Abramsson & Abramsson (No 6) [2025] FedCFamC1F 528 (6 August 2025)

1. Save with the leave of the Court, no party is permitted to rely on any further affidavits filed in these proceedings after the date of this Order.
2. For the purposes of paragraph 7 of this Order, any further affidavits filed in these proceedings will -

(a) Not be longer than 10 pages;

(b) Not reference more than 5 annexures;

(c) Be filed and served no later than 4.00 pm on Friday, 17 October 2025.

1. By no later than 4.00 pm on Friday, 17 October 2025 -

(a) Any party seeking leave for the electronic attendance of a witness is to file an application to that effect;

(i) The Independent Children's Lawyer is to forward to the Associate of the Honourable Justice Carew an AGREED UPDATED TRIAL PLAN (copied to all parties); or

(ii) In the event that at that time there is no Agreed Updated Trial Plan, then the Independent Children's Lawyer is to forward to the Associate of the Honourable Justice Carew the Independent Children's Lawyer PROPOSED UPDATED TRIAL PLAN (copied to all parties).

1. All subpoenas issued in these proceedings for persons to attend Court to give evidence are enlarged to 10.00 am on 27 October 2025.
2. The Independent Children's Lawyer is at liberty to issue further subpoenas to produce documents returnable on or before 4.00 pm on 15 October 2025 to -

(a) Suburb M School (per Education Queensland);

(b) KK Early Learning, Suburb M;

(c) Department of Families, Seniors, Disability Services & Child Safety.

1. There is no Court by the name "Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia". This Court was formerly known as the Family Court of Australia and is now known as the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 1).
2. The design of the seal affixed to this Order issued by the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 1) was determined by the Attorney-General pursuant to the undated Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Seal) Determination 2021 signed by the Attorney-General.

Note: The form of the order is subject to the entry in the Court's records.

Note: This copy of the Court's Reasons for judgment may be subject to review to remedy minor typographical or grammatical errors (r 10.14(b) Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth)), or to record a variation to the order pursuant to r 10.13 Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth).

Part XIVB of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) makes it an offence, except in very limited circumstances, to publish an account of proceedings that identify persons, associated persons, or witnesses involved in family law proceedings.

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment by this Court under a pseudonym has been approved pursuant to subsection 114Q(2) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth). In addition to the use of pseudonyms for the parties, other changes have been made to the published judgment to protect the identity of a party or a witness. Such changes (other than when a letter is used instead of a name or an address) are apparent on the face of the judgment by the use of square brackets.

1. Last Wednesday, 30 July 2025, I commenced a rehearing of a parenting matter that had been remitted by the Full Court after an appeal and cross-appeal were conceded on the basis that the reasons provided for a final parenting order made by another judge of this Court on 6 December 2024 were inadequate.
2. Pursuant to that order, two young children X, now aged 7, and Y, aged 4, were to live with the father and spend alternate weekend time with the mother with changeovers, before the commencement of the 2025 school year, to occur at K Counselling and thereafter at school or day care. K Counselling withdrew their services on 7 January 2025.
3. The children did not see their mother again until after the school year recommenced but then not always in accordance with the order. On 27 March 2025, the mother did not return the children to the father, and they remained in her care until a recovery order was made on 29 May 2025, and the mother was prohibited from having any contact or communication with the children until further order. At that time, the rehearing was listed to commence in September 2025. It was brought forward to July 2025 when earlier dates became available.
4. The first four days of this rehearing proceeded but unfortunately, yesterday morning the mother was not initially in the Court room for the recommencement of the trial although she was in the Court precincts. Her counsel informed the Court that the mother was unwell. The matter was stood down to enable the mother to seek medical attention.
5. A medical certificate tendered on behalf of the mother states the following:

[Ms Abramsson] consulted me today with a 2 day history of gastroenteritis. She has been unwell since the evening of 3 August when she commenced vomiting. This together with diarrhoea and bloating continued throughout the night and into Monday. Symptoms were marginally relieved with the use of zofran and gastrostop however last night and today she has still been unwell. Due to her symptoms she has been unable to sleep and is now not only suffering gastroenteritis but also symptoms of sleep deprivation with inability to focus or concentrate.

