Bolton & Bolton - [2022] FedCFamC2F 534

FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA
(DIVISION 2)
Bolton & Bolton [2022] FedCFamC2F 534

File number(s): PAC 4764 of 2021

Judgment of: JUDGE OBRADOVIC

Date of judgment: 12 April 2022

Catchwords: FAMILY LAW – Parenting – undefended as against the father – father’s severe mental illness and addiction – allegations of family violence against the father – mother to have sole parental responsibility – children to spend no time with the father – mother allowed to obtain passport and travel internationally with the child without father’s consent.

Legislation: Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) s 60CC

Division: Division 2 Family Law

Number of paragraphs: 29

Date of hearing: 12 April 2022

Place: Parramatta

Appearing for the Applicant: No Appearance

Appearing for the Respondent: Ms Futcher

Solicitors for the Respondent: Godden Lawyers
ORDERS

PAC 4764 of 2021

FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 2)

BETWEEN:
MR BOLTON
Applicant

AND:

MS BOLTON
Respondent

ORDER MADE BY:

JUDGE OBRADOVIC

DATE OF ORDER:

12 APRIL 2022

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.The mother shall have sole parental responsibility for X born in 2012 and Y born in 2014 (“the children”).
2.The children shall live with the mother.
3.The children shall spend no time with the father.
4.X born in 2012 and Y born in 2014 are permitted to travel internationally, without the need for the consent of the father to be provided to the issue of a passport to X born in 2012 and Y born in 2014. The mother shall be the only person with ‘parental responsibility’ of the children X born in 2012 and Y born in 2014 for the purposes of applying for, and being issued with, an Australian passport for X born in 2012 and Y born in 2014.

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).
Section 121 of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) makes it an offence, except in very limited circumstances, to publish 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 Bolton & Bolton has been approved pursuant to s 121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
(Ex Tempore; Revised from Transcript)
JUDGE OBRADOVIC:

These are final parenting proceedings regarding the parties’ two children, X, born in 2012, who has just turned 10, and Y, who was born in 2014, who will be eight years old this year.
The parties started living together in 2003. They were married in 2008 and they separated in 2017. The parties were divorced on 19 February 2019.
At the time of separation, X was five years old and Y was almost three. The mother has been their primary carer since separation. The children have spent very limited time with the father since separation and their time with him has been inconsistent and sporadic.
The children have not spent any time with the father since July 2020 and, during the first half of 2020 there were only two occasions when they saw their father. The father has been absent and disengaged for the best part of the last two years. Interestingly, it is the father who commenced these proceedings by filing an application for final orders on 10 September 2021 together with an affidavit in support of those orders. The father then filed a notice of discontinuance very shortly after proceedings were commenced, that is in January 2022.
On 21 January 2022, the father sent an email to the mother as follows:
I’m terminating the family law matter. I cannot afford to fight you, and I have no confidence that you would be cooperative even if the Courts did grant me access.
I will always be here if X and Y wish to speak with me or to see me.
I will always pay what is required by Child Support Agency.
Kind regards,
Mr Bolton.
During the time that the proceedings have been on foot, a large number of documents have been produced to the Court in answer to subpoena. After becoming aware of the detail of that material, the mother has changed her application to the Court and now seeks an order for no time between the children and the father. She submits to the Court that the father’s mental health issues, and his sex and child pornography addictions, pose an unacceptable risk of harm to the children.
The authorities dealing with risk of harm are well known. It is not necessary for the Court to make findings of fact in relation to specific allegations in order for the Court to be able to make findings in relation to risk of harm or that there is an unacceptable risk of harm.
In this instance, having regard to the evidence before the Court, that is the mother’s two affidavits and the documents in exhibit 1, the Court is satisfied that the father’s health issues and addictions do pose an unacceptable risk of harm to the parties’ two young female children.
CHRONOLOGY[1]
[1] From Mother’s Case outline Document filed 5 April 2022

Date Event

1981 Father born (now aged 41)

1983 Mother born (now aged 38)

~1991 Father attempted suicide aged 10

2003 Parties commenced cohabitation

2008 Parties were married

2011-2012 Father discovered at home of maternal grandma looking for shotgun with which to commit suicide, hospitalised at C Hospital for 3 nights

02/02/2012
Child subject of these proceedings, X born, now aged 9 (“X”)

