starbucks Advertiser]

All? Summer's got a different tempo. Everything's a little looser, brighter. One plan turns into another. You hear something, you stay a little longer. Next thing you know, you're somewhere you didn't plan to be. It's those in between moments. That's where the ideas hit. Conversations stretch out. Little memories sneak up on you. Sometimes it's just about what's in your hand. That color, that chill. The new Tropical Butterfly Refresher for from Starbucks. Guava and passion fruit flavors with mango pineapple flavored pearls. Yeah, that feels like summer before you even taste it. Funny how one small stop becomes the best part of the day. Start your summer rhythm with Starbucks. Try the new Tropical Butterfly Refresher from Starbucks

[Lowe's Advertiser]

during Memorial Day at Lowe's. Shop Household must haves for less. Save $80 on a Char Broil Performance Series 4 burner grill to chef up something plus get up to 45 off. Select major appliances to keep things fresh. Our best lineup is here at Lowe's. Lowe's we help you save valid through 527 while supplies last. Selection varies by location. See lowe's.com for details.

[Narrator/Reporter]

Visit your nearby Lowe's.

[Ethan Shapiro (Attorney for Johns Hopkins All Children's)]

Amazon Health AI presents Painful Thoughts why

[Andrea Dunlop]

did I search the Internet for answers to my cold sore problem? Now I'm stuck down a rabbit hole filled with images, alarmingly graphic, source in various stages of ooze.

[Narrator/Reporter]

I can clear my search history, but

[Andrea Dunlop]

I could never unsee that.

[Cape Fear Series Promoter]

Don't go down the rabbit hole.

[Ethan Shapiro (Attorney for Johns Hopkins All Children's)]

Amazon Health AI gets you the right care fast. Healthcare just got less painful since he got out. Bad things keep happening.

[Cape Fear Series Promoter]

Cape Fear, a new series is streaming June 5th on Apple TV.

[Ethan Shapiro (Attorney for Johns Hopkins All Children's)]

Why would I want to hurt you?

[Cape Fear Series Promoter]

Starring Academy Award winner Javier Bardem.

[Ethan Shapiro (Attorney for Johns Hopkins All Children's)]

Why?

[Cape Fear Series Promoter]

And Academy Award nominee Amy Adams.

[Pets Best Insurance Advertiser]

He's coming after my family.

[Ethan Shapiro (Attorney for Johns Hopkins All Children's)]

Why?

[Cape Fear Series Promoter]

Kate fear streaming June 5th on Apple TV.

[Andrea Dunlop]

Please note that this show discusses child abuse, which may be difficult for some listeners. For resources about abusive head trauma, go to shakenbaby.org

[Ethan Shapiro (Attorney for Johns Hopkins All Children's)]

take care of Maya Trial New details as well in the Take

[John Stewart]

Care of Maya trial well, Maya Kowalski and her family have waited now five years to hear a verdict in their $220 million lawsuit against Johns Hopkins All Children's Hospital.

[Ethan Shapiro (Attorney for Johns Hopkins All Children's)]

The conduct of Johns Hopkins All Children's Hospital, in fact, harmed Maya Kowalski.

[Andrea Dunlop]

What happened to Maya? That was the question posed by Diane Neary in her viral feature for New York magazine that ran in the fall of 20. There was that headline, along with a close up of Maya Kowalski's eyes. I remember reading this article long before I'd end up reading thousands of pages of court documents, medical records, testimony and police records about the case and thinking, I don't think this reporter understands what actually happened here. And then of course, there was the Netflix film.

[Ethan Shapiro (Attorney for Johns Hopkins All Children's)]

No matter what we did, the court sided with the hospital staff.

[Pets Best Insurance Advertiser]

Judges don't care about evidence.

[Narrator/Reporter]

You don't get to the truth by accepting what's in front of you without questioning it. And I realized that this was a lot bigger than just the Kowalskis.

[Legal Expert/Commentator]

How many times are you allowed to be wrong and destroy lives before they

[Andrea Dunlop]

say, okay, that's enough?

[Narrator/Reporter]

These families walked in hoping for help for their child and some of them walked out in handcuffs.

[Andrea Dunlop]

And this was followed by a high profile court battle. Nobody Should Believe me had been on the air for about a year at this point. And this was the biggest story about Munchausen by proxy since Gypsy Rose Blanchard. So I felt like I needed to address it. I pulled in some experts for a roundtable discussion about the film.

[Ethan Shapiro (Attorney for Johns Hopkins All Children's)]

My impressions were it was a huge opportunity lost. What they could have done is looked at the actual issues in this abuse they could have looked at. You know, in this case there was a.

[Andrea Dunlop]

And that was all I originally planned to do, but everyone else just kept getting it so wrong.

[Legal Expert/Commentator]

But it is not the person who's doing the medical record review's job to interview every doctor.

[Andrea Dunlop]

It's to look through those records.

[Legal Expert/Commentator]

And that is how you put one of those.

[Patrick (Dr. Sally Smith's son)]

How do you get that? Why do you believe that that's the case? If she is making. If she is the sole person making the recommendation to the judge, the judge is relying on.

[Andrea Dunlop]

She was not the sole person. She was not the sole person.

[Legal Expert/Commentator]

I'm sorry. There was affidavits and testimony, numerous doctor

[Ethan Shapiro (Attorney for Johns Hopkins All Children's)]

said testimony in the court.

[Andrea Dunlop]

What actually happened to Maya Kowalski is that she was the victim of extremely well documented Munchausen by proxy abuse. In the year preceding her fateful hospitalization at Johns Hopkins, all children's, Maya Kowalski was subjected to 55 infusions of ketamine, a powerful drug that can cause hallucinations, memory loss and bladder issues, among other side effects. Her treatment course also included a highly experimental five day ketamine coma in Mexico. Dr. Fernando Cantu, who performed the treatment, told Maya's parents that the procedure had a 50% chance of death. Maya was pulled from school wheelchair bound and dangerously underweight. Her mother, Biota Kowalski, an infusion nurse by trade, administered Ketamine, Dilaudid and other drugs. Orally, intramuscularly and into Maya's port at home, often against a doctor's orders. Biota talked online and elsewhere about Maya's impending death and pushed to get her daughter labeled as terminal and attempted to seek out hospice care despite the fact that complex regional pain syndrome isn't a terminal diagnosis. And that diagnosis was handed out to Maya by a dubious doctor after three world class hospitals diagnosed her with conversion disorder. On October 7, 2016, when Maya was hospitalized with reports of excruciating pain, Biota told staff at Johns Hopkins All Children's that if they refused to administer the unheard of amount of ketamine she was requesting, that they, quote, might as well consult hospice so she can finally get enough medication and just let her die. So how did such a clear and obviously life threatening case of abuse get twisted into a story about evil doctors kidnapping a child? What was going on here? Once I started pulling at this thread, I couldn't stop the case and the civil trial consumed my life for months. We just recapped this case in a miniseries, by the way. If you don't have time to listen to the previous 18 episodes I made about this, I ended up covering the trial as it unfolded over eight weeks, ending in a jury awarding the Kowalskis $261 million. And two years later, the story continues to unfold. Late last year, a Florida appeals court vacated the verdict and the Kowalski's request to reconsider the appeal decision was denied. And as all this has been playing out in court, the impact of Kowalski v. Johns Hopkins has been felt far and wide. Because as reporter Daphne Chen said in the trailer you just heard, this has always been bigger than just the Kowalskis. Kowalski lit the match, and no matter what ultimately happens in their court battle, the fire won't easily be contained. People believe their eyes. That's something that is so central to this topic because we do believe the people that we love when they're telling us something. If we didn't, you could never make it through your day. I'm Andrea Dunlop. Welcome to season seven of Nobody Should Believe Me. The Kowalski's legal battle had already been going on for years by the time this story got traction in the media. Jack Kowalski filed his original lawsuit in October of 2018, two years almost to the day after Maya was originally hospitalized with the defendant, Johns Hopkins All Childrens.

