//
[2025] NSWSC 955
General information, not legal advice.
Supreme Court of NSW
2025-08-21
McGrath J
Original judgment source is linked above.
Zoe will write a short plain-English summary of this judgment and email it to you for free: what it was about, what the court decided and why. It can take up to a minute.
General information, not legal advice.
Or create a free account to save it and ask Zoe follow-up questions.
Source: NSW Caselaw (www.caselaw.nsw.gov.au). Converted to plain text by ZoeLaw. Not the official version.
Medium Neutral Citation: The Adoption of Luna Amelia Abbott-Wood [2025] NSWSC 955
Hearing dates: 6 August 2025
Date of orders: 21 August 2025
Decision date: 21 August 2025
Jurisdiction: Equity - Adoptions List
Before: McGrath J
Decision: Orders for adoption made, consent of birth parents dispensed with, change of name approved and adoption plans approved
Catchwords: CHILD WELFARE — Adoption — where proposed adoptive parents are child’s current foster parents —whether adoption order is in child’s best interests — whether birth parents’ consent should be dispensed with — whether change of name should be approved — whether adoption plans are in the best interests of child and proper in the circumstances — HELD — adoption order is clearly preferable and in child’s best interests — consent dispense order is in the best interests of child — change of name approved — adoption plans are in the best interests of child and proper in the circumstances — adoption plans registered
Legislation Cited: Adoption Act 2000 (NSW), ss 8, 23, 28, 46, 50, 52, 54, 61, 66, 67, 72, 90, 91, 95, 101, 180
Births, Deaths and Marriages Act 1995 (NSW), ss 25A, 45
Children and Young Persons (Care and Protection) Act 1998 (NSW), ss 61, 82, 90
Cases Cited: Adoption of NG [2014] NSWSC 680
Director General Department of Human Services; Re M [2011] NSWSC 369
Re A Child Proposed for Adoption [2019] NSWSC 1653
Re Adoption of RCC and RZA [2015] NSWSC 813
Re B (A Minor) [2001] UKHL 70; [2002] 1 All ER 641
Re B (Adoption: Jurisdiction to Set Aside) [1995] Fam 239
Re the Adoption of CCS and FLS [2019] NSWSC 71
Secretary, New South Wales Department of Family and Community Services v MB [2017] NSWSC 1087
Category: Principal judgment
Parties: Secretary, New South Wales Department of Communities and Justice (Plaintiff)
P Wood (First Defendant)
Representation: Counsel:
R D Turnbull (Plaintiff)
P Wood (Self-represented)
Solicitors:
Crown Solicitor’s Office (Plaintiff)
File Number(s): 2024/00450751
Publication restriction: This judgment has been anonymised pursuant to s 180 of the Adoption Act 2000 (NSW)
By summons filed on 26 November 2024, the Secretary of the New South Wales Department of Communities and Justice (DCJ) seeks an order that Luna Amelia Abbott-Wood, now 3 years of age, be adopted by the proposed adoptive parents, Lily Patil and James Patil pursuant to the Adoption Act 2000 (NSW) (Act).
The Secretary also seeks orders dispensing with the consent of Luna’s birth parents, Molly Abbott and Peter Lawrence Wood; an order approving the name “Patil” as the surname with “Luna Amelia” as the given names; an order correcting Luna’s birth certificate to correct a misspelling of Peter’s middle name stated to be “Lawrance”; and approval and registration of both the maternal and paternal adoption plans.
In this judgment, I will refer to each of the family members and other individuals involved by their first names for convenience and without intending any disrespect. Where appropriate, I will refer to Lily and James collectively as the Patils. In this published version of this judgment, all persons referred to have been assigned pseudonyms in keeping with s 180 of the Act.
Luna was born on 13 March 2022 in New South Wales. Luna was born at 36 weeks gestation and was admitted to the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit following her birth due to being jittery and was there reported to be withdrawing from an unknown substance.
Luna is sensitive, cheeky, kind, playful and smart. Luna enjoys music and keeping busy. She loves to dance (including, but not exclusively to, the Wiggles) and her favourite film is (quite understandably) “Moana”. For the uninitiated, Moana tells the tale of an adventurous and strong-willed teenager who is chosen by the ocean itself to undertake a journey of heroism and self-discovery to restore balance to her island home and save her people.
Having only recently reached 3 years of age, Luna is still too young to fully understand or appreciate the complexities inherent in the adoption process. However, the Patils have displayed an outstanding level of commitment to maintaining open communication with, and Luna’s connection to, Luna’s birth family. That commitment has been unwavering and is particularly commendable given the unique challenges and circumstances of this case.
Happily, Luna is currently in good physical health with concerns regarding her left ear hearing and a turn in her left foot having resolved with age (together with some at–home physiotherapy exercises overseen by Lily). Luna’s growth and development are age appropriate, and Luna is meeting all developmental milestones. By all accounts, Luna is a healthy eater and an active girl with no known health concerns.
It is abundantly clear from all the evidence before me that Luna is surrounded by love and has formed a close connection to, and secure attachment with, both Lily and James.
Lily and James parent another child, Harry Patil, who was adopted by them in December 2020 and is now seven years of age. Luna has the benefit of living with, and learning from, Harry’s own adoption journey. This includes Harry’s grasp and discussion of adoption at a level commensurate with his age, including frequent use of terminology such as “tummy mummy”, “forever mummy and daddy” and “forever family”.
Lily (36 years of age) and James (38 years of age) have been married since 15 September 2018. They reside together with Harry and Luna in their home in New South Wales.
Lily is trained in nursing, critical care nursing, training and assessing, and she is employed as a Registered Nurse. Lily has resided in New South Wales for 25 years and is an Australian citizen. James is trained in construction management, building and carpentry, and he is employed as a State Manager. James has resided in New South Wales for 37 years and is an Australian citizen.
The Patils are authorised carers who have had the care and responsibility for Luna under out-of-home care arrangements pursuant to the Children and Young Persons (Care and Protection) Act 1998 (NSW) (the Care Act).
Luna has lived with Lily, James and Harry continuously since 5 December 2022, when Luna was just eight months old.
Molly (28 years of age) and Peter (33 years of age) are Luna’s birth parents. According to DCJ records, Molly separated from Peter on 2 November 2021 following a domestic violence incident which resulted in a “no contact” Apprehended Domestic Violence Order (ADVO) protecting Molly from Peter.
Luna refers to Molly as “Mummy Molly” and to Peter as “Daddy Peter”.
Molly has had a difficult life and has her own child protection history.
In 2009, Molly was removed from her mother, along with her siblings, and placed with her maternal grandmother having been exposed to family violence, neglect and drug use.
Molly has diagnosed depression and anxiety. At the time Luna was assumed into the care of the Minister, Molly was not taking the medication prescribed to her for those conditions and was experiencing mental health issues related to them.
It is also apparent from the material before me that Molly has struggled with both prescription and illicit drug abuse, including synthetic cannabis, methamphetamine and intravenous drugs. Molly has a history of being unable to manage her emotional responses, which has resulted in her lashing out physically, including by way of self-harm.
All of these matters have necessarily and understandably affected Molly’s capacity to care for and parent her children, including Luna. Four of Molly’s five surviving children have been removed from her care at different times and are subject to parental responsibility orders until they attain the age of 18 years.
The child who remains in Molly’s care is George Abbott. George is Luna’s maternal sibling and is 1 year old. While parental responsibility for George remains with Molly, George has come to the notice of the DCJ and his DCJ Case Manager is Ms Keira Henry.
Initially, Molly expressed opposition to the proposed adoption of Luna and repeatedly indicated an intention to file an application under s 90 of the Care Act (which provides for the recission or variation of care orders) seeking that Luna be restored to her care. These sentiments were expressed in both 2023 and early 2024 to a Senior Case Manager from Barnardos, Derrinda Doherty, who held day-to-day responsibility for casework in relation to Luna from 27 June 2023 to 29 October 2024. No such s 90 application was ever brought.
Molly maintained her opposition to Luna’s adoption until about 19 July 2024, at which time Molly was residing together with George at an intensive supported living facility for a 12-month live-in parenting program to address issues relating to parenting, drugs, alcohol and mental health. It was during this program that Molly informed Ms Henry that, while she considered adoption was best for Luna, she could not “sign anything” to that effect. Molly explained that it had not been an easy decision “not to fight for her children” (including Luna) but that she wanted what was best for them. Molly stated that she would not contest Luna’s adoption because Luna “has only ever known Lily and James, it would traumatise her to take her away from them, they are her family”. Molly added that she hoped Luna would one day understand why she was adopted.