09/2012 Father attempted suicide

03/12/2012 –
22/12/2012 Father admitted to D Hospital
- Sex/pornography addiction
- Disclosed a 16-year obsessional addiction to sex/pornography
On intake disclosed reduced ability to control behaviour, suicidal ideas

08/05/2013 –
10/05/2013 NSW Police report “The PAT has been suffering from depression and claims to be a sex addict. He believes his problem is getting worse and thinks if he doesn’t commit suicide he will harm someone close to him”
Father took 10 Pristiq tablets (Antidepressant) 28 Zactin tablets (Antidepressant) and 12 Panedeine tablets. Father travelled to “Location E” in Suburb F with intention of jumping to his death

10/05/2013 –
28/05/2013 Father admitted to D Hospital for Depression, suicidal intention, and Sexual addiction (asserted since age 16). His intake states “history of predatory behaviour”
“Cannot seem to stop cyber sex pornography addiction”
“ Disclosed online interaction with underage girls. – caused significant distress envisioned himself becoming a monster “paedophile”
“Patient mentioned of having online/conversation with 13 year old girl for ½ hour”
“he pretended to be a young girl online and communicates with them”

15/05/2013 Father sought Valium as was triggered by sexual thoughts about a “young and child like” patient in the hospital

17/05/2013 Father approached nursing staff in distress, stated he was “having thoughts about committing rape against female” [patient]

18/05/2013 Father tells staff that “he had very strong sexual thoughts yesterday… This morning he still has sexual thoughts but they are not as strong of other young female patients” Day leave is cancelled, Father is placed on category one risk

19/05/2013 “He says he has never physically involved with anybody. He has only been on internet porn sites though he has chatted online with underage girls”

24/10/2013 –
07/11/2013 Father admitted to D Hospital “due to deterioration in mental due to increased obsession with pornography”
- Intake notes mention 3 x admissions to public psych hospitals and 2 x D Hospital
- Auditory hallucinations

07/11/2013 Discharged early, “reported having negative thoughts about a female patient which is causing him distress”

30/05/2014 Child subject of these proceedings, Y born, now aged 7 (“Y”)

~2014 Father punched X (then aged 2 years) in the stomach whilst mother was out of the room, stating “I punched her. I punched her in the stomach because she wouldn’t get out of my face. I snapped, and punched her and she fell off the bed into the wardrobe doors.”

11/2014 Mother was in bed unwell whilst father was on the computer, father advised mother that Y had vomited when he was distracted by the computer, when Mother entered the room it was apparent Y was very unwell. Mother attended to Y and arranged an ambulance. Y had a febrile convulsion and was taken to G Hospital.

2016 Father reported himself to HR department at work for masturbating in a public space, accessing pornography and attempting suicide with a knife in the work bathroom. Father made redundant, spending $22,000 of his payment on pornography and gambling.

12/2016 Father admitted himself to H Hospital in Suburb J, disclosed that he had accessed child pornography and posed as a child online. Father asked to leave hospital after expressing sexual desire for an underage patient.

03/03/2017 Parties separated on a final basis

04/05/2017 Father attempted suicide overdosing on anti-depressants

28/04/2017 Father admitted to D Hospital Intake letter from GP includes handwritten comment “He has a obsession w/ underage girls”. Intake paperwork from hospital reads “Brief past history: child pornography”. “DOCs involved for child porn in 2013”

02/05/2017 Report from D Hospital reads “His pornography addiction/ role playing with a child avatar has continued to dominate his life”

15/05/2017 Patient at another D Hospital alleged current patient at D Hospital Suburb K (where Father was currently patient) named Mr L at an AA meeting, “stated he could sell child pornography to him” (Father maintained false allegations)

16/05/2017
Father stated the following:

-     Uses chat rooms/ pornography for up to 12 hours a day

-     “only used child pornography for 2 weeks in 2013”

-     Does role playing – plays as a girl talking to men

-     Feels pornography became exacerbated ~5 years ago when wife became pregnant and Mr L saw a pornography involving a father raping a baby”

-     Has repeated unwanted sexual thoughts of girls

15/05/2017 Allegations regarding Father offering to sell child pornography were reported to Department of Family & Community Services by D Hospital

05/05/2018 Father called a friend and advised he had consumed 500x Clomipramine 25mg, NSW Police and Ambulance staff attended and father was detained pursuant to section 20 of the Mental Health Act and conveyed to hospital

27/06/2018 Social worker interviewed Father, Father stated that he poses as a 20 year old woman online “for sexual gratification”, stated that whilst online he has been offered photos of children in acts of sexual abuse and torture and that he has
created a file and downloaded collection of these images Father stated to social worker that he has another collection of child pornography that he views for sexual gratification. This was reported to NSW Police

27/06/2017 Father had computers and mobile phones seized by NSW Police in regards to possible child abuse material

07/2018 Mother received phone call from Suburb M Police Station whilst in Country N regarding child pornography disclosures, the mother was not aware of the nature of the allegations.