Examination reveals [Ms Abramsson] as generally unwell, poor colour,tender abdomen, afebrile and mild dehydratio [sic].

l have commenced her om [sic] medication and referred her for tests to determine the cause of her symptoms.

I have advised her that she is unfit to face cross examination today and until further review.

(As per original)

1. It was conceded by all parties that the trial would need to be adjourned and unfortunately, due to the commitments of counsel in other part-heard trials and my commitments to other matters, the earliest dates available to continue the trial are not until the week commencing 27 October 2025.
2. Given that delay and the fact that the mother is not currently permitted to spend any time with the children, counsel for the mother was granted leave to make an oral application for a further interim parenting order. Counsel requested that the matter be stood over to today in order to prepare submissions in support of the application. That request was not opposed.
3. The mother seeks an interim order that the children spend alternate weekends with her commencing this Friday with changeovers at school and day care or facilitated by a friend, Ms N. The mother also seeks that she be permitted to take the children to therapy. The terms of the interim order sought by the mother are set out in the Minute of Order provided by the mother's counsel this morning and will be marked as Exhibit 1 in the interim application.
4. The orders sought by the mother are opposed by the father and the Independent Children's Lawyer ("ICL").
5. When the parents separated on 21 April 2022, X was four years old, and Y was only 13 months old. The mother had been the primary carer for the children, and they did not see the father again until January 2023 after an order was made on 20 December 2022 that they spend supervised time with him. The supervised time ceased in August 2023, and the children did not see the father again until they were placed in his care pursuant to an interim order made on 11 September 2024 and the mother was prohibited from having any contact or communication with the children pending the trial. The previous trial commenced on 3 November 2024 and as earlier noted a final parenting order was made on 6 December 2024 for the children to remain living with the father and spend time with the mother.
6. On any view, X and Y have endured significant trauma in their short lives. Each parent attributes almost the entire blame for that situation on the other parent. However, it is common ground that X and Y witnessed their mother drive off an embankment (described by the father as a 10 metre cliff) opposite the parents' home on 21 April 2022 and that the children were present during ensuing involvement of emergency services who took 45 minutes to extricate the mother from the car. That incident alone would without doubt be a traumatic event, at least for X. Given Y's age, he may not have any recollection of it. In a recent interview between the Department of Families, Seniors, Disability Services and Child Safety ("Child Safety") and X on 23 July 2025 she said, among other things, that her mother had fallen off a cliff and hurt her shoulder.
7. Each parent claims to have been the victim of family violence from the other including attempted strangulation, coercive or controlling behaviour, and threats to kill. The affidavit material is voluminous as are the proposed tender bundles which have been treated as aide memoirs up to this point. Four audio recordings (the fourth being composed of a number of separate audio clips) and one video recording have been tendered so far in the trial. The content is harrowing and corroborates, at the very least, the direct involvement of X in the parental dispute.
8. Although I have had the benefit of observing the father being cross-examined over two and a half days, the mother's cross-examination was interrupted after half a day due to illness. I am yet to make findings of fact. The paternal grandmother has been cross-examined. None of the experts or treating therapists have been cross-examined other than Mr S, an expert in Autism Spectrum Disorder ("ASD").
9. It is not in dispute that the children have endured significant upheaval in their care arrangements and have been separated from one or other of their parents on numerous occasions.
10. Child Safety are currently visiting the father's home weekly and indicated some concerns about his capacity to provide for the children's daily needs. X has presented with untidy and at times dirty hair, and last year Y has presented as hungry when attending day care with inadequate or insufficiently nutritious food in his lunch box. Child Safety has prepared a case plan for each child which is said to be an "intervention with parental consent". The parents were provided with a copy of each case plan last Tuesday evening. The father disputes that he has consented to the "intervention" and indeed he questions whether the matters raised by Child Safety reach the threshold for their intervention.
11. The case plans are aspirational and have stated aims to "meet the safety, belonging, and wellbeing needs of [the children]" and a stated focus on "continued support for the parents to work with Child Safety to demonstrate that they can address the concerns and achieve and maintain future safety goals". In relation to the father, the following matters were noted to be what "needs to be achieved":

[Mr Abramsson] advised that over the next six months he will continue to:

• ensure that his employment is stable.

