FITZPATRICK & ESSER

In the matter of *Fitzpatrick & Esser*, heard by Judge O'Sullivan, the dispute concerned parenting arrangements for a child born in 2006. While there was no disagreement regarding the child living with the mother, a significant conflict arose over whether the child should have any contact with the father, given the child's strong resistance and entrenched attitude, which was impacting their mental and psychological health. Evidence from a family consultant was presented to the court.

The court was required to determine whether the mother should have sole parental responsibility for the child and what arrangements, if any, should be made for time spent and communication between the child and the father, all within the overarching consideration of the child's best interests.

Judge O'Sullivan reasoned that the child's well-being and wishes were paramount. Applying principles of family law concerning the best interests of the child, the court found that granting the mother sole parental responsibility was appropriate given the circumstances. The court's orders reflected a careful balancing of the child's resistance and mental health concerns with the father's right to maintain some connection, albeit limited and child-driven.

Consequently, all previous parenting orders were discharged. The applicant mother was granted sole parental responsibility and the child was ordered to live with her. Any time spent and communication between the child and the respondent father were to be in accordance with the child's wishes, with the father permitted to send letters, cards, and gifts. The mother was directed to facilitate the child's requests for contact and to provide the father with school reports (with identifying school information removed) and photographs upon request, subject to limitations. The father was also ordered to provide his contact details to the mother.