19/02/2019 Parties divorced

2019-2021 Father spends ad hoc time with the children

~04-07/2019 Whilst Children spend time with Father, Father’s partner insists children bathe with her daughter, enters the bathroom whilst the children are showering or changing without their permission, refuses to permit the children to call their mother

26/12/2019 Father advises the children that he will have to choose between his partners and the children, after X argues with her regarding calling her mother. Father returns children early.

01/2020 Father’s partner returned to Country O

05/2020 Mother and children contact Father regarding spending time

05/2020 Father declines time, insists on Court proceedings and mediation, blocks mother’s mobile phone number

16/05/2020 Children spend day time with Father

10-13/07/2020 Children spend time with Father

16/07/2020 Children disclose to mother:
Father would spend time alone with each child, taking the other to paternal grandmother’s home;
Father took children to GP to look at the children’s vaginas;
Father insisted to children they required Psychological treatment;
Mother sends text message to father regarding her concerns

17/07/2020
Father makes report to Child Protection Helpline, alleging:

-     Children expressed suicidal ideation to him;

-     Children fight a lot and swear at each other;

-     Y gets physically violent

-     He has bi-polar disorder but is currently medicated;

-     X alleged to Father’s partner she witnessed her cousin inserting plastic toys into Y’s vagina 1 year earlier, simulating child birth.

This allegation has never been referred to in the father’s material, or explained. Mother reports children were referring to playing “babies”, placing dolls under their shirts and mimicking giving birth.

09/08/2020 Father sent Mother email stating: “Please tell me now if you are going to allow me to have the children in the next year. I am about to dispose of their beds and clothes and toys if not.”

10/04/2021 Father attends children’s school unannounced. This is the last time he sees the children.

07/2021 Father interviewed by the media regarding impact of COVID-19 travel restrictions on his relationship and discloses he has been experiencing suicidal ideation

10/09/2021 Father commences proceedings, swears affidavit stating that he has not been hospitalised for mental health treatment since 2018

10/2021 Children commence school at P School

05/11/2021 First return date. Father does not appear and his lawyer informs the Court the father has had a relapse and is hospitalised.

16/11/2021 Father’s solicitor sends correspondence alleging father attended Q Hospital Emergency Department on 20/10/2021 was released on 21/10/2021, and was not admitted to mental health ward.

December 2021 Father travels internationally with partner

January 2022 Father and his partner are interviewed by media online, states He was hospitalised twice in 2021 most recently in October

21/01/2022 Father tells mother he is discontinuing proceedings.

27/01/2022 Father files notice of discontinuance

31/01/2022 Father makes Facebook post suggesting he has posed as a minor on Snapchat and that “it was possible to obtain… illicit material, and without money changing hands. You will need to stop and think what that might mean”
DETERMINATION

