A Mom Turned to Raw Goat Milk to Help Her Toddler’s Constipation, Then Her 17-Month-Old Nearly Died as Another Child Fell Seriously Ill

Brooklyn Marris was 17 months old when a drive home from swim lessons became the beginning of a medical emergency that nearly claimed her life. On June 2, 2025, she began vomiting in the family car, and her symptoms grew increasingly alarming over the following days as the vomit changed from yellow to a dark greenish-black color. The New York Post’s report brought attention to the case, while ProPublica’s investigation examined how Brooklyn became seriously ill and why the aftermath raised questions about California’s oversight of raw milk sellers.

Brooklyn’s parents initially faced symptoms that could have been mistaken for an ordinary childhood illness, but her condition deteriorated rapidly. Within days, she needed specialized hospital care, breathing support and dialysis after a severe infection damaged her kidneys. Her experience would eventually become part of a much larger story involving another sick child, an unlicensed dairy operation and difficult questions about the risks of unpasteurized milk.

A Mother Searching for a Better Option

Brooklyn’s mother, Emily Marris, had been looking for a suitable alternative to breastfeeding after starting medication for chronic hip pain. Because the medication could pass through breast milk, she became concerned about continuing to nurse her daughter while taking it. Finding another option proved difficult because organic infant formula raised concerns for her, while store-bought cow’s milk appeared to worsen Brooklyn’s constipation.

Brooklyn’s early medical history made Emily especially protective of her youngest child. Born seven weeks prematurely, the toddler had a low birth weight and underdeveloped lungs, requiring a month in a neonatal intensive care unit. Emily wanted to find something that would support her daughter’s digestion without creating new problems, and she began considering alternatives that were being promoted by people in her wider community.

A Recommendation Came From a Familiar Community

Emily encountered discussions about raw goat’s milk through a Facebook group connected to her chiropractor. Members discussed the beverage as a natural alternative to conventional dairy, and some described it as easier for children to digest. One person recommended Moonlight Ridge, a nearby goat farm operated by Courtney Baker, giving Emily a specific place to investigate.

Emily arranged to obtain the milk from the farm, which was approximately 10 miles away. According to the reporting, Baker handed over an unlabeled jug of raw goat’s milk that was still warm to the touch. Emily later recalled that the family had asked questions about safety and had been reassured that the herd and milk were clean and tested.

Six Months Passed Before Brooklyn Became Seriously Ill

The milk initially appeared to help with the problem Emily had hoped to address. She reported that Brooklyn’s bowel movements became more regular, and the family continued using the milk for approximately six months while Emily also breastfed her daughter intermittently. That early improvement reinforced the impression that the alternative was working, but it could not establish whether the milk was free of dangerous microorganisms.

During those months, the family did not experience an illness that they connected to the milk. The situation changed abruptly in early June 2025, when Brooklyn began vomiting after returning from swim lessons. What initially looked like a stomach problem developed into a frightening medical emergency, leaving her parents searching for answers as her condition worsened.

The First Symptoms Escalated Quickly

Brooklyn’s vomiting continued over the next two days, becoming darker and more unusual in appearance. By the time her condition deteriorated further, she was lethargic and barely responsive, prompting her parents to seek urgent medical attention. The progression was particularly alarming because the severity of her condition was not immediately apparent from the initial symptoms.

Her parents ultimately ensured that additional testing was performed rather than treating the episode as a routine illness and simply returning home. Bloodwork revealed that Brooklyn had developed a serious complication involving damage to her blood vessels and rapidly worsening kidney function. The findings meant she needed a higher level of care than a typical childhood stomach illness would require.

Doctors Identified a Life-Threatening Complication

Brooklyn was diagnosed with hemolytic uremic syndrome, commonly known as HUS. The condition can develop after an infection with certain strains of E. coli and can cause small blood clots that damage organs, particularly the kidneys. In Brooklyn’s case, the damage was severe enough that her kidneys could no longer adequately perform their normal functions.

Doctors transferred her to Rady Children’s Hospital, where she was admitted to pediatric intensive care. She required a ventilator to support her breathing and dialysis to help manage kidney failure while her medical team worked to stabilize her condition. Her illness had progressed from vomiting to a potentially fatal systemic emergency in a matter of days.

A Dangerous E. coli Strain Was Confirmed

Testing confirmed that Brooklyn had contracted E. coli O157:H7, a strain associated with serious foodborne illness. This finding provided a crucial piece of the medical picture because certain Shiga toxin-producing strains of E. coli can trigger HUS and cause acute kidney failure. Doctors questioned the family about what Brooklyn had eaten and drunk as they tried to determine where the infection might have originated.