In August 2024, Molly again expressed her support for Luna’s adoption by the Patils, stating:
I just want the best for her, where she is what she needs, she is an amazing child and that is because of James and Lily not me, adoption is the best for Luna.
Molly did not complete the program and is now residing with her father.
Molly has not filed an appearance, did not appear at the hearing and has not given evidence in these proceedings. Molly was personally served with notice of the adoption application on 11 December 2024 and has stated that, while she would not contest the proposed adoption, she would not formally consent to the proposed adoption order.
As there is no formal instrument of consent pursuant to s 61 of the Act in respect of Molly, if an order for the adoption of Luna is to be made, it will be necessary for Molly’s consent to be dispensed with pursuant to s 67 of the Act.
Molly has not signed the maternal adoption plan.
While Peter’s name did not initially appear on Luna’s birth certificate, both Molly and Peter have confirmed that Peter is Luna’s biological father, as did two separate DNA tests conducted in 2023.
Peter also has his own child protection history and struggles with his mental health, including a reported diagnosis of paranoid schizophrenia.
Peter is presently incarcerated and appeared at the final hearing of these proceedings, as on other occasions, via audiovisual link. It is clear from the evidence before me that Peter has been periodically in and out of prison over the past two years.
Like Molly, Peter quickly recognised the tremendous love and care shown to Luna by the Patils and Peter has expressed both gratitude and happiness that Luna is with nice people who plainly love and care for her. However, unfortunately, these sentiments have been inconsistent and have on occasion been overshadowed by instances of aggression toward the Patils, specifically Lily, as well as self-described “childish” behaviour on Peter’s part.
Peter has oscillated between expressing opposition to, and support for, Luna’s adoption. On balance, Peter expressed support for the Patils continuing to care for and parent Luna but opposed the finality which attends an adoption order. The position now is that Peter withdrew his opposition to the adoption at the preliminary hearing, but he has not formally consented to it.
In July 2023, Peter expressed opposition to Luna’s adoption and foreshadowed a s 90 application of his own. That application did not eventuate.
In February 2024, during a visit with Luna, Peter expressed his desire that Luna be assumed into his care and live with him. At the same visit, Peter stated that he felt adoption would be best for Luna and that he just wanted some reassurance as to visitation and contact with Luna.
In October 2024, Peter had a conversation with Ms Doherty in which he explained that he had just been released from prison and that his life was not the best at that time. Peter maintained his opposition to the adoption but stated that if Luna could not be in his care, then she needed to remain with the Patils.
On 11 March 2025, Peter was personally served with notice of the adoption application.
On 11 April 2025, Peter filed an appearance opposing the proposed adoption order.
On 15 July 2025, at the preliminary hearing:
Peter indicated via his solicitor that he consents to (or does not oppose) the proposed adoption of Luna by the Patils (T1);
Peter then proceeded to explain that the only thing he opposed is the proposed change to Luna’s name. Specifically, Peter took issue with the proposed absence of “Wood” in Luna’s name because all of his children have “Wood” in their surname, Luna has a lot of siblings, and he does not want Luna to forget him. Peter proposed “Luna Amelia Abbott-Wood Patil” as an alternative name (T1, T4, T6); and
to his credit, Peter apologised to Lily for his past behaviour and thanked both Lily and James for parenting Luna (T3).
On 6 August 2025, at the final hearing:
Peter indicated a willingness to sign the paternal adoption plan (T2, T4); and
Peter made submissions in opposition to the proposed change of Luna’s name. The essence of Peter’s submissions was that the retention of “Wood” in Luna’s name would maintain Luna’s connection to him, her siblings and her extended family. This is an issue I have addressed later in these reasons.
Although Peter no longer opposes the adoption, there is no formal instrument of consent pursuant to s 61 of the Act in respect of Peter and so if an order for the adoption of Luna is to be made, it will be necessary for Peter’s consent to be dispensed with pursuant to s 67 of the Act.
Following the hearing, Peter signed the paternal adoption plan.
Luna has seven siblings, one of whom has sadly passed away.
Luna has three siblings born to both Molly and Peter:
Neville Wood, who was born in June 2017 and is 8 years of age. Between 2016 and 2019, the DCJ received 22 Risk of Significant Harm (ROSH) reports and 5 non-ROSH reports regarding Neville and concerning identified risks of pre-natal harm, domestic violence, substance abuse, neglect, sexual harm, non-accidental injury, psychological harm and physical abuse. In July 2019, Neville was assumed into the care of the Minister. On 6 July 2020, final orders were made in the Children**’**s Court of New South Wales placing Neville under the parental responsibility of the Minister until he attains the age of 18 years. Neville resides with authorised permanent foster carers in New South Wales.
Rose Abbott, who was born in January 2019 and passed away at 3 weeks of age from suspected sudden infant death syndrome. Windsor Police concluded that it had appeared Rose had rolled into a face-down position while sleeping.
Ariana Abbott-Wood, who was born in May 2021 and is 4 years of age. The DCJ received six ROSH reports in relation to the then unborn Ariana. Those reports raised concerns relating to domestic violence, mental health, parental substance abuse, homelessness and serious prior neglect and abuse. In May 2021, Ariana was assumed into the care of the Minister. On 11 April 2022, final orders were made in the Children’s Court placing Ariana under the parental responsibility of the Minister until she attains the age of 18 years. Ariana resides together with Neville, with the same authorised permanent foster carers. Both Neville and Ariana are the subject of an application for adoption, separate to these proceedings.
Additionally, Luna has two maternal siblings and two paternal siblings:
Ginny Abbott, who is a maternal sibling, born in September 2012 and is 12 years of age. Molly was just 15 years old when she gave birth to Ginny. The DCJ began case management prenatally in relation to Ginny owing to Molly’s then significant involvement with Police, as well as concerns regarding family violence. In September 2013, Ginny was assumed into care owing to concerns regarding Molly’s living arrangements, illicit drug use and ability to provide a safe and stable environment for Ginny. On 5 September 2014, final orders were made in the Children’s Court allocating all aspects of parental responsibility to Ginny’s maternal great grandmother, Katie, until Ginny attains the age of 18 years. Ginny resides together with Katie and Katie’s partner, Godric, at Werrington Downs, New South Wales.
George (mentioned above) who is the youngest of Luna’s siblings and is the only sibling who resides with either of Molly or Peter. George resides together with Molly in Penrith, New South Wales.
Rolanda Wood, who is a paternal sibling and is 10 years old. Rolanda resides together with her mother, Angelina, in South Windsor, New South Wales.
Ronald Wood, who is a paternal sibling and is 2 years old. Ronald is the subject of a guardianship order in favour of his maternal grandmother, Susan, and he resides together with her in Doyalson, New South Wales.
Between 12 September 2021 and 13 March 2022, the DCJ received seven pre-natal ROSH reports in relation to Luna, raising concerns about the risk of pre-natal harm, domestic violence, parental substance abuse, mental health, homelessness and serious prior abuse and neglect.
On 15 March 2022 (two days after Luna was born), Luna was assumed into care at a hospital.
On 17 March 2022 (four days after Luna was born), the DCJ completed a safety assessment at the hospital to assess the possibility of Luna residing with Molly. This assessment determined this course of action would be unsafe based on the high likelihood of serious harm befalling Luna upon leaving the hospital given Molly’s instability, lack of adequate housing, unaddressed child protection concerns and limited capacity for support given her transience. It was also noted that, at the time of Luna’s birth, there was an ADVO in place protecting Molly from Peter. The DCJ determined that safety planning was unable to mitigate the identified risk factors which would place Luna in danger following her discharge from hospital.
On 18 March 2022, Luna was discharged from hospital and placed with a Barnardos temporary foster care (TFC) carer upon her discharge. She remained in this placement until 4 December 2022.
On 28 October 2022, the Patils were approved to care for a second child of either gender aged 0–2 years (having been previously approved prior to their adoption of Harry).
On 23 November 2022, the Patils were matched with Luna. The matching approval highlighted that the Patils would be able to meet Luna’s needs and that they demonstrated commitment to, and understanding of, the importance of maintaining Luna’s contact with her birth family.
On 5 December 2022, Luna transitioned into the Patils’ care under interim orders and she has remained there ever since.
On 9 December 2022, the Patils’ authorisation was changed to include short-term care for a specific child, Luna, pending the granting of a final care order.
On 27 June 2023, the Patils were approved as dually authorised carers and proposed adoptive parents to care for Luna.
On 1 August 2023, Luna’s case plan was changed to provide an adoption goal with the Patils as the proposed adoptive parents.
