FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA
(DIVISION 1)
Culbert & Culbert (No 3) [2024] FedCFamC1F 892
File number: NCC 1363 of 2021 Judgment of: HARTNETT J Date of judgment: 20 December 2024 Catchwords: FAMILY LAW – PARENTING – Application for Review – Where the mother sought an Application for Review – Where the mother sought leave to adduce further evidence – Where final parenting orders were made in December 2023 – Where the father seeks the final orders remain – Where the mother seeks a reconsideration of the final parenting orders – Where the Court makes a finding of a significant change in circumstances – Where the Court is satisfied it is in the best interests of the children for the final parenting orders to be reconsidered. Legislation: Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) ss 60CC, 65DAAA
Family Law Amendment Act 2023 (Cth)
Family Law Amendment (Information Sharing) Act 2023 (Cth)
Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Amendment (2024 Measures No.1) Rules 2024 (Cth)
Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth) r 14.05
Cases cited: CDJ v VAJ(No 1) (1998) 197 CLR 172
Culbert & Culbert (No 2) [2023] FedCFamC1F 1127
Rice & Asplund (1979) FLC 90-725
Searson v Searson (2017) FLC 90-725
SPS v PLS (2008) FLC 93-363
Walden & Cooper [2020] FamCA 104
Division: Division 1 First Instance Number of paragraphs: 98 Date of hearing: 25 July 2024 Place: Melbourne, via videolink Counsel for the Applicant: Ms Stoikovska SC Solicitor for the Applicant: Barker Evans The Respondent: Litigant in person ORDERS
NCC 1363 of 2021 FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 1)
BETWEEN: MR CULBERT
Applicant
AND: MS CULBERT
Respondent
ORDER MADE BY:
HARTNETT J
DATE OF ORDER:
20 DECEMBER 2024
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.The mother be granted leave to tender into evidence the expert report prepared by Dr AB, psychiatrist, dated 8 July 2024, together with the affidavit of Dr AB filed 16 July 2024.
2.There shall be a reconsideration of the final parenting orders made 21 December 2023.
3.The orders made 21 December 2023 continue in full force and effect until further order AND THE COURT NOTES THAT the children shall commence to attend a school located in closer proximity to the father.
4.The proceeding is otherwise adjourned to a trial management hearing before Justice Hartnett via videolink at 10.00am on 29 January 2025.
Note: The form of the order is subject to the entry in the Court’s records.
Note: This copy of the Court’s Reasons for judgment may be subject to review to remedy minor typographical or grammatical errors (r 10.14(b) Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth)), or to record a variation to the order pursuant to r 10.13 Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth).
Part XIVB of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) makes it an offence, except in very limited circumstances, to publish an account of proceedings that…
Continue reading Culbert & Culbert (No 3)
Sign in free to access the full text
Details
- AGLC
- Culbert & Culbert (No 3) [2024] FedCFamC1F 892
- Case
- [2024] FedCFamC1F 892
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
In the matter of Culbert & Culbert (No 3), Hartnett J was tasked with determining whether to grant an application for a review of final parenting orders previously made in December 2023. The mother sought to adduce further evidence, specifically a psychiatric assessment of herself conducted by Dr AB in July 2024, which was not available to the court at the time of the original decision. The father opposed this application, arguing that the mother had not discharged the onus of establishing the relevance and admissibility of the new evidence. The court found that the mother had indeed met this burden, given that the psychiatric assessment revealed a significant change in circumstances, as the mother no longer held the fixed belief that the father had sexually abused their daughter, a belief that had been central to the previous court's decision.
Hartnett J considered the legal principles outlined in section 65DAAA of the Family Law Act 1975, which grants the court broad discretion to admit further evidence if it deems it appropriate. The court concluded that the new evidence was indeed material and relevant, as it provided critical insights into the mother's current mental health status, which directly impacted the best interests of the children. Given that the mother's earlier fixed and unshakeable belief had posed a serious risk of psychological harm to the children, the court found that the change in her mental health condition warranted a reconsideration of the final parenting orders. Consequently, the court granted leave for the mother to tender the expert report and affidavit of Dr AB and ordered a reconsideration of the final parenting orders made in December 2023. The existing orders remained in effect until further order, and the children were to commence attending a school closer to the father's residence. The proceedings were adjourned for a trial management hearing.
Hartnett J considered the legal principles outlined in section 65DAAA of the Family Law Act 1975, which grants the court broad discretion to admit further evidence if it deems it appropriate. The court concluded that the new evidence was indeed material and relevant, as it provided critical insights into the mother's current mental health status, which directly impacted the best interests of the children. Given that the mother's earlier fixed and unshakeable belief had posed a serious risk of psychological harm to the children, the court found that the change in her mental health condition warranted a reconsideration of the final parenting orders. Consequently, the court granted leave for the mother to tender the expert report and affidavit of Dr AB and ordered a reconsideration of the final parenting orders made in December 2023. The existing orders remained in effect until further order, and the children were to commence attending a school closer to the father's residence. The proceedings were adjourned for a trial management hearing.
Orders
Orders of the court
NCC 1363 of 2021
FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 1)
BETWEEN:
MR CULBERT
Applicant
AND:
MS CULBERT
Respondent
ORDER MADE BY:
HARTNETT J
DATE OF ORDER:
20 DECEMBER 2024
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. The mother be granted leave to tender into evidence the expert report prepared by Dr AB, psychiatrist, dated 8 July 2024, together with the affidavit of Dr AB filed 16 July 2024.
2. There shall be a reconsideration of the final parenting orders made 21 December 2023.
3. The orders made 21 December 2023 continue in full force and effect until further order AND THE COURT NOTES THAT the children shall commence to attend a school located in closer proximity to the father.
4. The proceeding is otherwise adjourned to a trial management hearing before Justice Hartnett via videolink at 10.00am on 29 January 2025.
Note: The form of the order is subject to the entry in the Court’s records.
Note: This copy of the Court’s Reasons for judgment may be subject to review to remedy minor typographical or grammatical errors (r 10.14(b) Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth)), or to record a variation to the order pursuant to r 10.13 Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth).