In regard to the unacceptable risk of harm, apart from the matters which are mentioned in the chronology just referred to, the Court notes from exhibit 1 as follows:
a.That in or about June 2018 the father stated that when he is on the internet, he gets offered photos of children in acts of sexual abuse and torture and that he has created a file and downloaded a collection of these images. When speaking about these things, the father broke down and became upset and he said that he cannot trust himself not to request further images and download them. The father also said that he has another collection of child pornography which he views for sexual gratification. Evidence in exhibit 1 at page 13 indicates that as at 2021 the father was a technology professional. The mother’s legal representatives submitted that, given the father’s skill in respect of information technology, that the father may be able to access material and view material that is not readily apparent to others from a search of his computer. The Court accepts this submission.
b.As at 2017, the father presented with a 16-year history of obsessional addiction to sex and pornography.
c.As at 2017, the father spent all day at work on his computer where he has no restrictions accessing pornographic material, including child pornography. The father has sought treatment through the sex and love addict anonymous but has found that has not helped with his addiction.
d.There were multiple suicide attempts and suicide ideations by the father or reported by the father over a period of many years.
These matters (from exhibit 1) are not an exhaustive summary of the evidence. The Court has had regard to the entirety of exhibit 1 and the mother’s affidavits in coming to the conclusion that the father’s addictions and mental health do pose an unacceptable risk of harm to the children.
It is a fact that the father has disengaged from these proceedings and that he does not press for any orders. His failure to engage with the children for long periods of time and his absence from the children’s lives, lack of communication with the mother all speak against an order for equal shared parental responsibility and, indeed, support a finding that the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility has been rebutted.
In those circumstances, it is appropriate that there be an order for the mother to have sole parental responsibility for the children not only because of the matters of risk, which the Court has identified, but also because if such an order was not made, any attempts at the parties to communicate and reach agreement in relation to the children’s long-term health, welfare and development would be hindered by their lack of ability to have any meaningful discussions. That in itself might put the children at risk in the long-term.
It is appropriate in all of the circumstances that an order for the children to live with their mother be made. The mother is, after all, their primary caregiver. She is, no doubt, their primary attachment and she has met their emotional and physical needs for a number of years by herself without any assistance by the father to do so.
The mother also presses the Court for an order that the children spend no time with the father. Such an order is, in this Court, usually an order of last resort but it is an order, in the circumstances of this case, which is appropriate and necessary to protect these children from the unacceptable risk of harm that the father poses in accordance with the findings herein made. In this instance, an order for the children to spend no time would give the mother a further piece of mind that the children would be safe.
It appears on the evidence that the father has not been honest, notwithstanding the parties’ many years together, with the mother about the extent of his addictions and mental health illness and the impact of these matters on his capacity to make appropriate decisions and, in particular, decisions which are not only legal but also safe for his two children. These are not things that the Court is willing to take a gamble upon. Children’s lives, their health and mental wellbeing are far too important for that. Once affected in a negative way, even though there may be ways for children to overcome these things, negative impacts are likely to have a long-lasting effect. And, in these circumstances, the Court poses the question why it would risk such possible long-term harm to these vulnerable young girls?
The father has, in any event, not been an engaged parent. Notwithstanding his email to the mother in January 2022, it may be that he has disengaged from the proceedings because he realises that he does, indeed, pose a risk to his children or it may be that he has disengaged for other reasons, including those reasons which are stated in his email. Whichever way the Court turns it, the father is not here. And while the mother’s legal representative has, through her submissions, in one sense, treated this matter as an ex parte application, it is not. It is an undefended hearing against the applicant, who has chosen to disengage and discontinue.

Many of the section 60CC factors do not carry significant weight when compared to the primary considerations which the Court has already addressed. The children’s views are not particularly well addressed in the evidence but, in any event, whatever views the children might have, they would not carry significant weight given their ages and vulnerability in all of these circumstances.
As the Court has already indicated, the father has spent very limited time with the children post separation and he has not participated in any meaningful way about any decisions affecting the children’s major long-term issues. He has not availed himself of the available opportunities of communicating with the children and he has not demonstrated any capacity to meet the children’s emotional or physical needs.
The mother also seeks an order that she be permitted to travel internationally with the children without the need for the consent of the father to the issue of a passport and without the father’s consent for such travel. Even though there is no evidence that the mother has any immediate plans for travel, in the circumstances of this case, it is appropriate that the mother does have sole parental responsibility in relation to the issue of a passport and that she does not need to seek the father’s consent for the issue of such passport or to be able to travel internationally with the parties’ two children. The Court does not consider the mother to be a flight risk. Indeed, there is no evidence that she is a citizen of any other country or that she is able to or intends to leave the jurisdiction permanently. There is absolutely no reason as to why she should not be able to travel overseas should she so choose with her children for holiday or other leisure or study purposes.
For all of those reasons, the Court therefore makes orders as set out in the forefront of these Reasons for Judgment.

