Headman and Reagon

In proceedings before Baumann J of the Family Court of Australia, the dispute concerned the welfare of a child, U, born in 2009. The court's orders indicate a significant concern regarding the child's circumstances and the parents' ability to agree on interim arrangements.

The court was required to determine the appropriate steps to ensure the child's safety and well-being, particularly in light of potential difficulties in parental agreement regarding interim time with the mother. This included considering the need for external intervention and expert assessment.

Baumann J invoked section 91B of the *Family Law Act 1975* to request the intervention of the Director-General of the Department of Child Safety, Youth and Women. The court also directed the Registrar to inform the Director-General and granted the Director-General liberty to access court documents. Furthermore, the court outlined a process for the mother to seek interim orders if the parents could not agree on arrangements within seven days, and set timelines for the father's response. The Independent Children’s Lawyer was also invited to seek funding for a psychiatric examination of the mother. The proceedings were adjourned for a case management hearing.