Part XIVB of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) makes it an offence, except in very limited circumstances, to publish an account of proceedings that identify persons, associated persons, or witnesses involved in family law proceedings.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
In accordance with the Orders made by Smith J on 21 December 2023, the children moved their primary residence from that of their mother to that of their father with the assistance of the Court Child Services at the City L Registry of the Court in early 2024. Prior to that, the children had spent time with their father in accordance with the orders made by his Honour, which included daily and overnight time in the period from 26 December 2023 until 10 January 2024. Various restraints were made as set out in the orders annexed to these reasons, with Order 26 providing that the mother’s compliance with the injunctions in those orders was a condition precedent to any time the children would spend with the mother, and to the communication the children would have with the mother.APPLICATION TO ADDUCE FURTHER EVIDENCE The mother sought, pursuant to s 65DAAA(2)(b) of the Act, the reconsideration of the final parenting orders. The Court has a broad discretion to admit further evidence, as discussed in CDJ v VAJ(No 1) (1998) 197 CLR 172 at [114]. Whilst the failure to lead evidence at trial is a relevant factor, it is a variable factor, the weight of which depends upon all of the other factors.[7] [7] CDJ v VAJ (No 1) (1998) 197 CLR 172 at [116]. The mother sought to rely upon the affidavit of consultant psychiatrist Dr AB sworn or affirmed on 16 July 2024, together with a bundle of documents marked “JS-1 to JS-3” annexed thereto. That affidavit went to a psychiatric assessment of the mother as carried out by Dr AB in July 2024 for approximately two and a half hours. The assessment was conducted via audiovisual link. Additionally, Dr AB reviewed considerable documents as forwarded to him going to the mental health treatment and/or functioning of the mother. In preparing his report, Dr AB had the benefit of access to all of the subpoenaed material relating to the mother’s mental health, save for the notes from the mother’s psychological assessment at OO Health Service pertaining to a possible brief psychotic episode. Dr AB was not provided with the reasons for judgment dated 21 December 2023 for the purpose of ensuring, as submitted by senior counsel for the mother, that Dr AB’s report would be as impartial as possible. Clearly, this was material not available to the Court at trial. It was material which evidenced a change in the approach of the mother toward the father in that her earlier fixed views as to him having sexually abused the child Y had altered. She was no longer of that view. The mother submitted that, if the psychiatric evidence was permitted to be before the Court, it would find an entirely different case for the Court to consider as to with whom the children should primarily live in the promotion of their best interests. The father resisted the application for the Court to have before it this material. The onus is on the mother to establish the relevance and admissibility of the matters raised in the affidavit of Dr AB and the documents exhibited thereto. I am satisfied that the mother has discharged that onus and that the recently obtained psychiatric assessment of the mother was material not available to the Court that made the final parenting orders.
Decision
Reasons for decision
If a finding is made that there has been a significant change of circumstances, the Court must consider the matters set out in s 60CC of the Act as to whether it is in the best interests of the child for the final parenting order to be reconsidered.JUSTICE SMITH’S JUDGMENT DATED 21 DECEMBER 2023 I herein set out some of those reasons which are relevant to the matters which I must determine:[6] [6] Culbert & Culbert (No 2) [2023] FedCFamC1F 1127.8.For reasons set out below, in summary, I find that the mother suffers from a long standing untreated mental health impairment which results in paranoid and irrational thoughts and beliefs and fears, particularly directed at the father. …16.On that basis, I make orders for the children to live primarily with the father and for the father to have sole parental responsibility, and orders for the children’s time with the mother to be conditional on her complying with an injunction against continuing to convey or promote the false belief in order to balance the risk of the mother continuing to promote the false belief to the children against the clear harm they will suffer if their relationship with their primary attachment figure, the mother, is terminated or severely limited.…50.The mother’s mental health was raised as an issue by the father early in the proceedings. There was no medical report or opinion on the mother’s mental health status. The father sought the appointment of a single expert psychiatrist at an interim hearing on 7 October 2022, after the matter went part heard. However, there were no funds available to pay for one so no order was made. The mother did not lead any evidence from any qualified or treating medical or mental health practitioner. Her submission was that it was unnecessary as she does not have any mental health impairments.51.While the evidence of the mother's mental health and family violence are interlinked it is convenient to deal with them separately, starting with the mother’s mental health.52.The father’s evidence was that in October of 2011 the mother commenced taking medication for “mental health issues” and that he then became aware she had been receiving assistance from a psychologist for “some time” prior. He said the mother stopped taking her medication during her pregnancy with [X] and that she resumed when no longer breast feeding. The father said that when not taking her medication the mother became “erratic, manipulative and verbally abusive”. He said the mother again stopped taking her medication whilst pregnant with [Y] and did not recommence. He said she became both physically and verbally abusive towards him. He said that when not taking medication the mother would accuse him of false things:… including but not limited to having an affair, having another family interstate, being gay and having gay sex at public toilets, accusing me of getting a friend's younger sister pregnant, being an alcoholic, being addicted to drugs, being addicted to Panadol or prescription medication, having secret bank accounts, and hiding money.53.In this context of the allegations of sexual abuse the father told the expert that he believed “at some stage the mother has believed it to be real and that it has happened”. That is the basis of his primary concern that the mother poses a risk of psychological harm to [Y], i.e., that the mother has falsely persuaded, and will continue to re-inforce, to [Y] that she was sexually abused by the father when she was not. In this way the father says the mother has caused, and will continue to cause, [Y] the same psychological trauma as if she had been sexually abused by the father. Similarly, [X] has become aware of the allegations that the father sexually abused [Y], and if false, this belief is also likely to have ongoing negative psychological impacts on [X].54.The expert interviewed both parties but not the children. The mother raised her concerns about “sexual abuse” by [C] and by the father. She did not raise the disclosure regarding [D]. The father raised his concern about the psychological harm to the children from the mother’s “mental health and erratic behaviours”, her response to [Y’s] disclosures about [C] and inability to facilitate a relationship with him.55.Both parties also raised their cross allegations of verbal, psychological and physical abuse and controlling behaviours. 