I certify that the preceding twenty-nine (29) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment of Judge Obradovic.
Associate:
Dated: 1 May 2022

File number(s):	PAC 4764 of 2021
Judgment of:	JUDGE OBRADOVIC
Date of judgment:	12 April 2022
Catchwords:	FAMILY LAW – Parenting – undefended as against the father – father’s severe mental illness and addiction – allegations of family violence against the father – mother to have sole parental responsibility – children to spend no time with the father – mother allowed to obtain passport and travel internationally with the child without father’s consent.
Legislation:	Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) s 60CC
Division:	Division 2 Family Law
Number of paragraphs:	29
Date of hearing:	12 April 2022
Place:	Parramatta
Appearing for the Applicant:	No Appearance
Appearing for the Respondent:	Ms Futcher
Solicitors for the Respondent:	Godden Lawyers

PAC 4764 of 2021
FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 2)
BETWEEN:	MR BOLTON Applicant
AND:	MS BOLTON Respondent

ORDER MADE BY:	JUDGE OBRADOVIC
DATE OF ORDER:	12 APRIL 2022

Date	Event
1981	Father born (now aged 41)
1983	Mother born (now aged 38)
~1991	Father attempted suicide aged 10
2003	Parties commenced cohabitation
2008	Parties were married
2011-2012	Father discovered at home of maternal grandma looking for shotgun with which to commit suicide, hospitalised at C Hospital for 3 nights
02/02/2012	Child subject of these proceedings, X born, now aged 9 (“X”)
09/2012	Father attempted suicide
03/12/2012 – 22/12/2012	Father admitted to D Hospital - Sex/pornography addiction - Disclosed a 16-year obsessional addiction to sex/pornography On intake disclosed reduced ability to control behaviour, suicidal ideas
08/05/2013 – 10/05/2013	NSW Police report “The PAT has been suffering from depression and claims to be a sex addict. He believes his problem is getting worse and thinks if he doesn’t commit suicide he will harm someone close to him” Father took 10 Pristiq tablets (Antidepressant) 28 Zactin tablets (Antidepressant) and 12 Panedeine tablets. Father travelled to “Location E” in Suburb F with intention of jumping to his death
10/05/2013 – 28/05/2013	Father admitted to D Hospital for Depression, suicidal intention, and Sexual addiction (asserted since age 16). His intake states “history of predatory behaviour” “Cannot seem to stop cyber sex pornography addiction” “ Disclosed online interaction with underage girls. – caused significant distress envisioned himself becoming a monster “paedophile” “Patient mentioned of having online/conversation with 13 year old girl for ½ hour” “he pretended to be a young girl online and communicates with them”
15/05/2013	Father sought Valium as was triggered by sexual thoughts about a “young and child like” patient in the hospital
17/05/2013	Father approached nursing staff in distress, stated he was “having thoughts about committing rape against female” [patient]
18/05/2013	Father tells staff that “he had very strong sexual thoughts yesterday… This morning he still has sexual thoughts but they are not as strong of other young female patients” Day leave is cancelled, Father is placed on category one risk
19/05/2013	“He says he has never physically involved with anybody. He has only been on internet porn sites though he has chatted online with underage girls”
24/10/2013 – 07/11/2013	Father admitted to D Hospital “due to deterioration in mental due to increased obsession with pornography” - Intake notes mention 3 x admissions to public psych hospitals and 2 x D Hospital - Auditory hallucinations
07/11/2013	Discharged early, “reported having negative thoughts about a female patient which is causing him distress”
30/05/2014	Child subject of these proceedings, Y born, now aged 7 (“Y”)
~2014	Father punched X (then aged 2 years) in the stomach whilst mother was out of the room, stating “I punched her. I punched her in the stomach because she wouldn’t get out of my face. I snapped, and punched her and she fell off the bed into the wardrobe doors.”
11/2014	Mother was in bed unwell whilst father was on the computer, father advised mother that Y had vomited when he was distracted by the computer, when Mother entered the room it was apparent Y was very unwell. Mother attended to Y and arranged an ambulance. Y had a febrile convulsion and was taken to G Hospital.
2016	Father reported himself to HR department at work for masturbating in a public space, accessing pornography and attempting suicide with a knife in the work bathroom. Father made redundant, spending $22,000 of his payment on pornography and gambling.
12/2016	Father admitted himself to H Hospital in Suburb J, disclosed that he had accessed child pornography and posed as a child online. Father asked to leave hospital after expressing sexual desire for an underage patient.
03/03/2017	Parties separated on a final basis
04/05/2017	Father attempted suicide overdosing on anti-depressants
28/04/2017	Father admitted to D Hospital Intake letter from GP includes handwritten comment “He has a obsession w/ underage girls”. Intake paperwork from hospital reads “Brief past history: child pornography”. “DOCs involved for child porn in 2013”
