MASOUD & MASOUD

In the matter of *Masoud & Masoud*, heard before Rees J, the dispute concerned interim parenting orders for three children. The Federal Magistrate had previously ordered that the children live with the father pending an investigation into allegations of the mother's prescription drug addiction. However, subsequent drug tests overwhelmingly indicated the mother was not using any substances. Furthermore, the daughters made allegations of violence within the father's household involving both the father and their brother.

The court was required to determine whether the interim orders should be revisited, notwithstanding the absence of a substantial change in circumstances. It also had to consider the expressed wishes of the children, with the daughters wishing to live with the mother and the son wishing to live with the father. A further issue was whether counselling for the children, to which both parties agreed, should be entirely confidential, given the potential conflict between the roles of therapist and reporter.

Rees J reasoned that interim orders could be revisited without a substantial change in circumstances, particularly in light of the conclusive drug test results and the serious allegations of violence made by the daughters. The court gave significant weight to the wishes of the daughters, who were of an age where their views were considered important. The court also determined that the role of a therapist and a reporter were inimical, and therefore, the counselling should be kept confidential.

Consequently, Rees J ordered that the previous orders of the Federal Magistrate, insofar as they related to the child J, be discharged. The judgment indicates a division of the children, with the daughters to live with the mother and the son to live with the father, and that counselling for the children would be confidential.