56.At that time there were no records in relation to the mother’s mental health. The expert recorded that:57.The expert interviewed both parties, [Ms K], [Mr E] and the children on 28 March 2022. The expert recorded: 91.The mother reports no formal diagnosis and only a brief past period of 4-5 months in about 2016 when she took prescribed medication […] in relation her mental health. The father reports believing that the mother was medicated for a more sustained period of time, that she ceased medication when pregnant with [X], recommenced medication at some stage after [X’s] birth, and ceased medication again when she was pregnant with [Y]. The father reports that, while she was “still angry and abrupt,” the mother “seemed far more balanced” when medicated previously and the extent of her behaviour, paranoia, and level of conflict between them and between her and her family members, friends and colleagues was not as bad. A note from psychologist [Ms U] (subpoena number 8) from April 2016 informs that the mother had commenced antidepressants. There does not appear to be any further information available regarding the mother’s history of prescribed medication in relation to her mental health.…92.The mother was asked specifically about her mental health in 2018 based on a review of notes contained in information from [W Health Service] (subpoena number 8). The mother described the mention of “psychosis” (a word used by a treating psychiatrist at [OO Health Service in mid] 2018) as being “unfortunate wording.” She explained that [Y] was born in 2017, she was in an abusive relationship with the father, that she was trying to run her business, and was experiencing postnatal anxiety, and that this combination of factors was placing her under great stress at the time. Regarding the documented “sensory stuff” (i.e. documented “sensory hallucinations” as noted by psychologist [Ms U] [in mid] 2018), the mother reports that she never saw or heard anything as suggested by [Ms U’s] notes, but that she felt like there was a presence in the house and explained that she has crystals and does believe “that there’s something else out there.” She expressed feeling that the psychiatrist she saw at the time did not actually assess her properly and was presumptive in forming their view of her. The mother reports that she essentially helped herself at the time, with support from [Ms U], and that she was better two weeks later.58.The mother’s trial affidavit, filed 22 July 2022, did not adequately address the historic evidence of impaired mental health set out in the subpoena material, which was available to her and her legal advisors, and which was raised with her by the expert in March 2022. 59.The mother referred to the fact that in March 2020 the father refused to return the children until she provided mental health records. She said that she had “situational anxiety” and received treatment from her GP, recently started on a small dose of [medication] which she had previously taken for anxiety for a few months in 2016, and was attending counselling with a [Ms V] every two weeks. The mother did not address the issue in her updating affidavit filed 6 March 2023, despite the matter being raised with her in cross examination at the first hearing. 60.The documents referred to by the expert, and others produced on subpoena, were tendered. The mother was cross examined on them. The mother’s history to the expert was of seeing counsellors from around 2010 and of medication starting in 2016. The available documents only went back to 2015.61.Given the absence of any medical opinion evidence directed to the relevant issues I consider it is necessary and appropriate to set out the most relevant material in some detail to explain the basis on which I have formed the view I have concerning the mother’s mental health without the assistance of an expert opinion.62.From at least late 2015 the mother was seeing [Ms U], a clinical psychologist at [W Health Service]. [In] May 2016, Ms U wrote to [Dr YY]. She said she had discussed the mother’s anxiety with her, including how “she reacts before she thinks with her husband”, and that the mother was benefiting from her low dose anti-depressant. It was suggested that the mother would hopefully “be able to focus and see her anxiety as not just a reaction to external events”. The mother raised with [Ms U] the possibility she had borderline personality disorder. However, [Ms U’s] did not consider that likely. [In] June 2016 [Ms U] wrote to [Dr Z] noting that the mother had undertaken an on-line screen with the [ZZ Program] which “suggested a probable […] Disorder” and that the mother was not concerned about pursuing any further assessments. 63.The parties’ relationship deteriorated from early 2018 with each party making allegations of increasing family violence. [Ms U] continued to treat the mother on mental health referrals. 64.There was an event [in early] 2018 which involved ambulance and police attendance. This was the first recorded police involvement in a domestic dispute. The mother relied upon this as evidence of the father’s persistent family violence. She said the father was verbally abusing her, that he filmed himself pretending she was assaulting him, and that he then called 000. 65. The COPS report read: … Ambulance officers were already on scene and police spoke with the victim [Mr Culbert] outside the house. The victim had driven back from [City CC] yesterday and arrived home today. He has been experiencing problems with his wife, P/[Ms Culbert], where they argue and he believes she is acting strangely due to untreated mental illness. P/N has accused the victim of sleeping with a female friend and getting her pregnant in recent weeks. During the argument […] the victim informed the P/N this friend was not pregnant and he was not cheating. During the argument the victim re-packed his things and attempted to leave with their 3yo son [X]. The P/N tried to stop the victim from leaving and allegedly assaulted the victim. The victim filmed part of the incident and contacted ambos to assist his wife. Police spoke with P/N who seemed well but did admit she suffers anxiety and has been stressed. P/N claims the victim constantly loses jobs and she has do to (sic) everything around the house. She also claims he goes partying and leaves the victim to look after children. P/N believes the victim is trying to leave her. P/N does accuse the victim of sleeping with a 14yo amongst other things. P/N has been seeing a counsellor but is not taking any medication. Police then reviewed the video the victim took. The footage depicts an argument but no offences were detected. It is clear the P/N was trying to prevent the victim from leaving but she was not violent. The victim appears to dramatise being “touched” by the P/N. The victim told police he has not lost his job; he received a redundancy and is starting a new job next month. Police are of the opinion the P/N is more anxious than she indicates and is exaggerating what is actually occurring. There is stress between all parties looking after their young children and the victim appears to he (sic) paranoid about the victim leaving her…(Bold emphasis added)66.The father was cross examined on this event. He did not agree that he was pretending the mother was assaulting him and maintained that he had been pushed. He denied that he was trying to leave the relationship or that the recording was to be used as evidence in the event the relationship ended. He said he made the recording to try and get the mother help.67.There was no evidence that the father was cheating on the mother, nor that he had impregnated another woman. These allegations, which were the kind of false allegations the father said the mother was making when suffering poor mental health, were not put to the father in cross examination as being true.68.In response to my question to the father about the allegation the mother made to police that he was sleeping with a 14-year-old, he said: “[t]here was no 14 year old. It was some irrational thought or thing that she said … it was basically in retaliation”. He said police spoke with the mother and she “confirmed with them that she made that up, that it never happened”. The father was not challenged on this evidence. It was not submitted there was any basis for the mother’s allegation of child sex abuse of a 14 year old as made to police at that time.69.