Evidence Act 2008 (Vic) s 79

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) ss 60CA, 60CC, 69ZT

The Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021

Alcan (NT) Alumina Pty Ltd v Commissioner of Territory Revenue [2009] HCA 41; (2009) 239 CLR 27

Chu Kheng Lim v Minister for Immigration, Local Government and Ethnic Affairs (1992) 176 CLR 1

Cooper Brookes (Wollongong) Pty Ltd v Federal Commissioner of Taxation [1981] HCA 26; (1981) 147 CLR 297

Commonwealth v Baume [1905] HCA 11; (1905) 2 CLR 405

Dasreef Pty Ltd v Hawchar [2011] HCA 21; (2011) 243 CLR 588

K & S Lake City Freighters Pty Ltd v Gordon & Gotch Ltd [1985] HCA 48; (1985) 157 CLR 309

Kuhl v Zurich Financial Services Australia Ltd [2011] HCA 11; (2011) 243 CLR 361

Lang v The Queen [2023] HCA 29; (2023) 278 CLR 323

Makita (Australia) Pty Ltd v Sprowles [2001] NSWCA 305; (2001) 52 NSWLR 705

Northern Territory v Collins [2008] HCA 49; (2008) 235 CLR 619

Project Blue Sky Inc v Australian Broadcasting Commission [1998] HCA 35; (1998) 194 CLR 355

Taylor v Public Service Board [1976] HCA 36; (1976) 137 CLR 208

Viteri & Manfredi [2024] FedCFamC1F 858.

Wagstaff v Wagstaff [2022] FedCFamC1A 119; (2022) 65 FamLR 461

FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 1)

1. The father has sole parental decision making for all long-term major decisions for W born 2008, X born 2009, Y born 2012 and Z born 2014 (collectively here known as "the children").
2. For the purpose of exercising sole parental responsibility -

(a) save in the event of an emergency, the father must contact the mother in writing no less than seven days prior to making any major long-term decision with respect to the children and with such communication to set out the issue at hand and the father's proposal;

(b) the mother must respond to any such communication in writing within three days thereafter detailing her position with respect to the issue;

(c) the father must consider the mother's position; and

(d) the father must inform the mother in writing of the decision he has made within seven days of making that decision.

1. The children live with the father.
2. There be a moratorium of the mother's time and communication with the children for a period of three months.
3. Prior to the children's time and communication with the mother recommencing, the mother is to engage in cognitive behavioural therapy and dialectical behavioural therapy with an agreed clinical psychologist with experience in family court matters at her sole expense.
4. For the purpose of paragraph 5 of these orders -

(a) the mother must provide the clinical psychologist with a copy of the Family Report by Ms B dated 17 March 2025 ("the Family Report");

(b) the mother must follow all reasonable directions of the clinical psychologist including but not limited to frequency of appointments;

(c) following the conclusion of no less than six sessions with a clinical psychologist, the mother must provide the father with a written report from the treating clinician, comprising -

(i) confirmation that the clinician has reviewed the Family Report;

(ii) verification that the mother has actively engaged in cognitive behavioural therapy and dialectical behavioural therapy;

(iii) confirmation the mother has attended for no less than six sessions;

(iv) whether the mother is adhering to treatment recommendations;

(v) an opinion as to whether it is psychologically safe for the children to resume time and communication with the mother; and

(vi) any plan for further treatment.

1. Upon the conclusion of the moratorium referred to in paragraph 4 of these orders and in compliance with paragraphs 5 and 6 of these orders the children must spend time with the mother for two nights per fortnight as follows -

(a) each Wednesday from the conclusion of school (or 3:30pm if a non-school day) until 7:00pm;

(b) in each alternate week from the conclusion of school (or 3:30pm if a non-school day) on Friday until 7:00pm on Sunday; and

(c) such further time as agreed between the parties.

1. During the moratorium, all orders relating to time in which the children communicate and spend time with the mother are suspended.
2. During the moratorium while the children are in the care of the father, the mother, her servants and/or agents are restrained by injunction from communicating with the children in person, by mail, by way of telephone, text message, any smartphone application, social media or emails.
3. In the event the children contact the mother, her servants and/or agents during the moratorium period, the mother, her servants and/or agents must not respond to such contact or communication and must report such contact or communication to the father via email or AppClose within 24 hours of such contact being made.
4. In the event the children attend upon the mother at her residential address or any other location during the moratorium period, the mother must report such attendance to the father and the mother must do all things necessary to facilitate the return of the children to the father.

1. For the purposes of giving effect to these orders -

(a) immediately after delivery of judgment in this proceeding, the mother, her servants and/or agents must leave the court building located at 305 William Street, Melbourne, Victoria 3000 and not return within 500 metres of the court building for a period of 24 hours;

(b) immediately after delivery of judgment, a court child expert after consultation with the independent children's lawyer must explain to the children the orders made this day prior to releasing the children into the care of the father;

(c) immediately after delivery of judgment, the father along with any elected support person or persons must attend upon court child services on level 5 of the court building as directed by a court child expert and follow the instructions of the court staff; and

(d) the father shall collect the children from Court Child Services and for the purposes of changeover a court child expert must be in attendance.

1. Court Child Services have liberty to engage the services of the court's MSS Security to assist in the handover of the children.

1. The mother must remain engaged with a clinical psychologist for cognitive behavioural therapy and dialectical behavioural therapy for a period of no less than two years from the making of these orders.
2. The father must continue to engage with his treating psychologist and psychiatrist for no less than one year from the making of these orders and follow all reasonable directions of his treating clinicians including but not limited to the frequency of appointments.
3. For the purpose of paragraph 14 of these orders, the mother must authorise and instruct her treating psychologist to provide the father with a letter or email on a monthly basis which confirms that she remains engaged with treatment and continues to follow all reasonable recommendations of the treating psychologist including as to frequency of appointments.

1. On the day the children change residence to live with the father, the father in consultation with the children must provide a list of items the children would like to take with them to the father's home, and the mother must do all acts and things to provide those items to the father at changeover on the day the children change residence.
2. For the purposes of paragraph 11 of these orders, within 14 days of the children coming into the father's care, the father must provide a further list of any of the children's possessions which the children would like to have with them or have forgotten to take with them, and that within seven days of receiving that list, the mother must do all acts and things to provide the father with the requested items to the father's place of abode.

(a) all changeovers that coincide with the commencement or conclusion of school shall occur at the children's respective schools;

(b) all other changeovers shall occur at the McDonalds carpark located at C Street, Suburb D;

(c) for the avoidance of doubt, the collecting parent will meet the children inside the McDonalds store and the dropping off parent will remain in their car at changeover, save to assist the children with putting their bags in the car if necessary; and

(d) for the purpose of paragraph 19(a) of these orders, the parties and/or their agents known to the children be permitted to collect the children from school at the commencement of the children's time with that parent.

1. The parties must communicate in relation to all matters concerning the children through the parenting application AppClose save for in cases of emergency where the parties are at liberty to telephone each other.
2. Prior to the children's time and communication with the mother recommencing pursuant to paragraph 7 of these orders, the father must provide the mother with monthly updates in relation to the children's welfare, education, psychological treatment and extracurricular activities via AppClose.
3. Save for within the period specified in paragraphs 4, 5 and 6 of these orders, the parties must facilitate the children's communication with the other parent in accordance with the children's wishes.

(a) be at liberty to provide a copy of these orders and the Family Report to all psychologists, medical providers and allied health professionals treating the children from time to time;

(b) must notify the other by telephone or Appclose of any serious illness or injury of the children while in their care and will provide details of any medical practitioner treating the children to the other party as soon as practicable;

(c) is authorised to communicate with each of the children's medical practitioners and allied health professionals and receive all information as to the children's treatment;

(d) must endeavour to seek relief and/or amelioration of the costs of compliance with paragraph 24(b) of these orders, however will equally meet any cost ultimately eventuating, as follows -

(i) upon one party making payment of an invoice for an out-of-pocket expense for a child's treating clinician, that party must provide to the other party a copy of the paid invoice and evidence of rebate within seven days of making payment; and

(ii) the other party must reimburse the paying party their half share of the ultimate cost within seven days of receipt of the paid invoice and evidence of the rebate.

1. Unless otherwise agreed between the parties in writing, the father -

(a) must enter all appointments for the children into Appclose within 24 hours of such appointment being made by him and such entries will include the first name and surname of the practitioner, the name of their place of work and the time and location of the appointment; and

(b) must facilitate the children's attendance to their respective psychologists, medical providers and allied health professionals ("treating clinicians") at such times as recommended by the treating clinicians.

1. Within 14 days of these orders being made, the parties must do all acts and things necessary to transfer management of the children's NDIS plans and funding to the father, including but not limited to serving a copy of these orders upon any relevant government institution, NDIS provider or otherwise, to facilitate the transfer of management into the father's name.

(a) to receive copies of all school reports, school notices and photographs in relation to the children that a parent would ordinarily receive at their own expense;

(b) to communicate with the children's schools by telephone, email or personal attendance in relation to the children's progress at school; and

(c) save for within the period specified in paragraphs 4, 5 and 6 of these orders, to attend school functions and events in relation to the children that a parent would normally be able to attend.

1. Commencing in the first Victorian gazetted term holiday period, following the commencement of paragraph 7 of these orders and following time pursuant to paragraph 7 of these orders occurring for a period of 12 weeks, for the term 1, 2 or 3 Victorian Gazetted holiday periods, the children must spend time with the parties as agreed in writing, and failing agreement -

(a) in odd numbered years, with the mother for the first half from the conclusion of school on the last day of term, and with the father for the second half of the holidays, with changeover occurring on the middle day at 5:00pm, and the children to remain in the father's care until the commencement of the school term; and

(b) in even numbered years, with the father for the first half from the conclusion of school on the last day of term, and with the mother for the second half of the holidays, with changeover occurring on the middle day at 5:00pm and the children to remain in the mother's care until the commencement of the school term.

1. For the purposes of paragraph 27 of these orders, if there are an odd number of overnights in the term 1, 2 or 3 Victorian Gazetted holiday periods then changeover must occur on the first of the two middle overnights in even years and on the second of the two middle overnights in odd numbered years.
2. For the first long summer gazetted holidays following the commencement of the arrangements in paragraph 7 of these orders and following time pursuant to paragraph 7 of these orders occurring for a period of no less than 12 weeks, and continuing thereafter, the children must spend time with the parties as agreed and failing agreement on a week about basis -

(a) in odd numbered years and continuing in all odd number years thereafter, on a week about basis commencing with the mother from the conclusion of school on the last day of term until 12.00pm the following Saturday when they will spend time with the father, with changeover occurring each Saturday at 12.00pm until the commencement of school on the first day of term 1; and

(b) in even numbered years and continuing in all even number years thereafter, on a week about basis commencing with the father from the conclusion of school on the last day of term until 12.00pm the following Saturday when they will spend time with the mother, with changeover occurring each Saturday at 12.00pm until the commencement of school on the first day of term 1.

1. For the purpose of paragraph 29 of these orders, the time arrangements pursuant to paragraph 7 of these orders are suspended from the conclusion of school on the last day of term 4 and are resumed from the commencement of school on the first day of term 1 and the arrangements pursuant to paragraph 7 of these orders recommence as though they were never interrupted.

1. Save for the period specified in paragraphs 4, 5 and 6 of these orders, the children spend time with the mother for special occasions, as follows -

(a) for the period Christmas Eve to Boxing Day as follows -

(i) from 11.00am Christmas Eve to 11.00am Christmas Day in even numbered years; and

(ii) from 11.00am Christmas Day to 7:00pm on 26 December in odd years;

(b) during the Easter period, from 10:00am on Good Friday until 10:00am on Easter Monday in odd numbered years;

(c) on the children's birthday(s) as follows -

(i) if a school day, when the children are in the father's care, from the conclusion of school to 7:00pm;

(ii) if a non-school day when the children are otherwise in the father's care, from 10:00am to 2:00pm;

(iii) otherwise as agreed between the parties

(d) from 5.00pm the day before Mother's Day to 6.30pm on Mother's Day;

(e) on the mother's birthday in any given year -

(i) if a school day, when the children are in the father's care, from the conclusion of school to 7:00pm; and

(ii) if a non-school day when the children are otherwise in the father's care, from 10:00am to 2:00pm.

1. Save for otherwise specified in these orders, the children spend time with the father for special occasions, as follows -

(a) for the period Christmas Eve to Boxing Day as follows -

(i) from 11.00am Christmas Eve to 11.00am Christmas Day in odd numbered years;

(ii) from 11.00am Christmas Day to 7:00pm on 26 December in even years;

(b) during the Easter period, from 10:00am on Good Friday until 10:00am on Easter Monday in even numbered years;

(c) on the children's birthday(s) as follows -

(i) if a school day, when the children are in the mother's care, from the conclusion of school to 7:00pm;

(ii) if a non-school day when the children are otherwise in the mother's care, from 10:00am to 2:00pm;

(iii) otherwise as agreed between the parties;

(d) from 5.00pm the day before Father's Day to 6.30pm on Father's Day;

(e) on the father's birthday in any given year -

(i) if a school day, when the children are in the mother's care, from the conclusion of school to 7:00pm; and

(ii) if a non-school day when the children are otherwise in the mother's care, from 10:00am to 2:00pm.

1. Each party be at liberty to travel within Victoria with the children, without the consent of the other party, during the children's time with them pursuant to these orders.
2. Each party be at liberty to travel interstate with the children during the children's time with them pursuant to these orders, on the basis that -

(a) the travelling parent provides the non-travelling parent with not less than 30 days written notice of their intention to travel interstate with the children;

(b) in the event of emergency relating to the travelling parent's family members such as illness or death, 14 days' notice can be provided; and

(c) not less than seven days prior to departure, the travelling parent shall provide the non-travelling parent with a copy of the itinerary including details and addresses of accommodation, copies of return flights, and contact details for the children while they are travelling.

1. Each party be at liberty to travel internationally to any Hague Convention country with the children, on the basis that -

(a) the proposed travel is no longer than two weeks duration, unless agreed between the parties in writing;

(b) the proposed travel does not interfere with the children's school attendance unless otherwise agreed between the parties in writing;

(c) 60 days' notice in writing of the intended travel is afforded to the non-travelling parent; and

(d) no less than 30 days prior to departure, the travelling parent must provide the non-travelling parent with a copy of the itinerary including details and addresses of accommodation, copies of return flights, and contact details for the children while they are travelling.

1. The travelling parent must provide make up time to the non-travelling parent equivalent to the number of overnights the children missed with the non-travelling parent at such days and times as agreed between the parties, and failing agreement, the non-travelling parent is to propose two sets of dates and times, and the travelling parent selects one of those sets.
2. Subject to the travelling parent complying with paragraphs 34 or 35 of these orders, the non-travelling parent shall not unreasonably withhold consent to the travel, including to non-Hauge convention countries.

1. No less than 90 days prior to any intended international travel, the parties shall forthwith do all acts and things and sign all documents necessary to -

(a) apply for the children's Australian passports at their equal expense;

(b) attend upon an Australia Post Office or the Melbourne Passport Office to lodge the applications; and

(c) in the event that either party refuses or neglects to comply with these orders, the Registrar of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia is hereby appointed to execute all documents in the name of the defaulting parent and do all things necessary to give validity and operation to these orders.

1. The children's passports shall be retained by the father.
2. No later than 14 days prior to the mother's international departure with the children, the father must provide to the mother, the children's passports to facilitate the travel.
3. Within seven days of the mother returning home from international travel with the children, she must return the children's passports to the father.

1. Within six months of these orders being made, the father must use his best endeavours to secure suitable accommodation within 20 minutes of all or one of the children's respective schools.
2. Within 14 days of the children coming into the father's care pursuant to these orders, the father must do all acts and things necessary to enrol each of the children in an extracurricular activity and will consult the children as to which activity they would prefer before making a decision.
3. Within 14 days of these orders being made, unless otherwise completed, the mother must enrol in the following parenting courses and provide a certificate of completion to the father once completed -

(a) Tuning into Kids;

(b) Tuning into Teens;

(c) Triple P; and

(d) a Parenting after Separation program.

1. Each of the parties must, as soon as practicable, advise and keep the other party informed of their contact details including email addresses, residential addresses and mobile numbers including any change thereto within 48 hours of any change.
2. The parties or their respective solicitors be at liberty to provide a sealed copy of these orders to -

(a) each of the children's schools;

(b) their respective medical practitioners;

(c) allied health professionals;

(d) sporting or other extracurricular club attended by the children from time to time; and

(e) any government institution or relevant body or organisation related to the medical treatment of the children that is associated with medical funding that the father may need to provide a copy of the orders to, to enable his communication with the same, including but not limited to Medicare, NDIS, disability support services and otherwise.

(a) communicating with each other through the children;

(b) physically disciplining the children;

(c) denigrating, abusing, rebuking, or marginalising the other parent or family members in the presence or hearing of the children or allowing any other person to do so;

(d) denigrating the other parent to the children's schools, treating clinicians, or sporting or other extracurricular clubs; and

(e) discussing these proceedings or parenting matters in the presence or hearing of the children or allowing any other person to do so.

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 Coman & Coman has been approved pursuant to subsection 114Q(2) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).

1. The trial of this proceeding concerned four children, each having varying degrees of mental health issues.
2. The mother has had the care of the children for over two years since 2023. The parties had an equal share arrangement of the children for five years in accordance with court orders until the mother unilaterally suspended the father's time in October 2022. The father and the children have had supervised visits since July 2024. One of the children, Y, only attended two sessions. Spend time arrangements between the father and the children progressed to unsupervised visits during the day on Sundays and from the conclusion of school on Thursdays until 7.00pm. However, the mother has not facilitated Y's attendance in accordance with court orders.
3. The father applied to this court for orders for sole parental decision making in respect of each of the children and for the children to live with him.
4. The mother sought orders for her to have sole decision making in respect of the children, for the children to continue living with her and for the father to have increased time.
5. The father alleged that the mother had influenced the children to form adverse attitudes towards the father. He sought orders for the mother to have no time with the children for a period of three months consequent upon the children living with the father.
6. Each parent is affected by mental health issues that are canvassed below. Each of the four children are likewise affected by mental health issues.
7. Evidence was given during the trial of this proceeding by a collection of psychologists, psychiatrists and general medical practitioners. The details of the evidence of those health professionals have been recorded in the passages below. A psychologist gave viva voce evidence, Ms B, with whose evidence I was impressed.
8. For the reasons that follow, in my judgment the best interests of the children are served by orders being made the substance of which is recorded immediately below. Those orders I make are -

(a) for the father to have sole decision making for each of the four children;

(b) for the children to live with the father forthwith; and

(c) for a moratorium of not less than three months from the date of these orders to be imposed so that the mother is to have no contact whatsoever with the children in which period the children's relationship with their father can be stabilised.

1. The father was born in 1979. He is 46 years of age.
2. The mother was born in 1977. She is 47 years of age.
3. The father deposed to commencing a relationship with the mother in early 2003 or thereabouts, marrying in 2005, cohabiting from the date of their wedding, separating on a final basis in August 2017 and divorcing in 2023.
4. The father has re-partnered, having met his current partner in 2020 then commencing what he called a "committed relationship" (his words) in late 2023.

1. The first child is W, 17, born in 2008. He has been diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder as well as selective mutism. The father deposed to W not being enrolled in any educational institution since mid-March 2025.
2. The second born child is X, 15, born in 2009. She is a year nine student in secondary school.
3. The third born child is Y, 13, born in 2012. He is a year seven student in secondary school.
4. The fourth child is Z, 10, born in 2014. He is a grade five student at primary school.

