Nak and Sim - [2008] FMCAfam 1150

FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NAK & SIM

[2008] FMCAfam 1150

FAMILY LAW – Parenting – children aged almost 5 and almost 3 – primary residence with father since separation two years ago – mother proposing that the children should primarily reside with her.

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth), ss.60CC, 61DA, 65DAA

Applicant:

MS NAK

Respondent:

MR SIM

File number:

PAC 1021 of 2008

Judgment of:

Terry FM

Hearing dates:

13 & 14 October 2008

Date of last submission:

14 October 2008

Delivered at:

Adelaide

Delivered on:

21 October 2008

REPRESENTATION

Counsel for the Applicant:

Mr Fong

Solicitors for the Applicant:

Just in Case Legal

Counsel for the Respondent:

Ms Carr

Solicitors for the Respondent:

Legal Aid NSW

ORDERS

That the parents have equal shared parental responsibility for the children [W] born 24 October 2003 and [X] born 5 December 2005.
That the children live with the father.
That the children spend time with the mother as follows:
(a)During school terms:
(i)each alternate weekend from 8.00am Saturday until 5.00pm Sunday;
(ii)if the mother is working evening or night shifts, each Wednesday from 8am until 2pm provided that once [W] commences school in 2009 this time will be with [X] only;
(iii)if the mother is working day shifts, from 3pm or the conclusion of school each Wednesday until 8.00am or the commencement of school each Thursday.
(b)For half of all school holidays as agreed between the parties and failing agreement for the second half of such holidays.
(c)On Mother’s Day from 8.00am until 500pm, with the time the children spend with the mother on Father’s Day to be suspended from 8.00am until 5.00pm;
(d)On the mother’s birthday for 3 hours;
(e)On each of the children’s birthdays for three hours;
(f)On Cambodian New Years Eve Day in 2010 and each alternate year thereafter from 9.00am until 5.00pm;
(g)At such additional or alternate times as may be agreed between the parties.
That from the commencement of the 2009 school year, for the purposes of the mother spending time with the children during school terms the mother collect the children from the front gate of the school and return them to front gate of the school.
That at all other times the mother collect the children from the father’s home at the commencement of her time with the children and return the children to the father’s home at the conclusion of her time with the children.
That each parent is restrained from
(a)speaking badly of the other parent to the children or in the presence of the children;
(b)quarrelling or arguing with the other parent during changeover;
(c)behaving aggressively toward the other parent at changeover.
That the mother notify the father by telephone if she will be late collecting the children from the father’s home.
That the father and the mother are each restrained from physically disciplining the children.
That the father and mother are either to personally supervise the children or if they are unable to do so, to arrange for a responsible person over the age of 16 years to supervise the children at all times the children are in their care.
That the father and mother each be permitted to take the children outside the Commonwealth of Australia to Cambodia on no more than one occasion of up to five weeks in every two year period provided that they give the other parent 8 weeks notice of their intention and provide the other parent with details of the flights and itinerary and provided the mother have “make-up” time with the children if the father takes the children to Cambodia.
That each parent shall, within 14 days of being requested in writing by the other parent to do so, sign passport applications to enable passports to be obtained for the children.
That if either the father or the mother fail to sign passport applications within 14 days of being requested in writing to do so, the parent who wishes to obtain passports for the children may apply for those passports, and may travel with the children outside the Commonwealth of Australia, notwithstanding that the consent of the other parent has not been obtained.
That the father and mother each notify the other forthwith if either of the children suffers any injury or serious illness while in their care.
That the father send to the mother a copy of the children’s school reports, any information about parent/teacher interviews, sporting or other special school events to which parents are invited and any applications for school photographs.

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment under the pseudonym Nak & Sim is approved pursuant to s.121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).

FEDERAL MAGISTRATES
COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT
DARWIN

PAC 1021 of 2008

MS NAK

Applicant

And

MR SIM

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

Introduction

Since their parents separated in November 2006, [W], almost 5, and [X], almost 3, have lived primarily with their father Mr Sim.
In February 2008 the boys’ mother, Ms Nak, filed an application in which she proposed that the boys live primarily with her. The father filed a response, in which he proposed that the arrangements for the boys should continue much as they are at present.