On 22 March 2022, the DCJ filed an application initiating care proceedings in the Children’s Court in relation to Luna pursuant to s 61(2) of the Care Act (Children**’**s Court proceedings).
On 23 March 2022, an interim order was made allocating parental responsibility for Luna to the Minister until further order.
Both Molly and Peter participated in the Children’s Court proceedings. During the Children’s Court proceedings, no suitable family members were identified as being able to care for Luna.
On 30 March 2022, the DCJ filed a Summary of the Proposed Plan in relation to Luna. This document outlined various changes required to be made by the parents in order for the DCJ to consider restoring Luna to their care.
On 30 June 2022, the DCJ filed the Care Plan in relation to Luna in the Children’s Court. The Care Plan stated there was no realistic possibility of restoring Luna to either of the parents’ care due to unaddressed child protection concerns.
On 16 June 2023, the DCJ filed an Amended Care Plan in relation to Luna in the Children’s Court. The Amended Care Plan recommended adoption as the best permanency pathway for Luna, as it would enable Luna to have primary carers to focus on who will prioritise her physical and emotional needs, ensuring that she grows and develops within a safe, stable, secure and positive home environment.
On 22 June 2023, the Children’s Court made final orders allocating parental responsibility to the Minister in relation to Luna until she attains 18 years of age. These orders remain in effect.
On 18 January 2024 and 15 May 2024, the DCJ filed reports pursuant to s 82 of the Care Act in the Children’s Court (s 82 Reports), which provided an update in relation to Luna’s placement and contact with the birth family:
The s 82 Report filed 18 January 2024 emphasised the “loving attachment” that Luna had then formed with Lily and James, with Luna referring to them as “mum/mummy” and “dad/daddy” respectively. That s 82 Report noted the complexities within Luna’s birth family and their relationships which can make organising regular contact with each of them logistically challenging. It also noted that combined visits were not always practical or in Luna’s best interests due to the extensive travel time involved. Despite this, the Patils have worked collaboratively with Luna’s birth family to facilitate, supervise and support visits with Luna at times and in places conducive to Luna’s age and development. The report highlighted that the Patils consider it very important for Luna to understand who her birth family members are and recognise them in real life, not just from photographs. Whenever possible, visits with Luna’s birth parents are inclusive of extended family.
The s 82 Report filed 15 May 2024 highlighted the relationship between Luna and Harry, noting that the pair are relaxed in each other’s company and play well alongside each other. That s 82 Report noted that Harry had started to attend school and Luna would miss him. It also noted that the Patils have continued to support Luna with all her day-to-day needs and that they provide Luna with a routine that fosters independence (including in respect of foods she would like to eat or clothes she would like to wear), and encourages incidental learning, such as the problem solving involved in putting her shoes on or packing toys away. The Patils had by this time moved into their newly renovated home and Luna was very comfortable there, proudly showcasing all her special toys in her decorated bedroom. As in the previous s 82 Report, it was noted that, where possible, the Patils try to combine family visits to lessen the travel burden on Luna but, given the family dynamics and “various Apprehended Violence Orders in place”, this can prove difficult. Most importantly, Luna’s speaking, confidence, learning and social skills had noticeably improved since the last s 82 Report was prepared some four months previously and, by all measures, Luna was continuing to thrive in the Patils’ care.
The Patils have demonstrated an extraordinary and unwavering commitment (which could also be well-described as heroic) to including Luna’s extensive birth family in her life. The Patils have developed a Life Story B****ook for Luna, which they keep on an iPad so that it can be updated regularly and so Luna can access it freely. The Life Story Book contains photographs, texts and captions, including information about, and photos of, Luna’s birth family. Some of those photos also displayed around the Patils’ home.
Lily has also prepared a B****irth F****amily S****crapbook, which is shared among the siblings for contributions by way of photographs, drawings and letters between themselves. Additionally, the Patils support Luna developing her emerging sense of identity by having a Life Story J****ournal that is age appropriate and provides a fun way for Luna to explore who is in her extended family.
Foremost, the Patils have been exemplary in their commitment to navigating and facilitating contact between Luna and her extended birth family. They have provided Luna’s birth family with an email address and phone number especially for contact with Luna and maintaining this connection. They provide updates and photos to all family members who wish to receive them.
The Patils are open about adoption and committed to speaking of, and to, Luna’s birth family with love, respect and positivity to ensure both Luna and her birth family can build and maintain a strong connection. Tellingly, their primary reason for doing so is because they believe this approach is in Luna’s best interests and is the most likely course to achieve the best outcome for Luna as she grows older.
Molly: The Care Plan and Amended Care Plan for Luna both recommend a minimum of four contact visits per year with Molly. Contact between Luna and Molly is generally positive, with visits often including Neville, Ariana and now George. The Patils have been facilitating visits with Molly independently since April 2023. In general, contact and visitation with Molly can fairly be described as sporadic (owing to Molly frequently having to cancel or reschedule). When visits have occurred, Luna has often clung to Lily. In August 2024, Molly had a conversation with Ms Doherty during which Molly advised that she preferred not to visit with Luna again until Luna was older and wanted to see her. Molly explained that it was emotionally difficult to see Luna knowing that she would never live with her and that Molly just wanted her “baby girl to be happy”. Molly stated that “James and Lily have done an amazing job and they are [Luna’s] parents”. Following this, Molly has received updates over the phone from Lily and had a call with Luna over FaceTime. The recommendations in the Care Plan and Amended Care Plan are reflected in the maternal adoption plan (set out in more detail below), which Molly has not signed.
Peter: The Care Plan and Amended Care Plan for Luna both recommend a minimum of four contact visits per year with Peter. Contact with Peter has been difficult given his periods of incarceration. Additionally, while incarcerated, Peter has been subject to a child protection alert with Corrective Services restricting any visitation with any children, either in-person or via audiovisual link. When out of custody, visitation with Peter is also complex given that there are (or least as of May 2024) extant ADVOs which prevent Peter from being in the presence of various members of his family. Consequently, any visitation between Luna, Peter and her extended paternal family must usually occur separately. When contact visits between Luna and Peter have been possible, they have generally gone well. On at least four occasions, scheduled visits have not taken place, usually at the request of Peter. One contact visit on 10 December 2023 was cancelled by the Patils after Peter failed to confirm the visitation or respond to text messages from the Patils sent in the preceding days. Following this, Peter sent abusive messages to the Patils expressing his anger at missing out on seeing Luna. On 11 December 2023, the Patils responded to those text messages asking for Peter’s cooperation, explaining that confirming contact visits 24 hours in advance would allow them to plan Luna’s outings with minimal disruption to her and they advised Peter that they would not respond to threatening or abusive messages. Contact visits subsequently took place in February and April 2024 and these were mostly positive. Luna has not had contact with Peter in 2025 owing to his incarceration. The recommendations in the Care Plan and Amended Care Plan are reflected in the paternal adoption plan (set out in more detail below), which Peter signed following the hearing in this matter.
Siblings: The Care Plan and Amended Care Plan for Luna recommended a minimum of twelve contact visits per year between Luna, Neville and Ariana. These recommendations are reflected in both the maternal and paternal adoption plans. Visits between the three of them have occurred regularly ever since Luna was placed with the Patils. They now occur at home or in parks for playdates on approximately a monthly basis. Happily, Neville and Ariana’s proposed adoptive parents have formed a strong bond with the Patils, and each are committed to supporting the children growing together and forming strong and loving bonds of their own.
Maternal siblings: Whenever possible, visits with Luna’s maternal family are inclusive of Luna’s older maternal sister, Ginny and her great-grandmother, Katie with whom Ginny resides. The Care Plan and Amended Care Plan recommend a minimum of six contact visits per year between Luna and Ginny. Four of these visits are face-to-face while two of them occur via FaceTime. Ginny also receives letters and photo updates in relation to Luna from Lily. George is not subject to a contact recommendation (as he was born after the Care Plans were compiled) but Luna is able to see George when face-to-face visits with Molly occur. Contact arrangements in respect of both Ginny and George have been included within the maternal adoption plan.
Paternal siblings: The Care Plan and Amended Care Plan recommend a minimum of six contact visits per year between Luna and Rolanda and between Luna and Ronald. Luna has enjoyed face-to-face visits with both Rolanda and Ronald, as well as sharing FaceTime calls with Rolanda (occasionally including Neville and Ariana). Luna and Ronald are very close in age and when they do see each other they tend to gravitate towards each other and do the same things. For this reason, visits often take place in a park that has enough equipment for them to share and play together. Contact with Susan (Ronald’s maternal grandmother, with whom he resides) has proven difficult, but the Patils have maintained photo and message updates with Susan and will continue to reach out and encourage contact between Luna and Ronald. Contact arrangements in respect of both Rolanda and Ronald have been included within the paternal adoption plan.