[In] May 2018 [Ms U] wrote to [Dr Z] requesting a plan for further sessions. She recorded “[Ms Culbert] presents with severe anxiety which manifests most noticeably in conflict with her husband” and that:At our last session [Ms Culbert] reported that she and her husband had had some distressing times. Her husband has been employed for 3 weeks now – [Ms Culbert] anxious that it will not last. He came home from being away for 4 days, had driven 15 hours and was putting the little boy to bed and looking at his phone. [Ms Culbert] got angry with him and then attacked him verbally about her fears that he was seeing another woman. It became very unpleasant - her husband stormed out. He called an ambulance who came and took her BP and chatted to her, and the police also arrived. No action was taken.[Ms Culbert] told me she has some paranoid thoughts that her husband might harm her, and some times senses a presence in the room.(Bold emphasis added)70. [Ms U’s] assessment was, relevantly:DASSDepression-18(moderate) Anxiety-16(severe) Stress-38(extremely severe)…ASSESSMENT AND MANAGEMENT[Ms Culbert] is reluctant to consider medication. I didn’t mention specifically a psychiatric assessment but I think that could be helpful. I am seeing her in 3 weeks and will talk address that. She is well engaged in therapy, but it is her inability to manage her emotional reactivity that seems to be the main issue.(As per the original)71.[In] 2018 the [BB Health Service] recorded a referral and, amongst other things, the following history:Situation:Worsening anxiety and paranoia. Lives with supportive husband and 2 kids. On […] leave now. Sees psychologist from [W Health Service] - once / month.Background:Anxiety in the past. Was on [medication] until […] 2017, stopped due to become pregnant.Assessment:Irrational fears/ sensory feelings or hallucinations, anxious with heart racing, feels like “weight on her body, paranoid that her husband is going to hurt her, this impacting her sleep, withdrawn, poor memory, overthinking, pressured speech, circumstantial.…Reason for Referral…[Ms Culbert] reported experiencing the following symptoms ;•Used to be [a communications professional] - read a lot. Doesn't want to be medicated.•Works in [a government department]..•Had anxiety in the past.•Sensory hallucinations/ paranoia - Lately, finding hard to sleep because “feels like there is a spiritual presence at home”. Goes to bed, and then gets a weird feeling like “someone walked in to room and heart beats goes fast, feels stress response, tries to lay on her side, then ends up like, sometimes it goes away - in the last couple of months, had feelings like this for 10 times. Feeling like being in a haunted place. Did hear something like, “whistle”.•Feels like, “weight on her body”. Used to get this in the past when she had anxious. Heavy feeling.•All the above impacting her sleep. All the above happens once in a week, can’t do anything on those days. Feeling or worrying that this could get worse.•Anxiety issues - up and down, situational. Gets raised heart rates, rushing thoughts.•Withdrawn - from people and from doing things.•Energy is okay - Has a [medical condition] - sometimes tired due to this or anything else, unsure.•Always needs to be busy - motivation is okay.•Husband has got depression and anxiety - makes her anxious. Husband lost job recently and that was a stress.•Memory is really bad.•Paranoia - Sometimes, “husband says mean things. When she is really tired, had thoughts like if husband is going to put a pillow on her face and harm her, these are thoughts that came to her head 3 times so far”.•States, “anxious, overthinking, super busy mother”. Denied SH and SI. Denied any HI.•Snappy at times.•Poor concentration at present. Not able to finish tasks.…MENTAL STATE IMPRESSIONS Well engaged, feels embarrassed that she needs to express her issues, however, cooperative, increased rate and quantity of speech, some pressure of speech and circumstantiality, irrational fears / sensory experiences, paranoia, good insight and seeking help. …At risk mental state [x] Yes [] No [] UnknownIrrational fears/ sensory feelings or hallucinations, anxious with heart racing, feels like “weight on her body, paranoid that her husband is going to hurt her, this impacting her sleep, withdrawn, poor memory, overthinking, pressured speech, circumstantial. 72.[In mid] 2018, a letter from the Health Service to an unnamed medical practitioner stated that: [Ms Culbert] was referred to our service by her psychologist, [Ms U], at [W Health Service], due to concerns regarding escalating anxiety, along with the occurrence of paranoid and bizarre ideas. There is a background of anxiety, which has been managed with [medication] (ceased […] 2017 due to pregnancy) and psychology (multiple times in the past).73. It continued:Recently, [Ms Culbert] has felt there is a “presence in the room” when she is going to bed at night. She then hears tweaks in the air-conditioning or creaks at the door, which she believes are related to the spirit. She does not think it will actually harm her or her family in any specific way, but feels the spirit isn’t one that is kind. She feels a fear when she senses this presence. She turns on her side and eventually falls asleep.At night, she has also had thoughts her husband may harm her. She does not have such thoughts about him in the daytime. There is no history of domestic violence.There is no history consistent with obsessive-compulsive disorder nor mania.Poor sleep as is a light sleeper to begin with. Often woken up by sounds made by the dog or [X] climbing into bed with her. Often has ruminating thoughts. For example, on a cold night, she was wondering if the baby was warm, and began googling “how many layers of blanket” are needed to keep a baby warm.Past psychiatric history:With the birth of her first child, [X] - in the initial months she also felt a “presence in the room” associated with feeling a breeze on her face that came from the window. This somehow resolved. She felt this spirit had been a good one, compared to the one currently. She mentioned that she checked with friends, who said that such occurrences of spirits were normal for new mothers.Anxiety - formally diagnosed 2012 for the first time, started counselling (CBT).-medications first tried in 2016, […]. Did not tolerate side effects, switched to [another medication].- has been on [that medication] since then until cessation in 2017.No past inpatient psychiatric admissions.…Is seemingly resistant to medications, which needs to be further explored.Imp:Bizarre beliefs and increased anxiety, which raise concerns re post-partum psychosis, though not seemingly of a delusional intensity, with little other accompanying signs. …4. Currently not amenable to a trial of antipsychotic to aid sleep. To try her preferred strategies of sleep hygiene, plus support with parenting routines to see if they can ameliorate some anxiety and aid sleep. (As per the original)74.The Health Service advised the mother that they wanted to speak with the father and she consented. The conversation with the father was [in mid] 2028: … [Mr Culbert] states that [Ms Culbert] has always been a worrier, but over the past 4-5 months this seems to have escalated with angry outbursts towards him and at times in front of [X]. [Mr Culbert] reports that these are happening around 1-2 times per week. [Mr Culbert] reports that he walks away when she does this as its the only way he knows how to stop the escalation. He described the event when the ambulance and police were called. This was similar to [Ms Culbert's] story, but why he drove away and took [X] with him and how the ambulance had asked him to wait for them. He described another incident of when they were driving and [Ms Culbert] wanted a trampoline for [X], but [Mr Culbert] said they couldnt have one in their yard due to the steep slope. [Mr Culbert] reports [Ms Culbert] escalating to the point of saying she was going to jump out of the moving car.