The fight over the narrative in the Shada case

VG and Faktisk.no have decided to write about the Shada case – seven years after the Palestinian girl died at a child welfare institution in Stavanger. Through its six-part article series, VG aims to help resolve and close the case. “Now Shada must be allowed to rest,” they conclude. Their story is not about a mysterious suicide that may have been a murder, but about conspiracy theories and hidden motives, critics of the child welfare system and Members of Parliament who have been misled by an exciting narrative. But is it VG or Vinsrygg that is creating a narrative leading us away from the truth?

When Whistleblowers Become Villains

In Norway, we have a long list of miscarriages of justice and failed investigations to look back on. In the Fritz Moen case, a disabled man was convicted and imprisoned for more than 18 years for two murders he had not committed. A private investigator became involved, and the real murderer confessed to the killings on his deathbed. Moen was acquitted of both murders only after his own death.

When Birgitte Tengs was murdered on Karmøy in 1995, her 17-year-old cousin was blamed. After hundreds of hours of interrogation, he eventually gave a false confession. He was convicted of murder in 1997, but appealed the decision and was later acquitted. The investigator who interrogated him took his own life.

In the Monika case, an eight-year-old girl was found hanged in her own home. A burglary had taken place, yet the case was nevertheless closed as a suicide. When police investigator Robin Schaefer took a closer look at the case in connection with another investigation, he chose to blow the whistle, but was forbidden by his own superiors from speaking about the case and instructed to focus only on his own investigations. Intense pressure from his management led to him being signed off sick. After the media shed light on the treatment of the police officer, and former Kripos investigator Asbjørn Hansen reviewed the investigation itself and concluded that it was inadequate, the case was reopened and Monika’s murderer was identified and convicted. Several senior police officials were forced to resign in the aftermath.

Mistakes can occur in investigations, and those responsible may go to great lengths to cover up their own errors. In such cases, it is often the whistleblowers who are smeared, ostracised and ridiculed.

Perhaps we should be cautious about drawing conclusions in cases where there are many unanswered questions and loose ends. And careful about attacking those who draw our attention to their existence.

VG has just published an article series about the Shada case, with particular focus on the physician Rodgeir Vinsrygg, who raises numerous questions about the death of Shada Al-Barghouti – a Palestinian girl who died at a child welfare institution in 2019. :contentReference[oaicite:0]{index=0}

VG has been building momentum for a long time in order to tackle the man head-on; only after flattening him do they finally reach the ball and send it wide of the goal.

The Cult Leader Vinsrygg

The visual style of the article – with a black background and white and red text – could just as easily have been used in coverage of a death cult such as the People’s Temple in Jonestown.

A physician has seduced critics of the child welfare system and Members of Parliament – hypnotised them with his credible voice, white coat, name badge and stethoscope. They are under his spell and buy everything he tells them. Ready to drink a mental poison chalice of distorted wisdom.

First we read about the extensive attention the case has received in child welfare-critical circles, and we meet Shada’s brother and her childhood friend Fatima, whom VG uses to evoke empathy among readers. They are defenceless victims of the misinformation the doctor is spreading.

VG writes: “In child welfare-critical environments on social media, parents share stories about children who have been taken from them. Shortly after Shada dies, several people from this environment approach the parents. One of them introduces himself as a doctor.”

Thus ends the first part of the article, and we are left wanting to hear more about this man who “introduces himself as a doctor”.

The Discrediting

We click on to the next part and discover that he actually is a doctor. VG writes that he presents himself as a lawyer, which he is not. He is the parents’ legal spokesperson, and Vinsrygg has made this clear in several videos. It is not unusual to have a legal representative who is not necessarily a qualified lawyer.

There is another problem: he presents himself as a surgeon. Which he is not. Vinsrygg does not hold a medical specialisation in surgery, although he has apparently assisted in surgical operations.

Why this overwhelming focus on Vinsrygg? Is not the case itself what matters most?