[Ethan Shapiro (Attorney for Johns Hopkins All Children's)]

So the original lawsuit against Johns Hopkins All Children's Hospital brought by the Kowalski family alleged a lot of things, some of which were dismissed before trial. The original lawsuit brought claims for everything from Malicious prosecution for the hospital and their health care providers calling the Department of Children and Family Services reporting suspicions of medical child abuse and neglect.

[Andrea Dunlop]

We spoke to Ethan Shapiro, an attorney for Johns Hopkins All Children's, about how this court case and its aftermath have played out.

[Ethan Shapiro (Attorney for Johns Hopkins All Children's)]

The counts that survived included everything from medical malpractice for the alleged misdiagnosis of medical child abuse, the alleged failure to give what we consider to be extreme doses of ketamine and other dangerous drugs. There were allegations of battery and there were allegations of. Of intentional infliction of emotional distress, some of which the family alleged caused the mother to commit suicide. As you saw from the appellate court ruling. The appellate court sided with my client, Johns Hopkins All Children's Hospital, ultimately finding that the hospital complied in good faith with the mandatory protection statutes and were not liable as a matter of law or as a matter of fact, for the unfortunate death of Mrs. Kowalski.

[Andrea Dunlop]

There were two possible far reaching issues with the Kowalski verdict had it withstood appeal. One is the potential legal precedent set by allowing a family to claim damages against an institution for a suicide. And the other, of course, was holding the hospital liable for reporting abuse.

[Ethan Shapiro (Attorney for Johns Hopkins All Children's)]

The attempts to hold healthcare providers liable for mandatory reporting under Chapter 39 are rare, but not unheard of. In fact, if you looked at the published decisions, a lot of them are for the flip side, where, you know, for example, a parent whose child was ultimately abused or harmed is suing a state agency or a mandatory reporter for failing to report suspected abuse. Think, for example, you know, in the case of a contested divorce where a child reports symptoms of sexual abuse to a teacher and the teacher doesn't bring that forward. You could see a situation where the other custodial parent finds out about that and then would have a lawsuit or potential prosecution against a mandatory reporter. Now, all of that being said, we've seen a spate of these lawsuits more in frequency since the Kowalski case, since the movie, and since the fact that it survived the initial motions to dismiss based on statutory immunity. How often do we see these types of cases go to trial? Incredibly rare. And I think they're going to become more rare now that the Second District Court of Appeal has reaffirmed statutory rights and immunities for mandatory reporters.

[Andrea Dunlop]

The Kowalski lawsuit and its imitators position this legal battle very clearly as a parents rights issue, claiming that, quote, Dr. Smith and Johns Hopkins, all children's knowingly and recklessly violated Jack and Beada's constitutional right to make medical decisions for their child by refusing to discharge Maya following repeated requests from Jack and Biota, and by conspiring to abuse a process and legislative provisions designed to protect children from imminent harm. And while some of the counts of the lawsuit, such as conspiracy, malicious prosecution, and the first and fourteenth amendment claims were dismissed before trial, the spirit of these claims remained. The plaintiff's story was that the doctors had conspired to separate Maya from her mother. They'd known their abuse claims were fake and they made them anyway. And their wanton disregard for this family had driven Biota Kowalski to take her own life. And these claims have served as inspiration for a number of other lawsuits around the country against child abuse. Pediatricians and hospitals from San Diego to Minnesota to Pennsylvania. According to these lawsuits, doctors aren't just making mistakes. They're all powerful entities who are conspiring to remove children from their innocent parents for their own financial gain and career advancement. The terminology varies depending on the venue, but there is in fact a name for all of medical kidnapping. Like any other conspiracy theory, it's hard to trace the exact origins of the term medical kidnapping. But it appears to have gained a foothold in parents rights focused Internet spaces sometime in the 2000 and tens and gained significant traction during the highly publicized Justina Pelletier case, a precursor lawsuit involving Munchausen by proxy. Medical kidnapping is deeply entwined with the idea that Munchausen by proxy isn't a real form of abuse, that every allegation is necessarily false, a witch hunt against caring moms, and that CPS workers and physicians are hiding behind their legal immunity protection. This concept has even deeper Internet origins than medical kidnapping itself, going back to the Mothers against Munchausen allegations website, which popped up in the late 90s. Medical kidnapping, like so many things, is a fringe idea that has migrated from the dark corners of the Internet into mainstream publications such as the New York Times and ProPublica People magazine. Where Take Care of Maya producer Katelyn Keating worked when she discovered this story, published an article in November of 2025 titled where is Maya Kowalski Now? All about her life after getting medically kidnapped 10 years ago. This was weeks after the verdict was reversed. So how did we get here? And how did hospitals become such a target?

[Ethan Shapiro (Attorney for Johns Hopkins All Children's)]

So hospitals are in a very unique situation for children that are at risk for suspicions of neglect or abuse, because often health care workers are the frontline defense in being able to diagnose it and being able to report it. If you think of a situation where a child would come into a hospital with an unexplained fracture that couldn't be a result of anything other than trauma and potentially trauma in an area that couldn't be explained in the absence of intentional abuse, the health care worker would be the one that would be in the best position to make that call of reasonable suspicion to the Department of Children and Families. Now in that unique situation where the child's an inpatient in the hospital already, the easiest thing for the courts to do to try to find an immediate safe placement for the child before the court can figure out whether one of the custodial parents or perhaps a grandparent or a relative could be fill in that role is to shelter the child immediately at the hospital. So hospitals are put in sort of a precarious position that other mandatory reporters don't have to deal with. Think firefighters, teachers. In some states, journalists are never going to be in the situation that the person making the report may also be the person required by order of the court to provide safe shelter to the child in the short and the medium term.