[Mr Culbert] states [Ms Culbert] is accusing him of having a girlfriend; of having another family; of being gay and meeting boys in parks and that he is going to kill her - which has led her to sleep in a different bedroom. He states that [Ms Culbert] thinks she is seeing spirits and has saged the house and has vacumned (sic) corners in the home to get rid of the spirits. [Mr Culbert] reports that after [X, Ms Culbert] thought she saw spirits, but that didnt last long and wasnt as bad as now.[Mr Culbert] states that that [Ms Culbert] has some high moments and ‘then I know its going to end badly’ ...... ‘either that night or the next day with a angry outburst’.When asked about cleaning or OCD tendencies [Mr Culbert] replied that [Ms Culbert] ‘is always moving’ ..... , ‘she doesn't clean, she will say she has spent the day cleaning, but she is only moving things from one spot to another’. [Mr Culbert] feels this has ‘got worse since [Y] was born’.When asked how [Ms Culbert] is with the children, [Mr Culbert] reports ‘she is good, shes a good mother, though [X] has been with them during some of the fights’.[Mr Culbert] reports that [Ms Culbert] has issues with people at work and often was crying about this when she was working.[Mr Culbert] feels that [Ms Culbert] was ‘more balanced when she was on medication’ .... it didnt take away the outbursts, but they were a lot less than now’. He stated that [Ms Culbert] is paranoid about taking medication as she is paranoid about the drug companies’.(As per the original)75.[In] 2018 the mother was seen with [Y] after a weekend away in [City DD]. The record states in part: … Thought content - states no longer feels the presence of spirits at home. Felt it once while on family holiday in [City DD] over the weekend, which made her think “maybe it's in my head” because it's not just happening at home.- however, states nil further occurrences since then- has been researching naturopathic methods to help her sleep and cope with stress, wants tests for zinc and copper levels etc.- hesitant to try medications because she works in [health] and knows “medications are not an exact science”. Her expressed views on medication and her choice of naturopathy were conflicting or vague at times- wants to try sleep and relaxation strategies, look after herself etc before she revisits medications.Sleep remains interrupted.Case discussed with [Dr EE], [a] psychiatrist, in a de-identified manner, for advice on management.Result of discussion as below:-- Impression: Agitated post-partum state with high levels of free-floating anxiety and poor sleep.Differentials are that of post-partum psychosis (though the time frame is not usual for typical post-partum psychosis); one must consider the contribution of pre-morbid anxiety and possible schizotypal personality traits, and the lack of sleep.- Recommendations:l. Address sleep first, then re-assess mental state. Preferred option is [a medication], starting at 0.25mg nocte, which is the preferred agent at mother-baby units to address agitated states in mothers, about 1% passes into breastmilk, can make baby sleepy. Aim for 5 to 7 nights of good sleep then reassess mental state. [Medication] can be increased to 0.5mg if required.76.[In] 2018 an email from [Ms U] to the Health Service in response to a “request for info re [Ms Culbert’s] premorbid personality and anxiety symptoms” read: … “Hi [Ms FF], [Ms Culbert] did mention when her eldest child was 4 months ([in] 2014) that she was hearing some voices and sensing a presence. Didn’t mention these in follow up sessions till more recently […]. Did take some antidepressant medication for a time but not happy with this.She saw [Dr GG] for a psychiatric assessment [in early] 2015 at [W Health Service].Has always been very anxious about money - her husband has lost quite a few jobs. Doesn't have a regular GP – wants to see someone who bulk bills. Critical of her husband's behaviour - doesn't wipe down the kitchen benches, eats white bread, Admits he is a good dad.Some problematic relationships but does have friends. Always worried about her self. She wondered if she had [a mental health disorder]… 77.In that context the Health Service sought to obtain a copy of [Dr GG’s] psychiatric assessment. It appears that they were not able to obtain a copy. However a summary was provided over the phone, recorded as: - however […] able to provide some info over phone by looking over reports fr 2015.- ax by [Dr GG] in 2015 was [several] months after birth of first child .Noted:-- increased irrationality with poor sleep, VH of man standing in room when [Ms Culbert] is half-asleep. This is similar to her experiences as a child. Sometimes wake up screaming.- lows were of feelings of intense gratitude for family & friends, feeling creative- downs were when she would whine more and feel increased interpersonal sensitivity- no overt perpetual dirturbacnes (sic) noted, good insight- imp was of GAD with secondary depression, on a b/g of familial hx of mood and anxiety disorder. also noted thyroid and Fe deficiencies.(As per the original, bold emphasis added)78. The reference to “VH” appears to be a reference to a “visual hallucination”. 79.[In mid] 2018 the mother had a telephone consultation with the Health Service which was recorded as: Phone call to [Ms Culbert] who states she ‘is feeling really good’. [Ms Culbert] was talking fast, but able to slow herself down and did not talk over staff. [Ms Culbert] continues to ruminate about things - ie appointment with [Dr HH]; her partner; medication etc. We discussed anxiety, the impact on ones brain and body - the rumination that can continue. We discussed the importance of sleep. [Ms Culbert] states she is sleeping well, she has started walking every day and feels this is making a difference. [Ms Culbert] reports eating regular meals. [Ms Culbert] states that she has not seen spirit since [City DD] and she is now accepting that this must be her anxiety, not a real thing, ‘and I think that’s all gone now’. [Ms Culbert] states that her and [Mr Culbert] continue to have issues and that 'we just dont communicate well'.We discussed the importance of [Ms Culbert] managing her own anxiety and that she couldnt make [Mr Culbert] seek help, but that she can talk with her counsellor about ways of managing [Mr Culbert’s] behaviours. We discussed [Mr Culbert’s] behaviours and [Ms Culbert] feels at times ‘its like emotional abuse ... he swears at me when he gets angry ... then I react to this’. Discussed DV and that [Ms Culbert] could access support to discuss this further ... [Ms Culbert] then said ‘No its just his way of coping .... hes had a terrible upbringing’. Discussed that [Ms Culbert] did not need to tolerate any abuse and discussed the impact of this on the children. [Ms Culbert] then acknowledge that her accepting help is beneficial for the whole family and she didnt need to access DV services. (As per the original)80.[In] 2018 the Health Service conducted a home visit. The record of the visit includes, amongst other things, that: … [Ms Culbert] discussed her continued worry about finances, how she budgets, how different her and her partner are with money. ‘[Mr Culbert] is a spender … I give him $70 a week to spend’. [Ms Culbert] talked of returning to work earlier than planned due to financial stress. She talked of books she had read on money and building wealth etc.