Documents relied on

The mother relied on the following documents:
a)Her Reply filed on 3 October 2008.
b)Her affidavits filed on 29 February 2008, 3 October 2008, 8 October 2008.
The father relied on the following documents:
a)His Response filed on 9 July 2008;
b)His Affidavit filed on 30 September 2008
A Family Report was prepared by Ms Eve Tschanter.
The mother, father and Ms Tschanter were cross-examined.

General History

The mother and father lived together between November 2002 and November 2006. [W] and [X] are their only children.
During the relationship, the father worked for [company omitted]. The mother, following [W]’s birth, stayed at home caring first for [W] and later for both children.
In November 2006, when the boys were almost three and eleven months old, the mother and father decided to move to a new flat. The father and the boys moved into the new flat, but the mother then informed the father that she would not be moving with them, and that he should look after the boys.
The mother was keen to return to the workforce. Prior to separation she had been looking at other care options for the boys. She had approached her first husband, Mr C, who looks after the mother’s two older children and asked if he would care for the boys. However in the end, in November 2006, the parties separated, and the father gave up his job and became the full time carer for the boys.
The mother and father gave conflicting evidence about how often the mother saw the boys after separation. The mother’s evidence was that in the early period after separation she saw the boys every day.[1] Her evidence was to the effect that there was a continuing relationship of some kind between she and the father for some time. The mother said that she and the father attempted reconciliation in January-February 2008.
[1] Mother’s affidavit paragraphs 37-39
The mother did admit that between April 2007 and July 2007 she saw the boys only a few times, and that she did not see them at all between July 2007 and October 2007.
The father’s evidence was that between November 2006 and August 2007 the mother spent time with the boys on only a few occasions. He denied that there was any form of continuing relationship or any attempted reconciliation.
In February 2008, the mother filed an application for parenting orders. On 5 May 2008, interim orders were made by consent that:
a)for a period of two months the mother spend time with boys every Thursday from 8am until 2pm and every Sunday from 8am until 5pm;
b)after two months, the mother spend time with the boys every Thursday from 8am until 2pm and every alternate weekend from 8am Saturday until 5pm Sunday.
The mother subsequently spent time with the boys largely in accordance with the orders.
I cannot resolve the dispute about how much time the mother spent with the boys between November 2006 and May 2008. Cross-examination of the parties did not help.
English is a second language for both parties. The father gave evidence through a Khmer interpreter. There were occasions when the answers given by both parties during cross-examination did not match up with the questions asked. I gained the impression that this was the result of misunderstandings about words, rather than the result of deliberate unresponsiveness. In those circumstances it is particularly difficult to get to the bottom of matters which are in dispute.
It is not in dispute that the boys lived primarily with the father after separation. It is also not in dispute that, while there was certainly a period of at least four to six months in 2007 during which the mother on her own admission saw the boys infrequently or not at all, since at least May 2008 the mother has spent time with the boys regularly. Ms Tschanter observed a good relationship between the mother and boys.

The mother’s current circumstances

The mother is 39. She lives in a one bedroom flat in [F]. The boys share her room when they are spending time with her.
The mother is employed as [occupation omitted]. Her basic shift is from 4pm until 9pm. However almost every day the mother is offered and accepts additional hours. As a result she finishes work at either 11.46pm or 1.46am. The mother works five days a week.
The mother did not see her work as a barrier to her having full time care of [W] and [X]. She said that other people at her work use family day care to look after their children, and that she could do the same. The mother also said that she was trying to switch to a day shift. If the mother works day shift she will start work at 6am and finish at 2pm.
The mother has not re-partnered. She has two older children, [Y] and [Z], a girl and boy who are now 18 and 16. The mother separated from these children’s father, Mr C, in 2001. [Y] and [Z] were then about seven and nine. After her separation from Mr C, the mother went to Darwin for six months and left the children with Mr C. The mother said that this arrangement was never intended to be permanent, but nevertheless these children have lived with Mr C ever since.
[Y] is at University and [Z] is in Year 11. The mother spends time with [Y] and [Z] and the older children see [W] and [X] from time to time when the younger children are with their mother. I have no reason to doubt that there is a good relationship between the four children.