[Legal Expert/Commentator]

And does a hospital, once a child is sheltered there, does a hospital have

[Andrea Dunlop]

any choice about whether or not to keep that child there under the law?

[Ethan Shapiro (Attorney for Johns Hopkins All Children's)]

No. The hospital is required to follow the court order just as anyone would be required to follow the court order. Now the hospital can make recommendations as to what they believe is in the best interest of the child from a medical standpoint for whatever medical treatment is necessary. And if you remember back to the Kowalski case, once all children's reasonably believed that Maya would have benefited from, you know, intensive inpatient or outpatient psychotherapy to treat whatever her pain syndrome was, they made a recommendation to transfer to Nemours hospital in Orlando who are experts in that, so they can make recommendations. But absent an order from the court releasing the jurisdiction the hospital has to keep the child in custody City. Since he got out, bad things keep happening.

[Cape Fear Series Promoter]

Keep fear A new series is streaming June 5th on Apple TV.

[Ethan Shapiro (Attorney for Johns Hopkins All Children's)]

Why would I want to hurt you?

[Cape Fear Series Promoter]

Starring Academy Award winner Javier Bardem

[Public Investing Advertiser]

and

[Cape Fear Series Promoter]

Academy Award nominee Amy Adams.

[Pets Best Insurance Advertiser]

He is coming after my family.

[Cape Fear Series Promoter]

Cape fear streaming June 5th on Apple TV.

[Public Investing Advertiser]

Support for the show comes from Public, the investing platform for those who take it seriously. On Public, you can build a multi asset portfolio of stocks, bonds, options, crypto and now generated assets which allow you to turn any idea into an investable index. With AI, it all starts with your prompt. From renewable energy companies with high free cash flow to semiconductor suppliers growing revenue over 20% year over year, you can literally type any prompt and put the AI to work. It screens thousands of stocks, builds a one of a kind index and lets you back test it against the S&P 500. Then you can invest in a few clicks. Generated assets are like ETFs with infinite possibilities, completely customizable and based on your thesis, not someone else's. Go to public.com podcast and earn an uncapped 1% bonus when you transfer your portfolio. That's public.com podcast paid for by Public Investing Brokerage Services by Open to the Public Investing Inc. Member FINRA and SIPC Advisory Services by Public Advisors, llc. SEC Registered Advisor. Generated Assets is an interactive analysis tool. Output is for informational purposes only and is not an investment recommendation or advice. Complete Disclosures available at public.comdisclosures the following

[Pets Best Insurance Advertiser]

ad is sponsored by Pets Best Insurance Services. You knew right away he's perfect. The one for you. Those puppy dog eyes, that cute little button nose. You don't even mind the drool. When you find your perfect match in a dog or cat, the love is unconditional. Your budget, on the other hand, has realistic limits. Help protect your heart and your wallet with pet insurance from Pets Best. With plans starting from less than a dollar a day, you can get up to 90% cash back on eligible vet bills. Pets Best makes it easy to pick a plan that works for you and your bank account. Find the perfect match for your Perfect [e-mail] Pet insurance products offered and administered by Pets Best Insurance Services, LLC are underwritten by American Pet Insurance Company or Independence American Insur Insurance Company for terms and conditions, visit www.petsbest.com. policy products are underwritten by American Pet Insurance Company, Independence American Insurance Company or Ms. Transverse Insurance Company and administered by Pets Best Insurance Services, LLC. $1.00 a day premium based on 2024 average new policyholder data for accident and illness plans. Pets Age 0 to 10 this is

[Martha Stewart]

Martha Stewart from the Martha Stewart Podcast. Ever wonder how to make hosting look effortless? Here's a secret when prepping for cooking and baking, get ahead of the mess with new Reynolds Kitchens countertop prep paper. Just lightly wet the counter so the paper grips. Lay it down and drips and spills stay on the paper, not on your counter. Cleanup is as simple as lifting it away to reveal clean counters. Effortless it is thanks to Reynolds Kitchens countertop prep paper. Wet it, set it, prep it, done. Available in the Reynolds Wrap aisle at Walmart, Target, Amazon and Costco.

[Andrea Dunlop]

There are many worthwhile critiques about how child protection is handled in the US and we're going to dig into those this season. But and sorry if this is a spoiler, there is no Evidence that doctors are conspiring to kidnap children or even making a significant number of incorrect abuse diagnoses. So why has this idea gotten so much traction? What is this actually about?

[Ethan Shapiro (Attorney for Johns Hopkins All Children's)]

I think what the plaintiff ultimately wanted to try was a civil rights case. And, Andrea, when you spoke earlier about this, you know, influx of what's been called generously, a parents rights movement, which is always in tension with what may be best for the child. This case was, in the plaintiff's mind, one of those cases in the forefront. They brought constitutional actions that were dismissed. I mean, you heard the backstory from the Kowalskis, escaping a communist system with the implication to only find themselves, you know, at the center of a deep state conspiracy amongst multiple actors to harm Maya and target the mother for reasons that were never fully explained, at least not with evidence. And as the second District said, there was no evidence of any intent directed at Jada Kowalski whatsoever. But that was certainly what they wanted to put in front of the jury, and that was certainly one of the things that they thought that they could exploit for the purpose. From my perspective, of drumming up juror

[Andrea Dunlop]

emotions, the plaintiff's lawyers and the Netflix film told an emotionally evocative story about a suffering family. But by leaving out so much crucial information, that story obscured a very big what would have happened if there hadn't been a report? What if biota had been allowed to carry on? Should parents just be allowed to give their children 50 to 100 times the recommended dose of ketamine and subject them to experimental procedures that carry a 50% risk of death? According to Jack Kowalski's post verdict comments

[Legal Expert/Commentator]

in the press, yes, parents have rights

[Patrick (Dr. Sally Smith's son)]

and they make the decision for their children.

[Andrea Dunlop]

Ethan disagrees.

[Ethan Shapiro (Attorney for Johns Hopkins All Children's)]

So hospitals are not Burger King. You can't walk into a hospital and have it your way and demand medical care that is wildly outside accepted medical standards. You can't do it for yourself, and it's going to draw extra scrutiny if you're going to demand it on behalf of a vulnerable child or a vulnerable adult that truly cannot consent on their own behalf, and that's fine. Our system is set up where we have parents be the natural guardians of the children who are empowered to make reasonable medical decisions, just the same way that you can be appointed to be the medical guardian for somebody becomes old and infirm. But it doesn't give the guardian the unfettered right to demand treatment that medical providers know to be dangerous. You know, there are protocols and pathways for the safe treatment of chronic regional pain syndrome, for the safe treatment of conversion syndrome. Of factitious disorder. And none of them call for doses of ketamine that I think the evidence showed were 23 milligrams per kilogram per hour, which is more than what you need to anesthetize a 2,000 pound horse. So the parents have rights to direct reasonable medical care, but they don't have an unfettered right to direct and demand dangerous medical care.