Other family members: Luna is fortunate to have many other significant people in her life, with her extended family including:
Pomona, her maternal grandmother. The DCJ did not make a recommendation for contact between Luna and Pomona in either of the Care Plan or the Amended Care Plan but Pomona attends Luna’s visits with her maternal family when she can. Contact between Pomona and Luna has been included in the maternal adoption plan.
Cornelius, her maternal grandfather. In the Care Plan and Amended Care Plan, the DCJ recommended a minimum of four visits per year with Cornelius. While Cornelius has requested not to have any visits with Luna for the time being, he can attend Luna’s visits with the maternal family if he wishes.
Katie, her maternal great grandmother and Godric, her maternal step-great grandfather. In the Care Plan and Amended Care Plan, the DCJ recommended a minimum of four visits per year between Luna and Katie. Contact with Katie has been positive with each of Katie and the Patils taking turns to travel to one another. Katie also receives regular photos and updates from the Patils. Contact between Katie and Luna has been included in the maternal adoption plan.
Mary, her maternal aunt. In the Care Plan and Amended Care Plan, the DCJ recommended a minimum of four visits per year between Luna and Mary. Mary resides in Sydney and recently had a baby. Mary is not currently attending any visits with Luna.
Hannah, her maternal aunt (aged 4 years). In the Care Plan and Amended Care Plan, the DCJ recommended a minimum of four visits per year between Luna and Hannah. Where possible, Hannah attends visits with Luna together with Pomona or Katie.
Penelope, her maternal aunt (aged 12 years).
Percy, her maternal uncle (aged 18 years). In the Care Plan and Amended Care Plan, the DCJ recommended a minimum of four visits per year between Luna and Percy. When possible, Percy attends maternal visits together with Katie with whom he resides.
Bill, her maternal uncle (aged 19 years). In the Care Plan and Amended Care Plan, the DCJ recommended a minimum of four visits per year between Luna and Bill. When possible, Bill attends maternal visits together with Katie with whom he resides.
Vincent, her paternal grandfather. In the Care Plan and Amended Care Plan, the DCJ recommended a minimum of four visits per year between Luna and Vincent. Vincent is unable to attend paternal family contact visits due to illness, ongoing disputes with Peter and disrespectful attitudes and behaviours displayed by Vincent toward Sybill and Hermione (described below). Contact between Vincent and Luna has been included in the paternal adoption plan.
Rowena, her paternal grandmother.
Sybill, her paternal aunt, with her children Helena, Helga, Seamus and Remus being Luna’s paternal cousins. In the Care Plan and Amended Care Plan, the DCJ recommended a minimum of four visits per year between Luna and Sybill to occur in conjunction with the paternal family visits.
Hermione, her paternal aunt, and Dean, her paternal uncle with their children, Colin and Viktor, being Luna’s paternal cousins. In the Care Plan and Amended Care Plan, the DCJ recommended a minimum of four visits per year between Luna and Hermione to occur in conjunction with the paternal family visits.
Luna’s contact with her birth family is supported by the Patils and has been carefully considered in each of the maternal adoption plan and paternal adoption plan, the contents of which are more fully explored later in this judgment.
As mentioned above, Luna was born at 36 weeks gestation and was thereafter admitted to the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit. While there were some initial concerns about Luna’s development, including her hearing in her left ear and turning out of her left foot, those concerns have completely dissipated. Luna’s growth and development is consistently reported to be within normal range. Luna has no current health concerns and she is meeting all developmental milestones.
Luna attends day care three days per week (having progressively increased from one day in June 2023, to two days in October 2023, to three days from January 2024). Initially, Luna was hesitant in her new surroundings but settled quite quickly. Luna enjoys attending day care and the steady increase in her attendance has presented her with new learning opportunities resulting in noticeable improvement in her communication and social skills.
Beyond formal education, Luna loves to keep busy and active. She attends weekly swimming lessons, weekly dancing classes and enjoys interacting with all her toys and engaging with new learning experiences.
As demonstrated by the s 82 Reports, Luna is flourishing in the Patils’ care and has formed a very close and loving bond with each of Lily, James and Harry. During a home visit in July 2024, Ms Doherty observed Luna drawing a picture. When Ms Doherty asked who was in her picture, Luna replied, “it’s my family”. When Ms Doherty asked who was in Luna’s family, Luna quickly responded, “Mummy, Daddy, Harry and Luna”.
Luna looks to both Lily and James to have her needs met and loves each of them dearly. It is abundantly clear that this feeling is mutual.
Luna and Harry embrace each other with love and affection and share a hug before bed each night. Harry reports that Luna can be something of a “bossy boots” and that she occasionally touches his things (which he does not like) but that he loves Luna as she makes him laugh. Harry refers to Luna as his sister or “sis”.
On occasion, Harry will invite Luna to build Lego with him. As Luna has grown more confident in speaking, she has returned this favour in kind by inviting Harry to join her when watching her favourite movie, Moana.
Harry is aware that Luna has a different surname to his and is aware that Luna cannot live with her “tummy mummy”, just as he cannot live with his. Harry has remarked that one day Luna would be a “Patil” just like him.
For the following reasons, I have determined that the formal requirements for adoption prescribed by the Act have been satisfied in the present case.
In respect of adoption orders generally, s 90(1) of the Act stipulates that the court must be satisfied as to certain matters, relevantly:
(a) that the best interests of the child will be promoted by the adoption, and
(b) that, as far as practicable and having regard to the age and understanding of the child, the wishes and feelings of the child have been ascertained and due consideration given to them, and
(c) if the prospective adoptive parent or parents are persons other than a step parent or relative of the child—that the prospective adoptive parent or parents have been selected in accordance with this Act, and
(d) that consent to the adoption of the child has been given by every person whose consent is required under this Act or that consent has been, or should be, dispensed with, and
…
(h) in the case of a child (other than an Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander child)—that the culture, any disability, language and religion of the child and, as far as possible, that the child’s given names, identity, language and cultural and religious ties have been taken into account in the making of any adoption plan in relation to the adoption.
The Court may not make an adoption order if the parties to the adoption have agreed to an adoption plan unless it is satisfied that the arrangements proposed in the plan are in the child’s best interests and are proper in the circumstances.
The Court may not make adoption order should unless it considers that the making of the order would be clearly preferable in the best interests of the child than any other action that could be taken by law in relation to the care of the child.
Note–
Other action that could be taken in relation to a child includes a parenting order under the Family Law Act 1975 of the Commonwealth or a care order under the Children and Young Persons (Care and Protection) Act 1998. Part 1 of Chapter 4 describes the persons who may be adopted and the persons who may adopt.
In respect of an application for adoption by a couple, s 28 of the Act requires that both members of the couple be:
resident or domiciled in New South Wales (s 28(1)(a)), and have lived together continuously for a period of at least two years immediately prior to the adoption application (s 28(4));
of good repute and fit and proper persons to fulfil the responsibilities of parents (s 28(1)(b)); and
21 or more years of age and at least 18 years older than the child (s 28(3)).
In the present case, the requirements of s 28(1)(a), (3) and (4) of the Act are all met, as is s 28(1)(b) of the Act, for reasons I will give below. The considerations set out in s 90 of the Act are also addressed below.
Determining adoption applications is an important part of the court’s work: Secretary, New South Wales Department of Family and Community Services v MB [2017] NSWSC 1087, Sackar J at [9].
An order for adoption is one of great magnitude, not least because the legal and social consequences that flow from an adoption are far-reaching (for the child themselves, as well as persons connected to the child) and involve a particular degree of finality: Re the Adoption of CCS and FLS [2019] NSWSC 71, Hallen J at [157], citing Re B (Adoption: Jurisdiction to Set Aside) [1995] Fam 239, Sir Thomas Bingham at 251G-H.
As observed by Hallen J in Re the Adoption of CCS and FLS at [150]:
An adoption order is status changing. It severs, in law, but not in fact, the existing relationship of blood, and creates an adoptive relationship in place of the natural relationship, which in fact, although not in law, continues, unchanged. New family ties are created which approximate blood ties. The child becomes part of his, or her, adoptive parents’ family, solely through operation of law, and there is no necessity for any actual blood relationship to exist between them. He, or she, thereafter, is regarded, in law, as the child of the adoptive parents, and the adoptive parents are regarded in law as the parents of the adopted child: s 95(2) of the Act. The adopted child also ceases to be regarded, in law, as the child of the birth parents and the birth parents cease to be regarded in law as the parents of the adopted child: s 95(2)(d) of the Act. The effect of an adoption order is to extinguish any parental responsibility of the birth parents. They no longer qualify as parents for the purpose of taking part in any future proceedings about the child. Thus, the adoption order directly affects three parties, namely the child, the birth parents and the adoptive parents.
