Dawkins and Boreham

In the Family Court of Australia, Ms. Dawkins (the mother) and Mr. Boreham (the father) were involved in proceedings concerning their daughter, X. The primary dispute revolved around the father's application to resume spending time with X, which had been suspended due to allegations of substantial alcohol abuse and previous family violence intervention orders. The court considered a family report, professional evidence, and the parties' submissions to determine the best interests of the child.

The court was required to determine whether to discharge previous parenting orders, establish equal shared parental responsibility, and, crucially, the extent and nature of time the child would spend with the father. Key legal issues included assessing the father's alcohol consumption and its impact on his parenting capacity, addressing past family violence concerns, and determining a progressive reintroduction of the father into the child's life in a manner that prioritised her safety and well-being. The court also had to consider the child's expressed desire to see her father.

Applying the principles of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth), particularly section 60CC regarding the best interests of the child, the court reasoned that a carefully managed and progressive reintroduction of the father's time with X was appropriate. This was informed by the family consultant's report, which indicated the child's desire to see her father and noted that he could not be classified as alcohol dependent, though concerns about his attitude to alcohol and blaming others remained. The court mandated strict conditions on the father, including a complete abstinence from alcohol for 24 hours prior to and during all time spent with X, and required his continued attendance at a parenting program. The court also ordered that X live with her mother and established a detailed schedule for the father's time with X, commencing with limited day visits and progressively increasing to overnight stays, with specific provisions for collection and return of the child and communication.

The court ordered the discharge of all previous parenting and child orders, but without prejudice to any prior injunctive or costs orders. It granted equal shared parental responsibility, with the child to live with the mother. A detailed schedule for the child to spend time and communicate with the father was set out, commencing with short supervised visits and gradually increasing in duration and including overnight stays from December 2012. Strict conditions were imposed on the father regarding alcohol consumption, attendance at a parenting program, and co-operation with the mother. The court also made orders regarding communication between the parents, collection and return procedures, and the child's safety, including the use of appropriate child restraints. A further hearing was adjourned to February 2013.