…We had a number of conversations around the impact of her ‘worry and ruminations’ on herself and her family, discussed medication how this can assist, though [Ms Culbert] continues to be reluctant. Discussed longer term counselling, but [Ms Culbert] states she had excuses due to finances, some relevant, some not so much - staff offered alternatives…81. [In mid] 2028 a Health Service Review recorded that: [AM Health] Supervision and case consultation with [Dr JJ] and [Dr KK] [AM Health] Co-Ordinator.Discuss [Ms Culbert] mental state, her initial presentation, [Ms Culbert] not wishing any medication, but appears reluctant or unable to seek longer term counselling support. Discussed [Ms Culbert’s]’s ruminations and paranoia. That she continues to ruminate on her mental health and how she can support this best with natural therapies. Discussed my observations.[Dr JJ] felt there was no reason for FACS notification or CWU report - children appeared well cared for and not frightened of their mother. [Ms Culbert] is not currently suitable to be scheduled as she is managing daily life. [Ms Culbert] has been able to implement some strategies, such as meditation prior to bed; getting out each day; meeting up with friends; she states the spirits have gone and no thoughts of harm to herself or others.THOUGHTS:Encourage [Ms Culbert] to attend [Dr HH's] review appointment.Phone partner to see if he has further concerns - encourage him to contact services if he is concerned with [Ms Culbert's] mental health.Try and keep [Ms Culbert] engaged in service.Letter to GP advising of support offered and [Ms Culbert’s] reluctance.(As per the original)82.The mother’s unwillingness to take medication and to see a psychiatrist appear to have lead to the mother’s disengagement from the Health Service. Their records of [mid] 2018 state: P/C to [Ms Culbert], who states she has been doing well. States she has been feeling good and attributes this to some lifestyle changes and the support she has been receiving from [Ms LL], [AM Health]. [Ms Culbert] states she will not be attending MO review tomorrow as she is not willing to take medication at this stage and feels discussing same will cause more stress for her. Attempted to convince [Ms Culbert] to attend though she was adamant this would not be helpful for her, then began giving other reason she could not attend, such as friends visiting, errands to run, etc. [Ms Culbert] states she does not want any further MO reviews booked at this stage, states in future if she gets unwell and needs to see a psychiatrist she will seek referral to [Dr NN], who one of her friends had spoken highly of. [Ms Culbert] asked if she could remain engaged with [Ms LL] if she stopped seeing the Dr, I advised that our recommendation would be that she continue seeing the Dr alongside [Ms LL] and myself. [Ms Culbert] asked if [Dr HH] could call her during appointment time as she wants to discuss blood test results, I advised I would ask [Dr HH].Email sent to [Dr HH] regarding above, response as follows;Hi [Ms MM] and [Ms LL], Thank you for your efforts with [Ms Culbert]. Firstly, i (sic) noticed her appt tomorrow with me is double-booked with 2 of my patients, so I doubt I’ll have the opportunity to call her.Secondly, I think you’ve done well in trying to maintain engagement, but should she be adamant in not seeing me, can we offer another MO (though there is a chance she’ll become wary of new MO and then refuse follow-ups)? If she refuses any doctor contact with us, we are obliged to inform her husband of our concerns, need for monitoring and recommendation for follow-up with a psychiatrist (ie husband to ensure she actually sees [Dr NN]).Can you both continue to manage patients who choose to see a private psychiatrist, or are you obliged to close their SR to avoid “double dipping”?Plan:- P/C to [Ms Culbert] to advise that [Dr HH] unavailable to call her tomorrow. Suggest to [Ms Culbert] MO review with alternate doctor, if [Ms Culbert] refuses same encourage her to follow up with [Dr NN].- P/C to [Ms Culbert's] husband to discuss our concerns and let him know that [Ms Culbert] is currently declining follow up with psychiatrist.(Emphasis added)83. [In mid] 2018 the Health Service called the father: Phone call to [Mr Culbert] ([Ms Culbert’s] partner) to discuss any concerns he may have with [Ms Culbert’s] mental health and to advise that she is not wishing support from the [OO Health Service] at the moment.[Mr Culbert] states that [Ms Culbert’s] ‘moods fluctuate’ - ‘are up and down all the time’ … ‘At time she can have angry outbursts … at other times, … like on Satureday (sic) … she just goes to bed for a couple of hours’, while he cares for the children. [Mr Culbert] doesn't know her GP as she ‘Dr shops, just like she is doing with you guys’. [Mr Culbert] has the 1880 MH line number and is aware he can contact them if he is concerned. I told him that if he needs to present with [Ms Culbert] to the [hospital] he can and encouraged him to seek assistance if he needs to. He stated that [Ms Culbert] had seen a naturopath and said ‘it was a waste of time as she's is already doing all the things suggested’. I advised that if [Ms Culbert] didn't wish to engage with [OO Health Service] we could not make her and would normally send a letter to her GP, but unsure who this was. [Mr Culbert] was understanding of above.84. That same day the mother was recorded as telling them that: Phone call from [Ms Culbert] whom I discussed her not wishing to attend [Dr HH's] appointments or engage with [Ms MM]. [Ms Culbert] stated that she has been seeing [Ms U] (counsellor) and is finding this helpful. [Ms Culbert] is ‘going with the lifestyle strategies at the moment … and feel they are helping … Im just going for a walk with [Y] now’. Ms Culbert states her GP is [Dr PP] at [QQ Street] Surgery [Suburb RR] and she would be happy for the bloods and a letter to go to him. [Ms Culbert] is not wishing support from [OO Health Service] at this time and is aware that she can re-engage or be referred in if she wishes at a later date.[Ms Culbert] is aware that I have talked with [Mr Culbert] this morning.(As per the original)85.[In mid] 2018 the father contacted the [BB Health Service] in relation to the mother’s mental health, saying they had argued, that he was concerned about her mental state, that she was showing signs of extreme paranoia, had classic anxiety and panic, was losing control of herself and yelling and going off at him, with erratic behaviour. 86.[In mid] 2018, A letter sent to the mother’s GP by the Health Service said, amongst other things: … During these appointments we discussed with [Ms Culbert] our recommendation that she commence on anti-psychotic medications, though [Ms Culbert] declined same. [Ms Culbert] has recently decided to cease contact with our service. …87.The mother was extensively cross examined on these documents and on the history she had given to the expert. In cross examination the mother consistently downplayed and sought to minimise the mental health issues identified in the contemporaneous notes, including denying histories recorded as having been given by her.…97.The expert noted the references to paranoid thoughts and queried whether the mother’s mental health may have impacted how she responded to, managed and interpreted [Y’s] comments or disclosure. The expert also referred to a need to consider the possible causes of the mother’s “seeming decline in mental health in 2018”, including potentially family violence, a stressful relationship dynamic or pre-existing factors.…99.The mother took [Y] to see [Ms SS] psychologist, of [TT Psychologists], [in] December 2020 pursuant to a mental health care plan. [Ms SS] recorded a history that [Y] “comes home from dad’s quite tired. Some nappy rash. Change in sleep posture. Some throwing upon return. …” It was noted that “nil issues raised by [Y]”. The mother did not proceed with further sessions for [Y].100.At the CIC interview [in] September 2021, the mother told the expert about the disclosures concerning the father and [C], not about the disclosure concerning [D]. Further: •The mother reports previous related concerns she held about one year ago that she did not share with anyone, noting that [Y] displayed concerning behaviours such as bed wetting, throwing up a few times on return from time with the father, and expressing being “scared” of going to the father’s, which led to her seeking psychological support for [Y] through [TT Psychologists] which was just one session due to [Y’s] young age.