• follow up on legal protections to keep himself and the children safe.

• engage in therapeutic support.

• re-establish a support network.

Child Safety advised they would [sic] [Mr Abramsson] to continue to engage with the Family Intervention Service to develop his parenting skills and capacity to ensure that he is engaging meaningfully with his children.

1. The father is currently employed three days per week as a psychiatrist for Queensland Health. His right to practice has previously been suspended. The father has ASD (level 1) and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder ("ADHD"). He returned to practice in about November last year. He lives in a two-bedroom apartment with the two children. He and the children share the same bedroom in different beds while his mother is living with him to assist in the children's care. The paternal grandmother lives in Adelaide but has spent extended periods living with the father and the children since they came into his care in September 2024 and has no imminent plans to return to Adelaide although she clearly wants to return to her home at some point where her 96-year-old mother and another son live.
2. The case plan notes some improvements in the father's home, such as the children now having "a basic routine, including brushed hair, food provision, and a bed to sleep in".
3. Child Safety have not sought to intervene in these proceedings, nor do they have any current intention to "pursue more intrusive action".
4. The case plans involved interviews with the parents and the children and when X was interviewed on 23 July 2025 at the father's home a technique was used "to obtain X's views and wishes" by focusing on her "dream house". When asked who she would like to live in this house, the child said she would like - "mummy, daddy, nanna, Y and JJ [the dog]" to live there. X said on multiple occasions that she would like to live with her mother and visit her father every second weekend. She identified various friends including four girls at her current school. Child Safety did not contact the ICL because "the ICL had not met with the children to obtain their views", but rather "the ICL and social worker had met with the children solely to inform them of their interim parenting placement with their father". Further, "[b]ased on this, Child Safety did not believe the ICL would have relevant information for the Child Safety Case Plan". While Child Safety are under no obligation to contact the ICL, the narrow basis for their decision not to contact the ICL seems curious.
5. In any event, children's views are but one factor to consider when determining what is in a child's best interests. The children in this case are very young and have a history of exposure to their parents' conflict. What weight will be placed on any views expressed by the children is yet to be determined. There is much evidence still to be reviewed and tested.
6. Dr R, consultant psychiatrist, assessed the parents during interviews on 16 and 30 November 2022. In his opinion, the father's psychiatric difficulties, which at the time of interview also included depression, were "not such as to preclude him from being an effective parent" and "[t]here is no reason why the children could not spend substantial unsupervised contact with him including living with him for significant periods of time". In relation to the mother, Dr R opined that the mother's "personality vulnerabilities are not such as to impact on her capacity to be a mother although the problems with affect regulation may cause difficulties as the children grow older and seek more independence and resist control". Dr R is yet to be cross-examined.
7. Mr S is a clinical psychologist with a particular expertise in ASD. He provided a report dated 3 January 2024. In his opinion, "although [the father] is autistic, he has the capacity to be a caring and supportive father to his two children" and further that he "cannot find a reason why the children could not spend substantial unsupervised contact with [the father], including living with him for substantial periods". Mr S has been cross-examined.
8. Ms E has prepared two family reports in this matter and two addendum reports. Ms E most recently met with the children on 17 June 2025, after they had been returned to their father on 29 May 2025. Ms Toohey expressed the following opinions in her addendum dated 20 June 2025:
   1. Overall, both children presented with distress during the meeting, with [Y] demonstrating a high level of distress and an inability to be comforted. While this presentation is concerning, in my opinion their behaviour is a direct result and a reflection of the traumatic impact of the prolonged parental conflict and parenting dispute, and the multiple abrupt changes in parenting arrangements.
