Fanning and Kress and Anor

In the matter of *Fanning and Kress and Anor*, Judge A Kelly of the Family Court of Australia considered an application concerning the parental responsibility and living arrangements for a child born in 2015. The applicant, the child's father, who is a convicted murderer, sought sole parental responsibility. The first respondent, the child's mother, was experiencing significant difficulties with her parenting capacity, while the second respondent, the child's grandmother, was providing a stable care environment. The court was required to determine whether the applicant should have no time with the child, the appropriate conditions for any supervised time, and whether the proposed arrangements presented an unacceptable risk to the child, given the history of family violence and illicit substance abuse.

The court's reasoning focused on the paramountcy of the child's welfare and the need to protect the child from unacceptable risk. Applying the principles relevant to parenting orders in circumstances involving family violence and parental capacity issues, the court considered the evidence presented regarding the applicant's criminal history and the mother's parenting challenges. The court determined that supervised time at a contact centre was necessary to mitigate risks.

The court ordered that all earlier parenting orders be discharged. Until further order, the second respondent was granted sole parental responsibility and the child was to live with her. The child was to spend time with the first respondent mother, but this time was to be substantially supervised by the second respondent. The child was also to spend time with the applicant father, but this was subject to strict conditions, including monthly intervals, supervision at a designated contact centre, and a three-hour maximum duration per session. The applicant's sister was required to undertake an undertaking to facilitate the child's transport for these contact arrangements. Furthermore, the applicant was restrained from communicating with or being within 200 metres of the second respondent or her residence. The court also made orders for the parties to enrol in post-separation parenting programs, continue psychological consultations, and undertake intensive counselling and psychiatric assessments. The proceeding was subsequently transferred to the Family Court of Australia.