I note that the adoption order sought in the present case is one in favour of the Patils, with whom Luna has been since December 2022, when Luna was just eight months old. They are her self-described “family”.
Because of the seriousness and significance of the decision, and in line with s 90(1)(a) and (b) of the Act, I must not make an adoption order unless I am satisfied that the best interests of Luna will be promoted by the adoption; and that, as far as practicable and having regard to Luna’s age and understanding, the wishes and feelings of Luna have been ascertained and duly considered.
I must have regard to the best interests of Luna, both in youth and later life, this being the paramount consideration as stated in s 8(1)(a) of the Act. I must also have regard to the principles that adoption is to be regarded as a service for the child (s 8(1)(b) of the Act) and that no adult is entitled as of right to adopt a child (s 8(1)(c) of the Act).
In determining the best interests of Luna, I must have regard to the matters contained in s 8(2) of the Act, including:
any wishes expressed by the child;
the child’s age, maturity, level of understanding, gender, background and family relationships and any other relevant characteristics of the child;
the child’s physical, emotional and educational needs, including the child’s sense of personal, family and cultural identity;
any wishes expressed by either or both of the parents of the child;
the relationship that the child has with his or her parents and any siblings (if any) and any significant other people (including relatives);
the attitude of each proposed adoptive parent to the child and to the responsibilities of parenthood;
the nature of the relationship of the child with each proposed adoptive parent; and
the suitability and capacity of each proposed adoptive parent, or any other person, to provide for the needs of the child, including the emotional and intellectual needs of the child;
the need to protect the child from physical or psychological harm caused, or that may be caused, by being subjected or exposed to abuse, ill-treatment, violence or other behaviour, or being present while a third person is subjected or exposed to abuse, ill-treatment, violence or other behaviour; and
the alternatives to the making of an adoption order and the likely effect on the child in both the short and longer term of changes in the child’s circumstances caused by an adoption, so that adoption is determined among all alternative forms of care to best meet the needs of the child.
The requirement in s 90(3) of the Act that the making of the order would be clearly preferable in the best interests of the child rather than any other action that could be taken by law in relation to the care of the child “requires something more than a slight preponderance of considerations in favour of adoption over the alternatives”; and “the requirement that the Court consider that an adoption order be “clearly preferable” is one that adoption be obviously, plainly or manifestly preferable to any other action that could be taken by law”: Adoption of RCC and RZA [2015] NSWSC 813, Brereton J at [14].
Consideration of whether adoption would promote the child’s best interests, and whether it is clearly preferable to any other order that could be made, involves identification of the likely effects of adoption, and of the various available alternatives, and examining their respective benefits and detriments from the perspective of the best interests of the child, so as to conclude whether adoption is, or is not, clearly preferable to all the others: Adoption of NG [2014] NSWSC 680, Brereton J at [74].
The question of what is in a child’s best interests involves the making of a judicial evaluation and the balancing of many factors from which an overall conclusion must be reached. It will, inevitably, be impressionistic and inexact: Re B (A Minor) [2001] UKHL 70; [2002] 1 All ER 641, Nicholls LJ (with whom Mackay, Hoffmann, Millett and Rodger LLJ agreed) at [16], cited with approval in Director General Department of Human Services; Re M [2011] NSWSC 369, by Hallen J at [90].
Taking into account the factors listed above, I put particular weight on the evidence before me that demonstrates the following:
Due to Luna’s young age, her wishes regarding the adoption have not been ascertained. However, it is evident that Luna has a deep, stable and loving relationship with the Patils who support and encourage her to grow in a loving and safe environment. Luna identifies Lily, James and Harry as “her family” and is comfortable in her new home. The Patils support Luna in understanding both her identity and adoption journey, all while fostering her independence, self-esteem, passions and building her social and communication skills. Luna is deeply loved and has a seminal place within the cohesive Patil family. Luna has a close relationship with Harry and misses him when he attends school. Despite her youth, Luna has already benefited from the unique ability to learn about adoption from an older sibling with shared experience. The potential comfort and reassurance this special bond could offer each of them – and particularly Luna as she grows older – is profound.
The s 91 report of Ms Margaret Murray, filed 26 November 2024, notes that Luna, then two years of age, was “too young to have an awareness or understanding of the proposed adoption” and “has limited comprehension as well as verbal skills to articulate her view on the proposed adoption”. At three years of age, Luna appears to understand that she has two families and identifies the Patils as one of her two sets of parents. Luna refers to Lily as “Mum” or “Mummy”, James as “Dad” or “Daddy”, Molly as “Mummy Molly” and Peter as “Daddy Peter”. Luna will continue to explore her own identity and what adoption will mean to her as her age, maturity and level of understanding progress. She is surrounded by people who will help her with that process, particularly Lily, James and Harry. Luna is told she is fostered with plans to adopt although she has limited understanding of this. Both Lily and James are committed to raising her with transparency, encouraging any questions she may have and speaking of Luna’s birth family frequently and with positivity.
The Patils are very attentive to Luna’s learning and development, including her social skills and her sporting abilities such as swimming and dancing. Luna presently attends day care three days per week and is thriving there. Luna has recently moved up to the ‘Pink Room’, indicating progress in her educational development in advance of her age. Luna is noted for her drawing abilities and she eagerly makes her way to the art area each day.
In terms of Luna’s cultural identity, Luna’s birth family are Anglo-Australian and so too are the Patils. Luna participates in family celebrations with the Patils such as Christmas, Easter and birthdays. Luna shares these special occasions with her extended birth family where possible, whether by way of a closely aligned visit, a FaceTime call or photo and message updates of these important milestones in Luna’s life.
In terms of Luna’s religious identity, both Lily and James were raised in the Catholic religion, but they do not attend church and do not adhere to any religious belief. Neither Molly nor Peter identifies with any religion.
Luna appears to have an idyllic life with her “forever family” in the Patils residing in an ample home with lots of amenities close to the beach. The Patils are financially secure and able to meet Luna’s present and future needs, including her physical, emotional and education needs. Additionally, Luna’s sense of personal, family and cultural identity is clearly of paramount concern to the Patils who have educated and equipped themselves on the virtues of open adoption and have built a strong foundation in this regard in their raising of Harry with honesty, transparency and positivity. There are countless happy photos of Luna in evidence before me, and the Patils have gone to considerable effort in regularly sharing these photos with Luna’s birth family – including Molly and Peter – sharing special moments such as Christmas morning with the many people who love and care for Luna.
Molly has indicated that she does not oppose the adoption of Luna by the Patils but cannot formally consent to it. Molly recognises that Luna is settled and happy with the Patils, she does not want to disrupt Luna’s placement and accepts that the Patils have taken incredible care of Luna. Molly recognises that Luna “has only ever known Lily and James” as her parents and that “they are her family”. Molly wants the best for Luna and in her view, adoption is best for Luna.
While initially opposed to the adoption, at the preliminary hearing Peter indicated he consents to (or does not oppose) the adoption. Like Molly, Peter was quick to recognise the incredible love, support and life that Luna enjoys with the Patils, and he too simply wants what is best for Luna. Peter supports the Patils continuing to care for and parent Luna. There is one matter about which Peter and the Patils do not agree and that is that Peter clearly opposes the proposed change of name in relation to Luna in that he wishes for Luna to retain “Wood” in her name. I have dealt with this issue in detail below.
There is no real contest from any of Luna’s birth family as to whether Luna should be adopted by the Patils. Nor is there any doubt among them or the caseworkers who have engaged with the Patils as to the capacity of the Patils to meet Luna’s physical, emotional, developmental and educational needs. From the moment Luna was placed into their care, they have made every effort to support her growth, happiness and her physical, psychological and emotional well-being. The Patils are fully committed to supporting Luna’s relationship and contact with Molly, Peter and her extended family. The Patils are well-equipped to address Luna’s needs, drawing on their extensive experience in raising Harry, who is adopted and is already displaying a strong sense of belonging and a level of understanding well beyond his years. The Patils are very capable of supporting Luna in every aspect of her life.
I may not make an adoption order unless satisfied that such an order is “clearly preferable” in the best interests of Luna, compared with any other legal measure that could be taken in relation to Luna’s care: s 90(3) of the Act.