1. The father deposed to his suffering from mental health issues as did the mother. He said the mother was diagnosed with borderline personality disorder and body dysmorphia as well as anxiety. On the birth of their first child the father deposed to the mother being diagnosed with post-natal depression and, even with improvements thereafter, the father said the mother lapsed into post-natal depression upon the birth of each child "with increased severity" (his words).
2. He described how the mother's behaviour manifested itself. While I accept that he deposed to the manifestation of the mother's behaviour, I do not accept from him that the behaviour he described was medically characterised as borderline personality disorder, body dysmorphia or post-natal depression. Only a duly qualified psychologist or psychiatrist was capable of linking any asserted behaviour exhibited by the mother to a psychological or psychiatric condition.[1]
3. The father deposed to events that he said gave rise to his own mental health issues. Those events included the following -

(a) developing severe complex post-traumatic stress disorder as a result of his involvement in more than 150 critical incidents, bullying and harassment;

(b) an episode in 2012 when the father was involved in a car accident leading to a person dying.

(c) an event in mid-2014 when he witnessed a public servant stealing confiscated substance following which the father reported them leading to the public servant's dismissal and subsequent accusation of whistleblowing by his colleagues, resulting in the father taking extended leave from work; and

(d) in 2016, upon the father's return to work he was confronted with an incident involving a woman who had escaped from a psychiatric hospital after injuring herself, causing the father's deterioration in his anxiety.

1. The father deposed to several suicide attempts between May 2017 and May 2022. He described those as "several pharmacological suicide attempts" subsequent to the diagnoses made in 2014 by his treating psychiatrist, Dr E. The father deposed to being voluntarily admitted to hospital for mental health treatment after each suicide attempt. He said the children were unaware of his suicide attempts.
2. The father deposed to being under the regular weekly treatment of his psychologist, Mr F since November 2019. The father said that since August 2022 he has had fortnightly consultations with his psychiatrist, Dr G.

1. All parties prepared detailed case outlines. In accordance with my usual practice, I required each party to provide a detailed opening, recognising that certain issues in the parties' written case outlines may have been compromised or conceded.
2. Mr James of counsel for the father submitted that this case was "a complex matter" (his words). While the evidence was voluminous, and the medical evidence in particular was exacting, the main arena of debate was the father's change of residence application and the moratorium on the mother's time with the children that the independent children's lawyer ("ICL") and the father propounded.
3. In essence, the father contended that the children's circumstances were presently dire and their decline in their mental health would only be arrested if the children lived with him. The ICL supported that position. Both the ICL and the father advocated for there to be a period after the commencement of the change of residence, during which the mother had no time with the children. The period under consideration was not less than three months.
4. The mother opposed the change of residence proposal and the moratorium. She urged me to make orders in accordance with her amended response. Parental responsibility was contested, the father seeking it with the mother seeking orders for parental responsibility to be conferred solely upon her.
5. The mother contended that she was functioning well and does not suffer from depression, persistent depressive disorder or symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder.
6. One of the issues in the case was said to relate to each parent's capacity to provide for the emotional welfare of the children having regard to each parent's own mental health issues.

THE EVIDENCE ADDUCED BY AND ON BEHALF OF THE FATHER

1. The father adopted the evidence set out in his affidavit made 5 May 2025 and in his affidavit made 26 May 2025. Among the more important matters that arose from the father's evidence-in-chief were the following -

(a) he was born in 1979, he and the mother married in 2005, they have four children, they separated on a final basis in August 2017 and they divorced in 2023;

(b) he lives with his mother Ms H and her husband Mr J in Suburb K where he has lived since separation;

(c) he is presently in a committed relationship with his partner, Ms M, with whom he does not live;

(d) he believes the mother suffers from borderline personality disorder, depression, body dysmorphia and anxiety;

(e) when each child was born the mother suffered post-natal depression;

(f) in 2017 and 2018, the respondent attempted suicide, denying those episodes to Dr N, consultant psychiatrist, and Ms B, consultant psychologist;

(g) he developed post-traumatic stress disorder during his employment in Public Service;

(h) after leaving the public service employment, in 2016 the father purchased a business where the father and the mother worked, although in 2017, without notice to the father, the mother closed the business and the father's attempts to acquire the mother's interest in the business were unsuccessful leading to the loss of his superannuation that had been invested in the acquisition of the business and its fit-out;

(i) the father was admitted to hospital on several occasions following suicide attempts;

(j) in November 2022 the mother vacated the former matrimonial home;

(k) the children were impacted by the father's shielding of his mental health struggles from them;

(l) since late 2019 the father has been in the care of Mr F, psychologist and since August 2022 the father has been in the care of Dr G, psychiatrist;

(m) between November 2017 and October 2022 the children lived with each parent equally and in 2018 the parents agreed on a parenting plan that provided for the children's time with each parent according to a particular routine;

(n) in early 2018 the mother informed the father that she attempted suicide by taking a collection of unidentified medications;

(o) following separation the father cared for the children, including arranging for W to be assessed for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and ASD;

(p) in that period W thrived academically, winning competitions for mathematics, chess and languages;

(q) in that period X was awarded captaincy roles at school, she created short comedic videos and was enthusiastic about cooking;

(r) also in that period Y was awarded captaincy roles at school, he enjoyed reading and he assisted the father when the father coached sport;

(s) Z was eager to be involved in whatever his siblings were doing;

(t) living next door to the former matrimonial home enabled the children to easily transition between residences;

(u) after separating, the mother became volatile, she rescheduled medical appointments arranged for them by the father and she rearranged dates organised by the father for the children to see their friends;

(v) the children told the father when they were in the mother's care that they were not permitted to contact the father and on occasions the mother physically restrained the children from interacting with the father if they attempted to greet him on the adjoining property;

(w) X was placed in the middle of the adult matters by the mother;

(x) the father reported to the police a physical altercation he had with the mother in mid-2018 leading to him obtaining an intervention order against the mother;

(y) in mid-2018, the mother applied for and later obtained an intervention order against the father;

(z) on one occasion Suburb O Police responded to the mother's request for their attendance when they searched the father's home and arrested the father by reason of him allegedly possessing a firearm, which the father denied;

(aa) during 2018 the father was treated with electroconvulsive therapy by his treating psychiatrist;

(bb) by agreement the intervention order obtained by the father against the mother was withdrawn;

(cc) periodically during 2019, the mother sought the father's assistance with the children;

(dd) between September 2017 when the mother and father separated and October 2022, both parents had equal care of the children until the mother unilaterally suspended all contact and communication between the father and the children without explanation;

(ee) between May 2021 and June 2021 the mother and father obtained intervention orders against one another;

(ff) in late 2022 the father was admitted to psychiatric care and treated with anti-psychotic medication;

(gg) the father consented to an intervention order being made against him (without admission);

(hh) in late 2022 the children moved out of the former matrimonial home to an unknown location at which time the mother unilaterally ceased the children's time with the father;

(ii) on 22 June 2023 the father commenced this proceeding;

(jj) the mother applied to extend the intervention order obtained against the father and after negotiation, the mother withdrew her application;

(kk) between 30 June 2024 and 29 September 2024 the father saw the children on 10 occasions, each of which were supervised;

(ll) between 4 July 2024 and November 2024 the father observed the children's behaviour deteriorating; and

(mm) on 20 October 2024, the children (other than Y) spent their first unsupervised time with the father since late 2022.

1. The father detailed the dates and circumstances during which he conferred with Ms B and otherwise narrated events during 2025.
2. The father deposed to the children's attendances at their school in the period June 2024 to the dates on his making of his affidavits. The father highlighted that W's present school performance is in stark contrast (his words) to W's school performance when in the father's care. He deposed to X having failed year 8 and being told to repeat year 8. The father deposed to the children's school attendance in term 1 of 2025 as follows -

(a) W did not attend the new school in which he was enrolled with the consequence that he lost his enrolment at that school;

(b) X was absent from school for 40.5 days;

(c) Y was absent from school for 30.5 days; and

(d) Z was absent from school for seven days.

1. The father deposed to the children's treatment from various medical and health professional treaters. Direct evidence was given in this trial by various medical practitioners and mental health professionals whose evidence has been surveyed in the passages that follow. Not all were called to give evidence. Nevertheless, no challenge was advanced in respect of any of the medical evidence or evidence from other health professionals, beyond the issues canvassed below in relation to the evidence of the Mr F, psychologist, and Dr G, psychiatrist.
2. The father deposed to searching for rental accommodation within 20 minutes of the location of the children's school.
3. Before the father was cross-examined, with leave, he adduced additional evidence-in-chief. He said W is not enrolled in any school at present.
4. The father said X has not attended school. The father said Y has failed to attend approximately 30 days of school.
5. The father gave viva voce evidence that pursuant to consent orders made on 15 October 2024 the father has been entitled to spend time with the children which progressed to unsupervised time with all children on a Thursday and on a Sunday. The father said W has since refused to attend time with the father on Sundays, without explanation from the mother.
6. Counsel for the mother cross-examined the father. That cross-examination was long, repetitive and unstructured. It ran over two days. Cross-examination more attuned to the real issues of importance in this case could have and should have produced vastly more efficient questioning. The more purposeful evidence adduced from the cross-examination of the father by counsel for the mother may be recorded in the manner described hereunder.
7. Counsel for the mother questioned the father at length about the reason for the closure of the business, suggesting that the father's hospitalisations resulted in his inability to run the business. The father disagreed, stating that the mother closed the doors resulting in the business coming to a halt. Once the business closed, the father said the fittings of the business remained with the real estate agent.
8. The father said W is an academically gifted child.
9. A great deal of the cross-examination of the father by counsel for the mother consisted of the father being read long paragraphs of his trial affidavit in which multiple propositions were embedded and the father being asked whether the entirety of the paragraph was correct. The father had already sworn to the truth of the paragraph. There was next to no utility to that style of cross-examination, and a large amount of time was added to the duration of the trial in that process.
10. The father strongly disagreed that -

(a) he had ever become agitated with W;

(b) the father blamed W for not talking or being open; and

(c) the father became frustrated with W in respect of his selective mutism.

1. The father said he was happy to pay half his children's medical expenses.
2. Counsel for the ICL cross-examined the father. The more important issues arising from the father's evidence given in answer to questions put by counsel for the ICL were as follows -

(a) his attempted suicide was by overdose of pharmaceutical medications;

(b) the children today present very differently to the way they presented in November 2022 when he had care of them;

(c) prior to October 2021 the father said he and the mother were engaged in extremely high conflict;

(d) their conduct was not child-focused;

(e) the father seeks a moratorium that the children do not see or speak to their mother for three months;

(f) he agrees that will be difficult for the children;

(g) W has now not bathed in two and a half years and instead uses baby wipes and his clothes are washed on a nine-month interval resulting in him smelling like garbage (the father's words);

(h) his jumper is blackened with blood and his trousers are covered in blood, food and other things;

(i) W did not attend the YY School in which he was briefly enrolled;

(j) W is a brilliant student;

(k) the father engaged in a collection of activities that encourages X to attend school and to excel at school;

(l) the father plans to assist Y by doing things that reinforce the benefit of making good decisions and the father plans to assist Z by increasing his school attendance;

(m) if one of the children told the father that he or she did not want to see the mother the father would ask why and, in Y's case, the father would attempt to persuade the children to see the mother; and

(n) the father said he wishes to continue using Dr G and Mr F.

1. The father was re-examined by Mr James, counsel for the father. The more important matters that emerged were as follows -

(a) in early 2018 the father found the mother slurring her words and groggy after she had attempted suicide while the children were sleeping in the family home; and

(b) despite the mother telling police that the father had a gun, the father did not at any stage have a gun.

1. In support of the father's case, Ms P made an affidavit on 30 September 2024. Ms P deposed to being the father's stepsister, her father and the father's mother having commenced a relationship in 1982. Ms P deposed to a conversation with the mother in this case that took place on 5 September 2015. During that conversation, Ms P deposed to the mother informing Ms P that the mother had been sexually assaulted and raped by her brother Mr Q.
2. In cross-examination counsel for the mother secured an admission that Ms P was sexually abused by Mr J's father and that Mr J's father sexually abused Ms P's older sister. Ms P gave evidence that Mr J currently lives with the father.
3. Mr J gave evidence in support of his stepson (the father). Set out below are the more important matters that emerged from his evidence.
4. The father's stepfather made an affidavit on 5 May 2025. In it he deposed to the following -

(a) he said he met the father's mother when the father was two years of age and he considered the father to be his son;

(b) in 2014 the father and mother purchased the dwelling next door to the home occupied by the father's mother and stepfather;

(c) the deponent assisted with dropping the children to kindergarten and school four to five days a week and he played with the children;

(d) in 2016 the father and mother purchased a business and for a year or thereabouts the deponent assisted in the operation of the business, refusing to accept payment for his services;

(e) in 2017, upon the ending of the relationship between the father and mother, the father moved in with the deponent and his mother;

(f) even when the mother and father separated the mother continued to join the father, his mother and his stepfather for Friday dinners, children's birthdays and Christmas, that stopped in 2021;

(g) the father recollected an event in early 2022 after the children had returned to the care of the mother when W called out for help resulting in police being called;

(h) the father did not see W, X and Z in the period November 2022 to November 2024 and on the latter date the deponent said the demeanour of the children was different as the children were reserved and silent;

(i) the deponent said that in March 2025 he observed the father interacting with X and that the father placed his hands on X's shoulders when X accused the father of assaulting her; and

(j) the deponent said that the father has indicated that the father and children may move in with the deponent at the end of this litigation and that the father is otherwise seeking rental accommodation.

1. Counsel for the mother cross-examined the stepfather. In answer to questions put to him by counsel for the mother, the father's stepfather gave evidence of the more important matters in the manner set out below. He said -

(a) he disputed grabbing W by the neck in the period September to December 2016;

(b) he disputed having a strained relationship with W;

(c) he denied having a strained relationship with the father;

(d) he denied ever having a physical altercation with the father;

(e) he denied that the father needs round-the-clock care;

(f) he emphatically denied watching pornography in the home; and

(g) he said 44 years ago he separated from the mother of his daughters.

1. Counsel for the ICL cross-examined the father's stepfather. In answer to questions put to him by counsel for the ICL, the deponent gave evidence on the following matters -

(a) Mr J denied that the father resented Mr J's parenting of the father;

(b) Mr J denied having a conflictual relationship with the father; and

(c) Mr J said the father became easily upset with Mr J when the father was psychotic.

1. In re-examination, Mr J said he never observed the father being physically violent towards the children or physically disciplining the children.
2. The father's mother gave evidence-in-chief in her affidavit made 5 May 2025 in support of the father in this case. The more important matters to arise from her affidavit were as follows -

(a) the children in this litigation are her grandchildren;

(b) she worked for many years in childcare, in various roles including at a school and at her own home, retiring in 2011;

(c) she has been married to the father's stepfather for 40 years;

(d) the father moved in with his parents (the mother and stepfather) in 2017;

(e) the father's mother provided assistance with the children upon the children's parents purchasing a home next door to the father's mother's and stepfather's home;

(f) the relationship between the children's mother and the father's mother deteriorated in 2016;

(g) between November 2017 to October 2022 the children stayed with their paternal grandmother three to four nights each week during which the deponent assisted with the meals, school drop offs and pickups;

(h) the deponent said that in the period 2017 to 2022 the father did not discuss his own mental health issues with the children;

(i) the deponent said that the father undertook several online parenting courses during 2021;

(j) when the father was hospitalised for mental health treatment, the children stayed with the deponent and with Mr J;

(k) after the separation of the mother and father, the relationship between the mother and the deponent was initially friendly but it deteriorated, illustrations of which the deponent provided in paragraph 18(a) to (f) of her affidavit; and

(l) between November 2022 and November 2024 the deponent did not see the children and when the deponent saw W in November 2024, W was fully covered in his clothes and X and Z greeted the deponent with indifference (her words).

1. The father's mother was cross-examined by counsel for the mother. The more important matters that arose from the answers given by the father's mother in response to questions put to her by counsel for the mother were as follows -

(a) the father's mother's home had been partitioned into a home that can accommodate all children in separate rooms;

(b) she turned 73 in August this year;

(c) the father attained year 11 secondary education;

(d) she receives a carer's allowance of $130 to $140 per fortnight for caring for the father;

(e) she has kept the father's prescription medication in her bedroom;

(f) she does not know the medication the father takes;

(g) the deponent disagreed that in 2017 the father's mental health suffered generally rather than as a result of his employment;

(h) she denied being afraid of the father;

(i) in reference to an incident in March 2025, the deponent denied the father pinning X against a wall or putting his hands on her;

(j) the deponent said X was angry at that incident but not upset; and

(k) the father's mother said she intended to help the father by dropping the children to school and picking them up as required.

1. Counsel for the ICL cross-examined the father's mother. The following matters emerged -

(a) the children did not know the father had attempted suicide;

(b) the father shielded the children as much as possible from learning that anything was wrong with him;

(c) the father is a caring, loving and good person;

(d) she is willing to do whatever is required to help the father on issues related to his health;

(e) the deponent had never witnessed episodes of violence with W;

(f) she has noticed a drastic change in W in not bathing for two years;

(g) W has very complex problems;

(h) she is ready for the children to live in her home with Mr J;

(i) the father has a good relationship with his stepfather; and

(j) she denied that the father had been abused by the stepfather.

THE EVIDENCE ADDUCED BY AND ON BEHALF OF THE MOTHER

1. Only the mother gave evidence in support of her own case. She made her trial affidavit on 19 May 2025 and was cross-examined, purposefully. The more salient matters that arouse from her trial affidavit appear hereunder -

(a) she married the father in mid-2005, they separated in August 2017 and they divorced in 2023;

(b) her children are the children relevant to this litigation;

(c) the children live with her and spend unsupervised time with the father each Sunday from 10.00am until 5.00pm and each Thursday from 10.00am until 7.00pm;

(d) she did not depose to her education, especially when she left school and what level she achieved;

(e) during her marriage to the father she was the primary carer;

(f) she said she has not been formally diagnosed with borderline personality disorder although she was diagnosed with post-natal depression after her pregnancy with W, X and Y; and

(g) in 2017 her mental health deteriorated.

1. The mother gave her version of events concerning her accusations of the father's alleged suicide attempt in November 2017. The medical evidence concerning the psychological and psychiatric conditions suffered by the mother and the father have been recorded in these reasons under the heading "medical evidence." To my way of thinking, medical evidence of a psychological and psychiatric nature must be given by experts who give opinion evidence within the contemplation of s 79 of the Evidence Act. Little forensic or probative purpose is served reciting the mother's characterisation of her own medical conditions. For that matter, psychiatric evidence was given by Dr G who has proceeded on the basis that the father's several suicide attempts occurred as alleged. The information in paragraphs 77 to 79 of the wife's trial affidavit, especially her construction of psychological evidence was of very limited utility.
2. The mother deposed to episodes she described as family violence from paragraphs 81 to 107 of her trial affidavit. The events narrated commenced in early 2018. The mother deposed to the many applications she made for intervention orders against the father in the period 2018 to 2021. She also deposed to events as a result of which she sought police assistance or was in contact with police in relation to the father's behaviour.
3. The mother's assertions in paragraph 119 of her trial affidavit that the children have been left "extremely traumatised", that they do not want to see or speak with the father, that they "have been let down" by the father and that they "still hold trauma from exposure to the father's mental health and family violence" were not probative, they were mostly commentary and they were opinions she was not qualified to offer. I placed little reliance on the information in that paragraph.
4. The mother stated in paragraph 144 of her trial affidavit that the father had no face-to-face time with the children between October 2022 and July 2024. The mother said that court orders made 5 October 2023 required the mother to facilitate video calls between the children and the father. She said the children refused to participate, other than W. She said supervised time commenced on 30 June 2024. The mother said that W and Z had no issue whereas X was slow to participate and Y became dysregulated.
5. The mother described a collection of events when she endeavoured to get Y to ready himself to leave the house, especially on occasions when (according to the mother) he was emotionally dysregulated. The mother said she tried several different approaches, mostly unsuccessful. She said Y refused to get out of the car to attend the visit. In late August 2024 the mother said she decided to not send Y for a visit by reason of his presentation and that in her view it was not in the best interests of Y to require him to attend his father. The mother characterised the father's failure to provide a gift for Y as the father "excluding" Y (her word). The mother said Y had always been clear in informing the mother about his reluctance to attend supervised visitations with the father.
6. At paragraph 176 of her trial affidavit the mother said that the father "would often use guilt, favouritism and conditional gifts to influence the children's behaviour and feelings towards" the father (her words). The mother's construction of the father's conduct did not reveal a cooperative approach towards parenting.
7. In her trial affidavit the mother provided a description of each child and of his or her particular circumstances. The mother also provided a detailed critique of the family report of a Ms B. The mother did not agree with Ms B's recommendations for a -

(a) change of residence; and/or

(b) a moratorium in the mother's time with the children.