[Andrea Dunlop]

The question of what rights children should have as human beings isn't a new one. And the tension between children's rights to to be safe and cared for and their parents rights to make decisions on their behalf is something that hospitals have always been caught in the middle of.

[Ethan Shapiro (Attorney for Johns Hopkins All Children's)]

Hospitals have been dealing with this for years. There are religious sects that do not believe in blood transfusions. So hospitals have attorneys on standby that they call at 2 in the morning to say, we have a child here who's been in a horrific accident, the child's bleeding out, the only way to survive is to transfuse blood. And the parents are saying that they object on religious and moral grounds. We file motions with the court, we wake up the judge in the middle of the night, we get an order from the judge for immediate blood transfusions, and we transfuse the child to save the child's life above what the parents wishes are. That's the tension in society where your religious rights and your rights to direct medical care, we've decided as a society end when it's going to jeopardize the life of a child. So it's not a new concept, it's not a new concept in the law, and it's not isolated to cases like this.

[Andrea Dunlop]

Halfway through the trial, just as the defense was going up, Judge Hunter Carroll ruled to dramatically limit testimony pertaining to Munchausen by proxy abuse. This was baffling, given that the abuse was the reason Maya had been separated from her parents in the first place. Not to mention the fact that the plaintiff had already been allowed to assert in their opening statement and had one witness testify that Biota Kowalski did not have Munchausen by proxy, which they framed as a psychological condition rather than a form of abuse.

[Ethan Shapiro (Attorney for Johns Hopkins All Children's)]

So I'm certainly not here to, you know, criticize tough decisions made by the trial court on evidence. But to your question about whether this particular issue broadened the mother's psychological diagnosis, There could be ways you could start the trial and go through the entire trial where that becomes less of an issue. However, if the plaintiffs are permitted to stand up an opening argument and talk about how the collective they set about to destroy this family with an erroneous diagnosis of Munchausen by proxy, or to talk about how, even though Johns Hopkins All Children's Hospital made the reasonable medical choice to try to escalate Maya's condition, whatever it may be, to the specialist at Nemours, that the family objected to that because of this erroneous diagnosis of medical child abuse from Munchausenbruck proxy. That, from my perspective, necessitates the defense to be able to justify to the jury that's now heard this testimony for several weeks to justify that that diagnosis or that working diagnosis, whether it appears in the medical record or on medical billing, was made reasonably. And I think the question that you're getting to next is, if that's true, then why didn't we, watching this trial, get to see all of Sally Smith's detailed report that the hospital relied on, in part, in arriving at similar diagnoses?

[Legal Expert/Commentator]

And I think, you know, importantly, with the framing of this, right, the question is whether there was, number one, cause for concern to make that immediate call. And then was there evidence of abuse that necessitated this separation period and her being sheltered in the hospital? And in fact, there was extensive evidence. And so that's the. The question. However, the plaintiff did have several witnesses testify that Beata, including Dr. Chopra, who is not an expert on this, that Biata Kowalski did not have Munchausen by proxy. And so they were permitted to testify, as you said, like in the negative, that this was an outrageous allegation and that, you know, Batta was a caring mother who was making appropriate medical decisions. So there was evidence allowed to be presented about Munchausen by proxy by the plaintiff. Can you talk about the decision that the trial court made halfway through the trial when it was the defense's turn to present?

[Ethan Shapiro (Attorney for Johns Hopkins All Children's)]

So from my perspective, sitting at counsel table, it appeared the court wanted to refocus the trial on the remaining allegations. Medical malpractice, intentional infliction of emotional distress. And I think there were some battery allegations in there as well. And the court's central question was, what does the mother's state of mind or whether she suffers from the psychological diagnosis have to do with whether the hospital provided medically acceptable care to Maya Kowalski? In the abstract, that's a completely fair question, right? Because if you take it one step back further, my client's position from day one was whether this is crps, or whether it's factitious disorder, conversion disorder, or a psychological pain response, the treatment for this is still not wild doses of ketamine. That are enough to anesthetize the horse. Now back to your question. You know, in real time, from my perspective, and it's just mine. At defense counsel table, we felt it necessary to paint the full picture for the jury, so we didn't look like monsters that were coming up with this diagnosis to target the family. But in the abstract, that was the way the court was looking at the question in real time. And, you know, certainly that affected the presentation of evidence after that.

[Andrea Dunlop]

Yeah.

[Legal Expert/Commentator]

Because while there was quite a lot of evidence that was admitted at trial and during the pretrial period, I mean, this has been. One of the benefits as a journalist about reporting on this case is that we just have so much information to work with. There are only pieces of that that were actually presented at trial. I don't think Biata's blog was ever presented at trial, which was a pretty strong piece of evidence. And so this trial court decision made it so that certain things that even were available to the public were not available to the jury. And then it also meant that the one piece of documentation that really tied all of this together from the person who had the highest level of expertise about abuse and who had reviewed thousands of pages of medical records, and that would be Dr. Sally Smith's report. And that was never admitted into evidence. That remains private and sealed to this day.

[Ethan Shapiro (Attorney for Johns Hopkins All Children's)]

It does, yes. Her report is confidential. I mean, the lawyers have seen it because we had the potential to introduce it into evidence. So I know what it says. Obviously, Dr. Smith knows what it says. The family knows what it says. The family did not want the jury to see it for understandable reasons. But ultimately, the court made the decision that the court made based on what I told you. That was what I understood to be the court's logic. You know, the court certainly had their reasons for following it. They were understandable to me in a vacuum. You know, it was. But again, it was frustrating to some degree that that report felt necessary, from the defense's perspective, to rebuttal insinuations of these false allegations or that they came out of nowhere that were introduced by the plaintiff.

[Legal Expert/Commentator]

You know, as someone who tells stories for a living about abuse and specifically about this abuse, you have to really tie it together.

[Andrea Dunlop]

It's not well understood.

[Legal Expert/Commentator]

It's not easy for your average juror to understand exactly what the harm was to this child and what the danger that. That she was in. But, you know, just in terms of, like, the asymmetry in the storytelling that you have the plaintiff able to tell this very dramatic story, which they did with all kinds of tactics. Right. They had a lot of pictures. They played the 911 call. They had videos of the family. They had videos of Maya in pain. You know, they used a lot of

[Andrea Dunlop]

elements to tell this story.

