ILHAN & SETT

In the matter of *Ilhan & Sett*, Cleary J of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia considered parenting orders for a child born in 2011. The dispute concerned the child's living arrangements and the extent of each parent's involvement in the child's life, with the mother harbouring concerns about potential sexual abuse in the father's household.

The court was required to determine the best interests of the child, specifically addressing the meaningful relationship the child had with both parents, the reliability of evidence concerning alleged sexual abuse, the risk of harm in each household, and the impact of the mother's entrenched views on the child's well-being. The court also considered the principle of equal shared parental responsibility.

Cleary J reasoned that while the child had a meaningful relationship with both parents, the interview with JIRT was unreliable and there was no evidence to support the mother's allegations of sexual abuse. The court found that the father's friends did not pose an unacceptable risk, but acknowledged some risk of psychological harm in the mother's household due to her persistent fears and questioning of the child. Ultimately, the court concluded that moving the child to the father's care would cause significant distress to both the child and the mother, adversely affecting the child's development. The mother's commitment to supporting the child's relationship with the father, particularly with professional assistance, was also a factor.

Consequently, the court ordered that all previous parenting orders be discharged. The parents were granted equal shared parental responsibility. The child was ordered to live with the mother, with specific provisions for the child to spend regular time with the father, including a transition period. Further orders detailed arrangements for communication, changeovers, school enrolment, health matters, travel restrictions, and specific issues such as denigration and discussing proceedings with the child.