1. The mother opposed Ms B's recommendation for the father to have sole decision making for long term major decisions because, so she said, of the father's ongoing and inconsistent health conditions. The mother was significantly resistant to Ms B's recommendation for a change of residence so as to break the cycle of dysfunction.
2. The mother disputed a number of factual contentions advanced by the father's mother in the father's mother's trial affidavit.
3. The mother also disputed a number of factual contentions advanced by the father's stepfather in the stepfather's trial affidavit.
4. The mother deposed to the children being present during a number of police and ambulance attendances. The mother disputed the father's evidence that the father coached Y's sport team. The mother deposed to the father being restrained by intervention orders from coaching Y's sport team. She disputed that she withheld the children. She denied ever threatening the father with taking the children away from him.
5. The mother deposed to the commencement of NDIS on 16 July 2024 resulting in a large amount of funding being provided to W.
6. The mother said she is not currently working.
7. The mother stated in her affidavit that "it is clear from the significant ongoing issues" she raised that orders in the form proposed by the father are not in the children's best interests. That was a submission. The Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 required the mother to depose to factual matters, not for her to make submissions. Her legal representatives were required, at the appropriate time in the trial of this proceeding, to make submissions - not her. Solicitors who draft trial affidavits must be more astute to their obligations to confine testimony in affidavits to evidentiary matters authorised by the rules of the court, even recognising the relaxation of certain strictures effected by s 69ZT of the Family Law Act.

1. Counsel for the father extensively cross-examined the mother. While lengthy, at no stage was Mr James's cross-examination of the mother unfair, prolix or disadvantageous. To the contrary, I found it to have been particularly useful. A synthesis of the more important matters that emerged from the mother's answers to questions put to her in her cross-examination by Mr James is recorded hereunder, namely -

(a) the mother agreed that the father's treaters' reports in this case showed that the father's depression had significantly decreased;

(a) the mother agreed the father had not attempted further suicide or suicidal ideation;

(b) Mr F reported that the father's prognosis on mental health issues was very good to excellent;

(c) the mother agreed that she had heard evidence in this trial that the father had been compliant in taking his medication, that the father attended his medical treaters regularly and that the father had successfully concluded the litigation in which he was engaged with his employer;

(d) the mother agreed she was reassured when reading the independent supervisor's report of Ms S that the father's 2024 supervised visits were very positive;

(e) the mother said she had no objection to the father spending time with the children;

(f) the mother said it was not her position that the father poses any significant risk to the children while in his care;

(g) the mother agreed that her proposal involved a period of five and a half weeks during which there would be a gradual build-up of the father's current arrangement of time to five nights a fortnight, half holidays and special occasions;

(h) the mother said that in her view it was "really important" (her words) that Y had some time with the father through a counselling service to re-establish his relationship with the father yet she agreed that her proposed orders made no provision for that;

(i) in reference to the mother's ability to comply with existing orders, she was taken to the orders of 5 October 2023 and -

(i) admitted that only W had video calls with the father rather than all four children having video calls with the father as was provided for in the orders;

(ii) she said she did everything she possibly could to get the other children to participate by video;

(iii) she admitted she did not enforce the order for the children to have video time with their children;

(iv) the mother admitted the children were required by the 5 October 2023 orders to attend family therapy with Ms R yet the mother said she (the mother) did not make an appointment with Ms R until the end of April 2024;

(v) when the family therapy appointment was eventually made, Y and X did not participate, even though the father paid for their attendance;

(vi) the mother wanted Ms R replaced as the family therapist because the mother considered that Ms R was not properly addressing the contact;

(vii) the mother agreed that Ms R informed the mother that the mother needed to exercise a degree of parental control and to stop asking the children if they wanted to attend;

(j) the mother agreed that in Ms R's 27 May 2024 report Ms R recommended that the children spend regular substantial time with the children which resulted in 10 supervised visits between 30 June and 29 September 2024, all funded by the father, of which Y only attended two;

(k) the mother said she did everything in her power to get Y to spend time with his father but she admitted that her efforts did not work; and

(l) the mother agreed that she read Ms S's affidavit to the effect that Y was unable to give a reason why he would not spend time with his father. The specific exchange was as follows -

"So your best efforts to get [Y] to spend time with the father weren't enough, were they?‑‑‑I guess. It's really an interpretation. I think from what I could do without [Y] having that psychological support and being able to discuss anything and his concerns about seeing his father, I think, yes, I did the best I could."[2]

1. Whether the mother took the view that in her mind she did her best was largely beside the point as the best interests of the children considerations were the critical issue, not the mother's belief in her attainment of her children's best interests.
2. The mother was asked about consent orders made on 15 October 2024. She agreed to the consent orders, despite Y not having seen the father since July, and on the basis that the children would spend unsupervised time with the father, with which the mother did not comply.
3. The mother agreed that it was not appropriate for her to speak with X on behalf of all children. The mother conceded she told the children that the children had been ordered to spend time with the father.
4. In answer to a question about why the mother thought X felt compelled to contact the ICL, the mother said that as a young teenage girl, the idea of having to spend her birthday shopping was probably something she was looking forward to rather than seeing the father on the father's birthday. The mother said Z's position was the same in that he told the mother he (Z) did not want to see the father on the father's birthday so the mother allowed Z to not see the father on the father's birthday despite court orders requiring Z to do so.
5. The mother agreed that W did not want to attend upon Ms B on 16 January so W did not confer with Ms B at the request of the mother. The mother agreed that W attended at the invitation of the father. Mr James put to the mother the following which she answered -

"Yes. So I return to the question, [Mrs Coman], given that track record of your non-compliance with the court orders, why would the court have any confidence at all that you would comply with the court orders that you say are in the best interests of the children?‑‑‑Well, I think in any circumstance, like I have, I will always continue to encourage that relationship, and I will do everything in my power to make that happen."[3]

1. The mother gave evidence that she did not recall various reports from medical practitioners sent to her from the father including a report from Ms T, nor was she aware of appointments made by the father with the children's medical and allied health professionals. When asked whether she accepted the father's evidence in that regard she said she was "not really sure" (her words) because she did not have any record of it.
2. The mother conceded that she suffered from body dysmorphia syndrome although she said its onset came "later on in the marriage" (her words) yet she did not give a date. She said she believed she disclosed to Dr N details of previous trauma she suffered. She disagreed with Dr N who said the mother had extreme and unpredictable mood swings. She agreed that she was the subject of childhood sexual abuse which was a significant trauma that affected her mental health later on. The mother agreed that significant depression and anxiety was relevant to her mental health history as was the mother's previous postnatal depression, previous body dysmorphia disorder and previous engagement in acts of self-harm. She admitted that one of her admissions to hospital in 2017 or 2018 was by reason of suicidal ideation.
3. The mother gave evidence about the treatment she received for body dysmorphic disorder. She said she consulted a psychiatrist. The mother admitted that she saw a clinical psychologist, Ms U, who reported that the mother was extremely severely depressed and extremely severely stressed. The mother said that 2017 was a very difficult time for her.
4. The mother admitted that she had "a pretty bad memory" (her words) in her recollection of events. She added that her pretty bad memory was "in most cases". Slightly later in her evidence, when answering questions from me, she said she rated her memory as being average.
5. The mother admitted that in late 2017 or thereabouts she spent the night in her car, she did not contact anyone saying where she was and that she was found by police at V Park where she was taken by ambulance to AA Hospital. She said the father blew the incident out of proportion. She was shown medical records taken by hospital staff that day which listed the mother's mental health, self-harm, suicide attempt and that she went into the bush in an attempt to injure herself a few weeks earlier. The mother did not deny those entries but rather said she was unable to recall.
6. The mother was questioned above on her presentation to Ms BB, a psychologist in September that year when the mother's history as given to Ms BB resulted in Ms BB recording that the mother had a history of depression and anxiety, she had stopped "reaching out to psychiatrists" (Ms BB's words) and that the "patient understands what she is doing and is improving her methods each time." The mother said in evidence that she did not recall what the mother told Ms BB. The mother said she did not recall whether the injuries detected by Ms BB were self-inflicted. The mother said in evidence that she did not recall what the mother told Ms BB. The mother said she did not recall whether the injuries detected by Ms BB were self-inflicted. The mother gave evidence that she did not recall telling a person whose name was Ms CC that the mother had driven to DD Park with the intention of harming herself and that the mother had a history of slitting her wrists. The mother denied slitting her wrists.
7. The mother was questioned about her hospital admission in early 2018. The mother answered questions put to her by Mr James stating that the father drugged the mother, told her lies about her consumption of alcohol, called an ambulance, stated that the mother attempted suicide when in reality the father drugged the mother and set her up. She admitted she made no mention of those matters in any affidavits prior to her trial affidavit.
8. The mother was questioned at length and in detail about entries in FF Healthcare's records concerning an overdose of medication suffered by the mother while the children were in her care. The mother said she did not recall whether or not she told Ms EE that she (the mother) took the medication with a view to attempting to kill herself. She said she did not recall telling Mr GG she ingested 15 propranolol, 10 valium, a bottle of alcohol as well as her previous medication. She agreed that her recital of the pharmaceuticals she said she took but about which she did not recall telling Mr GG was consistent with the version of the evidence given by the father on the same issue.
9. The mother admitted that she had a problem with trust.
10. The mother conceded that when answering questions put to her by stating that she did not recall a particular event or thing, she was conveying the meaning that she was unable to confirm or to deny the matter put to her.
11. She admitted telling Mr GG about her self-sabotaging behaviour, self-harming by cutting, alcohol abuse, increased tobacco smoking and undertaking activity that developed high risk behaviour.
12. The mother was questioned about aspects of the report of Dr N. She admitted that Dr N recorded accurately whatever the mother told him. She agreed that as Dr N made no mention in his report of the mother's body dysmorphia disorder she probably made no mention of it to Dr N. She said she did not intentionally provide Dr N with very selective information to enable him to conduct a psychiatric assessment.
13. The mother agreed that by June 2024 when Dr N recommended the father commence spending face-to-face time with the children that the mother had not engaged with a psychologist despite the recommendation to do so by Dr N. The mother said she could not afford to do so. She admitted she did not ask family and friends for financial help to do the things Dr N recommended.
14. The mother gave evidence that as at June 2025, W did not wish to see the father yet the mother did not know why.
15. The mother said she had no recollection of certain events described by Ms B, clinical psychologist, who reported that in Ms B's opinion, the mother had engaged in significant positive impression management and that the mother had significantly minimised her mental health history.
16. Mr James put to the mother that in Ms B's opinion the mother had anxiety and body dysmorphia the consequence of which is the negative effect being passed on to the children. The mother said she had never passed on to her children anything to do with her body. The mother admitted that children are perceptive and they take on their parents' anxieties.
17. The mother disagreed that the children have been exposed to the mother's untreated mental health problems since the mother became the children's primary carer in November 2022.
18. The mother said she mentioned to Ms HH, psychologist, the mother's issues with body dysmorphia but not issues with past suicidal ideation or past suicide attempts.
19. The mother said she has always taken the view that she has no concerns with the children having time with the father, with the correct support for the children.
20. The mother asserted that the father made false reports to police.
21. She said that between 2017 and October 2022 an equal shared care arrangement operated during which the mother and father were amicable.
22. The mother admitted that in early 2023 she provided JJ School with a copy of an intervention order and told Ms KK at that school that the paternal grandparents were to have no contact with the children. The mother admitted there was no allegation that the children had been exposed to any significant harm by the paternal grandparents taken from their lives for two years, contributing to their mental health decline.
23. The mother was asked about the details of the report of Ms R dated 27 May 2024. The mother maintained that she regarded the father as a dangerous person to her. Mr James asked the mother whether the mother waited for Y to actually attend Ms R. She said she did so as to ensure that Y attended. The mother said the supervisor told the mother to go back to her car and the supervisor instructed X and Y to go to the appointment, which Y did.
24. The mother deposed to being unable to get Y (then 12) dressed on one occasion stating that he had "completely shut down" (her words). The exchange between the mother and Mr James was as follows -

"Right. You couldn't get him to get dressed?‑‑‑No, he was completely shut down and really upset. He had been up the night before.

Right. So, well ‑ ‑ ‑?‑‑‑For a number of hours.

‑ ‑ ‑ you weren't able to assist him to get dressed at all?‑‑‑No. There was one stage I couldn't even get him out of bed, off the top bunk.

So you can't get him to get out of bed. You can't get him dressed?‑‑‑No. Well, he's also a 12-year-old boy.

You can't get him to see his father. You can't get him to go to school. You can't get him to do a lot of things?‑‑‑It's not that I can't do that. [Y] has quite a lot of anxiety ‑ ‑ ‑

Yes?‑‑‑ ‑ ‑ ‑ and there's a lot of things that he's also suffering from mentally that he's dealing with his psychologist."[4]

1. Mr James asked the mother about the success or otherwise she encountered in getting Y to attend school. The exchange was as follows -

"Right. [Y] is now 13. Last year at that time he was 12. Do you agree that a child of 12 years of age shouldn't have the choice about whether they go to school or not go to school?‑‑‑Absolutely, yes.

Yes. Absent of any risk issues, a 12 year old boy shouldn't have the choice about whether they see their parents or not pursuant to court orders?‑‑‑No, he shouldn't, but there was concerns for his welfare. He was showing very serious signs of emotional trauma, and he was shutting down, he was getting deeply upset, and he was finding it hard to communicate.

So you - from this point on, you obviously have been unable, since June last year, to get [Y] to spend time with his father, so I take it that you've exhausted any ability you have to get orders complied with for [Y] to spend time with his father?‑‑‑No, I haven't.

And you're now relying on external experts to solve that issue?‑‑‑I think it's very important for [Y] to have that professional help to get through any concerns that he has about attending to see his father."[5]

1. She was asked how she will approach Y's refusal to see his father, to which she said the following -

"Well, you're going and seeing [Ms HH] at the moment?‑‑‑Yes.

Right. And I presume that's the person you say will assist you moving forward in terms of your parenting and having the children see their father, attend school, improve their mental health issues?‑‑‑No. I was referring to [Y]'s psychologist, so any time that the kids come up with anything that is challenging or if they're having troubles with something, I go directly to their professional and discuss that with them. And I ask them to speak to the children about it and also give me ideas of what they think might help.

And you say you've done that up until this point?‑‑‑I always do. If something is different with the children, I will go straight to them.

And in relation to [Y], it has been unsuccessful?‑‑‑Correct.

As a result of that advice you've received, what have you changed in terms of the way you approach [Y]?‑‑‑Well, I just continue to encourage [Y], but also process the way that he thinks about things.

And if [Y] continues to say, "I don't want to see my dad and I don't have any reasons," you will just go along with that?‑‑‑No, definitely not.

No. All right. What are you going to do different that you've been doing for the last - or since June of last year?‑‑‑Well, I will just continue to speak to [Y] about the positivity of seeing his dad, which is what I have been doing, and also getting his treaters to help him with that process as well, and continuing that effort, and just continuing with that support from her. And I discuss with [Y] on a regular basis the importance of spending time with [Mr Coman], especially since the other kids are going as well."[6]

1. The mother said she sought orders for sole parental responsibility for long term decision making because of the ongoing conflict between the father and her in relation to the children.
2. On behalf of the ICL, Ms O'Connell cross-examined the mother. In response to questions put to her by Ms O'Connell, the mother said the following -

(a) if orders were made in the manner recommended by Ms B, the children needed the involvement of the children's treaters such as psychologists;

(b) the mother had never before got the children to go to their father on a Friday;

(c) the daughter wished to start working with animals and she knows she needs to get to school to get into university or a TAFE course to do that; and

(d) Z has been going to school.

1. Only two medical witnesses gave viva voce evidence in the trial of this proceeding. However, a substantial body of medical evidence went into the court book as an agreed exhibit and that evidence was not challenged. In the trial of this proceeding, information in the court book was the subject of reliance even though the author of the report was not called to give evidence or be cross-examined on his or her report. Yet all counsel invited me to rely on the totality of the medical evidence. Accordingly, in the passages below I have addressed each report in the court book.

1. Ms MM's report dated 13 November 2024 disclosed that Ms MM had seen Y weekly since October 2024. Ms MM reported -

(a) Y's primary source of anxiety stemmed from his mandatory supervised visits with Y's father;

(b) Y informed Ms MM that he did not wish to see his father;

(c) Y informed Ms MM that he felt that he was not being heard;

(d) after visiting his father, Y's anxiety presentation increased, he had difficulty sleeping and he cried more frequently;

(e) he says he is unable to physically speak up;

(f) Ms MM reported that "due to [Y]'s trauma background it is vital that his voice is heard to avoid feelings of helplessness";

(g) forcing Y to see his father negatively impacts upon his mental health which, if it continues, is likely to have a detrimental effect on any possibility of restoring a positive relationship with his father; and

(h) Ms MM recommended that Y be excused from attending visits with his father as those visits negatively impact upon Y's mental health.

1. Ms LL wrote a confidential treatment report in relation to Z dated 26 July 2024. Ms LL said her sessions with Z would be terminated. Ms LL reported that the mother had requested therapy for Z and to assist with emotional regulation, expression and attention. Ms LL reported that she had three sessions with Z, the first in April 2024, the second in May 2024 and the third in 2024 and stated -

(a) Z's language was less than what would be expected for his development and age;

(b) on occasions, Z did not respond at all to Ms LL's questions and muttered inaudibly to himself instead;

(c) he presented with hand shakiness, restricted facial expressions and poor eye contact;

(d) he was emotionally defensive and disengaged with social interaction;

(e) he did not display flexible social behaviour or congruent attunement to self; and

(f) he presented as a child impacted by adverse childhood experiences.

1. Ms LL made a collection of recommendations. Those included the following -

(a) Z required more specialised support than was provided by his school, directed specifically to Z as a child with adverse childhood experiences;

(b) Z would benefit from integrated trauma-based therapies using experimental approaches such as art, play, somatic experiencing or animal assisted therapy combined with psycho-education and trauma-focused cognitive behavioural therapy; and

(c) a new psychologist was required.

1. Ms LL wrote a confidential treatment report in relation to Y dated 26 July 2024. Ms LL provided a synopsis of her report to the effect that Y's needs are better served by a more specialised service. Ms LL encapsulated Y's history by recording the following -

(a) Y received counselling in 2023 from Ms NN, the diagnosis being "adjustment disorder" related to the prevailing family issues;

(b) at the time Y presented with school refusal, insomnia and anxiety;

(c) Ms NN focused on treatment aimed at emotional stability and cognitive restructuring;

(d) Y's mother requested Ms LL's assistance with therapy in February 2024, since which Ms LL conducted four sessions with Y, namely in March 2024, April 2024, May 2024 and June 2024;

(e) the mother informed Ms LL that she was concerned by Y's behaviours that included insomnia, early waking, early going to sleep, fear of the dark, anxiety about intruders, repetitive behaviour of checking for anyone following him; and

(f) Ms LL treated Y with a view to establishing greater psychological stabilisation.