[Legal Expert/Commentator]

Sort of did. Did that decision kind of hamstring the defense's ability to tell a story that actually put the focus back on Maya?

[Ethan Shapiro (Attorney for Johns Hopkins All Children's)]

Yeah, perhaps. So again, from the hospital's perspective, and maybe let me take it a step back from that, and this is me talking right from my perspective, but it's based on a lot of conversations with healthcare providers. A parent coming in with a different belief of what their child has is not uncommon. And most healthcare providers are not offended by that. Like healthcare providers are human medicine is an art and a science. You have a constellation of symptoms, and sometimes reasonable people can disagree. That's why they call it a standard of care, not necessarily one, you know, correct diagnosis in every circumstance. And where am I going with this, Andrea? So think about it this way. If somebody comes into to a hospital or a doctor and says, I think my child's got irritable bowel syndrome, and what really helps them is if I give them, you know, and ensure and two, Tylenol when they complain, the doctor could tell you, based on my test and based on my clinical diagnosis and the symptoms, I don't think your child has that. But if that's the only treatment you're recommending for what you think the diagnosis is, we're not calling DCF on you because you're not putting the child in danger. So merely because the hospital has a difference that, you know, we don't think. And when I say we, I'm speaking on behalf of basically every certified medical professional, with the exception of Kirkpatrick and Hannah. We don't think Maya has CRPs, says Lurie's Hospital in Chicago, says Tampa General Hospital, says all Children's Hospital, and says everyone else in between, they're not calling dcf. The call was based on the fact that you're hearing evidence of immediate threat to Maya's life, either from the drugs that are being given or what the mother is saying that she's going to do if you don't put my child in a propofol or a ketamine induced coma. So, you know, going back to your initial question of, you know, how does this affect the presentation of evidence? I think it affects it to the degree that this is not just about a parent disagreeing with what the diagnosis is, is, and, you know, portraying this as, oh, you Ivy League people up in your tower think you know what's best for my child. The imminent danger that a child could be in if the parents fervently believe and are disregarding medical advice from several world class and local providers is where the context needs to come for the jury to understand ultimately why the hospital was making reasonable decisions both in their medical care and their recommendations for future care.

[Legal Expert/Commentator]

Yeah, so take us to the verdict. What ultimately was the verdict and the

[Andrea Dunlop]

award in this case?

[Ethan Shapiro (Attorney for Johns Hopkins All Children's)]

Gross verdict I believe was for 261 million that was set aside slightly by the trial court on some post trial motions. That verdict has been completely vacated or erased by the second District Court of Appeal finding there were multiple errors in the way that the chapter 39, the statutory immunity was ultimately applied. So right now there is no verdict against my client and no judgment that we're liable for.

[Narrator/Reporter]

Since he got out, bad things keep

[Cape Fear Series Promoter]

happening Cape Fear A new series is streaming June 5th on Apple TV.

[Ethan Shapiro (Attorney for Johns Hopkins All Children's)]

Why would I want to hurt you?

[Cape Fear Series Promoter]

Starring Academy Award winner Javier Bardem.

[Ethan Shapiro (Attorney for Johns Hopkins All Children's)]

Why?

[Cape Fear Series Promoter]

And Academy Award nominee Amy Adams.

[Pets Best Insurance Advertiser]

He's coming after my family.

[Cape Fear Series Promoter]

Cape fear streaming June 5th on Apple TV.

[Public Investing Advertiser]

Support for the show comes from Public, the investing platform for those who take it seriously. On Public you can build a multi asset portfolio of stocks, bonds, options, crypto and now generated assets which allow you to turn any idea into an investable index with AI. It all starts with your prompt. From renewable energy companies with high free cash flow to semiconductor suppliers growing revenue over 20% year over year, you can literally type any prompt and put the AI to work. It screens thousands of stocks, builds a one of a kind index and lets you back test it against the S&P 500. Then you can invest in a few clicks. Generated assets are like ETFs with infinite possibilities, completely customizable and based on your thesis, not someone else's. Go to public.com podcast and earn an uncapped 1% bonus when you transfer your portfolio. That's public.com podcast paid for by Public Investing Brokerage Services by Open to the Public Investing Inc. Member FINRA and SIPC Advisory Services by Public Advisors llc. SEC Registered Advisor Generated Assets is an interactive analysis tool. Output is for informational purposes only and is not an investment recommendation or advice. Complete disclosures [e-mail] disclosures protect your pet

[Pets Best Insurance Advertiser]

with insurance from pets best plans start from less than a dollar a day. Visit petsbest.pet insurance products offered and administered by Pets Best Insurance Services LLC are underwritten by American Pet Insurance Company or Independence American Insurance Company. For terms and conditions, visit www.petsbest.com. policy products are underwritten by American Pet Insurance Company, Independence American Insurance Company or Ms. Transverse Insurance Company and administered by Pets Best Insurance Services LLC. $1.00 a day premium based on 2024 average new policyholder data for accident and illness plans.

[Andrea Dunlop]

Pets age 0 to 10 Ever wonder

[Martha Stewart]

how to make hosting look effortless? Here's a When prepping for cooking and baking, get ahead of the mess with new Reynolds Kitchen's countertop prep paper. Just lightly wet the counter so the paper grips, lay it down and drips and spills stay on the paper, not on your counter. Cleanup is as simple as lifting it away to reveal clean counters. Effortless it is thanks to Reynolds Kitchen's countertop prep paper. Wet it, set it, prep it, done. Available in the Reynolds wrap aisle at Walmart, Target, Amazon and Costco.

[Andrea Dunlop]

I've thought a lot about why the Kowalski story took off the way it did, and how such a well documented abuse case got laundered to the extent of a sympathetic Netflix documentary and a quarter billion dollar verdict in court. It certainly doesn't hurt that Maya is a beautiful white girl with a dead mother, a sort of true crime Disney princess. But I think Biota's absence from this story is what really allowed it to take off. Biata Kowalski was a complicated person in real life, someone capable of subjecting her daughter to unfathomable abuse. She said she would put her daughter on hospice and let her die. I have no reason to believe that she wasn't serious about that threat. But in the retelling, Beata is flattened into an archetypal, self sacrificing, heroic mother, the one people want to believe in. And because she wasn't around to complicate this picture, the filmmakers and lawyers got to make her into whatever they wanted. And of course, Maya and her younger brother are incredibly sympathetic figures. They've lived through a multitude of traumas in their young lives. But the idea that the doctors were the cause of these traumas, rather than the intervention that likely saved Maya Kowalski's life, is counter to reality. But I have a strong sense that most people watching the film and cheering on the initial jury decision don't have any idea what this verdict actually meant.

