The father of the baby did make the report as it mirrored his "notice of risk" that he filed to avoid mediation.
The report was about the two children that aren't his- ranging from them missing school repeatedly (untrue), the mother never cooking or cleaning (untrue- she just didn't cook or clean for him), allowing her kids to watch horror movies (untrue), refusing to allow her kids to play outside in fear of her ex-husband (untrue), stressing her daughter to the point of her having accidents (untrue) and having an unhealthy relationship with her son, who calls himself her husband (don't all kids to that?), and alienating her children from their dad (they were going through court and issues with DV, which they're going to have orders for soon resolving all of this).
Regardless when Uniting came and their only real concerns were missing school, which they can investigate and see is untrue. For his alleged baby, he said the mother never wanted the baby (untrue) and refused prenatal care - the mother had prenatal care until 18 weeks (her scan was perfect) - she then went interstate with her kids until week 30 with GPs permission. In that time, she continued eating right, taking Elevit, etc.
Upon returning to get state, she'd moved in with baby's alleged father and it was very cut off from everything she needed unless she had a licence (she doesn't), found out her GP quit, didn't want to go Dr shopping, continued with Elevit and looking after herself. As soon as she and her kids got out of his house and back to civilisation she booked in with the hospital and told them everything and there were no dramas. All baby's check-ups have been perfect.
But I'm wondering if anything mentioned would be good enough reason for the judge to remove her baby, especially since her ex-husband and ex-partner have the same lawyer?