1. Ms LL reported on the three sessions conducted at a school venue, the fourth session at school having been cancelled by the mother who by then was home-schooling Y. Ms LL reported -

(a) Y was quiet and pensive and he demonstrated strength in reflective complex thinking while pursuing mature perspectives on life for his developmental age;

(b) Y was guarded in what he disclosed as he was concerned about confidentiality;

(c) after the mother commenced home-schooling Y he began to exhibit heightened ruminations along with increased generalised anxiety demonstrating that Y had begun to shut down;

(d) other manifestations of his shutting down included low energy, a lack of capacity for sustained conversation, being tired and withdrawn and he revealed what Ms LL called "a stress burn out situation with underlying distress and high anxiety";

(e) Ms LL said that Y then became highly defensive, emotionally exhausted and that he experienced significant trauma;

(f) Ms LL said (without describing her reasons for such a conclusion) that Y had not adjusted to the impact of chronic family discord as a result of marital separation and the impact of family violence; and

(g) Y's personal regulation was impacting his capacity for learning and socialising, that he appeared overstretched and that he appeared to be no longer coping.

1. Ms LL reported her concerns that Y was more stressed and dysregulated and he was not coping with school. She said she had observed a deterioration in his condition over time. She said he needed more specialised services from someone with skills in complex cases involving children with adverse childhood experiences.

1. Ms T provided a report dated 6 February 2025 addressed to whom it may concern relevant to W. In that report, Ms T stated that she had counselled W between March 2023 and December 2025,[7] during which she said W's emotional wellbeing, daily functioning and engagement with external supports were challenging for W and that he continued to experience heightened anxiety, social withdrawal, avoidance behaviour, school refusal and a reluctance to attend medical appointments or therapy. She said his increased isolation negatively impacted his overall wellbeing.
2. Ms T said W continued to wear multiple layers of clothing and this suggested deeper psychological issues that required investigation.
3. She said W had "difficulties with self-care" (her words) as he had not showered in months and he resisted changing his clothes, affecting his physical health and comfort.
4. She said he continued to exhibit underlying anxiety, evident by his struggles to express and to process emotions relating to his recent reconnection with his father. Ms T said certain behaviours of W indicated an autism presentation.[8] She also said he may possess concurrent conditions such as sensory processing disorder, pathological demand avoidance or body dysmorphic disorder. Ms T recommended that a psychiatric and clinical psychological assessment be obtained "to clarify any comorbid conditions" (her words).
5. Ms T recommended several steps into the future. Those included -

(a) obtaining a psychiatric evaluation;

(b) obtaining a clinical psychological assessment;

(c) obtaining multidisciplinary support from child and youth mental health services for therapy, psychiatric review and family support;

(d) obtaining occupational therapy support for assistance in W in overcoming his sensory sensitivities and to assist in the development and coping strategies; and

(e) exploring equine-assisted therapy to develop strategies for social and daily living skills.

1. Dr G provided reports in this litigation and gave viva voce evidence. Dr G's expertise as a consultant psychiatrist was recorded in her curriculum vitae which demonstrated beyond debate that she was an expert, properly so called in the field of psychiatry, as was explained in Makita, Dasreef, Honeysett and Lang. Dr G provided reports dated 1 October 2024 and 2 May 2025.
2. Dr G reported on 1 October 2024 in relation to the father. In essence, in that report Dr G said the following of relevance -

(a) she had seen the father on a fortnightly basis since August 2022 when he was diagnosed as suffering from major depression, generalised anxiety disorder and PTSD, related to his past experiences;

(b) in the long term, the father is likely to experience some depressive, anxiety and PTSD symptoms;

(c) his current medication regime included antidepressants, sleep regulating medication and sedative medication;

(d) he had adhered to date with that medication;

(e) in the opinion of Dr G, the father's mental health does not restrict the father's ability to care for the children or to make appropriate parenting decisions;

(f) in the opinion of Dr G, based on her observations over the time she has known the father, she had no concerns about the father's ability to behave safely around his four children or to parent them appropriately; and

(g) in the opinion of Dr G, based on the information given by the father as well as by his mother, the father engages with the children in a calm and nurturing manner, he had not been observed being aggressive in any way and no physical or psychological risks to the children existed while the children were in the father's care.

1. Dr G's report dated 2 May 2025 was provided in response to questions posed about the father's "mental health difficulties" (her words). Dr G reported as follows -

(a) she saw the father on a fortnightly basis;

(b) in the opinion of Dr G, the father's mental state continued to improve with lesser periods of low mood and a greater sense of satisfaction with the trajectory of his life, a response to the father having increased contact with the children and a growing hope that the children may live with him,[9] even though he is likely to experience some degree of PTSD and anxiety symptoms in the long term;

(c) the father's depressive symptoms are likely to remain largely at bay if the father continues to have meaningful contact with the children;

(d) Dr G said the father had consistently adhered to his treatment plan and that the father does not suffer from appreciable side effects, especially, they do not impact on his alertness or judgment;

(e) the father's early treatment related to his biological and psychological issues and since 2023, when he was treated with electro-convulsive therapy during a psychiatric admission to OO Clinic, his mental state has markedly improved;

(f) the father has also benefited from regular therapy with Mr F, psychologist;

(g) the father's emotional wellbeing has most significantly improved by reason of his time with his children since late 2024;

(h) the father' reads widely on parenting strategies and childhood development; and

(i) Dr G said she does not have any concerns about the father's ability to behave safely around his four children and to parent them appropriately, he engages with them in a calm and nurturing manner and he is not aggressive towards them.

1. Dr G was cross-examined by all counsel. In response to questions put by counsel for the mother, Dr G gave the following evidence -

(a) the psychotic episode recorded in the psychological report for the father did not represent a propensity for psychosis in the father;

(b) the father had a low likelihood for any further psychotic episodes occurring in the future;

(c) work stressors were a significant part of the father's levels of distress and work-related factors have resolved to his satisfaction with the consequence that in the medium-term future Dr G does not foresee other stress factors;

(d) the father did not face major traumas or stressors based on his upbringing;

(e) Dr G did not believe the father's medication needed to be locked up to prevent him having access to it at home; and

(f) the father's use of self-harm is low and he has no thoughts of suicide.

1. In answer to questions put by counsel for the ICL, Dr G gave evidence over short compass. Dr G said the following -

(a) the father first consulted Dr G when using medicinal cannabis;

(b) if the arrangements between the father and the mother over their children were different, the father's mental state would improve significantly;

(c) the father's PTSD was more pronounced when he lost contact with his children back in 2022;

(d) the years 2023 and 2024 were periods of misery for the father based on his inability to see his children during which the father struggled with his PTSD symptoms;

(e) the father does not take medication that leads to drowsiness or unresponsiveness;

(f) Dr G has not observed the father with the children directly;

(g) at no stage has Dr G observed the father express resentment towards the children or frustration and he is reflective in a detailed manner regarding the challenges that occur in his relationship with his children;

(h) the father is likely to handle the usual tensions of children as they grow up perfectly reasonably; and

(i) Dr G said that whatever difficulties the father may face psychologically in relation to his children, he would face greater difficulties not seeing them or in him not having much to do with them.

1. Mr F prepared two reports for use in this litigation and he gave viva voce evidence. His first report was dated 1 October 2024 and his second was dated 30 April 2025. He exhibited them in reverse chronological order.
2. In each he addressed specific questions posed for his response.
3. In his report dated 1 October 2024, Mr F reported that the father was employed by the Public Service on inactive duty by reason of his mental health,. Mr F said he was introduced to the father pursuant to a referral from Dr QQ, a consultant psychiatrist. Mr F reported that the father has diagnoses of (by that I understand Mr F to be saying that the father has been diagnosed with) major depressive disorder, complex post traumatic stress disorder and obsessive-compulsive disorder. Mr F took a history from the father. While no substitute for actual proof of the facts recorded in the history taken, the following represents a synthesis of the facts given to Mr F by way of history on which his opinions were based -

(a) prior to their separation in 2017, the father and mother were married for 11 years;

(b) since separation, the father has lived at his parent's home;

(c) until 2022, the mother lived in the former matrimonial home;

(d) the father and mother have four children, the time with them having been shared equally between the parents until the end of 2022;

(e) the children have moved between the home of each parent as well as between the home of the paternal grandmother;

(f) several mutual intervention orders have operated since separation;

(g) litigation on a number of fronts contributed to the father's psychiatric breakdown;

(h) in 2023, the father was admitted to hospital consequent upon the death of Ms PP; and

(i) for several years the father has not exhibited any signs of suicidal ideation.

1. Mr F said the father has consulted Mr F since November 2019 on a weekly basis, monthly in person. That regime is to continue.
2. Mr F said he agreed with the father's diagnosis with major depressive disorder, complex post traumatic disorder and obsessive-compulsive disorder as well as disruption of family due to separation and divorce. Mr F said a brief psychotic episode resolved with appropriate medical treatment. Prior to him consulting Mr F and Dr G, Mr F said the father had severe depression leading to several suicide attempts and hospitalisations. Mr F said that over the last two years the father's depression was markedly less severe. Mr F said the father's OCD was now less severe although the father presented with the condition to a mild or moderate degree.
3. So far as the father's psychological prognosis was concerned, Mr F said it was very good to excellent.
4. The father attended every appointment with Mr F according to Mr F, in person ordinarily and punctually, save for the odd telehealth conference.
5. Mr F reported that the father is a "very emotionally aware and involved father" (his words) who has been very sensitive to and responsive to their developing needs and abilities (also his words). Mr F recorded that the father had undertaken a variety of parenting courses over the years to develop and enhance his knowledge and ability as a parent. Mr F also recorded the father's concern about the children's presentations, especially W who wears several layers of clothing and covers his face with a mask and a hoodie. Mr F said the father told him that Y was also wearing similar clothing. Mr F reported that he (the father) had ongoing concerns about his children's general wellbeing and psychological support. Mr F said he (Mr F) strongly supported the father's efforts with his children. Mr F reported that during the many sessions he had with the father, the father did not express any anger or frustration with the children nor any wish to hurt them in any way.
6. Importantly in my opinion, Mr F reported that any suggestion that the father might be a danger to the children was false (his words).
7. Mr F made a similar observation in that the father is not a danger to his ex-wife.
8. Mr F's second report was dated 30 April 2025, representing an update of his earlier report. Specifically, Mr F reported as follows -

(a) the father has continued to attend;

(b) Mr F's earlier diagnoses of the father's mental health continued to apply;

(c) Mr F's prognosis in respect of the father's mental health conditions remained as reported on 1 October 2024;

(d) he said the father continues to adhere to the treatment plan as previously reported;

(e) the father's improved mental health was attributable to several factors, namely -

(i) the father's determination to improve his mental health;

(ii) the father's willingness and commitment to taking the medication prescribed by Dr G;

(iii) the fact that the mother no longer lived next door;

(iv) not being visited with attendances by police as a result of complaints by the mother;

(v) undertaking his own research about ways to improve his children's lives including research about W's ASD and X's skin conditions;

(vi) developing a new romantic relationship;

(vii) having regular and substantial contact with his children for several hours each week;

(f) the father's mental health has substantially improved over the last five years and in particular the last two years with the consequence that he is now much more able to care for his children and to make all necessary and appropriate parenting decisions; and

(g) Ms F had "zero concerns that there is any risk, physically or psychologically, to the four children being in (the father's) care" (his words).

1. Mr F was cross-examined by counsel for the mother and for the ICL. The more important issues that arose from his evidence given in answers to questions put by counsel for the mother were as follows -

(a) he was not aware that the father's mother administered psychiatric medication the father consumed on a weekly basis;

(b) the father had no intention of being a danger to himself;

(c) the father was happier and his mental health improved when he spends substantial and significant time with the children; and

(d) the father is very worried about W.

1. In answer to questions put by counsel for the ICL, Mr F made other observations. Those included -

(a) Mr F recommended that the father continue his sessions with Mr F and that while the father was on psychotropic medication the father should see Dr G;

(b) Mr F had not met the children nor their mother; and

(c) the father is doing very well (his words).

1. In further cross-examination, Mr F said the father was attending upon Mr F partly by reason of this litigation and partly by reason of his own commitment to his own treatment. Mr F gave evidence that the father would be "completely happy" (his words) with seeing Dr G and Mr F for 12 months more.

1. Dr N, a consultant psychiatrist, provided two reports for use in this litigation. He did not give viva voce evidence. It is necessary to record the more important matters that emerged from each report. Those reports were dated 13 February 2024 in relation to the mother and a report also dated 13 February 2024 in relation to the father.
2. Dr N's report in relation to the mother was prepared the same day as he saw the mother. The more important matters that arose from that report were the following -

(a) she gave Dr N details of her past psychiatric history that included post natal depression after the births of the three older children, suicidality and an undiagnosed condition of borderline personality disorder.

(b) during the psychiatric assessment the mother exhibited a lack of emotional resonance, her speech was normal, no signs existed of hallucinations or illusions, she displayed no obvious signs of cognitive deficits and she acknowledged having difficulty standing up to the father;

(c) she does not suffer from any current diagnosable psychiatric disorders;

(d) for a period in the past the mother would have suffered from post traumatic stress disorder and persistent depressive disorder;

(e) she has only sought minimal help over the years despite persistent anxiety and lowered mood;

(f) she has minimised the seriousness of her difficulties when she could have been referred to a psychiatrist;

(g) it has been very helpful for her mental health that she has had only minimal contact with the father; and

(h) if the father is granted time with the children, regular engagement with a psychologist would be helpful to address adaptive strategies to manage her symptoms.

1. In his report concerning the father, Dr N gave his opinion that the father still has residual PTSD but that he has been free from major depressive disorder and he is not psychotic. Dr N recommended ongoing consultations with Dr G.

1. Ms R made a report dated 27 May 2024. Ms R did not give viva voce evidence. Ms R reported on the parents and each of the four children. It is necessary to address each in turn.
2. So far as the mother was concerned, Ms R's report was far ranging. She said -

(a) the mother presented as emotionally distressed and embittered;

(b) the mother asserted that the children were not ready for family therapy;

(c) the mother told Ms R that the mother's biggest fear (the mother's words) were that the children, when seeing the father "will hear negative things about" the mother because the father was "quite narcissistic" (the mother's words, as reported by Ms R);

(d) Ms R reported that the mother told Ms R that the father had done everything in his power to destroy the mother's life; and

(e) the mother told Ms R that the claims of the mother having mental health diagnoses were denied.

1. So far as the children were concerned, Ms R reported that each presented differently. Ms R gave details, namely -

(a) X remained in a waiting room, refusing to attend the individual interview with Ms R and lay curled under a table, while the mother looked on, in respect of which Ms R described the mother's reaction as "muted" while "looking impassively on", even when X refused to acknowledge Ms R;

(b) Y presented as being "wary and reluctant to speak individually" (Ms R's words), that Y acknowledged that it was possible the father had changed for the better but that Y was "not sure about meeting with his father" (words attributed to Y by Ms R).

(c) Z presented as being "unequivocally positive" (Ms R's words) about the father; and

(d) W presented also as being unequivocally positive about the father saying the father was always understanding, interested and helpful and that he would like to see the father every weekend.

1. Ms R reported that she assessed the children as benefitting from the opportunity to meet the father in a supported therapeutic environment yet the mother was unwilling to do so.
2. Ms R reported that W and Z spend three sessions with the father yet X and Y refused to attend. Ms R said the mother declined to express the mother's expectations for the children who refused to attend, to actually attend, stating instead that she wanted to give the children a choice about whether to attend. Ms R reported that she requested the mother to tell X and Y that the mother expected those children to meet with the father to which, according to Ms R, the mother stated that the father was the mother's abuser, that he had not changed, that he was a narcissist and that "it was not safe to be in there" (words Ms R attributed to the mother).
3. Ms R was positive about the father's interaction with the children, about his consultations with his psychologist, Mr F, and about his psycho-educational work.
4. Ms R reported that the mother has fixed negative views of the father and does not explicitly support the children joining the father but rather she presents as angry and reactive.
5. Ms R reported that the mother stated that the children functioned at relatively normal levels in respect of academic performance and psychosocial functioning whereas the father expressed concerns about the children's school attendance and about the issues raised in therapists' reports.
6. Ms R devoted a significant component of her report to an analysis of each child. To that I now turn.
7. First, she addressed W. She reported -

(a) W said he wanted to see his father;

(b) W wanted his father to not say anything negative about "the other parent" (his words), to not request W to bathe and to install a lock on the toilet; and

(c) W presented as being withdrawn in the mother's presence yet he enthusiastically embraced the father by way of welcome and farewell.

(a) X dressed fashionably yet she lay curled up under a bench while the mother sat impassively nearby;

(b) X's presentation was concerning to Ms R;

(c) X was not attending school, according to the father and that X did not like school, according to the mother; and

(d) X's confidence was low, according to the mother.

1. So far as Y was concerned, Ms R's assessment was brief. She said -

(a) he presented as being withdrawn; and

(b) he stated he did not want to see the father and Y did not want to say why.

1. As to Z, Ms R said Z engaged enthusiastically and playfully, giggling and not displaying any signs of being fearful and reported that he was agreeable to each weekend with the father.
2. Ms R expressed her clinical opinion about what she called "court ordered therapeutic counselling/family therapy...focused on the issues of the disrupted relationship for the children with their father". She said -

(a) all four children will benefit from a repaired and strengthened relationship with the father;

(b) the mother declined to attend joint parents sessions;

(c) two of the four children joined the father in three sessions during which the father was observed as being responsive, kind and cooperative;

(d) all four children will benefit from the father's capacity to facilitate a meaningful relationship with the children as well as his fostering of the positive development for their welfare; and

(e) the mother is not providing a facilitative foundation for X and Y to psychologically and emotionally prepare to meet the father, despite 90% of parents positively benefitting in the safe therapeutic environment canvassed by Ms R.

1. Ms R recommended that all four children spend regular and substantial time with the father in his care.

1. Ms B gave evidence in this proceeding. She also provided a report dated 17 March 2025. Before addressing her viva voce evidence, it is utile to address the details of her report. She undertook seven interviews. One separately with each parent and others with each parent together with the three children. W attended separately by telephone. Ms B identified the written material she read in formulating her report.
2. Ms B made observations about the mother, taken from the mother's presentation, the mother's psychological, educational, occupational and relationship history. Ms B also recorded the mother's description of the children's attributes and skills. She conducted a variety of tests as well.
3. Ms B provided the results of her mental state examination of the mother. It revealed that the mother was defensive and combative at times, she was anxious and that the mother's insight and judgment was fair. Ms B reported that the mother denied any sources of stress.
4. Ms B said it was extremely concerning that the mother lacked insight into Y's difficulties and her own parenting issues. Ms B said the mother rated Y at the fifth percentile for distractibility and hyperactivity (greater than 95% of his peers) and adaptability (equal to or better than 66% of his peers) though he is being assessed for ASD and ADHD. Ms B reported that the mother deferred to the children responsibility for getting the children to school.
5. Ms B rated the likelihood of the children being exposed to neglect or abuse in the mother's care as high to very high.
6. Ms B performed an analysis of the father. As with the mother, Ms B reported on his presentation, his psychological history, his educational and occupational history and his relationship history. Ms B recorded matters relevant to the father's interaction with all children. The father expressed his concerns for W in the following manner -

(a) while the father has a close relationship with W which is mutual, the father reported his deep concerns about the fact that W had not washed for two and a half years, he covers himself completely and wears layers of clothing some items of which are covered in blood and that W has no current friendships, communicating only with the parents;

(b) the father suspected W was engaging in self-harm;

(c) W walks in a room with his back to the wall, reminding the father of serviceman with PTSD; and

(d) despite W's deteriorating state, the mother fails to engage W with treating professionals.

1. Ms B addressed the father's relationship with X. Ms B reported the following -

(a) X is good mannered and empathetic;

(b) the relationship between the father and X is currently strained as X takes responsibility for the behaviour of her siblings;

(c) the father is of the view that the mother is influencing X to raise controversial topics so as to produce a reaction;

(d) the father was concerned that the mother's issues with body image may be influencing X; and

(e) the father was deeply concerned about X's failure to attend school (except for times which were enjoyable, say, Halloween) and that X had withdrawn socially.