Raw goat’s milk became a leading concern because Brooklyn had been drinking it regularly before becoming ill. Emily contacted Baker to report the diagnosis and warn her that doctors suspected the milk might be involved. The farm owner responded that her testing results had not shown anything abnormal, but ProPublica’s investigation reported that the farmer had not actually tested the milk for the specific E. coli strain that had sickened Brooklyn.

The distinction mattered because a claim that milk or a herd has been tested does not necessarily establish that it has been screened for every pathogen capable of causing serious illness. The family had believed the supplier’s assurances were meaningful evidence of safety. Brooklyn’s diagnosis forced them to confront the possibility that the milk they had trusted could have exposed their daughter to a dangerous infection.

Another Little Girl Became Seriously Ill

While Brooklyn remained in intensive care, another Southern California family began dealing with a frightening illness of its own. Iris and David Galindo had purchased raw goat’s milk from the same farm on June 2, 2025, for their six-year-old daughter, Victoria. They had been looking for an alternative to cow’s milk after receiving medical advice to limit their daughter’s consumption of it.

Victoria drank the milk that evening, and her condition subsequently deteriorated. After developing lethargy and bloody diarrhea, she was taken to Rady Children’s Hospital on June 13, where doctors identified HUS linked to the same E. coli strain found in Brooklyn. The fact that two children who had consumed milk from the same farm developed serious complications raised substantial concerns about a possible common source.

The Families’ Experiences Raised Urgent Questions

When Emily learned that another child had become seriously ill after drinking milk from Moonlight Ridge, she contacted Baker again. Emily urged the farm owner to stop selling the product while the families and investigators tried to establish whether the illnesses were connected. She also found that the farm continued to be promoted in online discussions as a source of fresh goat’s milk from a clean herd.

Emily eventually posted a warning about Brooklyn’s illness in the online group where the farm had been recommended. She described the severity of what had happened and urged other families to take the possible danger seriously. According to ProPublica, Baker asked Emily to remove the post, and Emily later deleted it, although she had already provided messages to state investigators.

The warning did not resolve the larger question of how the milk had been sold or what consequences the farm might face. It did, however, bring the two families’ experiences into sharper focus and drew attention to the difference between assurances about a product and evidence that it was safe for people to consume. Investigators would need to determine what the farm had been selling and whether its operation complied with California requirements.

Regulators Investigated the Farm’s Sales

California officials began investigating Moonlight Ridge after the two children became ill. The California Department of Food and Agriculture took the lead in examining whether the farm had been selling raw milk for human consumption without the required license. ProPublica reported that messages and other evidence gathered during the investigation raised questions about whether the business had represented its milk as suitable for children.

During a visit to the farm, Baker reportedly told investigators that the milk was intended for pets rather than people. That distinction was significant because California has licensing and safety requirements for businesses selling raw milk for human consumption. The state’s official guidance on raw milk and dairy products explains that even legally sold raw dairy products can contain disease-causing germs and cannot be assumed to be as safe as pasteurized alternatives.

The investigation also exposed the difficulty of determining how an unlicensed seller’s products were represented to customers. The families said they had purchased the milk for their children, and the reporting described communications that investigators could examine when considering the farm’s activities. Nevertheless, officials had to determine what the available evidence could establish under the applicable rules.

A Later Milk Sample Tested Negative

One complication was that neither family still had milk left from the original containers the children had consumed. Investigators therefore obtained another sample from the farm for laboratory testing rather than testing the actual milk given to the girls before their illnesses. That sample was collected later, after the children had already become sick.

The subsequent tests came back negative for several pathogens, including E. coli. Those results were relevant to the sample that had been tested, but they could not establish with certainty what had been present in the earlier batches consumed by Brooklyn and Victoria. The timing also mattered because a negative result from a later sample does not necessarily resolve the cause of an earlier illness.

The State Closed Its Investigation Without a Penalty

On August 1, 2025, the California Department of Food and Agriculture closed its case after finding that Baker had promoted raw milk for sale and sold unapproved milk products without a department license. According to ProPublica, the agency did not impose a financial penalty. An investigator said the state had been unable to demonstrate that the milk had been sold for human consumption, a finding that affected whether the matter could be referred for potential criminal prosecution.

Officials told ProPublica that their immediate priority had been stopping distribution of the product and protecting public health. The department explained that pursuing criminal charges could take longer than taking steps to halt sales, and the farm was subsequently allowed to pursue sales under the pet-consumption designation. The outcome left an obvious gap between the seriousness of the illnesses reported by the two families and the limited penalties imposed by the state.