I must therefore be satisfied that the balance weighs more than slightly in favour of the proposed adoption over other alternatives. The making of an adoption order must be obviously, plainly or manifestly preferable to any other action that could be taken by law. I must reach the degree of conviction in favour of the adoption commensurate with the gravity of the decision.
The notion of providing a child in care with a sense of security as soon as possible to aid their development in the future was well-described in Re the Adoption of AJH [2017] NSWSC 1751, by Hallen J at [297]–[299] as follows:
[297] It is often referred to in the literature that a child placed with foster carers has an abiding need for a sense of security and identity and that she, or he, will feel most secure when she, or he, is assured that no one can take her, or him, away from the family of which she, or he, is a legal member. It is recognised that the sooner a child can feel this sense of security, the better for her, or his, development in the future: see Re Peter [2009] NSWSC 697, per Palmer J, at [35].
[298] As was written in Re W (A Child) (Adoption: Grandparents’ Competing Claim) [2017] 1 WLR 889; [2016] EWCA Civ 793, by McFarlane LJ, with agreement of the other two members of the Court of Appeal (Percy and Lindblom LJJ), at [64]:
“One of the principal benefits of adoption is to achieve a secure, stable, reliable, permanent, lifetime placement for the child in the adoptive family as the adoptive son or daughter of the adopters.”
[299] Also, if the carers who have developed a strong bond of family relationship with the child feels that they are under threat of an application to the Children’s Court, at any time, for vacation of a care order and the consequent removal of the child from them, then they could be subjected to a level of stress and anxiety that must affect the parental relationship with the child who is in their care: Re Peter at [36].
In the present case, adoption serves the identity needs of Luna in circumstances where she is deeply integrated into the Patil family, who provides her with a stable and loving environment. Although Luna’s youth prevents her from fully understanding the concept of adoption, she has a strong emotional connection with the Patils, who have demonstrated steadfast commitment to supporting Luna navigate her adoption journey. Luna’s close and special relationship with Harry further reinforces her sense of belonging. I have little doubt that it will endure and prove to be an incredible resource of insight, understanding and love made all the more significant by their shared experience of adoption and finding the same “forever family” in the Patils.
The Patils are attentive to Luna’s developmental and emotional needs, providing routine and structure to facilitate Luna’s development and independence. Through adoption, Luna will gain the permanence and security she needs to flourish, while maintaining meaningful relationships with her birth family.
I note that if I were to maintain the status quo and make no order, Luna would remain, at law, the child of Molly and Peter, and in the care of the Minister. This would mean that, notwithstanding the assumption of the role of parents by the Patils and the provision of care in kind by each of them to Luna from the time she was 8 months old, and Luna’s perception of the Patils as her parents, they would not be legally recognised as such. An adoption order has the advantages of security and permanency, where making no order risks that Luna may experience insecurity and stigma, or at least internal disquiet, arising, for instance, from the fact she would continue to be the foster-daughter of the Patils, rather than their “daughter” like Harry is their son, at least so far as the law is concerned.
I note also that other alternatives – being a guardianship order or an order allocating long-term parental responsibility for Luna to the Patils – while achieving some of the functional aims served by an adoption order, lack the symbolic and expressive value of a formal adoption order. An order allocating parental responsibility for Luna to the Patils would not allow Luna to have automatic inheritance rights on an equal basis with Harry. A parental responsibility order, insofar as it would expire when Luna attains 18 years of age, lacks the permanence and sense of ongoing belonging afforded by an adoption order. Such shortcomings have been remarked upon by Slattery J in Re A Child Proposed for Adoption [2019] NSWSC 1653, at [165] as follows:
An order allocating parental responsibility to the proposed adoptive parents would address some deficiencies arising with the alternative of maintaining the status quo. An order allocating parental responsibility to the proposed adoptive parents would allow them to make significant decisions about the child. But it still lacks the permanency of an adoption order: Adoption of NG (No 2) [2014] NSWSC 680, (at [75]-[82]). And a major disadvantage of this alternative is that when the child reaches 18 years of age [they] would lose [their] legal connection to the proposed adoptive parents and their children, despite the reality that the proposed adoptive parents have been acting in the role of [their] parents almost since [their] birth.
I am mindful, moreover, that maintaining the status quo or making a parental responsibility order in lieu of an adoption order would mean depriving Luna of the freedom to grow and develop as an individual outside of the care system and exposing her to the precarity – in terms of a risk of future placement instability and the looming possibility of a s 90 application being brought – that attends that status.
For these reasons, I am persuaded that the interests of Luna are best served by an adoption order in favour of the Patils, and that this course is clearly preferable to the alternatives to adoption.
If a child is 18 or more years of age, parental consent is not required for an adoption order: s 54(1)(d) of the Act. If a child is 12 or more years of age and of sufficient maturity to understand the effect of giving consent, he or she may give sole consent to his or her adoption by a proposed adoptive parent or parents if the child has been cared for by the proposed adoptive parent or parents for at least two years: s 54(2) of the Act.
As Luna is currently 3 years old, she is not able to consent to her own adoption in accordance with s 54 of the Act.
As I have stated above, Molly does not formally consent to the adoption of Luna by the Patils, although she acknowledges that Luna is happy and well looked after in their care. Molly supports Luna remaining with the Patils and recognises that she is not able to care for Luna at this time. Molly took no part in these proceedings and has stated that, in her view, adoption by the Patils would be best for Luna. Molly has not provided formal consent by way of a signed instrument of consent in respect of Luna’s adoption.
As I have also stated above, Peter initially expressed opposition to the adoption but later (at the preliminary hearing) indicated his consent to it. Like Molly, Peter recognises the tremendous love and care shown to Luna by the Patils and has expressed gratitude for the life Luna is able to enjoy with them. While Peter has indicated his consent (or withdrew his opposition) to the adoption, Peter has not provided formal consent by way of a signed instrument of consent in respect of Luna’s adoption.
Pursuant to s 52, in conjunction with s 90(1)(d), of the Act, the consent to the proposed adoption of each of a child’s birth parents and any person who has parental responsibility for the child is generally required. However, parental consent may be dispensed with if the court so orders: s 66 of the Act. If consent is dispensed with by the court, consent is not required under s 52 of the Act: s 54(1)(a) of the Act.
As neither of Luna’s birth parents have formally consented to Luna’s adoption, the Secretary seeks an order to dispense with each of their consent.
Section 67 of the Act sets out the circumstances in which a consent dispense order may be made, providing:
(1) The Court may make a consent dispense order dispensing with the requirement for consent of a person to a child’s adoption (other than the child) if the Court is satisfied that—
(a) the person cannot, after reasonable inquiry, be found or identified, or
(b) the person is in such a physical or mental condition as not to be capable of properly considering the question of whether he or she should give consent, or
(c) if the person is a parent of, or person who has parental responsibility for, the child—there is serious cause for concern for the welfare of the child and it is in the best interests of the child to override the wishes of the parent or person who has parental responsibility, or
(d) if an application has been made to the Court for the adoption of the child by one or more persons who are authorised carers or the guardians for the child—
(i) the child has established a stable relationship with those carers or guardians, and
(ii) the adoption of the child by those carers or guardians will promote the child’s welfare, and
(iii) in the case of an Aboriginal child, alternatives to placement for adoption have been considered in accordance with section 36.
(2) The Court must not make such a consent dispense order unless satisfied that to do so is in the best interests of the child.
Under s 72(1) of the Act, the court must not make a consent dispense order unless the person whose consent is sought to be dispensed with has received at least 14 days’ notice of that application. I am satisfied that both Molly and Peter have been personally served with the requisite documents and are each on notice of the application to make a consent dispense order.
Dispensing with the consent of a parent is a serious step and not to be done lightly: Re Adoption of RCC and RZA [2015] NSWSC 813, Brereton J at [17].
Sections 67(1)(d)(i) and (ii) of the Act make clear that I may not make a consent dispense order unless satisfied that Luna has established a stable relationship with the Patils as her authorised carers, and that adoption by the Patils will promote Luna’s welfare. Further, I cannot make a consent dispense order unless I am satisfied that to do so is in Luna’s best interests: s 67(2) of the Act.
For the reasons outlined above, I am satisfied as to these matters. Luna has lived with the Patils for the vast majority of her life, since she was 8 months old. Luna is happy and secure in her home environment and has formed strong, positive and loving bonds with each of Lily, James and Harry.
It is obvious to me that the adoption will promote Luna’s welfare, not least because she is well-settled and is receiving due care and attention. Under the care of the Patils, Luna is excelling in her educational and developmental progress. Luna is learning, dancing, drawing, swimming, and making friends. By all accounts, Luna appears to be enjoying a wonderful life with the Patils and is jovial and confident in their presence. Luna identifies the Patils as her family.