1. As for Y, Ms B recorded that Y was protective of his mother. Ms B reported that according to the father Y's attendance at school declined to an estimated 20 - 25%.
2. Z's school attendance dropped by up to 75% and the father was concerned about Z's abrupt decision to quit sport which surprised the father, according to Ms B.
3. So far as the father's mental health issues were concerned, Ms B reported that the father was very calm and cooperative, he displayed a normal range of moods, he had no hallucinations or delusions and his insight and judgment were good.
4. After disclosing the results of various diagnostic tests, Ms B reported that the likelihood of the children being exposed to neglect or abuse was low to moderate.
5. Ms B undertook an analysis of W. Ms B said the following of note -

(a) W failed to attend two scheduled sessions which the mother failed to facilitate reinforcing an ongoing pattern that the children are permitted by the mother to decide whether they attend appointments, school or spend time with the father, effectively thereby disregarding court orders and structured interventions intended for their wellbeing;

(b) W no longer attends psychological therapy sessions and the mother attends instead so that beyond interactions facilitated by the father, W has minimal engagement with others further exacerbating his isolation;

(c) the mother opposed W being required to see Ms B citing the distress W could suffer by being compelled to go which Ms B said reflected on the mother's potential for her relationship with W to be impacted rather than on the opportunity to support W's mental health;

(d) in one instance, W left the company of the father after which W's demeanour changed markedly when he "visibly shrunk into himself in the couch" (Ms B's words);

(e) the bond between W and his father is "incredibly strong", according to Ms B; and

(f) without significant time with the father, W's mental health will continue to decline and without significant change, W's prognosis is highly troubling.

1. Ms B offered recommendations in respect of X. Ms B said -

(a) X did not raise any concerns about the father's behaviour to justify her current limited contact with him;

(b) X feels safe in the father's presence;

(c) X did not express strong feelings about a change of residence; and

(d) X preferred spending time with the mother than with the father.

1. So far as Ms B's comments about Y were concerned, Ms B recorded that Y stated that the mother said the father "was always bad" (words attributed to Y) yet Y conceded neither parent had engaged in physical discipline. Y was unable to say to Ms B anything negative about the father. Y told Ms B that he enjoyed playing video games with the father.
2. As to Z, Ms B recorded that Z told her he had never felt scared in the presence of his father. Ms B said Z's non-attendance at school was very concerning. Z told Ms B that he would be ok with spending alternate weekends with his father and he thought it "would feel pretty good" (his words) if he had time on a week about basis with each parent. Z rated nine out of ten with him spending time with his father whereas he rated six out of ten for his time with his mother.
3. Ms B made observations on the interaction between the mother and the children. Ms B said the following -

(a) the children's reserved behaviour and manner revealed a level of social hesitation that raised concerns about their social development;

(b) the children's guarded demeanour made it difficult to assess the depth of their connection with their mother; and

(c) the children's reluctance to fully relax and engage freely suggested they may be socially isolated.

1. Ms B undertook an equivalent examination in relation to the children's interaction with the father. The observations made by Ms B were relevantly as follows -

(a) the mother behaved inappropriately at the interview when the father arrived;

(b) Z was more at ease when the father arrived than he had been prior to that point in time;

(c) when the father was present with the children a sense of fun, laughter, joking and connection was observable, absent in the earlier interaction indicating that the children genuinely enjoyed their time with their father; and

(d) the children have a strong bond with their father despite a prolonged separation.

1. So far as Ms B's conclusions were concerned, they were far ranging. The following is a distillation of them -

(a) while the father had unsupervised visits during the day time, Y did not participate in them;

(b) the mother's allegations of family violence during her marriage to the father (including coercive control and "love bombing"[10]) is misapplied;

(c) both parents have experienced severe mental health challenges including suicide attempts;

(d) the father developed work-related PTSD leading to major depressive disorder which exacerbated long-standing OCD traits;

(e) he coped maladaptively through heavy drinking and gambling, putting a strain on the family;

(f) the mother suffered from long-term depression, anxiety, body dysmorphia, and personality-related difficulties contributing to insecurities about her body and her relationship with the father;

(g) the mother engaged in impulsive behaviour leading to her relationship with the father growing toxic;

(h) while the father's mental health issues have been more severe, he has consistently sought treatment whereas the mother's account of her mental health history contains inconsistencies she engages in impression management and she is not forthcoming in her disclosures;

(i) both parents have underestimated the impact of their mental health and high conflict dynamic on the children;

(j) despite that, the children functioned relatively well during equal care arrangements that lasted for five years and only declined in October 2022 after the mother unilaterally suspended the father's time with the children with the consequence that their deterioration cannot be attributed to the father and instead may relate to the mother's ongoing mental health issues and parenting difficulties;

(k) no reasonable explanation has been given by the mother about why the children's time with the father had not been reinstated once it was confirmed that the psychotic episode from which he suffered was a medication-induced reaction and he presented no ongoing psychiatric concerns;

(l) the children attended school while in the father's care contradicting the mother's contention that the children's refusal to attend school was attributable to the father;

(m) the intervention order taken out by the mother prevented the father from consistently taking W to school;

(n) despite recognising the children's mental health issues the mother has not prioritised the children's engagement with treating health professionals;

(o) the mother has disregarded current orders concerning time between them and the father, erroneously characterising her legal obligations as coercive rather than necessary for the children's best interests;

(p) the mother has adopted a passive approach in parental matters, suggestive that she is unwilling to take a firm role in setting expectations and boundaries, seeming instead to be more focused on preserving both her and the children's immediate comfort and a harmonious relationship with them rather than ensuring their long-term stability and development;

(q) children flourish when they are raised with strength, resilience and well-defined boundaries and to that end, a parent's role is not to seek approval or friendship from their children but to provide guidance, protection and the necessary structure to prepare them for adulthood;

(r) the mother has burdened the children with decision-making creating an environment where they feel pressured to align with her perspective;

(s) X is enmeshed with the mother's emotional world and has taken on a parentified role;

(t) by the mother failing to establish structure, she has not only contributed to the children's emotional and behavioural struggles but she has fostered patterns of avoidance and instability rather than resilience and security;

(u) the mother has failed to reflect on her own behaviour by reason of her having made numerous reports to authorities and family violence services, she actively portrays the father as a dangerous abuser and she took deliberate steps to interfere with the father's ability to coach basketball, itself representing a campaign of vilification which has contributed to a biased perception of the father, further straining his relationship with the children and impeding their ability to have meaningful connections with him;

(v) when measured against the relevant diagnostic and statistics manual of mental disorders (DSM-5-TR) the mother presents with symptoms of anxiety and a specified personality disorder including borderline and dependent traits;

(w) the father presents with complex PTSD symptoms of obsessive-compulsive disorder;

(x) both parents require long term psychological intervention having regard to their history of suicidality and both remain susceptible to relapse;

(y) the mother's long-standing anxiety and body dysmorphia significantly affected her relationship with the father and that continues to shape her relationship with the children;

(z) W's condition is deeply concerning particularly as the mother refuses to follow professional advice yet the fact that the father successfully brought W to the session with Ms B underscored the father's ability to support W's needs while the mother's failure to act has only served to prolong W's distress, especially as W's hygiene requires urgent intervention; and

(aa) the mother demonstrates a limited understanding of the children's complex psychological needs and her lack of awareness hinders her ability to effectively support the children's emotions and developmental wellbeing, particularly if the mother is granted sole parental responsibility.

1. Ms B recommended that the father be granted sole parental responsibility for the children. Ms B recommended the father have (what she called) full custody of the children with a three-month moratorium on the mother having contact with the children. The precise terms of Ms B's recommendations were in two parts. In the first part was the following -
   1. The father has sole parental responsibility for the children but considers the mother's views before making long-term decisions.
   2. There is a change of residence and a moratorium on the mother's time and communication with the children for three months.
   3. The father relocates to appropriate accommodation within 20 minutes of the schools, within six months.
   4. It may assist [Y] to immediately engage in playing Roblox, Minecraft and Fortnite with the father and to attend three appointments with [Ms MM] and the father across three weeks, prior to the change of residence taking place. [Ms MM] is also provided with consent by the parties to release [Y]'s ASD/ADHD evaluation and support an NDIS application if deemed appropriate.
   5. [W], [Y] and [X] are in dire need of psychological assistance. Referrals and regular attendance are prioritised, with fortnightly sessions for at least six months or until time arrangements have stabilised. This report is provided to the psychologist. The assessor is not of the view that the same psychologist should see multiple siblings.
   6. It is recommended that [W] is referred to [RR Health Service] by his paediatrician as he would benefit from the support of a care team, including a psychiatrist, clinic psychologist, and occupational therapist.
   7. The father continues to attend appointments with his psychologist and psychiatrist at least fortnightly for one year. If he has a further relapse/psychiatric admission, the mother and maternal grandmother are notified, and he engages with a psychologist and psychiatrist at least fortnightly for one year from the date of discharge. A copy of this report is provided to the clinicians.
   8. The mother's time with the children only recommences if she is actively engaging in cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) and dialectical behaviour therapy (DBT) with a psychologist who has experience in Family Court matters. Fortnightly sessions for a minimum of two years. A copy of this report is provided to the psychologist.
   9. After three months, the mother's time commences during school term, on alternate weekends from the conclusion of school Friday to 7 PM Sunday and for dinner on Wednesdays from the conclusion of school to 7 PM, and over half of the school holidays on a week-about basis. The mother's time with the children is only increased further during school term if she demonstrates she is able to facilitate the children attending school.
   10. Effort is made to enrol the children in an extracurricular activity, preferably a team sport.
   11. Changeover occurs at school, McDonald's at [Suburb D], or at a mutually agreed location.
   12. The children are able to communicate with the other parent in accordance with their wishes, after three months.
   13. Both parents are able to attend the children's extracurricular activities and school and sporting events after three months.
   14. The mother completes a Tuning into Kids, Tuning into Teens, Triple P, and Post-separation Parenting program, such as those offered by ZZ Family Services or online, unless previously completed.
   15. The parents communicate using a parenting app such as AppClose.
2. In the second was a different set of recommendations. They were as follows -
   1. It will benefit the children's development if parents reside in proximity to each other when the children's time is divided between parents' homes. Proximity facilitates co-parenting, reduces travel time, accommodates changes in parenting arrangements as children's needs evolve, supports children's activities, strengthens social and community networks, and ensures consistency in education and healthcare.
   2. Encourage the child(ren) to develop and maintain relationships with both parents. Both parents should make every effort to facilitate the child(ren)'s time with the other parent and extended family members.
   3. Each parent has a responsibility to support and facilitate and child(ren)'s care with the other parent, new partners, and the extended family of the other parent, irrespective of personal negative feelings.
   4. The child(ren) should not be exposed to denigration or marginalisation of the other parent or family members by anyone, including parents, siblings, extended family or friends.
   5. Resolve differences between the parents through direct communication, mediation, or parent coordination if necessary.
   6. Consider seeking counselling for issues related to coping, stress and family dynamics in the context of Family Court proceedings. Counselling should typically involve a family therapist or an experienced psychologist. The Court may order that this report be made available to the therapist.
   7. Utilise communication tools, such as a communication book or parenting app like 'Our Family Wizard', especially when direct communication between parents is challenging. However, parents should strive to communicate effectively on their own and behave responsibly when in each other's presence.
   8. Employ appropriate parental approaches to manage children's behaviour. Minimise the use of physical discipline and ensure discipline aligns with community standards and expectations, directly related to the child's behaviour.
   9. Do not require the child(ren) to act as messengers between parents or family members.
   10. Avoid questioning the child(ren) about their activities at the other parent's home.
3. Ms B was cross-examined at length by all counsel in the proceeding. I found Ms B to have been a most impressive witness, providing robust and unambiguous answers to questions put to her. Her answers were considered, measured, well thought out, logical and forthright. I had no hesitation relying on her evidence. In answer to questions put to her by counsel for the ICL, Ms B gave the evidence on the following matters -

(a) the mother was inclined to take the easy approach towards the children, especially W, rather than having to deal with his difficulties;

(b) the mother's focus was on the potential for her relationship with W to be impacted rather than obtaining assistance for his mental health;

(c) the father displayed a deep connection with W and was sensitive to W's emotional needs;

(d) the father's efforts to understand and accommodate W's needs have been extraordinary;

(e) it concerns Ms B that W has become resistant to the father seeing W;

(f) it was wonderful to see how patient and considerate the father was with W;

(g) it was concerning for Ms B to learn that X was keeping a diary of her grievances in respect of the time she sees her father which revealed that X was continuing to act on the mother's behalf;

(h) X was parentified (Ms B's words);

(i) X had an enmeshed relationship with the mother;

(j) seeing the diary notes kept by X did not cause Ms B to be concerned about the children living with the father and it confirmed Ms B's view of the need for there to be a change of this cycle;

(k) in Ms B's view, Z was very positive about seeing his father and the mother's comment that Z was confused on the matter revealed that the mother had been talking with the children over a couple of years about spending time with their father;

(l) in Ms B's view she had no confidence that the mother had devised a new strategy for Y in respect of Y's time with his father;

(m) the mother conducted herself in such manner that she wanted to appear as if she is complying with court orders but in reality the mother's behaviour was about her granting the children on whether or not permission to have a relationship with the father;

(n) so far as the three month moratorium was concerned, Ms B recommended that the children's issues with school refusal were so entrenched and significant that it was unrealistic to think that the father could immediately turn things around and a moratorium of three months was a minimum time to establish any real change;

(o) attending school was a reflection of the children being able to choose whether they do a particular thing, their mental health was declining and their relationship with their father had been incredibly damaged (her words) so that harm and neglect would continue;

(p) there will be resistance to the change recommended and the father needs time to establish that the change is not merely short term so a three month moratorium is the minimum time;

(q) the course recommended will be challenging for the children, disruptive and difficult for them;

(r) Ms B said "I really fear for these children";

(s) without the moratorium proposed, Ms B said she was extraordinarily worried about the children, W's decline in the time he has been with his mother is "quite startling" (her words), the children are isolated because they are not attending school, their social skills are very strange, they are not connecting with their community and she said that their future, especially in relation to their mental health going forward, is very concerning; and

(t) the children now present with significant mental health issues and the mother does not present with the skills to recognise or to respond to those issues whereas the father is better able to do so.

1. On behalf of the father, counsel cross-examined Ms B. She said -

(a) X's trajectory is now worse than when Ms B first saw X;

(b) X is on the way to developing a personality disorder;

(c) Ms B said the mother will not implement an arrangement for the children to live with her on a nine-day fortnight and half holidays as it was not occurring presently and all issues in relation to the children's downward trajectory will continue; and

(d) having regard to the multiple issues the children need to be addressed and turned around with their schooling, their mental health and their isolation and the severity of their dysfunction, it is unrealistic to think those issues can be turned around quickly.

1. The mother's counsel cross-examined Ms B and Ms B repeated her recommendation for the relevant moratorium to be for not less than three months. Ms B also said the following during cross-examination -

(a) she did not agree to the parents having equal shared time immediately after the conclusion of the moratorium period;

(b) Ms B did not consider that the children's views should be given significant weight having regard to their ages and development stages;

(c) the middle children had been extraordinarily influenced;

(d) even though W is nearing 18 years of age, his trajectory is poor because his mental health has declined so much that Ms B said she had a responsibility to him now;

(e) a risk exists that the children will not abide by any order relating to any moratorium; and

(f) if any child went back to the mother, the child should be immediately returned.

1. By report dated 12 August 2020, Dr SS provided details of W's selective mutism, his restricted eating and his ASD. Dr SS referred W to a paediatrician at WW Hospital for a report. Dr SS recommended a tier three psychiatric service. By report dated 17 August 2021, Dr SS reviewed W and agreed with the ASD assessment provided by his psychologist which confirmed W's diagnosis with select mutism.
2. Dr SS did not give evidence.

1. By report dated 12 February 2022, Mr TT recorded that Z did not suffer from ASD and instead, Mr TT concluded that Z's behaviour was better explained as a response to family dysfunction.
2. Mr TT provided a short report to whom it may concern dated 7 September 2023 in which Mr TT made similar observations.
3. Mr TT did not give evidence.

1. The father's most recent iteration of his application was filed on 26 May 2025, being his outline of case, annexure A of which set out the orders he sought. It was in the following terms -

Parental responsibility

1. That the Father have sole parental decision making for all long-term major decisions, for [W] born 2008, [X] born 2009, [Y] born 2012 and [Z] born 2014 (collectively "the children").
2. For the purpose of exercising sole parental responsibility:

   1. Save in the event of an emergency, the Father contact the Mother in writing not less than 7 days prior to making any major long-term decision with respect to the children and with such communication to set out the issue at hand and the Father's proposal;

   2. The Mother may respond to any such communication in writing within 3 days thereafter detailing her position with respect to the issue;

   3. The Father consider the Mother's position; and

   4. The Father inform the Mother in writing of the decision he has made within 7 days of making that decision.

Spend time arrangements

1. The children live with the Father.
2. There be a moratorium of the Mother's time and communication with the children for a period no less than three months.
3. Prior to the children's time and communication with the Mother recommencing, the Mother is to engage in cognitive behaviour therapy and dialectical behaviour therapy with an agreed clinical psychologist with experience in Family Court matters at her sole expense.
4. For the purpose of Order 5:
   1. The Mother is to provide the clinical psychologist with a copy of the Family Report by [Ms B] dated 17 March 2025 ("the Family Report").
   2. The Mother is to follow all reasonable directions of the clinical psychologist including but not limited to frequency of appointments.
   3. following the conclusion of no less than six sessions with a clinical psychologist, the Mother is to provide the Father with a written report from the treating clinician, comprising:
      1. confirmation that the clinician has reviewed the Family Report;

1. verification that the Mother has actively engaged in cognitive behavioural therapy and dialectical behaviour therapy;

2. confirmation the Mother has attended for no less than six sessions;

3. whether the Mother is adhering to treatment recommendations;

4. an opinion as to whether it is psychologically safe for the children to resume time and communication with the Mother;

5. any plan for further treatment.

6. Upon the conclusion of the moratorium referred to in Order 4 and compliance with Orders 5 and 6 hereof, the children will spend time with the Mother for two nights per fortnight as follows:

   1. Each Wednesday from the conclusion of school (or 3:30pm if a non- school day) until 7:00pm; and
   2. In each alternate week from the conclusion of school (or 3:30pm if a non- school day) on Friday until 7:00pm on Sunday.
   3. Such further time as agreed between the parties.

Ongoing Treatment

1. The Mother remain engaged with a clinical psychologist for cognitive behavioural therapy and dialectical behaviour therapy for a period of no less than two years from the making of these Orders.

2. The Father continue to engage with his treating psychologist and psychiatrist for no less than one year from the making of these Orders and will follow all reasonable directions of his treating clinicians including but not limited to the frequency of appointments.

3. For the purpose of Orders 8, the Mother authorise and instruct her treating psychologist to provide the Father with a letter or email on a monthly basis which confirms that she remains engaged with treatment and continues to follow all reasonable recommendations of the treating psychologist including as to frequency of appointments.

Children's belongings

1. That on the day the children change residence to live with the Father, that the Father in consultation with the children, provide a list of items the children would like to take with them to the Father's home, with the Mother to do all acts and things to provide those items to the Father at changeover on the day the children change residence.

2. That for the purposes of paragraph 11, that within 14 days of the children coming into the Father's care, that he provide a further list of any of the children's possessions which the children would like to have with them or have forgotten to take with them, and that within 7 days of receiving that list, the Mother will do all acts and things to provide the Father with the requested items.

Changeover

1. Unless otherwise agreed in writing:

   1. all changeovers that coincide with the commencement or conclusion of school shall occur at the children's respective schools.

   2. All other changeovers shall occur at the McDonalds carpark located at [C Street, Suburb D].

   3. For the avoidance of doubt, the collecting parent will meet the children inside the McDonalds store and the dropping off parent will remain in their car at changeover, save to assist the children with putting their bags in the car if necessary.

   4. For the purpose of Order 13(a), the parties and/or their agent known to the children be permitted to collect the children from school at the commencement of the children's time with that parent.

Communication

1. The parties will communicate in relation to all matters concerning the children through the parenting application AppClose save for in cases of emergency where the parties are at liberty to telephone each other.