What VG wants in this section is perfectly clear. They want to break down the reader’s perception of Vinsrygg as an authority and present him as a liar. Afterwards, VG will present the truly heavyweight authorities. The ones we can trust – unlike Vinsrygg.

Rodgeir Vinsrygg is fitted with the tinfoil hat when VG and Faktisk.no bring out their favourite label: “conspiracy theory”.

After Vinsrygg, Rune Fardal, Vigdis Bollerud and Marius Reikerås are dragged through the same mud. VG questions their credibility and motives.

In democratic Norway in 2026, it is apparently not those who dare to question power and institutions who are praised for their courage, but rather smeared for daring to open their mouths.

Conspiracies in Parliament

According to VG and Faktisk.no, the theories have spread all the way into the Storting. Liv Gustavsen (Progress Party) submitted a question to the Minister for Children and Families, Lene Vågslid.

“Which specific measures have been implemented or strengthened as a result of the ministry’s review of deaths in child welfare institutions during the period 2018–2023, and can the minister explain whether, and to what extent, the Shada case has been included in this learning process, as well as what improvements, if any, have been made directly as a result of this case?”

She justified the question in part by stating: “In my view, the Shada case has not been sufficiently illuminated or explained, and this currently damages the reputation of the child welfare service in a manner that is unfair to the rest of the service.” (1)

Thus, asking questions about the review of deaths in child welfare institutions, because a lack of transparency may damage the reputation of the child welfare service, is apparently the same as bringing conspiracy theories into the parliamentary chamber.

To me, Gustavsen appears to be asking precisely the same question that VG gives the impression of trying to shed light on.

Discontent with the Child Welfare Service

There has been enormous dissatisfaction with the Norwegian child welfare service. Not without reason.

In 2025, 1,219 children were subject to emergency child protection orders in Norway. (2) This means that more than a thousand children were removed from their homes by the state. Police are often present when the child welfare service removes children from their parents.

“It often creates deep and lasting trauma, which follows them into adulthood in the form of mental health problems, anxiety and attachment difficulties,” lawyer Barbro Paulsen told me when I interviewed her for steigan.no last year.

The child welfare service, with its intrusive interventions in family life, has become internationally known and has been portrayed in the Bollywood film “Mrs. Chatterjee vs Norway” and the Palme d’Or-winning film “Fjord” by the Romanian director Christian Mungiu.

But it is not primarily the interventions in family life that create international problems for the child welfare service. The service is supposed to work towards family reunification, and that rarely happens.

Since 2018, Norway has been found guilty of 37 violations of family rights in a total of 25 cases before the European Court of Human Rights.

Cross-country skiing, biathlon and violations of family rights are therefore the fields in which we compete for gold.

It is hardly surprising that emotions run high among surviving parents.

Questions About VG’s Coverage of the Investigation

It appears as though VG has started at the wrong end. They begin with the answers and work backwards towards an explanation. Where is the curiosity? Where is the doubt as to whether the experts may be wrong on some points? Have we learned nothing from previous investigative fiascos, where the experts and authorities were the ones who were wrong and then attempted to cover it up?

The experts agree that there is nothing mysterious about a sixteen-year-old girl taking her own life by hanging herself from an iPhone charger attached to a curtain rod capable of supporting up to 10 kilograms.

Photographs from the scene show a girl with a dark blue and swollen eyelid. Presumably this was not the result of a fight, because her room was neat and tidy when she was found. Is that enough information to conclude that no struggle took place? The swollen eye is not mentioned in the autopsy report.

Shada also had a wound on her temple. The pathologist states that it may have occurred during the autopsy itself, because he did not mention it in his report. Therefore, he is certain that Shada had no wound on her temple when the autopsy was performed. Is it common to inflict wounds on a body during an autopsy and then be unable to remember afterwards whether one did so?

Only two of the people interviewed by VG, crime scene investigators Huse and Angell, believe that the case could have been investigated more thoroughly – although they do not believe this would likely have led to a different outcome. But is that not the purpose of an investigation: to test different hypotheses and see whether they are supported or not? Rather than arriving at a conclusion that has already been decided upon?

