Mullens and Allen

In *Mullens & Allen* [2012] FamCA 923, the Family Court of Australia considered an application by Ms Mullens (the applicant mother) concerning parenting orders for her two children, B and C, with Mr Allen (the respondent father). The mother had raised concerns regarding the father's capacity to care for the children, citing allegations of sexual abuse, his Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) and its impact on his ability to plan and care for the children, and his general inability to provide optimum care. The court heard oral evidence from Dr D, a psychologist who had prepared a report concerning the father's ADHD and his management of the condition without medication.

The primary legal issues before the court were to determine appropriate interim parenting orders, specifically regarding the father's time with the children, and to consider the application of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth), including the principles of equal shared parental responsibility and the balancing of the children's need for a meaningful relationship with both parents against the need for their protection. The court was also required to address the change in the supervisor for the father's time with the children, as the previously appointed supervisor, the paternal grandfather, was no longer able to fulfil this role.

Collier J applied the principles of section 60CC of the *Family Law Act 1975*, balancing the importance of a meaningful relationship with both parents against the need to protect the children. The court considered the evidence, including Dr D's report and cross-examination, which indicated that the father, despite his ADHD, could manage his responsibilities with appropriate support mechanisms. The court found that the mother had provided satisfactory care and that the father had provided appropriate care when the children were with him. Crucially, the court found no evidence to rebut the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility under section 61DA, and determined that the children should spend significant and substantial time with the father, including overnight stays, to foster their relationship.

The court ordered that the parties have equal shared parental responsibility for the children, who would continue to live with the mother. The father was to spend time with the children, initially for four weeks with one overnight occasion per week, and thereafter for two overnight occasions per week, with the specific dates to be agreed between the parties. This supervised time was to be undertaken by the father's partner, who had provided an undertaking to the court. The court also confirmed that dates were to be allocated for a two-day hearing to finalise the matter and granted liberty to relist the proceedings on short notice in the event of any difficulties.