Yeddich & Meier and Anor 2014 FamCA

A child aged 13 years had been subject to a hearing 7 years before.  Reports had been received from three psychiatrists who recommended that the boy live with the father and that the father have sole parental responsibility.  The child had travelled across a major city and ended up in a police station (abscond).  An ICL recommended a change in orders on the basis of changed circumstances and the child’s wishes.

The judge found that this was an effort by a pseudo-mature 13 year old who had maintained a consistent position about orders but, despite the boy’s consistent position, all experts had continued to recommend that it is not in his best interest to get what he wants which is to live with the mother.  The judge did not agree with a principle of a child dictating what will happen on parenting matters.

The judge confirmed the existing order.