(Emphasis added) 101.At the Family Report interviews on 28 March 2022: 66. The mother consistently referred to [Y] having been “sexually abused” and expressed having “no doubt” that the father has sexually abused her, saying “as a mother you know” and that her “mother's instinct” meant she held suspicions for a year prior to [Y’s] initial disclosure in [mid] 2021 (e.g. bedwetting and vomiting for a period of about 3 weeks previously after spending time with the father). …(Emphasis added) 102.In cross examination when asked why [Y] first saw [Ms SS] prior to the disclosures, the mother said, “I call it mother’s instinct” although qualified this by saying she “just wanted to check how they were going mainly about the separation”.108.I find that both parties have engaged in behaviour which would constitute family violence within the meaning of the Act and that these behaviours have occurred in, and must be viewed in, the context of the mother’s mental health impairments. …180.The mother called the father a paedophile a number of times during her evidence.181.The mother submitted that she was not a psychological risk of harm to the children.182.Neither the father nor the ICL ultimately submit a case of malicious coaching by the mother. I am satisfied that the mother did not maliciously coach [Y], noting that if that had been her intention, one would have expected the first disclosure to be about the father, who the mother already held suspicions about, and not [C]. For reasons set out elsewhere, I find it was unintentional, or possibly reckless, leading in the context of the mother’s paranoia and pre-existing suspicion. It falls within the fourth scenario posited by the expert. 183.The case of psychological risk in the mother’s household is that the harm of sexual abuse is mainly psychological. If [Y] has been lead to incorrectly believe that she has been sexually abused by the father when she has not been, then [Y] is likely to suffer the same psychological trauma as if she had been sexually abused by him. Similarly, [X] is likely to suffer these issues as well because he has been involved in this belief.184.The mother submitted that even on the findings I have made, of inadvertent leading to an incorrect belief in sexual abuse occurring, that changing [Y’s] residence would not cure the problem because: So where is the evidence to suggest that anything is going to change in terms of what belief the child holds if she were to go and live with the father, by which I mean, even on the father’s case, at some point the child is going to spend time with the mother.185.The mother raised in submissions whether the father would take steps to disabuse [Y] of the false belief in an appropriate way. The expert dealt with the need for counselling to address the false belief, if that finding was made, and the father gave evidence that he would take [Y] to an appropriate counsellor. 186.The mother submitted, and I accept, that a change of primary residence to live with the father with whom the children have been having limited supervised time would be a significant change of circumstances. The mother raised whether the father had the empathy, and positive attitude towards the mother, necessary to safely facilitate that change. The difficulty would be compounded by the father’s new baby. The mother drew attention to the [F Family Services] notes which suggested a degree of restraint on the father’s part and lack of engagement, although the father gave evidence that the nature of the allegations made him feel constrained and I accept his evidence on that issue.187.The children may need to change the children’s school due to the travel distance and the fact that they will not be zoned for [W School] with a changed primary residence. Although that is an unfortunate additional change it may be unavoidable.188.In reply to the ICL’s submissions, below, the mother submitted that to the extent the Court accepted the risk was a psychological risk in the mother’s household, it would be adequately dealt with by the proposed s 68B injunction restraining the parties from discussing the allegations of sexual assault with [Y], on the basis that the mother has always complied with the Court’s orders, and noting that the proposals all involve the children spending some time with the mother. On that basis, it was submitted that there would be no need to change residence.189.The ICL’s final proposal, provided after the conclusion of the evidence, was put in the alternative depending on the findings made as to unacceptable risk on two scenarios. 190.The first option was based on the Court finding that there is no unacceptable risk of sexual or other harm in the father’s household, and finding an unacceptable risk of psychological harm in the mother’s household due to the mother’s fixed incorrect belief that the father had sexually assaulted [Y]. 191.On the first option, the ICL proposed that the children live with the father, with the father to have sole parental responsibility. They would spend no time with the mother for two months, then move to professionally supervised time with the mother for three hours a week. The mother’s further time was structured as conditional on her engaging with a psychologist and that psychologist providing a report as to the mother’s “mental health wellness”. On completion of that condition the proposal was for increasing periods of time with the mother leading up to alternate weekends and half school holidays. In submissions, the ICL noted the problem with the condition concerning attendance on a psychologist and abandoned that condition while including the increase and taking the risk of the mother continuing the belief as a lesser risk than terminating the relationships completely. 192.That was also subject to a s 68B injunction on both parents discussing these proceedings or the allegations of sexual assault with the children. The ICL also proposed that the father engage the children in therapy to support their change of circumstances, changeovers at McDonald's [Suburb H], and both parents undertaking certain courses.193.The second option was based on the Court finding that there is an unacceptable risk of harm to the children from the father. In that case the children would live with the mother who would exercise sole parental responsibility, with the father able to communicate with the children only by sending birthday and Christmas cards and reasonable gifts.194.On either option, the ICL provided for each party to keep the other party informed of medical emergencies or issues, and to be at liberty to contact the children’s schools and be updated as to their progress. The ICL also proposed s 68B injunctions in excluding only changeovers.195.The ICL proposed ancillary orders around keeping the other party informed of health emergencies and other matters and mutual s 68B orders restraining each parent from approaching within 200m of the other parent’s residence or place of work. The s 68B orders were made by consent prior to Judgment on the basis that they would also be included in the final orders.196.The proposed orders did not include provision for communication, which the ICL raised in oral submissions proposing at least weekly audio-visual communications between the children and the mother, or the father when in the mother’s care during holidays.197.The ICL’s submissions were premised on a finding that the mother has mental health difficulties, that the father did not sexually abuse [Y], that the mother’s mental health condition caused her to be hypervigilant and to lead [Y] into expanding disclosures, and to be unable to see any position other than her own. 198.It was submitted that the mother’s belief that the father is a predator and paedophile is unshakeable, as she confirmed in her own evidence and as the expert confirmed. Given that [Mr E] holds the same view, the ICL submitted there was “a significant danger of psychological and emotional harm for each of the children in the mother’s household", because even doing the best she can she is unlikely to be able to not convey that false belief to the children. The ICL submitted that the expert agreed with the proposition, but also accepted that the [F Family Services] supervision notes showed that the children continue to willingly and readily go to the father, which suggested that the mother’s fear had not been conveyed to the point where the children were alienated, or rejecting, the father even given [Y’s] and [X’s] belief that the father has sexually touched [Y].199.The ICL also referred to the expert's opinion, that there as a risk that the mother’s fixed view would mean she may engage in further questioning of [Y], misinterpretation of events or [Y’s] comments and involvement of police and DCJ and submitted that “[i]n the independent children’s lawyer’s submission, that is a real and present danger”.