2. Prior to the children's time and communication with the Mother recommencing pursuant to Order 7 hereof, the Father will provide the Mother with monthly updates in relation to the children's welfare, education, psychological treatment and extracurricular activities via AppClose.

3. Save for within the period specified in Orders 4, 5 and 6 herein, the parties will facilitate the children's communication with the other parent in accordance with the children's wishes.

Medical

1. Each party:

   1. be at liberty to provide a copy of these Orders and the Family Report to all psychologists, medical providers and allied health professionals treating the children from time to time.
   2. will notify the other by telephone or Appclose of any serious illness or injury of the children while in their care and will provide details of any medical practitioner treating the children to the other party as soon as practicable.
   3. is authorised to communicate with each of the children's medical practitioners and allied health professionals and receive all information as to the children's treatment.
   4. will endeavour to seek relief and/or amelioration of the costs of compliance with Order 18(b) herein, however will equally meet any cost ultimately eventuating, as follows:
      1. upon one party making payment of an invoice for an out-of- pocket expense for a child's treating clinician, that party will provide to the other party a copy of the paid invoice and evidence of rebate within 7 days of making payment; and
      2. the other party will reimburse the paying party their half share of the ultimate cost within 7 days of receipt of the paid invoice and evidence of the rebate.

2. Unless otherwise agreed between the parties in writing, the Father:

   1. will enter all appointments for the children into Appclose within 24 hours of such appointment being made by him and such entries will include the first name and surname of the practitioner, the name of their place of work and the time and location of the appointment.
   2. will facilitate the children's attendance on their respective psychologists, medical providers and allied health professionals ("treating clinicians") at such times as recommended by the treating clinicians.

3. Within 14 days of these Orders being made, the parties do all acts and things necessary to transfer management of the children's NDIS plans and funding to the Father, including but not limited to serving a copy of these Orders upon any relevant Government institution, NDIS provider or otherwise, to facilitate the transfer of management into the Father's name.

Education

1. Each party be at liberty:
   1. To receive copies of all school reports, school notices and photographs in relation to the children that a parent would ordinarily receive at their own expense.

      1. To communicate with the children's schools by telephone, email or personal attendance in relation to the children's progress at school.

      2. Save for within the period specified in Orders 4, 5 and 6 herein, to attend school functions and events in relation to the children that a parent would normally be able to attend.

School holidays

1. Commencing in the first Victorian gazetted Term holiday period, following the commencement of Order 7 herein and following time pursuant to Order 7 occurring for a period of 12 weeks, for the Term 1, 2 or 3 Victorian Gazetted holiday periods the children spend time with the parties as agreed in writing, and failing agreement:

   1. in odd numbered years, with the Mother for the first half from the conclusion of school on the last day of term, and with the Father for the second half of the holidays, with changeover occurring on the middle day at 5:00pm, and the children to remain in the Father's care until the commencement of the school Term; and

   2. in even numbered years, with the Father for the first half from the conclusion of school on the last day of term, and with the Mother for the second half of the holidays, with changeover occurring on the middle day at 5:00pm and the children to remain in the Mother's care until the commencement of the school Term.

2. For the purposes of Order 21 herein, if there are an odd number of overnights in the Term 1, 2 or 3 Victorian Gazetted holiday periods then changeover occur on the first of the two middle overnights in even years and on the second of the two middle overnights in odd numbered years.

3. For the first long summer gazetted holidays following the commencement of the arrangements in Order 7 herein and following time pursuant to Order 7 occurring for a period of no less than 12 weeks, and continuing thereafter, the children spend time with the parties as agreed and failing agreement on a week- about basis:

   1. In odd numbered years and continuing in all odd number years thereafter, on a week about basis commencing with the Mother from the conclusion of school on the last day of term until 12pm the following Saturday when they will spend time with the Father, with changeover occurring each Saturday at 12pm until the commencement of school on the first day of in Term 1; and
   2. In even numbered years and continuing in all even number years thereafter, on a week about basis commencing with the Father from the conclusion of school on the last day of term until 12pm the following Saturday when they will spend time with the Mother, with changeover occurring each Saturday at 12pm until the commencement of school on the first day of in Term 1.

4. For the purpose of Order 23, the time arrangements pursuant to Order 7 herein are suspended from the conclusion of school on the last day of term 4 and ceases being suspended from the commencement of school on the first day of Term 1; and the arrangements pursuant to Order 7 recommence as though they were never interrupted.

Special occasions

1. Save for the period specified in Orders 4, 5 and 6 herein, the children spend time with the Mother for special occasions, as follows:

   1. for the period Christmas Eve to Boxing Day as follows:
      1. from 11.00am Christmas Eve to 11.00am Christmas Day in even numbered years; and
      2. from 11.00am Christmas Day to 7:00pm on 26 December in odd years.
   2. During the Easter period, from 10:00am on Good Friday until 10:00am on Easter Monday in odd numbered years.
   3. on the children's birthday(s) as follows:

      1. if a school day, when the children are in the Father's care, from the conclusion of school to 7:00pm;

      2. if a non-school day when the children are otherwise in the Father's care, from 10:00am to 2:00pm.

      3. otherwise as agreed between the parties.

2. From 5.00pm the day before Mother's Day to 6.30pm on Mother's Day.

3. On the Mother's birthday in any given year:

   1. if a school day, when the children are in the Father's care, from the conclusion of school to 7:00pm;
   2. if a non-school day when the children are otherwise in the Father's care, from 10:00am to 2:00pm.

4. Save for otherwise specified in these Order, the children spend time with the Father for special occasions, as follows:

   1. for the period Christmas Eve to Boxing Day as follows:
      1. from 11.00am Christmas Eve to 11.00am Christmas Day in odd numbered years; and
      2. from 11.00am Christmas Day to 7:00pm on 26 December in even years.
   2. During the Easter period, from 10:00am on Good Friday until 10:00am on Easter Monday in even numbered years.

5. on the children's birthday(s) as follows:

   1. if a school day, when the children are in the Mother's care, from the conclusion of school to 7:00pm;

   2. if a non-school day when the children are otherwise in the Mother's care, from 10:00am to 2:00pm.

   3. otherwise as agreed between the parties.

   4. From 5.00pm the day before Father's Day to 6.30pm on Father's Day.

   5. On the Father's birthday in any given year:

      1. if a school day, when the children are in the Mother's care, from the conclusion of school to 7:00pm;

      2. if a non-school day when the children are otherwise in the Mother's care, from 10:00am to 2:00pm.

Travel

1. Each party be at liberty to travel within Victoria with the children, without the consent of the other party, during the children's time with them pursuant to these Orders.
2. Each party be at liberty to travel interstate with the children during the children's time with them pursuant to these Orders, on the basis that:
   1. the travelling parent provides the non-travelling parent with not less than 30 days written notice of their intention to travel interstate with the children;
   2. in the event of emergency relating to the travelling parent's family members such as illness or death, 14 days' notice can be provided; and

1. not less than 7 days prior to departure, the travelling parent shall provide the non-travelling parent with a copy of the itinerary including details and addresses of accommodation, copies of return flights, and contact details for the children while they are travelling.

2. Each party be at liberty to travel internationally to any Hague Convention country with the children, on the basis that:

   1. The proposed travel is no longer than two weeks duration, unless agreed between the parties in writing;
   2. The proposed travel does not interfere with the children's school attendance unless otherwise agreed between the parties in writing;
   3. 60 days' notice in writing of the intended travel is afforded to the non- travelling parent;
   4. Not less than 30 days prior to departure, the travelling parent shall provide the non-travelling parent with a copy of the itinerary including details and addresses of accommodation, copies of return flights, and contact details for the children while they are travelling.

3. The travelling parent shall provide make up time to the non-travelling parent equivalent to the number of overnights the children missed with the non- travelling parent at such days and times as agreed between the parties, and failing agreement, the non-travelling parent is to propose two sets of dates and times, and the travelling parent selects one of those sets.

4. Subject to the travelling parent complying with Orders 28 or 29 herein, the non- travelling parent shall not unreasonably withhold consent to the travel, including to non-Hauge convention Countries.

Passports

1. No less than 90 days prior to any intended international travel, the parties shall forthwith do all acts and things and sign all documents necessary to:

   1. Apply for the children's Australian passports at their equal expense;
   2. Attend upon an Australia Post Office or the Melbourne Passport Office to lodge the applications; and
   3. In the event that either party refuses or neglects to comply with these Orders, the Registrar of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia is hereby appointed to execute all documents in the name of the defaulting parent and do all things necessary to give validity and operation to these Orders.

2. The children's passports shall be retained by the Father.

3. No later than 14 days prior to the Mother's international departure with the children, the Father shall provide to the Mother, the childrens passports to facilitate the travel.

4. Within 7 days of the Mother returning home from international travel with the children, she will return the children's passports to the Father.

Other

1. Within six months of these Orders being made, the Father will use his best endeavours to secure suitable accommodation within 20 minutes of all or one of the children's respective schools.
2. Within 14 days of the children coming into the Father's care pursuant to these Orders, the Father will do all acts and things necessary to enrol each of the children in an extracurricular activity and will consult the the children as to which activity they would prefer before making a decision.
3. Within 14 days of these Orders being made, unless otherwise completed, the Mother enrol in the following parenting courses and provide a certificate of completion to the Father once completed:
   1. Tuning into Kids;
   2. Tuning into Teens;
   3. Triple P; and
   4. a Parenting after Separation program.
4. Each of the parties shall, as soon as practicable, advise and keep the other party informed of their contact details including email addresses, residential addresses and mobile numbers including any change thereto within 48 hours of any change.
5. The parties or their respective solicitors be at liberty to provide a sealed copy of these Orders to:

   1. each of the children's schools;

   2. their respecitve medical practitioners;

   3. allied health professionals;

   4. sporting or other extracurricular club attended by the children from time to time; and

   5. or any government institution or relevant body or organisation related to the medical treatment of the children that is associated with medical funding that the Father may need to provide a copy of the Orders to, to enable his communication with the same, including but not limited to Medicare, NDIS, disability support services and otherwise.

Injunctions

1. The parties be restrained from:
   1. Leaving the children or any of them in the unsupervised care of the paternal uncle [Mr Q].
   2. Communicating with each other through the children.
   3. Physically disciplining the children.
   4. Denigrating, abusing, rebuking, or marginalising the other parent or family members in the presence or hearing of the children or allowing any other person to do.

1. Denigrating the other parent to the children's schools, treating clinicians, or sporting or other extracurricular clubs.
2. Discussing these proceedings or parenting matters in the presence or hearing of the children or allowing any other person to do so.

1. The mother's most recent iteration of her response was filed 27 May 2025, being her outline of case. It was in the following terms -

Parental responsibility

1. The Mother have sole parental decision making for all long-term major decisions, for [W] born 2008, [X] born 2009, [Y] born 2012 and [Z] born 2014 (the children).
2. For the purpose of exercising sole parental responsibility:

   1. Save in the event of an emergency, the Mother contact the Father in writing not less than 7 days prior to making any major long-term decision with respect to the children and with such communication to set out the issue at hand and the Mother's proposal.

   2. The Father may respond to any such communication in writing within 3 days thereafter detailing his position with respect to the issue.

   3. The Mother consider the Father's position.

   4. The Mother inform the Father in writing of the decision she has made within 7 days of making that decision.

Live with and spend time arrangements

1. The children live with the Mother.

2. The children spend time with the Father as follows:

   1. Commencing forthwith and for a period of 4 weeks:
      1. Each Wednesday from the conclusion of school (or 3:30pm if a non-school day) to 7:00pm.
      2. Each alternate weekend from Saturday from 10:00am to Sunday 4:00pm.
   2. Thereafter and for a period of 6 weeks:
      1. Each Wednesday from the conclusion of school (or 3:30pm if a non-school day) to 7:00pm.
      2. Each alternate weekend from the conclusion of school Friday (or 3:30pm if a non- school day) to Sunday 4:00pm.
   3. Thereafter and for a period of 6 weeks:
      1. Each Wednesday from the conclusion of school (or 3:30pm if a non-school day) to 7:00pm.
      2. Each alternate weekend from the conclusion of school Friday (or 3:30pm if a non- school day) to the commencement of school Monday (or 9:00am if a non-school day).
   4. Thereafter and for a period of 6 weeks:
      1. Each Wednesday from the conclusion of school (or 3:30pm if a non-school day) to 7:00pm.
      2. Each alternate weekend from the conclusion of school Friday (or 3:30pm if a non- school day) to the commencement of school Tuesday (or 9:00am if a non-school day).
   5. Thereafter:
      1. Each alternate weekend from the conclusion of school Friday (or 3:30pm if a non- school day) to the commencement of school Wednesday (or 9:00am if a non- school day).
   6. For half of each school holiday period, commencing the first half in odd-numbered years and the second half in even-numbered years.
   7. For Christmas as follows:
      1. In odd-numbered years, from 2:00pm Christmas Eve to 2:00pm Christmas Day.
      2. In even-numbered years, from 2:00pm Christmas Day to 2:00pm Boxing Day.
   8. For Father's Day from 9:00am to 5:00pm.
   9. As otherwise agreed between the parents in writing.

3. For each of the children's birthdays, the children spend time with the parent they are not in the care of from 1:00pm to 6:00pm or if the birthday falls on a school day, from the conclusion of school to 7:00pm.

4. The Mother's time with the children be suspended as follows:

   1. For half of each school holiday period, commencing the second half in odd-numbered years and the first half in even-numbered years.
   2. For Christmas as follows:

      1. In even-numbered years, from 2:00pm Christmas Eve to 2:00pm Christmas Day.

      2. In odd-numbered years, from 2:00pm Christmas Day to 2:00pm Boxing Day.

      3. For Mother's Day from 9:00am to 5:00pm.

      4. As otherwise agreed between the parents in writing.

[Y]

1. Commencing forthwith:

   1. The Father engage with [Y] via various videogames.
   2. The Father and [Y] attend three appointments across three weeks with [Ms MM].

2. The parents shall forthwith provide [Ms MM] with consent to release [Y]'s ASD/ADHD Assessment, as their equal cost.

Changeovers

1. Changeovers that do not occur at school shall occur McDonald's in [Suburb D] or as otherwise agreed between the parents in writing.

Communication

1. The parents communicate via AppClose regarding the children save for in the event of an emergency or if AppClose is unavailable, in which case they may communicate by SMS.

2. Each of the parents shall, as soon as practicable, advise and keep the other party informed of their contact details including email addresses, residential addresses and mobile numbers including any change thereto within 48 hours of any change.

Medical and schooling

1. The parents shall ensure the children continue to be engaged with their treating clinicians including psychologists for [Y], [X] and [W] and the costs of same be shared equally between the parents.
2. The parents endeavour to seek relief and/or amelioration of the costs of compliance with the children's medical appointments, however will equally meet any cost ultimately eventuating, as follows:
   1. Upon one parent making payment of an invoice for an out-of- pocket expense for a child's treating clinician, that parent will provide to the other parent a copy of the paid invoice and evidence of rebate within 7 days of making payment; and
   2. The other parent will reimburse the paying parent their half share of the ultimate cost within 14 days of receipt of the paid invoice and evidence of the rebate.
3. In the event that the children suffer any significant injury, medical condition, serious nonroutine medical issue or are hospitalised including attending at any emergency department, the parent with whom the children with at the time must as soon as practicable notify the other parent and provide details of the medical issue along with the names and contact details of any treater so that each parent may liaise directly with the children's treating medical practitioners, dental and allied health professionals.
4. The parents be at liberty to provide a copy of these Orders to the children's school, medical practitioners, allied health professionals and extra-circular providers.
5. The parents be at liberty to, at their own expense, and are by this order authorised to:

   1. Obtain from the children's schools, at their own expense, all notices, reports and photographs.

   2. Obtain from the children's medical practitioner and/or allied health professionals, at their own expense, any documents including reports, referrals and prescriptions.

   3. Liaise with any medical practitioner or allied health professional who are attending upon the children and to obtain any reports and information concerning the children from such professionals.

Travel

1. Each parent be at liberty to travel within Victoria with the children, without the consent of the other party, during the children's time with them pursuant to these Orders.

2. Each parent be at liberty to travel interstate with the children during the children's time with them pursuant to these Orders, on the basis that:

   1. The travelling parent provides the non-travelling parent with not less than 30 days written notice of their intention to travel interstate with the children;
   2. In the event of emergency relating to the travelling parent's family members such as illness or death, 14 days' notice can be provided; and
   3. Not less than 7 days prior to departure, the travelling parent shall provide the non- travelling parent with a copy of the itinerary including details and addresses of accommodation, copies of return flights, and contact details for the children while they are travelling.

3. Each parent be at liberty to travel internationally to any Hague Convention country with the children, on the basis that:

   1. The proposed travel is no longer than two weeks duration, unless agreed between the parties in writing;
   2. The proposed travel does not interfere with the children's school attendance unless otherwise agreed between the parents in writing;
   3. 60 days' notice in writing of the intended travel is afforded to the non travelling parent; and
   4. Not less than 30 days prior to departure, the travelling parent shall provide the non- travelling parent with a copy of the itinerary including details and addresses of accommodation, copies of return flights, and contact details for the children while they are travelling.

4. The travelling parent shall provide make up time to the non-travelling parent equivalent to the number of overnights the children missed with the non travelling parent at such days and times as agreed between the parents, and failing agreement, the non-travelling parent is to propose two sets of dates and times, and the travelling parent selects one of those sets.

5. No less than 90 days prior to any intended international travel, the parents shall forthwith do all acts and things and sign all documents necessary to:

   1. Apply for the children's Australian passports at their equal expense;
   2. Attend upon an Australia Post Office or the Melbourne Passport Office to lodge the applications; and
   3. In the event that either parent refuses or neglects to comply with these Orders, the Registrar of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia is hereby appointed to execute all documents in the name of the defaulting parent and do all things necessary to give validity and operation to these Orders.

6. The children's passports shall be retained by the Mother.

Restraints

1. Each of the parents, their servants and agents be and are hereby restrained by injunction from:

   1. Abusing, insulting, belittling, rebuking, or otherwise denigrating the other parent or members of their household in the hearing and/or presence of the children and from permitting any other person to do so.

   2. Discussing these proceedings or the contents of any documents filed in or intended for use in these proceedings to, with or in the presence or hearing of the children and from permitting any other person to do so.

   3. Leaving the children in the unsupervised care of the maternal uncle [Mr Q].

   4. Leaving the children in the unsupervised care of the paternal step-grandfather [Mr J].

Ongoing treatment

1. The Mother shall forthwith engage in cognitive behaviour therapy and dialectical behaviour therapy with a clinical psychologist with experience in Family Court matters, at her sole expense.
2. The Mother shall be at liberty to provide the clinical psychologist with a copy of the Family Report by [Ms B] dated 17 March 2025.
3. The Father shall continue to engage with his treating psychologist and psychiatrist and following all reasonable directions of his treating clinicians.

1. The independent children's lawyer's minute of proposed final orders sought was submitted on the last day of the trial. It was in the following terms -
   1. There be a moratorium of the Mother's time and communication with the children for a period no less than three months ("the moratorium period").

Parental responsibility during the moratorium period

1. The Father have sole parental decision making for all long-term major decisions, for [W] born 2008, [X] born 2009, [Y] born 2012 and [Z] born 2014 (collectively "the children").

