Erin Patterson, an Australian woman convicted of killing three relatives with food laced with deadly mushrooms, was reportedly approved for Ozempic while serving a life sentence, putting taxpayer-funded health care at the center of a new controversy.
Patterson, 51, is being held at Melbourne’s Dame Phyllis Frost Center after being sentenced to life imprisonment with a non-parole period of 33 years.
Now reports that she has access to weight-loss injections have raised a thorny question about prison health care: Should public money be used to fund this kind of treatment for a man convicted of three murders and one attempted murder?
Infamous mushroom cook Erin Patterson has reportedly been approved for taxpayer-funded Ozempic while serving a life sentence for a triple murder.
The 51-year-old woman, who said during the trial that she struggles with overeating, recently began receiving weight-loss injections in… pic.twitter.com/b0VdnjZrMt
— 10 News Melbourne (@10NewsMelb) September 8, 2026
Why was Patterson given Ozempic?
Victoria’s Department of Justice and Community Safety says prisoners can be prescribed weight-loss drugs if doctors determine there is a clear medical need.
The department also said access to prescribed weight-loss medications was provided on the recommendation of a coroner after an inmate died in custody under obesity-related circumstances.
The department does not comment on the individual medical circumstances of prisoners. As such, Patterson’s official treatment has not been publicly explained in detail.
Ozempic is widely associated with weight loss, but it is also used to treat type 2 diabetes. The key question, according to the department, is whether the doctor considers the treatment medically necessary.
Mass murderer Erin Patterson gets access to weight-loss drugs from government coffers while serving a life sentence. The decision sparked outrage, with thousands of law-abiding Australians unable to access expensive treatment. pic.twitter.com/z8EsVX385C
– 7NEWS Queensland (@7NewsBrisbane) September 8, 2026
Taxpayer disputes
This explanation did not stop the backlash.
Victoria’s Shadow Minister for Police and Correctional Services Brad Battin criticized the decision, saying taxpayers should not be forced to fund prisoners’ weight-loss injections and that diet and exercise should be considered instead.
This controversy is especially striking because Patterson is no ordinary prisoner. She became one of Australia’s most famous inmates after being convicted of the deaths of Don Patterson, Gail Patterson and Heather Wilkinson.
However, the prison system’s position is that decisions about medical care are based on medical necessity and not on the popularity or notoriety of the inmate being treated.
Patterson’s food story
There is also an important context for weight loss treatment. During the trial, Patterson discussed long-standing issues related to overeating and body image. These details help explain why weight management can now be part of her medical care.
However, they do not change its legal status. Patterson continues to deny intentionally poisoning his relatives and is appealing his conviction.
Dispute over the conditions of her imprisonment
The Ozempic controversy also escalated into a separate dispute over Patterson’s prison conditions.
Her lawyers say she faces extremely strict conditions, including solitary confinement. The issue was significant when Judge Christopher Beale handed down her initial sentence, with the judge considering the possibility that her notoriety could leave her isolated for years.
Prosecutors challenged this line of reasoning at a Court of Appeal hearing in August 2026.
Director of Public Prosecutions Brendan Kissane K.S. told the court there was no evidence that Patterson would necessarily remain in such conditions for many years. Prosecutors pointed to her access to gyms and recreation areas, the library, television and other activities, while noting that her conditions were being reviewed.
This distinction is important because reports of Patterson’s treatment with Ozempic link its prescription to limited exercise capacity. However, the extent of these restrictions remains controversial.
Patterson isn’t the only prisoner
The controversy extends beyond Patterson. Another Victorian prisoner, Alicia Schiller, was reportedly approved for Ozempic while she was incarcerated. Her case has previously drawn attention to taxpayer-funded medical treatment in prison.
This provides broader context for Patterson’s recipe. The debate is not necessarily about whether one notorious prisoner was singled out, but about how Victorian authorities determine what medical treatment prisoners should receive. For critics, the problem is government spending. For prison authorities, the stated test is a medical necessity.
Her murder conviction remains under appeal
Patterson was convicted in 2025 of murdering Don and Gail Patterson and Gail’s sister Heather Wilkinson after serving them beef Wellington with suicide mushrooms at her Leongatha home in 2023.
Heather’s husband, Ian Wilkinson, became seriously ill after eating, but survived. Patterson was also found guilty of attempted murder.
She is appealing the verdict and seeking a retrial. Prosecutors are separately challenging her 33-year non-parole period, arguing that the sentence was inadequate and that she should potentially never be released. The Court of Appeal upheld its decision.
For now, Patterson remains behind bars while her legal battle continues, and reports of her treatment of Ozempic spark a whole other debate.
Fundamentally, this is a question that goes far beyond one inmate: If medical treatment is deemed necessary, should the inmate’s criminal history determine whether taxpayers should pay for it?