…209.In the absence of any opinion from a mental health practitioner, I have given significant weight to the contemporaneous documentary evidence from the mother’s treating mental health practitioners in forming my opinion.…223.The fact that the mother has untreated mental health impairments, and denies that she has had such impairments, is itself a factor which must be weighed in assessing not only her parenting capacity but also the risks this may present for the children.…249.I find that [Y] has not been sexually abused by the father.…251.I find that the mother has, unintentionally as a result of her mental health impairment, caused [Y] and [X] psychological harm by causing them to falsely believe that the father has sexually abused [Y].252.The mother has an unshakeable belief that the father sexually abused [Y]. When asked by the expert whether she had considered the possibility that [Y] had not been sexually abused by the father she told the expert that that was not possible. In cross examination the mother repeatedly referred to the father as a “paedophile”. 253.I find that the mother’s fixed belief that the father sexually abused [Y], in the context of her untreated mental health impairment, and the fact that this belief is fully supported by [Mr E], poses a serious risk of ongoing harm to [Y] and [X] through the continuing propagation of this false belief. Although a serious risk of harm, this risk must be weighed against the risk of psychological harm to the children of the termination or severe long-term restriction of their important and meaningful relationship with the mother.…260.If the children continue to live primarily with the mother, her fixed and unshakeable belief means that there is no prospect that this false belief will be able to be rectified. Rather, it is inevitable that the belief will become entrenched.263.That is a difficult balance to achieve given the mother’s, and [Mr E’s], fixed belief in the context that the mother maintains she has no mental health impairments.…286.The vehemence of the mother’s belief that the father has sexually abused [Y], in the context of her untreated mental health condition which has expressed itself in paranoid and irrational thinking with associated uncontrolled emotional conduct, causes me to find the psychological risks to the children of continuing to live with the mother significantly outweigh the psychological risks to the children of the major and traumatic move this change of primary residence, and probably schools, eventually due to the location of the father’s residence, will necessarily entail. The father agreed that he would not change schools initially for consistency to reduce the impact of the change of residence, and I will make the order that they not change schools for 12 months to avoid adding unnecessary stress.…296.I do not think consultation between the parties is feasible. The mother said the bridges between herself and [Ms K] were all 100% burned, and [Mr E] also believes the father is a paedophile, so these are not alternative communication paths. In those circumstances there will be an order for notification rather than consultation and notification, on each parties part, of any medical or other significant issue. For the avoidance of doubt there will be an order that each party may exercise day to day decision making when the children are in their care.(As per the original) (Footnotes omitted)
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
What I am dealing with at this stage of this proceeding is a preliminary inquiry as to whether the Court shall reconsider the final parenting orders made. It is on that basis that the expert witness evidence is allowed to be placed before the Court unchallenged. ConsiderationSection 65DAAA(1)(a) the court has considered whether there has been a significant change of circumstances since the final parenting order was made The father does not consent or agree to a reconsideration of the final parenting orders. The reasons as provided by Smith J for the making of final parenting orders centred around the mother’s fixed belief that the father had sexually abused the parties’ daughter. The Court found that that was a false belief. The Court also found the mother’s partner to hold the same false belief. The Court acknowledged that the mother had been the primary carer of the children. However, her fixed belief had caused her to withhold the children from the father and to exclude him, as far as possible, from their lives. The evidence before me, and not before Smith J, is the evidence of Dr AB. That evidence records that the mother no longer holds this false belief. This, I find, is a significant change in circumstances albeit it does not extend to the mother’s partner about whom there is no new evidence. The parties are bound by the findings of fact made by his Honour Smith J. As set out in his reasons for judgment, his Honour found that the children were at a serious risk of harm in the mother’s primary care. His Honour, however, did not have the benefit of Dr AB’s psychiatric report of the mother. Dr AB’s psychiatric assessment of the mother includes the following:[9] [9] Affidavit of Dr AB filed 16 July 2024, Annexure “JS-3”.5. Your opinion as to whether [the mother]:a. suffers from a longstanding untreated mental health impairment which results in paranoid and irrational thoughts and beliefs and fears particularly directed at the father …I do not believe [Ms Culbert] currently has a long standing untreated mental health impairment. She does not in my opinion demonstrate paranoid or irrational thoughts regarding [Mr Culbert].b. has an unshakeable belief that the father sexually abused [Y].[Ms Culbert] stated that she accepted [Mr Culbert] did not sexually abuse [Y].6. Your opinion regarding treatment recommendations to address any false belief our client holds that [Y] was sexually abused by the father.[Ms Culbert] does not in my opinion require any such treatment as she stated that she does not currently hold the belief that [Y] was sexually abused by [Mr Culbert].7. To the extent our client currently holds or has held a false belief that the father sexually abused [Y], the prospects of the belief:a. becoming entrenched, or rectified.[Ms Culbert] was able to repeatedly state to me that she did not believe that [Mr Culbert] sexually abused [Y]. [Ms Culbert] was able to reflect on why she had changed her opinion regarding the allegation which is discussed in the body of the report.8. To the extent our client currently holds or has held a false belief that the father sexually abused [Y], your opinion as to whether our client is likely to propagate to the children a false belief that [Y] was sexually abused.[Ms Culbert] stated that she did not hold the belief that [Mr Culbert] sexually abused [Y]. [Ms Culbert] indicated that she was aware that it was harmful to the children to propagate this allegation about their father. As such I do not believe that [Ms Culbert] is likely to propagate this belief to the children. (Emphasis in original)