2. For the purpose of exercising sole parental responsibility:

   1. Save in the event of an emergency, the Father contact the Mother in writing not less than 7 days prior to making any major long-term decision with respect to the children and with such communication to set out the issue at hand and the Father's proposal;

   2. The Mother may respond to any such communication in writing within 3 days thereafter detailing her position with respect to the issue;

   3. The Father consider the Mother's position; and

   4. The Father inform the Mother in writing of the decision he has made within 7 days of making that decision.

Spend time arrangements during the moratorium period

1. The children live with the Father and spend no time with nor communicate with the Mother.
2. During the moratorium period:
   1. The mother be restrained from contacting the children's schools, medical practitioners and allied health professionals; and
   2. the Father provide the Mother with no less than monthly reports via AppClose as to the children's school attendance, attendance upon any medical or allied health practitioners and general progress.
3. Prior to the children's time and communication with the Mother recommencing, the Mother is to engage in cognitive behaviour therapy and dialectical behaviour therapy with an agreed clinical psychologist with experience in Family Court matters at her sole expense.
4. For the purpose of Order 6:
   1. The Mother is to provide the clinical psychologist with a copy of the Family Report by [Ms B] dated 17 March 2025 ("the Family Report").
   2. The Mother is to follow all reasonable directions of the clinical psychologist including but not limited to frequency of appointments.
   3. Following the conclusion of no less than six sessions with a clinical psychologist, the Mother is to provide the Father with a written report from the treating clinician, comprising:

      1. confirmation that the clinician has reviewed the Family Report;

      2. verification that the Mother has actively engaged in cognitive behavioural therapy and dialectical behaviour therapy;

      3. confirmation the Mother has attended for no less than six sessions;

      4. whether the Mother is adhering to treatment recommendations;

      5. an opinion as to whether it is psychologically safe for the children to resume time and communication with the Mother; and

      6. any plan for further treatment.

Parental Responsibility after the Moratorium period

1. Upon the conclusion of the moratorium period referred to in Order 1 and the Mother's compliance with Orders 6 and 7 hereof, the Father and Mother have equal shared parental decision making for all long-term major decisions, for [W] born 2008, [X] born 2009, [Y] born 2012 and [Z] born 2014 (collectively "the children").

Care arrangements after the Moratorium period

1. The children live with the Father.
2. The children spend time with the Mother as follows:
   1. For a period of three months on a supervised basis at EACH contact service at such times and for such duration as directed by the service, with any cost of the supervised time to be borne equally between the parties and with the Father and the Mother to complete application forms for the EACH service within 7 days of these Orders;
   2. Thereafter:

      1. Each Wednesday from the conclusion of school (or 3:30pm if a non-school day) until 7:00pm;

      2. In each alternate week from the conclusion of school (or 3:30pm if a non-school day) on Friday until 7:00pm on Sunday; and

      3. Such further and other time as agreed between the parties.

Ongoing Treatment

1. The Mother remain engaged with a clinical psychologist for cognitive behavioural therapy and dialectical behaviour therapy for a period of no less than two years from the making of these Orders.

2. The Father continue to engage with his treating psychologist and psychiatrist for no less than one year from the making of these Orders and will follow all reasonable directions of his treating clinicians including but not limited to the frequency of appointments.

3. For the purpose of Orders 11 and 12 herein, the parties authorise and instruct their treating psychologist to provide the other party with a letter or email on a monthly basis which confirms that the respective party remains engaged with treatment and continues to follow all reasonable recommendations of the treating psychologist including as to frequency of appointments.

Children's belongings

1. That on the day the children change residence to live with the Father, the Mother make the children's belongings available to the Father.
2. For the sake of clarity, the children's belongings include but are not limited to:

   1. [W]'s computer;

   2. [X]'s cat named "[...]";

   3. [Y]'s virtual reality device; and

   4. The children's other electronic devices.

Changeover

1. Unless otherwise agreed in writing:

   1. all changeovers that coincide with the commencement or conclusion of school shall occur at the children's respective schools.

   2. All other changeovers shall occur at the McDonalds carpark located at [C Street, Suburb D].

   3. For the avoidance of doubt, the collecting parent will meet the children inside the McDonalds store and the dropping off parent will remain in their car at changeover.

   4. For the purpose of Order 16(a), the parties and/or their agent known to the children be permitted to collect the children from school at the commencement of the children's time with that parent.

Communication

1. The parties will communicate in relation to all matters concerning the children through the parenting application AppClose save for in cases of emergency where the parties are at liberty to telephone each other.

2. Prior to the children's time and communication with the Mother recommencing pursuant to Order 10 hereof, the Father will provide the Mother with fortnightly updates in relation to the children's welfare, education, psychological treatment and extracurricular activities via AppClose.

3. Save for within the period specified in Orders 4, 5 and 6 herein, the parties will facilitate the children's communication with the other parent in accordance with the children's wishes.

Medical

1. Each party:
   1. be at liberty to provide a copy of these Orders and the Family Report to all psychologists, medical providers and allied health professionals treating the children from time to time.
   2. will notify the other by telephone or Appclose of any serious illness or injury of the children while in their care and will provide details of any medical practitioner treating the children to the other party as soon as practicable.
   3. is authorised to communicate with each of the children's medical practitioners and allied health professionals and receive all information as to the children's treatment.
   4. will endeavour to seek relief and/or amelioration of the costs of compliance with Order 20(b) herein, however will equally meet any cost ultimately eventuating, as follows:
      1. upon one party making payment of an invoice for an out-of-pocket expense for a child's treating clinician, that party will provide to the other party a copy of the paid invoice and evidence of rebate within 7 days of making payment; and
      2. the other party will reimburse the paying party their half share of the ultimate cost within 7 days of receipt of the paid invoice and evidence of the rebate.
2. Unless otherwise agreed between the parties in writing, they will:

   1. enter all appointments for the children into Appclose within 24 hours of such appointment being made by him and such entries will include the first name and surname of the practitioner, the name of their place of work and the time and location of the appointment.

   2. will facilitate the children's attendance on their respective psychologists, medical providers and allied health professionals ("treating clinicians") at such times as recommended by the treating clinicians.

Education

1. Each party be at liberty:

   1. To receive copies of all school reports, school notices and photographs in relation to the children that a parent would ordinarily receive at their own expense.

   2. To communicate with the children's schools by telephone, email or personal attendance in relation to the children's progress at school.

   3. Save for the moratorium period and the period of supervised time, to attend school functions and events in relation to the children that a parent would normally be able to attend.

School holidays

1. Commencing in the first Victorian gazetted Term holiday period, following the commencement of Order 10 herein, for the Term 1, 2 or 3 Victorian Gazetted holiday periods the children spend time with the parties as agreed in writing, and failing agreement:

   1. in odd numbered years, with the Mother for the first half from the conclusion of school on the last day of term, and with the Father for the second half of the holidays, with changeover occurring on the middle day at 5:00pm, and the children to remain in the Father's care until the commencement of the school Term; and

   2. in even numbered years, with the Father for the first half from the conclusion of school on the last day of term, and with the Mother for the second half of the holidays, with changeover occurring on the middle day at 5:00pm and the children to remain in the Mother's care until the commencement of the school Term1; and

   3. In even numbered years and continuing in all even number years thereafter, on a week about basis commencing with the Father from the conclusion of school on the last day of term until 12pm the following Saturday when they will spend time with the Mother, with changeover occurring each Saturday at 12pm until the commencement of school on the first day of in Term 1.

Special occasions

1. Save for the moratorium period and the period of supervised time, the children spend time with both parties on the following special occasions as agreed:

   1. for Christmas;

   2. for Easter;

   3. On Mother's Day for the Mother and Father's Day for the Father;

   4. On the children's birthdays.

Travel

1. Each party be at liberty to travel within Victoria with the children, without the consent of the other party, during the children's time with them pursuant to these Orders.

2. Each party be at liberty to travel interstate with the children during the children's time with them pursuant to these Orders, on the basis that:

   1. the travelling parent provides the non-travelling parent with not less than 30 days written notice of their intention to travel interstate with the children;
   2. in the event of emergency relating to the travelling parent's family members such as illness or death, 14 days' notice can be provided; and
   3. not less than 7 days prior to departure, the travelling parent shall provide the non-travelling parent with a copy of the itinerary including details and addresses of accommodation, copies of return flights, and contact details for the children while they are travelling.

3. Each party be at liberty to travel internationally to any Hague Convention country with the children, on the basis that:

   1. The proposed travel is no longer than two weeks duration, unless agreed between the parties in writing;
   2. The proposed travel does not interfere with the children's school attendance unless otherwise agreed between the parties in writing;
   3. 60 days' notice in writing of the intended travel is afforded to the non-travelling parent;
   4. Not less than 30 days prior to departure, the travelling parent shall provide the non-travelling parent with a copy of the itinerary including details and addresses of accommodation, copies of return flights, and contact details for the children while they are travelling.

4. The travelling parent shall provide make up time to the non-travelling parent equivalent to the number of overnights the children missed with the non-travelling parent at such days and times as agreed between the parties, and failing agreement, the non-travelling parent is to propose two sets of dates and times, and the travelling parent selects one of those sets.

5. Subject to the travelling parent complying with Orders 26 or 27 herein, the non-travelling parent shall not unreasonably withhold consent to the travel including to non-Hague convention Countries.

Passports

1. No less than 90 days prior to any intended international travel, the parties shall forthwith do all acts and things and sign all documents necessary to:

   1. Apply for the children's Australian passports at their equal expense;

   2. Attend upon an Australia Post Office or the Melbourne Passport Office to lodge the applications; and

   3. In the event that either party refuses or neglects to comply with these Orders, the Registrar of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia is hereby appointed to execute all documents in the name of the defaulting parent and do all things necessary to give validity and operation to these Orders.

Other

1. Within six months of these Orders being made, the Father will use his best endeavours to secure suitable accommodation within 20 minutes of all or one of the children's respective schools.
2. Within 14 days of the children coming into the Father's care pursuant to these Orders, the Father will do all acts and things necessary to enrol each of the children in an extracurricular activity and will consult the children as to which activity they would prefer before making a decision.
3. Each of the parties shall, as soon as practicable, advise and keep the other party informed of their contact details including email addresses, residential addresses and mobile numbers including any change thereto within 48 hours of any change.
4. The parties or their respective solicitors be at liberty to provide a sealed copy of these Orders to:
   1. each of the children's schools;
   2. their respecitve medical practitioners;
   3. allied health professionals;
   4. sporting or other extracurricular club attended by the children from time to time; and
   5. or any government institution or relevant body or organisation related to the medical treatment of the children that is associated with medical funding that the Father may need to provide a copy of the Orders to, to enable his communication with the same, including but not limited to Medicare, NDIS, disability support services and otherwise.

Injunctions

1. The parties be restrained from:
   1. Leaving the children or any of them in the unsupervised care of the maternal uncle [Mr Q];
   2. Communicating with each other through the children;
   3. Physically disciplining the children.
   4. Denigrating, abusing, rebuking, or marginalising the other parent or family members in the presence or hearing of the children or allowing any other person to do.
   5. Denigrating the other parent to the children's schools, treating clinicians, or sporting or other extracurricular clubs.
   6. Discussing evidence in these proceedings in the presence or hearing of the children or allowing any other person to do so.

1. The three major significant contested applications were parental responsibility, with whom the children are to live and whether the moratorium period sought by the father should be ordered.

1. Before addressing the main arenas in which this litigation was fought, it is essential to record that the orders sought by both parties were "parenting orders", as defined by the Family Law Act. When making orders in the nature of parenting orders, I am required by mandatory stipulations in the Family Law Act to only make orders once I am persuaded they are in the best interests of the children. Any order made that does not meet that criteria is invalid and liable to be set aside on appeal.
2. In arriving at orders that are in the best interests of the children, s 60CC of the Family Law Act sets out a collection of considerations in which the court must engage (again, mandatory) none of which is determinative yet all of which serve to inform the decision to be reached. The detail and content of s 60CC considerations are involved. In the circumstances of this case a proper analysis of them involves close attention and resolution of contested evidence on several issues. The considerations of s 60CC must be addressed in respect of each parenting order sought. That is for the simple reason that a particular order proposed by one party may be in the best interests of the children whereas in respect of a different parenting order, the proposed order advanced by the other parent may be in the children's best interests. Having regard to the far-reaching importance of the orders sought by each parent in this case, there is no short cut and no other way than address in detail each proposal and to apply all relevant s 60CC considerations.

1. The father sought orders for the children to live with him. The mother sought orders for the children to live with her. In order to give effect to the father's proposal, orders would be required for the residence of the children to be changed from the mother's residence to the father's residence. The children currently live with the mother so if I were persuaded to make orders in the terms the mother proposes, no change will be warranted in the children's living arrangements.
2. In the father's case outline, he made a collection of submissions that did not necessarily dissect each order sought and apply the elements to s 60CC to that proposed order. That said, under the rubric of parental responsibility (being an order sought by both parents) the father advanced contentions that incorporated submissions concerning a change of the children's residence. In essence, the father relied on the following matters to support orders being made in his favour for him to have sole parental responsibility for the children. They were that -

(a) the mother's fixed negative views of the father render co-parenting difficult;

(b) the mother has not demonstrated a willingness to promote a healthy relationship between the father and the children;

(c) the mother has displayed consistent resistance to the involvement of the father in decisions concerning the children;

(d) Ms B in her 17 March 2025 report recommended the father have sole decision making responsibility due to the mother's demonstrated inability to ensure that the children regularly attend school and engage with necessary medical and psychological appointments; and

(e) Ms B reported that the mother demonstrated a limited understanding of the children's psychological needs and the urgency of appropriate intervention which compounded the children's struggles.

1. In her case outline, the mother advanced contentions that supported her application for her to have sole decision making responsibility. In essence, the mother contended as follows -

(a) the father lacks insight about the impact of the incident in November 2022;

(b) the mother, as primary carer, should remain;

(c) the mother has greater capacity to meet the children's psychological and emotional needs;

(d) it is highly unlikely that the children will wilfully engage with the father if a change of the children's residence were ordered;

(e) the father has a history of mental health issues; and

(f) the children are likely to be at risk if the father's mental health issues are triggered.

1. It is important to observe that the father's application for sole decision making responsibility for the children's long term decisions was predicated upon an order being made for a change of residence for the children from the mother to the father.
2. In support of the father's application for sole decision making and for an order changing the children's residence, the father addressed s 60CC(2)(a) of the Family Law Act. That subsection necessitated a consideration of the arrangements that would promote the safety (including safety from being subjected to, or exposed to, family violence, abuse, neglect or harm) of the children and each person who has care of the children.
3. The father argued that upon the mother unilaterally terminating the father's time with the children in October 2022, the children's wellbeing deteriorated with the consequence that they do not now attend school. He contended that the mother has made a large number of baseless reports to authorities about the father, straining the parents' relationship and impeding the father's ability to meaningfully connect with the children.
4. In his viva voce final address, Mr James of counsel focused on the mother's prolonged inability or unwillingness to comply with existing court orders with the consequence that I can confidently proceed on the basis that the mother will not give effect to and comply with existing orders. Mr James contended that if the mother continued to not comply with orders, it will continue the children's downward spiral. Mr James said that the child Y had not attended school since July 2024. He put the matter in the following terms -

"Because of the dysfunction of the children at this stage, the fact that they are not attending school, their mental health is deteriorating, that their relationship with their father has been disrupted, that a minimum of three months is what is required in order for the father to effect change and change this downward trajectory for the 40 children."[11]

1. Mr James submitted that the existing status quo of the children being in the mother's care cannot stand. He said that in November 2022, when the mother ceased the father's time with the children, the children's circumstances have spiralled downwards in that two children do not attend school and the attendance of the other two is deteriorating. Prior to November 2022, the children all attended school regularly, W's autism was addressed, the children were not demonstrating significant mental health issues, they were engaged in extracurricular activities, they had friends and the children were living half the time with the father. Now, said Mr James, all children suffer from significant anxiety particularly the eldest three and all the children are socially isolated.
2. Mr James said the children's prognosis was poor in that, according to Ms B, their circumstances are only likely to get worse. Mr James said Ms B advised that "something has to change".
3. Mr James agreed that the court (me, in this instance) must make orders that operate prospectively, into the future. In debate with Mr James I mentioned how the evidence disclosed that one or more of the children do not bathe and dress in a manner that is noxious to his health, they do not attend school, they do not attend regular medical appointments and they do not attend to developmental issues for their own betterment. Mr James submitted that the children's refusal to attend school commenced in the mother's home. Prior to that, the father had no trouble getting the children to school when they were in his care. No hygiene issues then presented themselves. No socialisation issues emerged prior to November 2022, so Mr James submitted, and the children were progressing well academically as well as socially.
4. Mr James put the position in the forthright terms. He said the following -

"Well, I'm not going to say to your Honour that my client is the perfect parent. Parenting, particularly of adolescents, is a difficult task. And if he is put into that role, he's put into that role where he has a significant challenge. But from the evidence, he is in a better place, better prepared, has better parenting skills to arrest these problems than the mother has. The mother has demonstrably failed these children. They are in crisis."[12]

1. It was readily apparent that for the purposes of s 60CC(2)(a), Mr James of counsel emphasised matters of safety in a prospective sense, that is to say in futuro meaning that unless orders are made arresting the downward spiral of these children while presently in the care of the mother, their safety is compromised because their downward spiral will continue unabated with the consequence that their personal health is compromised as is their socialisation, their education and their overall wellbeing.
2. There was considerable merit in that contention, it seemed to me.
3. The ICL contended that the recommendations of Ms B should be accepted and implemented into final orders. Ms O'Connell for the ICL submitted that a change of residence should be ordered, as should a three month moratorium which is followed by a three month period of supervised time. The ICL proposed joint decision making upon the mother having engaged in the therapeutic process recommended by Ms B.
4. So far as the specific aspects of s 60CC(2) of the Family Law Act were concerned, Ms O'Connell submitted that I was required to consider any family violence and its history. That much was apparent from the wording of s 60CC(2)(a) which expressly incorporates reference to "family violence", a term defined expansively in s 4AB of the Family Law Act. Of course, in addition to the court being required to consider family violence, the court is also required to consider "abuse", "neglect" "or other harm". No party advanced a specific submission to the effect that a failure to ensure children attend school, or to bathe, or to engage in age-appropriate socialisation meets the characterisation of "other harm". Yet it seems to me to be beyond argument that it does. The harm is self-evident - risk of infection and disease from a failure to bathe and risk of adverse intellectual and emotional development from a failure to attend school.
5. Section 60CC(2)(a) required me to act protectively by making orders having the effect of promoting the safety of the children. The safety of the children was promoted by, among other things, my making orders that operated in such manner that the children bathed, attended school and socialised for their personal betterment. While in the mother's care it seemed to me that the children were not safe from being subjected to "other harm" of the sort I have just described.
6. As a matter of statutory construction[13] an overlap exists in promoting the children's safety from being subjected to "other harm" as mentioned in s 60CC(2)(a) when compared to s 60CC(2)(c) and (d) requiring a consideration of the psychological, developmental and emotional needs of the child as well as the capacity of each (relevantly here) parent to provide for those psychological, developmental and emotional needs of the child. In other words, orders that promote safety from being subjected to other harm within the contemplation set out above are also likely to be orders that address the developmental, psychological and emotional needs of the child and necessarily involves a consideration of each parent's capacity to provide for those issues. The parents' mental health in this case is obviously relevant to s 60CC(2)(d) considerations.
7. A parent who by reason of one or more psychological conditions lacks capacity to provide for the developmental, psychological and emotional needs of a child may very well fail to adequately provide for the developmental, psychological and emotional needs of the child with the consequence that that parent fails to keep the child safe from being subjected to (among other things) "other harm".
8. Ms O'Connell counsel for the ICL cast her submissions, broadly, along those lines, correctly in my view.
9. Ms O'Connell submitted that Mr F, psychologist, was reasonably complimentary of the father in terms of the father's psychological presentation, and that Dr G, psychiatrist, was likewise positive in relation to the father's capacity to adequately promote the best interests of the children including keeping them safe.
10. On behalf of the ICL Ms O'Connell agreed that the evidence about the father's current mental health was to be contrasted with the evidence concerning the mother's mental health. Ms O'Connell submitted that Ms B is to be understood as saying that the mother was not open, honest or forthcoming about her own mental health history. Dr N gave evidence, according to Ms O'Connell, which was deficient in relation to the mother's own mental health history. Ms O'Connell submitted that the mother was selective in the information she provided to medical practitioners and she was equally selective in the information she gave this court. Ms O'Connell submitted that the mother was not faithful to her duty to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth in the way the High Court said a witness must do.[14] Ms O'Connell submitted that the mother's answers to questions put to her to the effect that she did not recall a particular matter was illustrative of that issue. The ICL submitted that the mother engaged in impression management in the way Ms B described. Ms O'Connell submitted that the mother failed to give a true and accurate account of the mother's own mental history. Ms O'Connell submitted that it was significant that the mother called no corroborative evidence. She submitted that the overall utility of psychological evidence called in respect of the mother was necessarily diminished when the veracity of the information provided by the mother to the psychologist was deficient in important respects. That submission had a great deal to commend itself. Whether or not the mother engaged in "impression management" (and no evidence was given of the psychological meaning of that concept), it was readily apparent to me that the mother had been selective in the information she provided to the psychologists who assessed the mother for psychological issues. Ms O'Connell submitted that -

"It means that it's likely that the assessment is invalid".