The father’s current circumstances

The father lives with [W] and [X] in either a two or three bedroom flat at [C]. The father is engaged full time in caring for the children and is in receipt of Centrelink benefits.
The children attend [C] Early Learning Centre on Monday and Tuesday between 8am or 9am and 4pm.
[W] is enrolled to start school at [C] Public School in 2009. [X] is enrolled at a playgroup at that school for two hours on Thursday and Friday mornings. The father is not able to take [X] on Thursdays if [X] is with the mother.
The father has not re-partnered. To the best of my knowledge [W] and [X] are his only children.

[W] and [X]’s best interests

Any orders I make about the children must be the orders which are in [W] and [X]’s best interests. Sections 60CC(2) and (3) of the Family Law Act set out the considerations to which I must have regard in order to determine the children’s best interests.
The primary considerations are contained in s.60CC(2) and are as follows:
“a)The benefit to the children of having a meaningful relationship with both of the children’s parents; and
b)The need to protect the children from physical or psychological harm from being subjected to or exposed to abuse, neglect or family violence.”
I accept unreservedly that [W] and [X] will benefit from having a meaningful relationship with each of their parents.
I must consider whether the children are likely to be at risk of physical or psychological harm from being exposed to abuse neglect or family violence in the care of either of their parents.
Each parent raised issues which need to be considered under this heading.
In July 2008 [W] broke his arm. Ms Tschanter said that the mother regarded [W]’s broken arm as a non-accidental injury.
It was the father’s case that the injury happened when [W] jumped from the lounge to the floor and hit his arm on the TV table. The father promptly took [W] to hospital and informed the mother about what had happened.
There is nothing other than the mother’s bare assertions to Ms Tschanter to suggest that the broken arm was the result of anything other than an accident. Ms Tschanter said that [W]’s story about how he broke his arm coincided with the father’s. The hospital notes do not contain any information which raise a concern that the injury might be non-accidental.
In August 2008 [W] had an inflamed and swollen eye. The mother said that [W] told her that his father had pushed him into a table.
[W] was taken to the doctor, and a letter from the treating doctor stated that the condition of [W]’s eye was due to conjunctivitis and a stye. I do not accept that the condition of [W]’s eye was a result of [W] being pushed into a table by the father.
The mother also gave evidence of an occasion when [X] appeared to be fearful of the father. Ms Tschanter did not however observe anything untoward in the relationship between [X] and the father and I am not satisfied that [X] is fearful of the father.
I do not consider that there is any evidence that the father has deliberately injured either child. I am not satisfied that the children are likely to be exposed to abuse neglect or family violence in the father’s care.
The father said that during the relationship, the mother sometimes pushed and hit the children. In oral evidence he said that the mother would sometimes smack the children on the mouth if they were not eating properly.
Whether or not the mother smacking the boys was a problem at an earlier time, and there is no compelling evidence to suggest that it was, there is no evidence that the mother currently hits or pushes the boys.
The father did not suggest that the boys came home from visits complaining of their mother hitting them or treating them harshly. Ms Tschanter observed nothing untoward in the relationship between the mother and [W] and [X]. I do not consider that the children are likely to be exposed to abuse neglect or family violence in the mother’s care.
Turning to the additional considerations, there was no evidence that either child is expressing a view about parenting arrangements. Ms Tschanter’s evidence about a response [W] gave through the Khmer interpreter is not evidence that [W] has a view about parenting arrangements.
The children have a good relationship with each of their parents.
Ms Tschanter observed the children interacting with both parents and her opinion was that:
“[W] and [X] appear to have a close attachment with both parents.”
I must consider the willingness and ability of each of the children’s parents to facilitate and encourage a close and continuing relationship between the children and the other parent.
The father questioned the mother’s willingness and ability to facilitate and encourage the children’s relationship to him.
The father said that in the past the mother had often put him down to the children, saying that he was the low part of the family and that he did not know anything.
Ms Tschanter commented that “most of the interview with Ms Nak consisted in allegations about the father Mr Sim.” Ms Tschanter also reported the mother as saying that she would prefer it if the father simply disappeared out of her [and the children’s] lives.
The mother denied having put the father down in the past or having described him as the low part of the family. However given the mother’s statements to Ms Tschanter, I consider it likely that the mother has talked as the father described. I consider it likely that the mother has said derogatory to or about the father during arguments. I accept that the mother told Ms Tschanter that that she would like the father to disappear.
I accept that the mother does not hold the father in high regard, has no particular goodwill toward him and would prefer not to have to deal with him. It does not automatically follow that the mother would try to exclude the father from the children’s lives, however much she might consider that things would be easier if he were not around. It does however raise a concern about whether if the children lived with the mother, their relationship with their father might be affected by the mother’s attitude toward the father.
On the positive side, the mother has complied with the court orders made on 5 May 2008 and has not over held the children on any occasion.

