Mathers & Mathers

In *Mathers & Mathers*, heard before Murphy J, the parties, who were in a same-sex relationship, sought consent orders concerning their children. The dispute centred on the meaning of "parent" in the context of artificial conception procedures where each party was the biological parent of a child. The court was asked to consider an order in favour of a parent and a person concerned with the care, welfare, and development of each child, with the overarching consideration being the best interests of the children to live with both parties.

The primary legal issue before the court was the interpretation of "parent" under the relevant family law legislation, particularly in circumstances involving a same-sex couple where both individuals were biological parents to the children. The court also had to determine whether the proposed orders, which appeared to confine parental responsibility to long-term issues, were appropriate and in the best interests of the children.

Murphy J considered the meaning of "parent" in the context of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth) and the specific circumstances of artificial conception. The court acknowledged the biological parentage of both parties and the need to ensure the children's welfare and development were adequately provided for. The judge indicated that orders would be made in favour of a parent and a person concerned with the care, welfare, and development for each child, finding it to be in the best interests of the children to live with both parties. The court directed the parties to consider the reasons for this approach and to draft the final orders accordingly, with a focus on ensuring appropriate parental responsibility was maintained.