1. To my way of thinking, the issue is better addressed by reference to the probative nature of the psychological assessment of the mother in circumstance where the mother was not open and honest about the information she imparted.
2. Ms O'Connell submitted that in the absence of information from the mother's treating psychologists, the court is denied the ability of reaching a level of persuasion that the mother's mental health has been, or is being, treated.
3. Again, there is considerable merit in that contention.
4. On behalf of the mother, no submission was put that addressed s 60CC(2)(a) of the Family Law Act, and in particular, psychological evidence pertaining to the mother as it bore upon the safety of the children. Instead, counsel for the mother directed submissions to the mother having "a chance"[15] to demonstrate that she is able to ensure the children attend school. That wholly missed the point to which s 60CC(2)(a) was directed. That subsection is concerned with the children's exposure to issues that compromise their safety. One of the major factual and evidentiary issues in this case is the parents' mental fabric and how that bore upon safety to the children. Counsel for the mother did not address that matter in her final address beyond the following -

"Your Honour has heard that both parties have suffered significant mental health issues, hospitalisations, diagnoses. Neither party is perfect, and so both parties have something to offer these children."[16]

1. To submit that both parties have mental health issues was blindingly obvious, as a large volume of psychological and psychiatric evidence in the case attested. That submission went nowhere. Both parties had been hospitalised. Again, that point went nowhere - indeed, it was common ground that both parties had been hospitalised. Both parties had been diagnosed with a collection of psychological conditions. Again, that much was common ground. The issue then became whether those mental health issues, those hospitalisations and those diagnoses impacted upon the safety of the children. Ms B said they did in the case of the mother. In the case of the father, Mr F and Dr G said none of those matters impacted upon the safety of the children apropos the father. The mother has either been unwilling or unable to procure the children's attendance at school. Whether that arises by reason of a permissive parenting style or her psychological issues was not the subject of careful analysis. It may not matter because the current status quo will continue unabated unless orders are made that provide a circuit-breaker of the children's downward spiral. Their emotional and psychological welfare is at stake. They have reached crisis point while in the mother's care.
2. Section 60CC(2)(b) required me to consider any views expressed by the children. Each was asked with which parent each child wished to live. W was willing to live with the father. W did not explicitly express his views on time arrangements. However, his bond with the father remains incredibly strong and the observations of the interaction with the father was profound. X was strident that she did not want to live with the father. According to Ms B's report, Y did not explicitly express his views on time arrangements. However in cross-examination Ms B stated that Y was more resistant to spending time with the father. Z was ambivalent. Z was willing to spend time with the father. Naturally, the children's wishes in relation to parental responsibility were not expressed. However, their views about the parent with whom they wish to live were expressed. No suggestion emerged in the evidence that their wishes should be wholly disregarded. However, whatever views the children expressed, s 60CC(2)(b) did not predominate and instead was one of a constellation of factors which the court is required to consider.
3. Section 60CC(2)(c) required consideration to be given to the developmental, psychological, emotional and cultural needs of the children. Consonant with the observations of the Full Court in Wagstaff v Wagstaff,[17] every word of every section must be construed so as to give meaning to the relevant provision, as was held in Commonwealth v Baume[18] and Chu Kheng Lim v Minister for Immigration, Local Government and Ethnic Affairs.[19] In other words, as s 60CC(2)(c) speaks of four matters (the developmental, psychological, emotional and cultural needs of the children) it is not a sufficient application of the subsection to blend those four elements into an amorphic mass. Cultural needs of the children were not the subject of evidence. The developmental needs of each of the children are being stymied in the current regime in which the children live. Their psychological needs are presently unmet. Their emotional needs are acute while in the mother's care.
4. Section 60CC(2)(d) required consideration to be given to the capacity of each person who has or is proposed to have parental responsibility for the children to provide for each child's developmental, psychological, emotional and cultural needs. As has been recorded above, the father (who has historically suffered from bouts of mental ill-health) functions well at present, is devoted to his children, they love him and he them, the psychologist Mr F and the psychiatrist Dr G both express highly positive views of the father's parenting capacity as does Ms B. Conversely, the psychological evidence (such as it was) in respect of the mother presented by Ms B showed the mother as a person who was managing her image. I am willing to proceed on the basis that the mother loves her children. However, it seemed to me that the mother is unable or unwilling to ensure that the children attend school and, in W's case, bathe. The mother takes the view that the children's interests are not being promoted by the father as well as they are being promoted by her. That mindset has led to the consequence of the children not attending school for prolonged periods. The mother does not demonstrate the same sense of urgency that the father demonstrates to seeing the establishment of a regime for the children to attend school thereby giving them an opportunity to flourish.
5. Each parent wants all children to live with him, in the father's case, and her, in the mother's case. That does not address the element of s 60CC(2)(d). However, s 60CC(2)(d) calls for examination of the parents' capacity to provide of the children's emotional and cultural needs. According to Mr F and Dr G, the father possesses the requisite capacity. The mother does not presently have that capacity. Ms B gave evidence that the mother needs to parent the children. She said the mother must assume the role of the leader who counsels the children into doing things that promote their development, psychological and emotional welfare and, where necessary their cultural needs. At the moment she is not doing that. She needs assistance. Until she becomes adept at providing those things, her capacity to do so as s 60CC(2)(d) provides is impaired.
6. It was not disputed that the children will benefit from a relationship with both parents, so long as it is safe for each to have that relationship. In days gone by the father had time with the children by agreement. The children no longer spend time with the children. To my mind, based on the evidence of Mr F and Dr G, it is safe for the father and the children to have a relationship. The mother called no evidence from which it could be assessed that it was safe for the children to have a relationship with her. She does not send her children to school. That impacts on their development in a major way. In my view it is inadequate for a parent to provide proper parenting while concurrently permitting the children to decide whether and if so when the children will attend school. That is for the parent. I am not persuaded that the children benefit from their time with the mother having regard to the fact that she so fundamentally abdicates her parental role of ensuring her children obtain an education. Conversely, the father historically was diligent in getting the children to school.
7. Pursuant to s 60CC(2A)(a) of the Family Law Act I am required to consider any history of family violence. Under s 60CC(2A)(b) I am required to consider any family violence order that applies.
8. The history of family violence orders and, in this case, intervention orders is long and detailed. The evidence on point was addressed by both parties. It revealed -

(a) in mid-2018 the father reported the mother to police in relation to an incident by which the mother allegedly shoved the father out of the door of her home during a changeover. Victoria Police filed an application for an intervention order listing the father and children as protected persons;

(b) in mid-2018 Victoria Police filed a cross-application for an IVO on behalf of the mother, listing the mother and children as protected persons. On the father's evidence, the mother reported that the father had acquired a gun resulting in four officers attending the father's home and placing him under arrested while the home was searched for the firearm. No firearm was located;

(c) in late 2018 the parties withdrew their respective IVOs;

(d) in mid-2021 the father filed an application for an IVO against the mother after she allegedly became volatile over a message, she placed cameras on her property facing his home and he was concerned about the children's safety in the mother's care;

(e) in mid-2021 an interim IVO was ordered naming the father and children as affected family members and the mother as the respondent;

(f) on a date in mid-2021 the father reported the mother for breaching an IVO by parking a communal driveway;

(g) in mid-2021 the mother filed a cross-application for an IVO against the father;

(h) a short time later, the father reported the mother breaching the IVO by installing security cameras;

(i) in mid-2021 an interim IVO was ordered naming the mother and children as affected family members and the father as the respondent;

(j) in late 2021 the father reported the mother to Victoria Police alleging she damaged his box stored in the garage at the former matrimonial home;

(k) in early 2022 the mother reported a breach of an IVO to Suburb UU Police by reason of the mother receiving mail from the father;

(l) in early 2022 the father reported a breach of an IVO by the mother in early 2022 concerning email and correspondence in relation to the children;

(m) in early 2022 the father reported the mother for breaching an IVO by parking behind the father at L School;

(n) in mid-2022 the father reported a breach of the IVO by the mother for allegedly filming him at the children's sports game;

(o) in mid-2022 the father reported a breach of the IVO by the mother by her coercing and abusing his children and using X to obtain personal information about him and keeping him and the children under surveillance; and

(p) in early 2023 a final FVIVO is ordered by the Suburb VV Magistrates' Court listing the father as the respondent and the mother and children as protected persons, expiring in early 2024.

1. An unusually large number of intervention orders was involved. To my mind, that reflected the intense hostility between the parties. It cannot be denied that some orders were sought in a retaliatory manner.
2. Such behaviour only served to highlight the impossibility of orders being made for equal shared parental responsibility. The parties are unable and unwilling to cooperatively parent their children. Each seeks sole parental responsibility.

1. Parental responsibility is sought by each parent. Such an order is a "parenting order" for the purposes of the Family Law Act. Under s 60CA, in deciding what parenting order to make I am required to address the best interests considerations set out in s 60CC(2).

1. In my view the father should have parental responsibility for the children. The evidence viewed in its totality revealed that he is a loving parent who interacts well and appropriately with the children. It also revealed that prior to the mother unilaterally terminating his time with the children, the children performed well at school, they were progressing (despite certain personal set-backs in some of the children) and they did not exhibit the behavioural traits they now exhibit, most noticeably by W with his refusal to bathe. The father was able to get the children to school. The children responded positively to the father's attention to them and the children did not exhibit the behaviour they currently exhibit. The father was able to get the children to medical practitioners and to appointments to see other health professionals, apparently without incident. Now, the children mostly do not willingly attend medical appointments and they attend sessions with psychologists seemingly under sufferance. One of the children laid under the professional's table. Such behaviour is very concerning.
2. A direct and unmistakeably frank opinion has been offered by Ms B. She gave her evidence against a backdrop where the psychological evidence of Mr F was overwhelmingly positive and supportive about the father as was the psychiatric evidence of Dr G. Each was challenged at length about any possible risks the father posed to the children. Each gave evidence to the effect that he posed no such risk. To that must be added the evidence of the way he discharged his parental obligations while the children were in his care, prior to the mother unilaterally terminating his time with the children, which as has been essayed above, was overwhelmingly positive. I am persuaded that the father is child-focused, that his psychological and psychiatric issues from which he previously suffered are in check that he is regularly and diligently obtaining ongoing psychological and psychiatric help and that the father is functioning in such manner as to be able to adequately address the children's needs of all descriptions.
3. The same cannot be said of the mother.
4. The precise details of her psychiatric issues and psychological conditions were not the subject of evidence from the persons who treat her on a regular ongoing basis. That denied the court the very considerable advantage of deeply understanding her behaviour. It also denied the court the opportunity of obtaining evidence from her treating mental health practitioners about the likelihood of regression by the mother, or equally importantly, her prospects of behaving irrationally and in a manner antithetically to the children's best interests into the future Ms B provided an exceptionally helpful report. However, she too was denied information on which to base some of her observations. The mother's failure to adduce evidence from her treating mental health practitioners did not assist the mother's case in this litigation.
5. That said, enough information was available to me to form a view about the parenting style of the father, on the one hand and of the mother, on the other hand.
6. I have already described above my assessment of the father's parenting style. He is genuinely motivated by a desire to ensure his children have the greatest available opportunity to fulfill their potential, recognising the personal issues they confront on a daily basis.
7. The mother is not similarly child-focused. She does not work. She adopted a highly permissive approach to parenting, essentially, leaving it to the children to decide what each wants to do on a daily basis. She is aware that W has issues with personal hygiene and has not showered or bathed for over two years. Yet she did nothing to change that, preferring instead to observe, never taking the lead role that a parent must take to address issues with children, about which Ms B reported. That permissive attitude towards parenting has permitted the children to not attend school over an unacceptably prolonged period. By not attending school the children have not progressed in an educational sense and they have not experienced the socialisation of which Ms B wrote in her very detailed report. That has had the effect of disadvantaging the children in their emotional development about which Ms B wrote.
8. The mother said she is unable to get the children to go to school I find that evidence wholly unsatisfactory. As a matter of common human experience, parents across the Commonwealth of Australia, in cities and in the country, across all cultural divides get their children to school each day. It is an abdication of parental responsibility to do otherwise. These children have not attended school for a considerable time while in the mother's care. Whether or not the mother personally values education is largely beside the point. By failing to get the children in this case to attend school, the mother is actively disadvantaging her children in society. That is not in their best interests.
9. In addition, the evidence revealed that the mother has not been diligent in getting the children to their appointments with health professionals. These children have particular and very precise needs that call for regular attention. By her failure to take the children to their heath professionals the mother further disadvantages the children.
10. Ms B was unambiguous in her views about parental responsibility. It was in the father's favour.
11. I agree.
12. I was left with no doubt (or, expressed according to the civil standard, on the balance of probabilities) that the father should be ordered to have parental responsibility for the children. The mother comprehensively failed to discharge her duties. In her care the children have deteriorated in their development. That must stop.
13. I order the father to have sole parental responsibility. The precise form of the order is as sought by the father, reposed in the early pages of these orders.

1. Each parent sought orders for the children to live with him or her. It is inconceivable for the children to continue to live with the mother in the way they have for the last two years and for them to change their current patterns of conduct by, say, regularly attending school. Only with an order for the children to live with the father can some meaningful circuit break occur in the existing behaviour of the children. I am persuaded on the balance of probabilities that an order for the children to live with the father is in the children's best interests. I make such an order. To the extent that the mother sought an order for her to have parental responsibility for the children, I dismiss her application for an order for her to have parental responsibility for the children.
2. Ms B gave evidence that the children should live with the father. He sought an order in those terms. The mother sought an order for the children to live with her. Ms B did not recommend for the children to live with the mother.
3. If the children live with the mother pursuant to an order of the court, I take the view that there is a high degree of probability that the children will continue to not attend school. I also take the view that the mother is unwilling or unable to procure the children's attendance at school. I also take the view that the mother is unable or unwilling to ensure that W's habits in relation to his personal hygiene will change.
4. The children's circumstances are dire.
5. The mother has no proposal to address the children's downward spiral - whether by ensuring the children attend school or by ensuring their personal hygiene is proper.
6. Conversely, the father has attended or participated in a collection of courses about parenting. In addition, the father gave evidence that his present accommodation can include the children. The mother did not dispute the adequacy of the father's accommodation arrangements for the children.
7. In my view the children's best interests are advanced by the children living with the father. The children's developmental, psychological and emotional needs are not being met by the mother while the children live with the mother. Ms B gave evidence to the effect that the children's current circumstances will not change while they live with the mother.
8. No counsel addressed me about any authorities that considered a change of residence application. For that matter, not a single authority was cited by any counsel in this case.
9. In my view, an order is appropriately made in the best interests of the children for the children to cease living with the mother and to commence living with the father forthwith. Unless such an order is made, the children's downward spiral will continue unabated. I make an order in accordance with the father's proposal in relation to the children living with the father. I dismiss the mother's application for the children to live with her.
10. Counsel for the ICL supported the father's proposal in respect of the children living with the father.

1. The orders proposed by the father, in which the ICL agreed, involve not only the children changing residence but also a moratorium in respect of the mother's interaction with the children. The rationale for the imposition of the moratorium was explained by Ms B. In essence, the ordering of a moratorium assists in achieving the success of the operation of the orders in relation to parental responsibility, the live with arrangements and the children's time with the father. Put differently, unless the moratorium is ordered the children are at risk of defying the court orders and returning to the mother's care in such manner as wholly thwarts the purpose and intent of the orders.
2. The mother was opposed to the making of orders in the nature of a moratorium. The evidence in support of the moratorium was considered, well credentialed and balanced. It was not recommended lightly. Having heard extensive debate about ordering the moratorium or refusing it, on balance I agree that the successful engagement by the children with their father can only be achieved if the mother's adverse influence over the children is eradicated.
3. Ordering a moratorium is not without precedent.[20]
4. The arena of debate in relation to a moratorium centred around the duration of it. In support of the grant of the moratorium was the concept that the children will not be free of the mother's influence without it. Over the last two years the children have been kept from the father. That must stop. The children must be permitted to forge a proper relationship with the father, uninfluenced by the mother for a particular period.
5. The period recommended by Ms B was three months.
6. In the moratorium period, the mother must obtain psychological assistance and treatment to help her overcome the conditions about which Ms B reported.
7. Once the moratorium period elapses, subject to the mother having obtained in the period intervening between the date of these orders and the expiration of the moratorium period the requested psychological treatment recommended by Ms B, then her time with the children will be unsupervised for a further period in the manner set out in the early pages of these reasons.
8. Unless orders are made in those terms, the children are at high risk. I am persuaded that orders in the nature of a moratorium must be made in the form proposed by the father.
9. Orders for time thereafter will also take the form advanced by the father.

I certify that the preceding two hundred and fifty-three (253) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment of the Honourable Justice Wilson.

[1] Makita (Australia) Pty Ltd v Sprowles [2001] NSWCA 305; (2001) 52 NSWLR 705, Honeysett v The Queen (2014) 253 CLR 122, Dasreef Pty Ltd v Hawchar (2011) 243 CLR 288 and Lang v The Queen [2023] HCA 29; (2023) 278 CLR 323.

[2] Transcript 5 June 2025, p. 265 lines 13 - 17.

[3] Transcript 5 June 2025, p. 270 lines 1 - 6.

[4] Transcript 6 June 2025, p. 369 lines 10 - 26.

[5] Transcript 6 June 2025, p. 370 lines 22 - 39.

[6] Transcript 6 June 2025, p. 371 lines 5 - 33.

[7] That was an obvious error which I took her to mean December 2024.

[8] Ms T did not provide any medical or psychological verification in support of a conclusion about an autism diagnosis.

[9] Dr G's exact words were him regaining "custody of his children". The word "custody" in reference to care for children has since been jettisoned.

[10] A colloquialism that is so abstract as to defy meaning in a judgment.

[11] Transcript 11 June 2025, p. 442 lines 37 - 41.

[12] Transcript 11 June 2025, p. 447 lines 18 - 23.

[13] Project Blue Sky Inc v Australian Broadcasting Commission [1998] HCA 35; (1998) 194 CLR 355, Taylor v Public Service Board [1976] HCA 36; (1976) 137 CLR 208, Cooper Brookes (Wollongong) Pty Ltd v Federal Commissioner of Taxation [1981] HCA 26; (1981) 147 CLR 297, K & S Lake City Freighters Pty Ltd v Gordon & Gotch Ltd [1985] HCA 48; (1985) 157 CLR 309, Alcan (NT) Alumina Pty Ltd v Commissioner of Territory Revenue [2009] HCA 41; (2009) 239 CLR 27, Northern Territory v Collins [2008] HCA 49; (2008) 235 CLR 619 to name but a few.

[14] Kuhl v Zurich Financial Services Australia Ltd [2011] HCA 11; (2011) 243 CLR 361.

[15] Transcript 11 June 2025, p. 432 line 25.

[16] Transcript 11 June 2025, p. 436 lines 29 - 33.

[17] (2022) FedCFamC1A 119 (at [88]) per Wilson J.

[18] [1905] HCA 11; (1905) 2 CLR 405.

[19] (1992) 176 CLR 1.

[20] Viteri & Manfredi [2024] FedCFamC1F 858.