ESTWICK & ESTWICK

The Family Court of Australia considered parenting orders concerning two children, B and C, in proceedings between the applicant father, Mr Estwick, and the respondent mother, Ms Estwick. The Independent Children’s Lawyer also participated in the proceedings. The central dispute revolved around the father's history of family violence, drug use, and mental health issues, and their impact on the children's welfare and their relationships with both parents.

The court was required to determine the most appropriate parenting arrangements for the children, specifically addressing issues of parental responsibility, the children's living arrangements, and the extent of time the children should spend with each parent. Key legal questions included how to weigh the children's views in light of their exposure to the father's threats, the mother's capacity to facilitate safe relationships, and the overall risk of harm posed by the father. The court also had to consider the father's withdrawal from the proceedings and his apparent indifference to court orders and therapeutic strategies.

In its reasoning, the court placed significant weight on the extensive history of family violence perpetrated by the father against the mother and children, including physical assaults, homicidal and suicidal threats, and drug use. The court noted the Family Consultant's assessment of the father's conduct as "coercive and controlling" and her recommendation for a complete severance of the children's relationship with him due to the high risk of harm. While the mother initially proposed continued interaction, the court found her willingness to facilitate this relationship to be misguided given the father's behaviour. The court afforded little weight to the children's views, as they may have been influenced by the father's threats. Applying principles from the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth) and relevant case law, the court prioritised the children's safety and well-being.

Consequently, the court discharged all previous parenting orders. The mother was granted sole parental responsibility for the children, and the children were ordered to live with her. The court made orders restraining the children from spending any time with the father and limiting communication, with specific provisions for the father to send letters, cards, and gifts, and for the mother to convey the children's communications to him. The father was also restrained from approaching the mother's residence or the children's schools. The court further ordered the mother to ensure the youngest child continued therapeutic counselling and directed the Family Consultant and Independent Children's Lawyer to explain the orders to the children.