[Ethan Shapiro (Attorney for Johns Hopkins All Children's)]

From my perspective, had this verdict remained, this would have continued to be a massive chilling effect on the ability of mandatory reporters to report their suspicions of medical child abuse, physical child abuse, mental child abuse or neglect without the fear of being prosecuted in in a civil court, being prosecuted in the court of public opinion and Potentially having your life and your finances and your professional license ruined. And unless you're on the front lines of this. I represent hospitals for a living. So I have a lot of people call me with questions. What do you think in this scenario? And I remember one that really haunted me. It was about two weeks after the verdict and I had a client, a doctor, call me who was an ER physician and said, I have a child in here, she's an 11 year old girl, she's got a severe vaginal infection. And the person who's posing as the parent doesn't seem to speak the same language as her. Right. Flashing red lights for child trafficking and sexual abuse. And her question was, if I call this, do I have to attach my name to it? Which in Florida you do if you're a healthcare provider, can that be discoverable and can I be sued? And the answer to all of those questions are yes, yes, and yes. And you know what, I have to explain this. While you can be sued, one would hope that given the fact that you have what I think is more than a reasonable suspicion, that should you be sued, we'd be able to get the case dismissed right away. Which always leads to the next question than what happened in Kowalski. Right. And I'm not trying to make it so simple to say that, you know, there's no scenario that any mandated reporter could step above or beyond the bounds of immunity. Even though I believe in the 2nd district seem to agree that the evidence was that all children's complied in good faith with their mandatory reporting obligations. But imagine if you're in that situation on the front line of protecting children, and you are pausing and that's what I'm talking about in terms of the chilling effect. If it happens in a case that's that obvious, then what happens on the cases that are more on the margins and when the statute is written where these people can be prosecuted for failure to report a suspicion, not a substantiated belief, but a suspicion, then I think from my perspective for those two years, the chilling effect was very real.

[Andrea Dunlop]

Much of the media surrounding these cases emphasize the idea that doctors and child abuse pediatricians are rushing to judgment. Diane Neary, the journalist I mentioned up top, recently did a season of serial called the Preventionist where she hammered her argument against child abuse pediatricians with these words in the series finale. I'm saying even one pause, one wait a second, might be the difference between a family staying together or being broken apart. But as Ethan says, there's a very real cost to that pause and Children are the ones who pay it. We don't have to guess what happens when doctors start ignoring warning signs of abuse. The deaths of Olivia Gant and Colin McDaniel tell us how that story ends, how Maya's story could have ended. The fate of Justina Pelletier, whose parents lawsuit was the precursor to the Kowalskis, shows yet another possible path. The Pelletiers lost their lawsuit against the hospital, but they did get their daughter back. Now in her 20s, she is deeply impacted by her ongoing health issues. It seems very unlikely that she will ever live an independent life. So the big question now is, did the appeal, which barely made a blip in the media, put us back on the right track?

[Ethan Shapiro (Attorney for Johns Hopkins All Children's)]

The 2nd District's decision in favor of my client was, from my perspective, very well written, very lengthy, very thorough analysis of the way the law is right now. I believe that is going to be a vindication of the rights and duties of mandatory reporters so long as they're staying within the law, complying in good faith with their rights and obligations under the law. So my optimistic view of this is that the decision in favor of my clients is going to vindicate the rights and responsibilities of all mandatory reporters. Now, the attack for which those of us and I put myself in that camp believe that the law should remain broad, that we would like to, you know, we would like the state to be aware of reasonable suspicions of abuse, the vast majority of which are screened out without any action or any interference of parents rights. But I think if there's going to be an attack from the camp that believes these laws are too restrictive, that parents should have closer to unfettered rights to make decisions of their child, even if from the mind of a reasonable person, that those decisions are harming a child. I think you're going to see the attacks at the legislative end because from the court's perspective, they're interpreting the law as it's written. You know, if you read the 2nd district's opinion in favor of my clients, they're doing an excellent deep dive into here's what the statute says, here's what the entire statutory scheme is. And based on our interpretation of the statute, here's what the decision should ultimately be in favor of Johns Hopkins All Children's Hospital. And if people want to undo that, it's not going to be by bringing case after case. It's going to be lobbying for legislators to roll this back. It could be rolled back with something as simple as changing the criteria of mandatory reporters have to report a reasonable suspicion. You could change that definition to say they're only required to report substantiated complaints that are verifiable through a panel of three medical experts. That would make the standard for a report so infinitely high, it would only catch those that are so egregious. These are societal questions. And for the past 60 years, society has decided to cast this net very broadly. You're at the front line of this, Andrea, and if you're sensing a sea change, you should be alarmed.

[Andrea Dunlop]

As Ethan indicates, I've been keeping an eye on the shifts in these conversations around doctors, abuse and parental rights. In fact, it's baked into my origin story. My sister Megan Carter was covered in Mike Hixenbach series Do no Harm, along with a whole host, a host of other families who claim to have been falsely accused of abuse by doctors. And Hickson Bog isn't alone. Similar stories have made the pages of USA Today, the New York Times serial podcast, New York magazine, and this one really hurt ProPublica. And as I've tracked these stories, I've noticed a trend. While cases of false accusations of Munchausen by proxy often make big headlines, as they did in the Justina Pelletier case and the Mystery Kowalski case, there are a bunch of other cases being ushered in with them that are seemingly much more straightforward. Physical abuse cases. Munchausen by proxy cases are particularly easy to misrepresent in the media because of how misunderstood this form of abuse is. If you leave enough context out, you can frame a perpetrator as a heroic, embattled mom, especially because perpetrators themselves have often put in years of. Of work to build that image. By the time these false accusation stories end up in the press, the media coverage of their cases becomes another part of their whole grift, another opportunity to play both the victim and the martyr, to pull one over on not just the journalist, but their entire audience. And Munchausen by proxy stories are by their very nature difficult to unravel and get to the bottom of. It's also really important for anyone reporting on child abuse to understand how these systems actually work, because that pause that journalists like NRI are asking for, it's already happening. There already are systems in place to rule out abuse and protect families from being unduly separated from their children. But that part doesn't make such a juicy headline.

