McGlennan and Don (No 2)

In the matter of *McGlennan and Don (No 2)*, Burr J of the Family Court of Australia considered parenting orders concerning a severely autistic child, M. The dispute centred on with whom M should live and the extent of parental responsibility, given M's established progress in his father's care, a history of domestic violence and alcohol abuse by the father, and the mother's care of M's siblings. The father had previously obstructed the mother's time with M, and M's autism meant he struggled with change, posing a significant risk if his current circumstances were altered.

The court was required to determine whether the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility under s 61DA of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth) had been rebutted, and consequently, with whom M should live and spend time, always considering M's best interests. The court also had to assess the impact of the parties' highly toxic and uncommunicative relationship on M's welfare.

Burr J found that the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility was rebutted due to the parties' inability to communicate effectively and the detrimental impact this would have on M. Applying the paramount consideration of M's best interests, and noting the significant risk to M's development and inability to adapt to change if his living arrangements were altered, the court ordered that M live with the father, who was granted sole parental responsibility. The mother was ordered to spend time with M on a weekly basis, adhering to his established routine, with specific provisions for handovers and injunctions to prevent harassment and maintain proximity restrictions between the parents, save for specific exceptions related to M's welfare and medical needs.