FAULKNER & MCINTOSH

In the matter of FAULKNER & MCINTOSH, Cleary J of the Family Court of Australia considered parenting orders concerning four children. The dispute involved arrangements for the children's residence, time with each parent, and parental responsibility, particularly in light of past family violence and the substantial geographical distance between the parents.

The court was required to determine whether the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility was rebutted due to the father's past family violence, and if so, what parenting orders would be in the best interests of the children. Key considerations included the children's meaningful relationships with both parents, their views, sibling relationships, the mother's primary attachment and caregiving role, the children's contentment in their current residence with the mother, and the practicalities of travel for contact with the father.

Cleary J found that while the father had engaged in family violence, it would be a positive benefit for the children if their parents communicated and made genuine efforts to reach joint decisions, and that both parents were capable of doing so. Consequently, the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility was not rebutted, and an order for equal shared parental responsibility was made. The court ordered that the children live with the mother, acknowledging her primary attachment and the children's settled circumstances. To manage the significant travel distance, the court stipulated a reduced schedule for the children's time with the father, primarily during school holidays and specific weekends per school term, with detailed provisions for communication and changeovers.

The court discharged all prior parenting orders and made new orders reflecting these determinations. These included orders for equal shared parental responsibility, the children to live with the mother, and specific arrangements for the children to spend time with the father during school holidays and on designated weekends. Further orders addressed telephone communication between parents and children, communication protocols between the parents themselves, and provisions for schools and medical practitioners to share information with both parents.