Mr C, the father of the mother’s older children, is still part of those children’s lives.
The father has complied with the court orders about the children spending time with the mother, and there was no evidence of him speaking badly to the children about their mother. He proposed that the children continue to spend time with their mother if they lived with him. I am satisfied that the father has a reasonable capacity to facilitate and encourage the children’s relationship with the mother.
I must consider the likely effect of any change in the children’s circumstances, including the likely effect of separation of the children from:
i)either of their parents; or
ii)any other child, or other person (including any grandparent or other relative of the child) with whom he or she has been living.
This is an important issue in this case. The father has cared for the children for two years, since [X] was 11 months and [W] almost three. The children are healthy and developing well. They have a good relationship with the father. He has obtained appropriate medical treatment for them when it has been required. He has enrolled [W] in school and accepted advice about taking [X] to playgroup.
The children are used to being in the father’s primary care after, as

Ms Tschanter said, no doubt facing a period of adjustment when the parties first separated.
The mother proposed that the arrangements be changed and that the children be placed in her primary care. However the mother is not ideally placed to take on the children’s primary care immediately. She lives in a one bedroom flat with one bed, and she is employed outside the home on evening shift.
I accept that the mother may be able to obtain more suitable accommodation. I accept that the mother may be able to arrange care for the children while she works. However, unless she can find someone to sleep over at her home (which might be difficult while she lives in a one bedroom flat) the children will have to go to the day carer and wake up to go home when the mother finished her shift.
I accept that the mother may in due course change to a day shift, but that also has its difficulties, as the mother will be required to start work at 6am. Getting the children to day care and school in these circumstances would require a very early start by the children.
If the children move to the primary care of the mother, it is unlikely that the mother would continue to take them to the early learning centre at [C], or the playgroup at [C] Public school, although I accept that she may source other appropriate activities for them. [W] would almost certainly need to start at a different school next year.
If the children moved to the primary care of their mother, they will face a substantial change to their daily routine. It is difficult to see how it would be in their best interests to change a situation with which is satisfactory and which they are familiar to a situation which is untried.
The mother’s history in regard to her two older children also raises a concern about whether she can be depended upon to give continuing care to [W] and [X] if they do come to live with her. No doubt at the moment the mother has every intention of providing stable and reliable care for the boys. However when they were very young, she voluntarily relinquished them to the father so that she could pursue employment. When she separated from the father of her older two children, she left those children with their father while she went to Darwin for six months.