Further, the Patils are committed to supporting Luna to develop a positive sense of identity and belonging within her family. They are also completely open about adoption and beyond supportive of Luna’s contact with her birth family as detailed throughout this judgment and addressed within both the maternal and paternal adoption plans as set out below.
I am comfortably satisfied that dispensing with the consent of Molly and Peter so as to allow for the making of the adoption order in favour of Lily and James is in Luna’s best interests.
(1) On the making of an adoption order—
(a) an adopted child who is 18 or more years old is (unless he or she decides otherwise) to have the same surname and given name or names as he or she used immediately before the order is made, and
(b) an adopted child who is less than 18 years of age is to have as his or her surname and given name or names such name or names as the Court, in the adoption order, approves on the application of the adoptive parent or parents.
(2) Before changing the surname or given name or names of a child, the Court must consider any wishes expressed by the child and any factors (such as the child’s maturity or level of understanding) that the Court thinks are relevant to the weight it should give to the child’s wishes.
(3) If, before the making of the adoption order, the adopted child has been generally known by a particular surname, the Court may, in the adoption order, order that the child is to have that name as his or her surname.
(4) An approval of a change in the given name or names of a child who is over the age of 12 years must not be given by the Court unless the child has, in a consent given under section 55, consented to the change.
(5) The Court must not approve a change in the given name or names of a child who is more than one year old, or a non-citizen child, unless the Court is satisfied that the name change is in the best interests of the child.
(6) Nothing in this section prevents the changing of any name of an adopted child, after the making of the adoption order, under the law of New South Wales.
The effect of s 101(2) of the Act is that I cannot change Luna’s name without first considering her express wishes and any factors (such as Luna’s maturity and understanding) that I consider relevant to the weight to be given to those wishes.
The effect of s 101(5) of the Act is that I cannot change Luna’s name unless I am satisfied that doing so is in Luna’s best interests.
The evidence from caseworkers and program managers involved in supervising Luna’s care placement, and from the Patils, is that Luna is not yet of the age or maturity to express her wishes in relation to the proposed change of her name.
Arguably the most contested issue in this case is for me to determine is whether Luna’s name should be changed and, if so, how it should be changed.
As indicated above, while Peter withdrew his opposition to Luna’s adoption, he strongly opposes the proposed change of Luna’s name.
The Secretary seeks an order approving the name “Patil” as the surname and “Luna Amelia” as the given names of Luna, so that her full name will be “Luna Amelia Patil”.
Peter argued that “Abbott-Wood” should be retained in Luna’s name and proposed “Luna Amelia Abbott-Wood Patil” as an alternative.
In these circumstances, it will be necessary for me to set out and carefully consider the submissions made in respect of this issue which were as follows.
The Secretary is of the view that the proposed name change is in Luna’s best interests as it allows her to maintain the first and middle name given to her by her birth parents, while also sharing the same surname as her proposed adoptive parents and brother to reflect her inclusion in the Patil family.
Similarly, both Lily and James have expressed the view that the proposed name change is in Luna’s best interests as it will consolidate her sense of belonging to their family, as well as maintaining that connection to her birth family by keeping her given names.
In support of the proposed change to Luna’s name, the Secretary submitted that:
Luna will maintain the benefit of a connection to her birth family by reason of her retention of the given names “Luna Amelia”, as chosen by them.
“Patil” as Luna’s surname will be a recognition of her proposed adoptive parents’ relationship with her.
It is important in this case that Lily and James already have an adopted child in Harry who bears the name “Harry Patil” without any retention of his previous surnames.
In these circumstances, in order to integrate Luna more fully into the Patil family, it is appropriate that “Patil” be her surname.
An integrated birth certificate would recognise the connection between Luna and Peter for the rest of time.
Any concern that Luna might lose her connection to “the Wood family”, including Peter and her siblings, are alleviated by the meaningful contact arrangements proposed and agreed to by the Patils under the paternal adoption plan and are alleviated somewhat by the obvious commitment by the Patils to maintaining ongoing contact between Luna and her birth family.
In support of these submissions, the Secretary highlighted, amongst other things, the view of Ms Murray, the author of the s 91 report, who considered that the name “Luna Amelia Patil” would “preserve the forename and middle name given to her when she was born and the change in surname will identify [her] as a legal member of the [Patil] family, consolidating her sense of belonging and security as well as making her an equal to Harry within her family”.
Whilst the Secretary acknowledges the change of name is a challenging and upsetting prospect for Peter as her birth father, the Secretary notes that Luna will have an Integrated Birth Certificate (IBC), as contemplated by s 25A of the Births, Deaths and Marriages Act 1995 (NSW), which will clearly show Luna’s parents at birth, her adoptive parents and her current name. “Abbott-Wood” will therefore remain an important part of Luna’s life story and will forever be reflected in the IBC.
In opposition to the proposed change to Luna’s name, Peter submitted that:
The issue with respect to the proposed change to Luna’s name should be determined by reference to Luna’s best interests (T3).
Luna “has a lot of siblings, a lot of extended family, and we all love her extremely and dearly” and that he or they do not want Luna to grow up being the only sibling without “Wood” in her name (T3).
Peter did not want Luna to grow up feeling “left out” or for Luna to later think that he or Molly did not care about Luna and fight for her because both he and Molly care about Luna “a great deal” (T3, T6).
It would “absolutely break [him]” to lose legal ties with Luna (T6).
Peter submitted that Harry’s family and name are both unknown to him and his circumstances should be distinguishable from those of Luna. Peter repeated that each of Neville, Ariana, Rolanda and Ronald retain his last name and that it would be in Luna’s best interests to retain “Abbott-Wood” in her name with “Patil” as her surname (T8–T9).
I am of the view that the change of name as proposed by the Secretary is in Luna’s best interests. Taking the Patils’ surname will reflect her internally-felt, and now legally confirmed, reality of membership of her adoptive family, and increase her sense of belonging and self-determination. She will now also share the surname of her brother Harry, which will help Luna feel a sense of belonging and cohesion within the Patil family.
This decision honours Molly and Peter as her parents, ensuring that Luna retains the given names they chose for her (“Luna Amelia”), while taking the Patils’ surname to reflect her now permanent place within their family unit.
Peter’s concern about losing connection with Luna once “Abbott-Wood” is removed from Luna’s full name is considerably lessened because Molly’s full name and Peter’s full name will both clearly appear on Luna’s IBC as her parents at birth when it is issued. Further, it is abundantly clear from the evidence before me that both Lily and James are committed to supporting Luna maintain and build her connection with not only Molly and Peter but also her siblings in Neville and Ariana and her extended family.
The importance of given names and a surname in any adoption decision will vary with the particular circumstances. In some instances, it will be very important that a surname be retained, either as an on-going surname or as part of a middle name, to maintain a real or even symbolic connection with birth parents and siblings and perhaps even the cultural heritage of the birth family. In other instances, the birth surname will have lesser importance than a proposed new adoption surname to give connection to the proposed adoptive family and their cultural heritage.
But connection for a child does not just come from a name. Real and abiding connection comes from the extent to which a parent (birth or adoptive) spends the time and energy to love, care and support a child to meet their needs. The real and abiding connection which Luna will have with the extended members of her birth family will not come from the sharing of a name. It will come from the monumental efforts to which the Patils have gone to ensure that Luna sees and has meaningful contact with all of the birth family members and by the work which has been done by the Patils in compiling and updating the Life Story Book, the Birth Family Scrapbook and the Life Story Journal. In my view, Luna will never have any doubt about those birth family members with whom she is connected because from their unceasing efforts, the Patils will ensure that she does not.
During the hearing, I explained an IBC to Peter and that on the IBC, Peter would always be listed as Luna’s birth father and Molly would always be listed as Luna’s birth mother (T6). The use of an IBC for Luna will also make it very clear to her that she has connection to her birth family and her adoptive family in equal measure because it will record those details in perpetuity.
I also consider that it is important that Luna does not get burdened with a long and complicated five-part, hyphenated full name (“Luna Amelia Abbott-Wood Patil”) through her years of development. If she wishes to introduce “Abbott-Wood” in the fullness of time then she may wish to take that step for herself.
Taking all of these matters into account, I am satisfied that I should approve the surname “Patil” and the given names “Luna Amelia”.
The maternal adoption plan was signed by James and Lily on 21 November 2024 and the Secretary (by their delegate, Barnardos) on 26 November 2024. The maternal adoption plan has not been signed by Molly.