[Ethan Shapiro (Attorney for Johns Hopkins All Children's)]

So this is my personal opinion on this. It's the same when you watch Law and Order and they skip jury selection because it's boring and long. And you know, all of a sudden you've got a jury and you're starting, but that's kind of one of the most important elements of this. And until you do it, you don't really realize how much goes into that process. This is the same with the due process rights. After a call is made and there's this perception that, you know, a doctor or any mandatory reporter can pick up the phone and call the suspicion of abuse or neglect, and within moments the child is taken away from the parents. That's not how it works. There, there are, as there were in Maya Kowalski's case, there's an investigation. There has to be a well documented file that is brought before a judge who's going to look at that at multiple stages, the emergency stage. Is this an emergency where the child's at imminent risk, where I have to put a shelter order in place because there's obvious signs of abuse, neglect, sexual abuse, or someone threatening to take the child into hospice to put them under? Is this a situation where, you know, I can do something temporary by saying, like, you know, here's an injunction against giving this medication, but everybody cool off and come back in a week and, you know, the child's going home with the parents. And so you, your listeners have to remember that there's a lot of due process. And from my experience, and I will admit I don't have a lot of experience in front of the dependency court, but from my, what I would admit to be somewhat limited experience, the judges are very reluctant to start interfering with parents rights unless they have to. And the other thing I would tell you is, yes, I, I can completely understand a situation of a mandatory reporter thinking, okay, the child has confided in me that, you know, dad spanks them, right? Something that I think reasonable minds in society can think. There's degrees of that. And maybe I don't spank my kids, but we're not going to start separating every child from their parent who gets a swat on the butt, even if I don't think that's appropriate behavior. But if you don't call in something that's setting off your alarm bells, how do you know that's not the fourth or fifth time that child's confided in somebody? Why wouldn't you let the agencies that are, that are trained to track these think, huh? That's the fifth time now that I've got a call from five different teachers saying that that kid was subject to some type of corporal punishment at home that made the child uncomfortable. Maybe we should investigate this because these kids now come forward five times. And so that's the type of thing that when you get rid of the reasonable suspicion standard, you're also getting rid of the ability of trained professionals to track whether there's a pattern that may, in isolation, not seem threatening to the welfare of a child or a vulnerable adult, but over time lets them track potential problems.

[Legal Expert/Commentator]

Do you think that medical professionals would still report if they weren't required by

[Andrea Dunlop]

law, but they knew that they would be protected by the law?

[Ethan Shapiro (Attorney for Johns Hopkins All Children's)]

In my experience, having gone through this, perhaps the most heroic thing that I've heard from my client that participated in Maya Kowalski's case, who were raked over the coals in the court of public opinion, raked over the coals in a biased movie that gave no effort to give context, intentionally concealed deposition testimony that would have put the hospital in a much more favorable light, were dragged into a forum and subject to intense public scrutiny. When you ask them was this worth it, their response is, if it helped a child get onto a road where they detox from drugs that could have potentially killed them, put a child on the road where they're running, where they're back in school, where they're able to maximize their potential, I would do it again. So, you know, when you say all healthcare providers, you know, of course there are some that are going to wash their hands of the situation, but when you really look at the people that have dedicated their lives to pediatrics, they're not in it for the money. There are much more lucrative areas of medicine that people could go into. I am optimistic that if you tweaked the law, you would still get a lot of people on the pediatric side that would err on doing what they needed to do to protect the child, so long as they knew that they had statutory protections, should their reasonable suspicion be opposed by somebody.

[Andrea Dunlop]

Sometimes Munchausen by proxy cases come to a head in a dramatic moment, the way that Maya's case did. But it's always preceded by a pattern of abuse over time. But so many cases in these compendiums of falsely accused parents are not Munchausen by Proxy cases, but cases of abusive head trauma, a form of child abuse that, unlike Munchausen by proxy, involves a specific incident and about which there is a huge degree of medical and scientific consensus on how to diagnose. So how were these stories ending up in the same bucket as Munchausen by Proxy? Though the Kowalski case is the main focus of Take Care of Maya, the film widens its lens to four other families who claim they've also been falsely accused of abuse by the child. Abuse pediatrician Dr. Sally Smith. And as the credits roll, a montage of families from around the country plays. These parents also say they've been falsely accused by doctors. Here's reporter Daphne Chen in Take Care of Maya.

[Narrator/Reporter]

It was January 2019 when I hit publish on that piece about the Kowalski family and I kind of thought I'd move on to the next thing. But that was when the call started coming in and the email started coming in and I realized that this was a lot bigger than just the Kowalskis. I'm sitting at my desk and I start hearing from more and more families. People who had gone to the doctor for help for their kids and then became the target of the system. These families walked in hoping for help for their child and some of them walked out in handcuffs.

[Andrea Dunlop]

And this helps frame Jack Kowalski's legal crusade as addressing a systemic injustice. He's not just dragging his traumatized children through a highly publicized years long legal battle for a payday. He's there on behalf of all falsely accused parents who've been victimized by the system. Here's Viviana Graham, one of the other parents featured in the film.

[Narrator/Reporter]

This young girl, Maya, represents hope for all of us in bringing Sally Smith down. Bringing the system down.

[Andrea Dunlop]

This is the framing throughout the varied media stories and lawsuits around the country. Out of control child abuse pediatricians. Falsely accusing parents is a system systemic issue that needs reform. I started off reporting on the Maya Kowalski case from the outside, following the trial and reading huge piles of legal documents. But then midway through my reporting, I got a voicemail.

[Patrick (Dr. Sally Smith's son)]

Hi Andrea, this is Patrick.

[Ethan Shapiro (Attorney for Johns Hopkins All Children's)]

I am Dr. Sally Smith's son.

[Andrea Dunlop]

The media at this time was excoriating Dr. Sally Smith, the child abuse pediatrician in the Maya Kowalski case, calling her vile names and criticizing every minute of tape from her depositions. Seemingly every family who'd ever been involved in a case that she'd provided an evaluation for sprang forth to claim that it was not their children who'd been the victims, but they themselves. Innocent parents who'd suffered at the hands of Dr. Smith. I was the lone voice in the media who seemed to understand that far from being the villain of the Maya Kowalski story story, Sally Smith, along with the care team at Johns Hopkins, All Children's, had been one of its heroes. People were not happy with me for this take. In fact, my reporting on Dr. Smith landed me my very first death threats. After the trial was over and the quarter billion dollar verdict rendered, I flew down to Florida to interview Dr. Smith. By the time I sat down with her, I Knew the Kowalski case up, down and sideways. And of course, this was Munchausen by proxy, my area of expertise. But I became curious about the other four families in Take Care of Maya who were alleging that they were victims of Dr. Smith. There was one story that really stuck with me. In particular that of the sole male voice in this cohort, a Florida man named John Stewart, who claims he was falsely accused of the murder of 15 month old Nolan Kelly. Here he is in Take Care of Maya.

[John Stewart]

I spent over 300 days in jail before they finally dropped the charges. They ruined my life because of it.

[Andrea Dunlop]

In addition to his fleeting soundbites in the film, John inserted himself into the courtroom drama by showing up on the day Dr. Sally Smith testified He confronted her outside of the courthouse and filmed the aftermath, which was shared on TikTok.

