BIRCHER & BIRCHER

In the Family Court of Australia, the court considered a dispute between a mother and father concerning parenting orders for their children. The existing final parenting order, made in 2014, stipulated that the children live with the mother and spend alternate weekends and half of school holidays with the father. The mother sought to reduce the father's time with the children, while the father sought a week-about living arrangement and equal division of the December/January school holidays.

The court was required to determine the best interests of the children regarding their living arrangements and the allocation of parental responsibility. Specifically, the court had to consider whether to vary the existing time arrangements, whether to grant sole parental responsibility to one parent or maintain equal shared parental responsibility, and how to address the significant conflict between the parents that was adversely affecting the children. The children's expressed preferences for an equal time arrangement were also a relevant consideration.

Carew J reasoned that despite the parents' deficiencies, a meaningful relationship with both parents was in the children's best interests. The court found that while the current arrangement had both advantages and disadvantages, an equal time arrangement, with the children living week-about with each parent and spending half of the December/January school holidays with each, would likely assist in mitigating the negative effects of parental conflict. Regarding parental responsibility, the court noted the parents' history of involving the children in their disputes, leading to significant negative consequences for the children's health and well-being. Consequently, the court determined that equal shared parental responsibility was not in the children's best interests for all matters.

The court ordered that the children would live in a week-about arrangement, with the exception of the December/January school holidays, which would be divided equally between the parents. Furthermore, the father was granted sole parental responsibility for health issues, with the mother restrained from interfering in those decisions. The mother was granted sole parental responsibility concerning the choice of high school for the two younger children. For all other matters, the parents would retain equal shared parental responsibility.