We remember Monika Sviglinskaja. The eight-year-old girl who was said to have taken her own life by hanging herself. The police closed the case on that basis, despite the fact that a burglary had occurred in the flat and children of that age very rarely take their own lives. The police investigator who blew the whistle was ostracised and silenced. But he did not give up, and eventually the investigation itself was scrutinised and the real murderer was tracked down and convicted. Along the way he encountered massive resistance from his own superiors, who refused to admit mistakes. (3)

A few years later, something similar occurred in the Osen case. A 67-year-old art dealer was kidnapped and brutally beaten. A lone investigator worked on the case for a long time. Despite numerous leads and strong indications as to the perpetrators, management wanted to close the case.

Hanged from a Curtain Rod

The essential issue in the Shada case is the death itself: that a teenager took her own life by hanging herself with an iPhone cable attached to a curtain rod. It is surely not enough that it is possible to carry out, as VG writes – even if it sounds highly improbable – but whether it actually happened; that is the question.

Rodgeir Vinsrygg and his associates raise many questions about the Shada case. And they quickly conclude what must have happened. A shredded passport and an overcrowded dressing table are linked to prostitution; the fact that Jonas Gahr Støre sold his stake in Stendi after Shada’s death supposedly means that he must be involved in covering up the murder of a child. This creates unnecessary noise and distracts attention from what is essential in the case: Shada’s death. There are several concrete elements that do not sit right.

The Death Certificate

Following the death, a death certificate was issued. The physician who signed it is not easy to identify from the certificate alone. After speaking with an experienced general practitioner, I obtained some information about how death certificates are usually prepared.

“Any doctor who practises seriously has a stamp that includes a healthcare personnel number,” he says. The use of HPR numbers was introduced in 2001.

In Guidance on Completing Death Notifications, authored by Director of Health Torbjørn Mork and published in 1982, we read: “The signature must be legible and should without exception be accompanied by a stamp, typed name or the name written in block capitals.” (4)

In the death certificate, the physician also states that Shada took her own life as a result of depression/anxiety and post-traumatic stress.

Put everything else aside – the make-up, the childhood, Støre – what happened in that room when Shada died? Should that not be the focus? And should it really be VG’s role to investigate this by turning it into a story about an almost religious group of child welfare critics at whom one can laugh while eating popcorn?

Bombastic Claims

The Shada team makes bombastic claims about connections that it is unable to substantiate. Why, when there are a few concrete matters worth focusing on? The death certificate, the death itself and the injuries to the body. Perhaps the team has done this to attract attention, only for it to backfire. The Shada team has probably drawn many premature conclusions in a number of matters. VG must not do the same. Are critics who raise questions about cases containing suspicious and unresolved elements to be branded paranoid conspiracy theorists?

VG’s message is that we should all remain silent. The information that emerges harms Shada’s brothers and her childhood friend, they argue. And by quoting the brothers, they conclude their article with the message: “Now Shada must be allowed to rest.”

Conspiracy theories are dangerous, according to VG. If the solution to the Shada mystery were so easy to establish, why have the child welfare institution and the police not invited the parents and their legal representative to a meeting in order to clarify the matter calmly and peacefully? Instead, they have allowed the case to grow to gigantic proportions, and suddenly newspaper coverage is required to calm an agitated band of child welfare critics who have gone astray. Perhaps the solution is not so simple after all.

VG’s coverage will not be the end of this case. There are thousands of angry people who are, with good reason, fed up with the child welfare service’s treatment of families – the forced removal of children, the separation of families, and the drug abuse and deaths at institutions. This applies not only to the Shada case. There are numerous other tragic stories that deserve to see the light of day and lead to changes in the system. These people are not going to give up.

It is probably not a good idea for VG and Faktisk.no to try to place a lid on a pot that is already boiling over.

^*) The People’s Temple was a religious sect founded by Jim Jones in Indianapolis in 1955. In 1978, 918 of its members took their own lives by drinking poison, describing it as “revolutionary suicide”.

Editorials