29 Notwithstanding his son's obvious needs and demands, the position of the applicant in this case is significantly different from that of the applicant in Nguyen v The Queen [2001] WASCA 72, which was relied upon for the applicant. In that case, the applicant and her de facto husband, who were both Vietnamese, had been convicted after trial of an offence of attempting to obtain possession of a trafficable quantity of heroin. The applicant was sentenced to 8 years' imprisonment, with a non-parole period of 3 years and 7 months. The co-offender was sentenced to 12 years' imprisonment with a minimum of 6 years. The applicant had four children, ranging in age from 16 to 6 years. At the time of the offence, the three youngest children were living with the applicant and the co-offender, who was the father of the youngest child. An attempt by the applicant before she was sentenced to have the father of her three elder children come from Sydney to assist with the care of the children failed and, at the time of sentencing, the children, who were aged between 6 and 16, were being cared for by her business partner and boarder, a middle-aged divorced man of Chinese descent who managed a restaurant which required him to work between 3.00 pm and 11.00 pm. Their relationship was said to be tenuous. There was no family support available to care for the children, who were presenting serious disciplinary problems. In the very unusual circumstances of that case, the appellant was released on a recognizance to be of good behaviour. Whilst it is appropriate, having regard to the heavy burden that will rest upon the boy's mother, to make some allowance for the position with respect to the applicant's son, a very substantial allowance on this basis would not, I consider, be justified in this case.