DEPARTMENT OF FAMILY AND COMMUNITY SERVICES & JAKERMAN

This matter concerned parenting orders for two children, X and Y. The parties agreed that the father would have sole parental responsibility for the younger child, Y, who would live with him. It was also agreed that the Minister for Family and Community Services would have sole parental responsibility for the elder child, X. The father initially sought orders for X to engage in reintroduction therapy with him, but during submissions, he accepted the reasoning of the Applicant and the Independent Children’s Lawyer. The court, presided over by Hogan J, made final orders that discharged all previous parenting orders.

The court was required to determine the specific parenting arrangements for X and Y, including parental responsibility, living arrangements, and time spent with parents. A key issue was the extent of contact, if any, between the children and their parents, particularly in light of the father's initial position regarding reintroduction therapy and the subsequent acceptance of opposing submissions. The court also had to consider provisions for the children's well-being, including facilitating contact between X and Y, and restraining parental conduct that could be detrimental to the children.

The court's reasoning led to orders that vested sole parental responsibility for X in the Minister, with X to live as directed by the Secretary. The father retained sole parental responsibility for Y, who was to live with him. Limited, unsupervised time with the mother was ordered for Y, subject to confirmation of attendance. The court also made orders to support the relationship between X and Y, to prevent future involvement of X with a specific organisation, and to restrain denigration of parents or their beliefs in the presence of the children. Crucially, the court issued an injunction restraining both parents from approaching X, her residence, educational institution, or extra-curricular activities, and from contacting X or her carers except as otherwise ordered. The Independent Children’s Lawyer was directed to explain the orders and reasons to X.