02/05/2017	Report from D Hospital reads “His pornography addiction/ role playing with a child avatar has continued to dominate his life”
15/05/2017	Patient at another D Hospital alleged current patient at D Hospital Suburb K (where Father was currently patient) named Mr L at an AA meeting, “stated he could sell child pornography to him” (Father maintained false allegations)
16/05/2017	Father stated the following: - Uses chat rooms/ pornography for up to 12 hours a day - “only used child pornography for 2 weeks in 2013” - Does role playing – plays as a girl talking to men - Feels pornography became exacerbated ~5 years ago when wife became pregnant and Mr L saw a pornography involving a father raping a baby” - Has repeated unwanted sexual thoughts of girls
15/05/2017	Allegations regarding Father offering to sell child pornography were reported to Department of Family & Community Services by D Hospital
05/05/2018	Father called a friend and advised he had consumed 500x Clomipramine 25mg, NSW Police and Ambulance staff attended and father was detained pursuant to section 20 of the Mental Health Act and conveyed to hospital
27/06/2018	Social worker interviewed Father, Father stated that he poses as a 20 year old woman online “for sexual gratification”, stated that whilst online he has been offered photos of children in acts of sexual abuse and torture and that he has created a file and downloaded collection of these images Father stated to social worker that he has another collection of child pornography that he views for sexual gratification. This was reported to NSW Police
27/06/2017	Father had computers and mobile phones seized by NSW Police in regards to possible child abuse material
07/2018	Mother received phone call from Suburb M Police Station whilst in Country N regarding child pornography disclosures, the mother was not aware of the nature of the allegations.
19/02/2019	Parties divorced
2019-2021	Father spends ad hoc time with the children
~04-07/2019	Whilst Children spend time with Father, Father’s partner insists children bathe with her daughter, enters the bathroom whilst the children are showering or changing without their permission, refuses to permit the children to call their mother
26/12/2019	Father advises the children that he will have to choose between his partners and the children, after X argues with her regarding calling her mother. Father returns children early.
01/2020	Father’s partner returned to Country O
05/2020	Mother and children contact Father regarding spending time
05/2020	Father declines time, insists on Court proceedings and mediation, blocks mother’s mobile phone number
16/05/2020	Children spend day time with Father
10-13/07/2020	Children spend time with Father
16/07/2020	Children disclose to mother: Father would spend time alone with each child, taking the other to paternal grandmother’s home; Father took children to GP to look at the children’s vaginas; Father insisted to children they required Psychological treatment; Mother sends text message to father regarding her concerns
17/07/2020	Father makes report to Child Protection Helpline, alleging: - Children expressed suicidal ideation to him; - Children fight a lot and swear at each other; - Y gets physically violent - He has bi-polar disorder but is currently medicated; - X alleged to Father’s partner she witnessed her cousin inserting plastic toys into Y’s vagina 1 year earlier, simulating child birth. This allegation has never been referred to in the father’s material, or explained. Mother reports children were referring to playing “babies”, placing dolls under their shirts and mimicking giving birth.
09/08/2020	Father sent Mother email stating: “Please tell me now if you are going to allow me to have the children in the next year. I am about to dispose of their beds and clothes and toys if not.”
10/04/2021	Father attends children’s school unannounced. This is the last time he sees the children.
07/2021	Father interviewed by the media regarding impact of COVID-19 travel restrictions on his relationship and discloses he has been experiencing suicidal ideation
10/09/2021	Father commences proceedings, swears affidavit stating that he has not been hospitalised for mental health treatment since 2018
10/2021	Children commence school at P School
05/11/2021	First return date. Father does not appear and his lawyer informs the Court the father has had a relapse and is hospitalised.
16/11/2021	Father’s solicitor sends correspondence alleging father attended Q Hospital Emergency Department on 20/10/2021 was released on 21/10/2021, and was not admitted to mental health ward.
December 2021	Father travels internationally with partner
January 2022	Father and his partner are interviewed by media online, states He was hospitalised twice in 2021 most recently in October
21/01/2022	Father tells mother he is discontinuing proceedings.
27/01/2022	Father files notice of discontinuance
31/01/2022	Father makes Facebook post suggesting he has posed as a minor on Snapchat and that “it was possible to obtain… illicit material, and without money changing hands. You will need to stop and think what that might mean”