[John Stewart]

She's evil. She's a liar. She's a malpractice Sally. She freaking charged me with a crime that I did not commit. The medical evidence clearly shows that I was innocent and she's never been held accountable. She's freaking medically kidnapped Maya Kowalski. She needs to be held accountable. The fact that you as a deputy are not arresting her disgusts me and disturbs me on every level. She has fucking killed people. She has literally killed people. She is. She has freaking abused children. She has harmed children. I'm reporting this to you. I want her arrested for that. Please arrest her for that. She is illegally kidnapped numerous children. She has illegally imprisoned numerous parents without any medical evidence, and she has not been held accountable. And I'm begging anybody in law enforcement to do their job and hold that evil psychopath, narcissistic scumbag accountable.

[Andrea Dunlop]

There were almost no details in the film about what happened to Nolan Kelly or any of the other children. But on my way to interview Dr. Sally Smith two years ago, I read the media coverage of John's case. The most thoroughly reported account of John's case was in the Sarasota Herald Tribune. It featured four pictures of John, two of which showed him in his military uniform. There's only one picture of Nolan. He's standing outside with one of his siblings, pantsless as one year olds often are. He has adorable tufts of curls and his big dark eyes look up into the camera. I had so many questions about what really happened to Nolan. I was overwhelmed by sadness reading about it. He'd been 15 months old when he died, a month younger than my own son was then. The part of me that was curious to know the more was drowned out by the part of me that Couldn't bear to. So I let it go until two years later, I got a message.

[Patrick (Dr. Sally Smith's son)]

Well, I was actually watching Dateline, and a show about Dr. Vega being involved came on. And I was like, you know, I started. So I started, I started thinking about some things. So then I asked them, you know, about my case in particular. ChatGPT. And it brought up your podcast. So I looked at it, listened to it, and saw that I felt that you were basically defending Sally Smith erroneously. So. Yeah, so that's, that's why I reached out to y', all, because I didn't feel that. That it was right that she basically got to lie again.

[Andrea Dunlop]

Coming up this season on Nobody Should Believe Me.

[Ethan Shapiro (Attorney for Johns Hopkins All Children's)]

I think inevitable conclusion that this is not accidental trauma in the child.

[Legal Expert/Commentator]

The ME ruled this a homicide, right?

[Patrick (Dr. Sally Smith's son)]

Yes. Correct.

[Andrea Dunlop]

One of the main problems with the

[Pets Best Insurance Advertiser]

system is that it is focused so

[Andrea Dunlop]

much on poor people that it ends up really missing serious cases of abuse.

[Ethan Shapiro (Attorney for Johns Hopkins All Children's)]

Then the question is, just because something makes sense, is it true?

[Legal Expert/Commentator]

These things that they introduce as speculative

[Andrea Dunlop]

is just to throw off the court. The court is not a medical arena. It's a legal arena.

[Ethan Shapiro (Attorney for Johns Hopkins All Children's)]

Review thousands and thousands and thousands of

[Legal Expert/Commentator]

pages of documents about this child and ended up producing a 45 page report delineating all of the different ways that there was evidence of medical child abuse in the case. The arguments were the exact same tactics I had spent two years exploring with vaccines. I didn't have to go through the whole. Let me look into this because I recognized. I think he knows exactly what happened. I think blacking out is just a cop out excuse. He knows what he did is horrific.

[Andrea Dunlop]

I mean, just watching him, I think he's a dangerous person. And I think, frankly, if you put this on the airways, you may escalate it.

[Ethan Shapiro (Attorney for Johns Hopkins All Children's)]

Parents have extraordinarily strong rights in this country, and children are the ones that have very, very limited rights.

[Patrick (Dr. Sally Smith's son)]

Come on. I mean, that's. If you can't get your mind around that, like, there's. There's no point in even talking anymore. Seriously, the assumption that being with a

[Ethan Shapiro (Attorney for Johns Hopkins All Children's)]

parent is always going to be the best solution. It will always feel wrong to me. I. I will always grieve that I didn't get those years in a situation away from my parents.

[Andrea Dunlop]

Nobody should believe me. Is written, reported and executive produced by me, Andrea Dunlop. Our co executive producer is Mariah Gossett. Our editor is Greta Stromquist. Story editing by Nicole Hill. Research and fact checking by Erin Ajayi. Additional research by Jessa V. Randall. Mixing and engineering by Robin Edgar. Our production manager is Nola Carmouche. Music from Blue Dot Sessions, Sound Snap and Slipstream. Special thanks this week to Ethan Shapiro.

[Lowe's Advertiser]

Paramount plus is now the home of all your BET favorites.

[John Stewart]

What?

[Lowe's Advertiser]

Yes, with all new episodes of Tyler Perry's Divorce Sisters you've always liked, a little drama, plus a whole new world of movies like Gladiator 2.

[Cape Fear Series Promoter]

Now I will control an Empire Original

[Lowe's Advertiser]

series like the Shy.

[Andrea Dunlop]

Just make sure we protect each other.

[Lowe's Advertiser]

And live sports like ufc.

[John Stewart]

Welcome to the history books.

[Lowe's Advertiser]

New home, same family. Your BET favorites are now on Paramount Plus. Subscribe now.

[Martha Stewart]

This is Martha Stewart from the Martha Stewart Podcast. Ever wonder how to make hosting look effortless? Here's a secret when prepping for cooking and baking, get ahead of the mess with new Reynolds Kitchens Countertop prep paper. Just lightly wet the counter so the paper grips. Lay it down and drips and spills stay on the paper, not on your counter. Cleanup is as simple as lifting it away to reveal clean counters. Effortless it is. Thanks to Reynolds Kitchens Countertop Prep Paper. Wet it, set it, prep it. Done. Available in the Reynolds Wrap aisle at Walmart, Target, Amazon and Costco.

[Sheba Cat Food Advertiser]

Here's the truth. You could literally be adored by everyone and then come home and still get completely ignored by your own cat. It's classic cat behavior. But new Shiba Premium Puree is a lickable treat that changes all that. They're protein rich, made with bone broth, and have the smooth, creamy texture cats go crazy for, especially when it's hand fed. Yeah, it's more than a treat. It's a fast pass to favorite human status. So feed your cat Shiba and go from totally ignored to truly adored in just 12 days. Guaranteed or your money back. Learn [e-mail] you're listening to a podcast,

[Podcast Announcer]

so you're doing something else too. Like maybe scrolling home listings on Redfin, saving places you like without thinking you'll get them. Because that's what house hunting has become. But Redfin isn't built for endless browsing. It's built to help you find and own a home. Redfin agents close twice as many deals as other agents, which means when you find a place you love, you've got a real shot at getting it. Redfin helps turn saved listings into real addresses. Get [e-mail] own the dream this is an Iheart podcast.

[Andrea Dunlop]

Guaranteed human.