Maree Crabtree As a disabled adult who has, at times, been dependent on family for basics, this is, put bluntly, utterly terrifying. We have, as a culture, dehumanised disabled people, and made such glorified martyrs of those who care for us, that alleged murderers are actually being framed as the true victims and sufferers of our disabilities. To me, this is disturbing on a visceral level. Though there are any number of committed carers out there, doing a wonderful job of supporting their loved ones, many disabled people will be familiar with the experience of being dependent upon someone who would really rather not. Carers who, for whatever reason, don't prioritise the basic rights and welfare of their charges. It might be an unpaid family member with limited empathy, or a support worker who's just there for the cheque, but the experience of losing control over when and how much you get to eat, sleep, bathe, be mobile and access the outside world, simply due to an unbalanced power dynamic and a lack of alternative care options, is both frightening and disquietingly common. Knowing that the empathy of the world at large ultimately lies with the carer, whose efforts will be considered charitable and laudable regardless of the quality of care they provide, only adds insult to deprivation of liberty. That a carer may go so far as to violently end a disabled person's life, and remain a sympathetic figure, creates an extra layer of horror over proceedings.

"Could have put them in an institution you say!" says "Zoey", commenting on an article about the Crabtree case. "Yes but no one will care for these severely disabled adults like a mother." There are serious critiques to be made on the institutionalisation of disabled people, however - and I can't speak for everyone here, but as a rule - the living arrangement where you get to continue breathing is generally preferable to the one where you don't, and if you have venerated motherhood to the point where murder has become part of your standard for acceptable care, it might be time to start re-evaluating. My favourite comment on the Crabtree case so far though, comes from a man who spent 26 years as an operational paramedic before joining the James Cook University Human Research Ethics Committee: "you mean the deceased cabbaged (sic), bed bound ADULTS! Yes I have sympathy towards them, sympathy that our society allows people to live like that when we are quite happy to euthanise animals for the slightest disability or disease!" There's a lot to unpack here, perhaps starting with there being no indication that Erin and Jonathon Crabtree were in any way bound to their beds. In fact, they appear relatively active in photographs provided. The quality of life they maintained, even the nature of their disabilities, are not something we've been made much aware of, but apparently the words "severely disabled" alone were enough to deem two young people better off dead. How comforting to know that there are people entrusted with healing us who hold our lives in such esteem.

The notion that it is up to society to "allow" people to live or die based on perceived quality of life is equally disturbing in its paternalistic disregard for the agency of disabled people. But as the internet was rushing to defend Maree Crabtree, something interesting happened to change the narrative. Greater detail on the police press conference was published in which it was alleged that "significant financial gain are the motivators for these crimes" with hundreds of thousands in superannuation and insurance money being fraudulently claimed. Crabtree was also accused of the grievous bodily harm and torture of a third adult child and counselling her, now deceased, son to commit armed robbery. This was not a stressed out mother at her wits end. This was about greed. The benevolent bringer of death to disabled people quickly became a monstrous villain to be harshly condemned. Either way, Erin and Jonathon are still dead. As I've said before, an able body is a temporary privilege. Whether it's congenital, or acquired via illness, injury or old age, most of us will experience disability before the end. As a universal insurance policy, perhaps it would be best to refrain from accepting disability as a reasonable motive for murder in the first place.