The Farm Owner Disputed Responsibility

Baker disputed the families’ account and denied that the case demonstrated her farm had caused their illnesses. In reporting published by ProPublica, she said the milk was sold as pet milk and argued that the families had knowingly purchased a product not intended for human consumption. She also pointed to negative test results and said she disagreed with the investigation’s characterization of the events.

ProPublica reported that the farm’s negative laboratory results came from samples that were not collected under direct supervision and were taken after the children had become ill. The publication also reported that Baker said she had tested her herd for certain goat diseases but had not claimed to have tested the milk for foodborne pathogens. She later moved out of California and reopened her farm in Arizona, according to the same investigation, while continuing to dispute the allegations.

Brooklyn Survived, but Her Recovery Continued

Brooklyn eventually improved enough to leave intensive care, but surviving the acute infection did not mean the consequences had disappeared. She received dialysis and other critical treatment during her hospitalization, and her parents later described the experience as profoundly traumatic. The illness also interrupted her early development, leaving the family to navigate recovery after an ordeal that had nearly cost them their daughter.

In an October 2026 interview with PEOPLE, Emily and Josh Marris described Brooklyn’s progress while explaining that she still needed ongoing care. She had received physical and speech therapy and continued to require medication, while her family reported lingering nighttime episodes and lasting kidney damage. Although she was doing well in many respects, her parents said regular medical monitoring would remain necessary.

Victoria also required continued medical follow-up after her hospitalization. The two families had faced a similar medical complication, and both were left managing the longer-term effects of an illness that had developed after their children drank milk from the same source. Their experiences highlighted that surviving a severe foodborne infection can involve a long recovery even after the immediate emergency has passed.

Health Authorities Warn That Raw Milk Can Carry Dangerous Germs

Raw milk is milk that has not undergone pasteurization, a heating process designed to destroy harmful microorganisms. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention warns that raw milk can carry pathogens including E. coli, Salmonella, Listeria and Campylobacter. Children under five are among the groups at higher risk of severe illness from these infections.

The Food and Drug Administration’s guidance on raw milk also addresses claims that unpasteurized milk offers special health benefits. The agency warns that raw milk can expose consumers to dangerous pathogens and is particularly unsafe for children. Although supporters sometimes describe it as more natural or beneficial, pasteurization preserves milk’s nutritional value while substantially reducing the risk of foodborne disease.

Pediatric Experts Reinforced the Warning in October 2026

The American Academy of Pediatrics issued a policy statement on October 5, 2026, addressing unpasteurized milk and dairy products consumed by pregnant people and children. The policy statement published in Pediatrics supports choosing only pasteurized milk and milk products for these groups. It also endorses a ban on the sale and distribution of unpasteurized milk products in the United States.

The guidance reinforces an important distinction between a product appearing fresh and its being microbiologically safe. Careful handling and good sanitation practices can reduce some risks, but they cannot provide the same level of protection as pasteurization. For families making decisions about milk for young children, public-health experts continue to recommend pasteurized products rather than relying on assurances about a raw product’s quality or natural production.

A Civil Lawsuit Left the Families’ Allegations Unresolved

After the children recovered enough to leave the hospital, the Marris and Galindo families connected and compared their experiences and communications with Baker. They decided to pursue a civil lawsuit against the farm owner and the business, alleging that contaminated raw milk had been sold to them as suitable for human consumption. The complaint filed in Riverside County Superior Court sets out the families’ allegations.

Baker told ProPublica that the farm would defend itself against the claims. The lawsuit had not been resolved at the time of ProPublica’s September 2026 reporting, so the allegations had not been established through a final court judgment. The civil case represents a separate effort from the state investigation, which closed without a financial penalty despite the two children’s severe illnesses.

Emily Wants Other Parents to Understand the Risks

Emily’s response to the ordeal has been shaped by both the possibility of losing her daughter and the belief that she had made a decision without understanding its full risks. She has shared the family’s experience publicly in the hope that other parents will learn about the dangers of unpasteurized dairy before making similar choices. Her message is not that she expected her child to become ill, but that the assurances she encountered did not adequately prepare her for the potential consequences.

Her efforts to warn others have also brought her into conflict with some members of the online communities where raw milk is promoted. ProPublica reported that after she posted another warning about the girls’ illnesses, her profile was suspended from the group connected to her chiropractor. The experience added another difficult chapter to a family’s attempt to make sense of what happened.

Brooklyn’s survival remains the most important outcome, but her family continues to live with the consequences of the infection. The illnesses of both girls, the subsequent investigation and the unresolved lawsuit have made the case about more than one family’s decision to try an alternative milk product. For Emily, the central hope is that other parents will have access to clear information about raw milk’s risks before a similar medical emergency changes their lives.