Smirnov & Tyrova 2009 FACAfam 1083
A child aged 9 years attended a course of attachment therapy provided by an agency to promote contact with the mother (therapy for child). The agency refused to provide material about the child’s participation in the course for the parties to view saying it was confidential, while acknowledging that the information was considered prima facie to be highly relevant to the child’s welfare. A subpoena was issued to obtain the material.
The judge ruled that the agency functioned as a family counsellor in providing attachment therapy. The parents understood when they agreed to the therapy that it was reportable and was not confidential or privileged.
The judge supported the subpoena.