   2. Sudden and abrupt changes in parenting arrangements can disrupt a child's sense of stability and security. When children experience abrupt changes, the impact can manifest as acting out, aggression, withdrawal, or difficulties at school. It is very difficult for children to adjust to sudden changes, and high levels of distress, confusion, sadness, anxiety, and behavioural problems are to be expected.
   3. In addition to their exposure to their parents' toxic relationship, emotional dysregulation, and frequent arguments throughout their entire childhood, [X] and [Y] have experienced at least three very abrupt and extreme changes in parenting arrangements since September 2024. In my opinion, it is very likely that as soon as the children became cognisant of their surroundings, they were filled with anxiety, confusion, and a sense of dread or trepidation about the potential for another sudden and confusing change to their lives.
   4. In my opinion, to avoid further harm being experienced by the children, it is imperative that a final decision about the parenting arrangement be made as soon as possible. In my opinion, there is no likely prospect of a co-parenting arrangement being successful, and therefore, the children should live with one of their parents and have no contact with the other.
9. X changed schools at the beginning of this year and Y changed day care centres. There have been difficulties with X settling into her new school although that seemed to be improving prior to the end of March 2025. X did not attend her school while living with her mother from the end of March 2025 until the end of May 2025. There were further issues with X attending school, when she was returned to the father, but she is now attending in her uniform and for full days. It is heartening that X referred to several friends she has made at her new school when she was recently interviewed by Child Safety. Y did not attend day care when he was living with the mother from the end of March 2025 to the end of May 2025. The mother was concerned that if he did so, the father would retrieve him. Y recommenced at KK Early Learning at Suburb M on 14 July 2025 and attends four days per week.
10. The Director of that Centre, Ms GG, states that Y's first day back was hard for him and on the second day he was again initially unsettled and did not want the father and X to leave. However, the father followed Ms GG's advice and left the centre with X and Y then "completely settled down within five minutes and he had a good day". In her affidavit, Ms GG describes Y as looking "very well". The centre provides food for the children and Y eats well. Ms GG states that in her opinion Y was settled and doing well during his attendance at the centre when he initially started there this year. Y's presentation did not cause any concern. It was noted that Y often wore the same clothes to day care but they appeared clean. Ms GG noted a change in Y's behaviour coinciding with the commencement of the mother collecting and dropping Y off. He was noted to be more unsettled, emotionally dysregulated and withdrawn.
11. On 1 January 2025, the mother was unable to console X who was highly distressed, when she was due to return to the father after spending time with the mother. The mother recorded the experience, and it was harrowing to listen to the child's distress over some 30 minutes of the recording. The distress continued thereafter, and the police were eventually called. The child eventually returned to the father, but it was after this changeover that K Counselling withdrew their services. Other attempts at changeover after this occasion were also distressing for X and culminated in the mother retaining both children in her care. The mother was unable to get X to remain at school and the school suggested that a more neutral place be found for changeovers. Ultimately, the mother enrolled X in distance education for the time she lived with her in late March 2025 to the end of May 2025.
12. Counsel for the mother has said all he can possibly say in support of the mother's application for an interim parenting order and while I have no doubt that the children want to see their mother, I cannot take the risk at this interim stage of subjecting them to the further trauma of seeing the mother and thereafter being subjected to distressing and long drawn out changeovers before returning to the father, assuming that the changeover would even occur.
13. I am not persuaded to make any of the other orders sought by the mother on an interim stage and her application will be dismissed.
14. I will formally adjourn the trial part-heard to the week commencing 27 October 2025 for up to four days.
15. I will also request the ICL to provide a copy of these reasons to Child Safety.

I certify that the preceding thirty-one (31) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Ex Tempore Reasons for Judgment of the Honourable Justice Carew.