Klein & Klein 2010 FamCAFC 150
A mother appealed rulings made by a trial judge that required the mother to return with…
Rogers & Bloom 2015 FamCA 27
The judge found that for a shared care arrangement (co-parent) to be considered viable, parents need to have the capacity to communicate, to resolve conflict, to have a modicum of trust and respect for the other party (communicate respect), and to have the capacity to remain child focused. The parties in this case were assessed as not meeting these criteria so the children would be psychologically compromised if the shared care arrangement were to continue.
Expert Evidence
A report by a family consultant was subject to cross-examination to assess whether the report displayed bias towards one parent (partisan). The father had re-partnered and the children commented to the consultant that the father allowed his new partner to carry out parenting tasks such as helping with homework, leading the consultant to conclude that the father was “somewhat unavailable to the boys.”
The consultant did not report that a former partner of the mother was known to have used drugs and was prone to significant violence, omitting relevant evidence (expert evidence unsatisfactory).
You may also like
Thomas & Watson 2013 FamCAFC 8
A couple had two children aged 13 and 7 years. An initial order for shared care…
Peters & March 2010 FamCA 151
The mother left the father taking two children aged 6 and 5 years. The older child…
Bryant & Stapleton 2010 FamCAFC 5
A trial judge ordered that a 5 year old child live with the mother and spend…
Professional Standards
Shared Time for Infants A policy document by the Australian Association for Infant Mental Health Inc.…
Phitzner & Hollas 2014 FamCA 344
Four children had lived with their mother since separation and had recently recommenced spending time with their…