The maternal adoption plan makes provision for contact between Luna, the Patils, Molly, Neville, Ariana, Ginny, George, Pomona and Katie. The parties to the maternal adoption plan are Luna, the Secretary (by their delegate, Barnardos), the Patils and Molly.
In summary, the maternal adoption plan contemplates Luna’s contact with her maternal family will be as follows:
Face-to-face visits:
(a) Luna will have visits with Molly at least four times per year on a day, time and place to be agreed between the Patils and Molly, with each visit to be for a minimum of two hours. (b) Luna will have visits with her full siblings, Neville and Ariana, at least twelve times per year on a day, time and place to be agreed between the Patils and the proposed adoptive parents of Neville and Ariana, with each visit to be for a minimum of two hours. (c) Luna will have visits with her maternal sibling, Ginny, at least four times per year on a day, time and place to be agreed between the Patils, Ginny and Katie, with each visit to be for a minimum of two hours. (d) Luna will have visits with her maternal sibling, George, at least four times per year on a day, time and place to be agreed between the Patils and Molly with each visit to be for a minimum of two hours and with these visits to occur in conjunction with Molly’s visits. (e) Luna will have visits with her maternal great grandmother, Katie, at least four times per year on a day, time and place to be agreed between the Patils and Katie, with each visit to be for a minimum of two hours and with these visits to occur in conjunction with Ginny’s visits. Both Pomona and Hannah will also be invited to attend.
Telephone and electronic communication: The maternal adoption plan also provides for video calls to occur between Luna and her maternal family, including both Molly and Ginny, on special occasions such as birthdays, Easter, Christmas and Mother’s Day. Any such communication will of course be based upon and subject to the needs and wishes of Luna.
Exchange of information, letters, photographs, cards and gifts: The Patils agree to provide Molly with news and information as to Luna at each contact visit, as well as providing photographs of Luna to Molly and other extended maternal family members who wish to receive them at least two times per year. Cards, letters, photographs and gifts can otherwise be exchanged between Luna and her maternal family at contact visits or by post.
Where possible and in Luna’s best interests, siblings and extended maternal family will have their visits joint with Molly’s visits.
The paternal adoption plan was signed by Peter after the final hearing in this matter on 8 August 2025 and by the Secretary and the Patils on 15 July 2025. Peter wishes for the paternal adoption plan to be registered.
The paternal adoption plan makes provision for contact between Luna, the Patils, Peter, Neville, Ariana, Rolanda, Ronald and Vincent. The parties to the paternal adoption plan are Luna, the Secretary (by their delegate, Barnardos), the Patils and Peter.
In summary, the paternal adoption plan contemplates Luna’s contact with her paternal family will be as follows:
Face-to-face visits:
(a) Luna will have visits with Peter at least six times per year on a day, time and place to be agreed between the Patils, Peter and (where appropriate) the proposed adoptive parents of Neville and Ariana, with each visit to be for a minimum of two hours. Three of the six visits per year will occur by way of joint sibling visits where Luna will join three of Neville and Ariana’s visits with Peter. (b) As provided for in the maternal adoption plan, Luna will have visits with her full siblings, Neville and Ariana, at least twelve times per year on a day, time and place to be agreed between the Patils and the carers of Neville and Ariana, with each visit to be for a minimum of two hours. As noted above, Peter will be invited to attend three of these visits. (c) Luna will have visits with her paternal sibling, Rolanda, at least four times per year on a day, time and place to be agreed between the Patils, Angelina and Rolanda, with each visit to be for a minimum of two hours. (d) Luna will have visits with her paternal sibling, Ronald, at least four times per year on a day, time and place to be agreed between the Patils and Susan. In the event Susan is not able to facilitate a visit, or does not reply to the Patils, that visit will be forfeited. The Patils agree to continue to reach out to Susan and encourage visits taking place. (e) Luna will have visits with her paternal grandfather, Vincent, at least four times per year on a day, time and place to be agreed between the Patils and Vincent, with each visit to be for a minimum of 1.5 hours. These visits may occur in conjunction with other family members, such as Peter, but only where all parties agree for that to occur. Vincent cannot attend any joint sibling visits unless by invitation of Peter and with the agreement of the proposed adoptive parents of Neville and Ariana.
Telephone and electronic communication: The paternal adoption plan also provides for video calls to occur as between Luna and her paternal family, including Peter, on special occasions such as birthdays, Easter, Christmas and Father’s Day. Any such communication will of course be based upon and subject to the needs and wishes of Luna.
Exchange of information, letters, photographs, cards and gifts: The Patils agree to provide Peter with news and information as to Luna at each contact visit, as well as providing photographs of Luna to Peter at least six times per year, including by surface mail in accordance with prison regulations if Peter is incarcerated during the relevant period. Cards, letters, photographs and gifts can otherwise be exchanged between Luna and her paternal family at contact visits or by post.
Where possible and in Luna’s best interests, siblings and extended paternal family will have their visits joint with Peter’s visits. The Patils will contact Peter to confirm arrangements for scheduled visits seven days prior, and Peter then has six days to request a reasonable change in location. The joint sibling visits are not subject to change. Peter and other members of Luna’s paternal family must confirm their attendance 24 hours prior to any scheduled visit. If Peter fails to confirm his attendance, or indicates non-attendance, then the scheduled face-to-face visit will be replaced by a video call at a mutually agreed time on the same day as the visit.
Both the maternal adoption plan and the paternal adoption plan recognise that the nature of contact between Luna and her birth family should be structured in such a way that will best meet Luna’s needs, with the mutually agreed aim of the arrangements being to support Luna with her development, her sense of identity and assist Luna to maintain and build her connection to her birth family.
It is envisaged that the arrangements within both the maternal adoption plan and paternal adoption plan will continue until Luna attains 18 years of age unless either or both of the plans are reviewed prior to that time. That said, at all times contact arrangements will take into account Luna’s age and stage of development and any wishes Luna may express in relation to those arrangements. Luna will be encouraged and supported to attend contact visits, but there is always the possibility to adjust these arrangements to better meet the needs of Luna and ensure that the time, place, mode and frequency of contact with the various members of Luna’s birth family, as envisaged by the plans, continues to serve Luna’s best interests.
The Secretary submits that both the maternal adoption plan and the paternal adoption plan are proper in the circumstances and in Luna’s best interests as they ensure Luna will have meaningful and ongoing time with not only her birth parents but also her extended birth family in conformity with ss 46 and 90(2) of the Act.
I am satisfied that each of the maternal adoption plan and paternal adoption plan are proper in the circumstances, are in Luna’s best interests and ought to be registered.
For the reasons given above, I propose to make the following orders and notations:
Pursuant to s 67(1)(d) of the Adoption Act 2000 (NSW), the requirement for the consent of the child’s birth mother, Molly Abbott, is dispensed with.
Pursuant to s 67(1)(d) of the Adoption Act 2000 (NSW), the requirement for the consent of the child’s birth father, Peter Wood, is dispensed with.
Pursuant to s 23 of the Adoption Act 2000 (NSW), order for the adoption of the child, Luna Amelia Abbott-Wood, in favour of the adopting parents, Lily Patil and James Patil.
Pursuant to s 101(1) of the Adoption Act 2000 (NSW), order the approval of the name “Patil” as the surname and “Luna Amelia” as the given names of the child.
Pursuant to ss 50(1) and (3) of the Adoption Act 2000 (NSW), the Maternal Adoption Plan signed by Lily Patil and James Patil on 21 November 2024, and Barnardos’ Principal Officer, Olivia Grace Rennie on 26 November 2024, be registered.
Pursuant to ss 50(1) and (3) of the Adoption Act 2000 (NSW), the Paternal Adoption Plan signed by Lily Patil, James Patil and Barnardos’ Principal Officer, Olivia Grace Rennie, on 15 July 2025, and by Peter Wood on 8 August 2025, be registered.
Pursuant to s 45(2) of the Births, Deaths and Marriages Registration Act 1995 (NSW), the Registrar of Births, Deaths and Marriages Registration is to correct the register in respect of the child’s original birth certificate by amending the father’s middle name from “Lawrance” to “Lawrence”.
It is noted that the court is satisfied that the arrangements proposed in the Maternal Adoption Plan, signed by Lily Patil and James Patil on 21 November 2024, and Barnardos’ Principal Officer, Olivia Grace Rennie on 26 November 2024, are in the child’s best interests and are proper in the circumstances.
It is noted that the court is satisfied that the arrangements proposed in the Paternal Adoption Plan, signed by Lily Patil, James Patil and Barnardos’ Principal Officer, Olivia Grace Rennie, on 15 July 2025, and by Peter Wood on 8 August 2025, are in the child’s best interests and are proper in the circumstances.
**********