FAIRBURN & GODFREY

In the matter of Fairburn & Godfrey, Austin J of the Family Court of Australia considered the parenting arrangements for a child, B. The dispute involved allegations of sexual abuse and serious physical family violence between the parents, as well as concerns regarding the parents' alcohol use and the mother's potential neglect. The Department of Community Services had declined to intervene.

The court was required to determine the best interests of the child, specifically addressing the risks of harm from sexual abuse and family violence, and the parenting capacity of each parent. Key issues included whether the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility applied, and which parent the child should live with, considering the high level of antagonism between the parties.

Austin J found that the child remained at risk of sexual abuse from the father, and a lesser risk from the mother's partner. While the child could be protected from family violence by not spending time with the father, the court noted that exposure to family violence within the mother's household could not be practically avoided. The risk of neglect by the mother was also considered pronounced, and both parents' parenting capacity was impaired by alcohol use. The court concluded that the past family violence rendered the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility inapplicable, and that the mother should have sole parental responsibility.

Consequently, the court ordered that all former parenting orders be discharged, the mother have sole parental responsibility, and the child live with the mother. The parties were restrained from causing or allowing the child to spend any time with the father, and the father was restrained from approaching within 100 metres of the mother's residence or the child's school. However, the father was permitted to communicate with the child in writing on an intermittent basis, with specific provisions for the exchange of mail.