It would not be in [W] and [X]’s best interests if they moved to live with their mother, and adapted to that change, only to have the mother at some time in the future return them to the father because of the mother’s own needs at the time. Given the mother’s actions in the past, the possibility of that occurring cannot be completely ruled out.
I must consider the boys maturity sex and background.
In terms of the boys’ maturity, they are young, almost three and almost five. They have already been required to adapt once to a change of primary carer. [W] is about to start school. The boys need continuity of care and stability.
In terms of the boys’ background, both parents are Cambodian and have a common cultural background.
Both parents agree that because of their Cambodian heritage, they should each be permitted to take the boys to Cambodia for a holiday from time to time.
I must consider the capacity of each of the parents to meet the needs of the boys, including their emotional and intellectual needs.
I accept that each parent can meet the boys’ basic needs to be fed and clothed. I am not satisfied that either parent has yelled at or shouted at or physically disciplined the boys to any extent which should cause concern.
I do not accept that there is any reason to be concerned about the father’s ability to care for the boys, simply because of issues raised by the mother about things such as the washing of clothes or [X]’s toilet training.
The father is clearly willing to accept guidance about issues concerning the boys socialisation and education. He takes the boys to an early learning centre and he accepted advice that [X] should attend playgroup.
The father as a stay at home parent is better placed at present to take the boys to these activities. He will be better placed to get [W] to and from school when he starts next year.
The mother would face some challenges in caring for the boys if they moved to her primary care. She would need to organise day care for them, and would have to deal with the difficulty of getting [W] to school, either after she had had only a few hours sleep or in circumstances where she had to start work at 6am.
It is troubling that the mother has recently made two allegations of non-accidental injury in respect of the children, allegations for which there is no reasonable basis in the available evidence. These actions by the mother have the potential to be emotionally damaging to the boys. I note that these allegations have been made in the lead up to the final haring and it is to be hoped that once the proceedings are over and orders made there will be no recurrence of baseless allegations by the mother.
I must consider the attitude of each parent to the duties and responsibilities of parenthood.
The father has demonstrated a good attitude to the duties and responsibilities of parenthood. He took up the challenge of caring for the boys full time in November 2006 and has made a good job of it.
The father complained that the mother had not paid child support since separation, but his evidence was that he only applied for child support a few months ago.
The mother’s determination to earn an income demonstrates a good attitude to the duties and responsibilities of parenthood. The children need to be financially supported, and a hardworking employed parent is a good role model for the boys, especially as they get older. However, the mother does not show a good attitude to the duties and responsibilities of parenthood when she now, without any reasonable basis, seeks to heap criticism on the father as a parent, the father with whom she left the boys so that she could return to the workforce.
In the lead up to the final hearing of the parenting proceedings, the mother quickly seized on [W] breaking his arm and having a swollen eye as opportunities to criticise the father. Ms Tschanter commented that:
“Ms Nak did not demonstrate during the interview that she was aware of the impact of the above allegations and their associated behaviour may be having on the children. Ms Nak’s focus was to discredit the father’s parenting capacity and express her distrust and anger toward him.”
The father has done a good job raising the boys, the task the mother handed him in November 2006. The mother does not show a good attitude to the duties and responsibilities of parenthood when she now tries to discredit the father at every opportunity, rather than to work with him so that the boys have the advantage of two parents having a meaningful conflict free involvement in their lives.
There are no allegations of family violence, nor any family violence orders.

Parental Responsibility

Pursuant to section 61DA of the Family Law Act, I am required to apply a presumption that it is in the best interests of the children that their parents have equal shared parental responsibility for them, absent a finding that one of the parents has engaged in abuse of the children or family violence.
The presumption can also be rebutted if it would not be in the children’s best interests for it to apply.
I am not satisfied that either parent has engaged in abuse of the children (as it is defined in the Family Law Act) or family violence. I am satisfied that the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility should apply. Each parent also proposed this outcome.

Conclusion

As I have found that the parents should have equal shared parental responsibility for the children, I am required by section 65DAA of the Family Law Act to consider whether it is in the children’s best interests and reasonably practicable for them to spend equal time or alternatively substantial or significant time, with each of their parents.
Neither parent proposed an equal time arrangement. Each proposed that the children live with them and spend an alternate weekend and a mid week overnight each week with the other parent.
I am not of course bound by the proposals of the parties, but it might well be that the proposals each party put forward about the children’s time with the parent with whom the children did not live is an indication of what each parent considers practical, given the distance the parents live apart and the fact that [W] will be starting school in only in a few months time.
The mother proposed that the boys live primarily with her. It was her case that she loves the boys, and has a good relationship with them. It was her case that she does stimulating and enjoyable activities with the boys.
It was further the mother’s case that that she could provide the boys with a better standard of day to day care than the father could. The mother also said that the father was abusive to the children on occasions, and (by implication) said that it would therefore be to the children’s advantage to spend less time with him.
I do not accept however that it would be in the boy’s best interests to change their current living arrangements.
If the boys move to the mother’s primary care, they will be required to adapt to many changes. In particular the mother would need to make arrangements for the boys to be cared for while she worked. There was no evidence that she had thought through the details of what would be required, what it might mean for the boys and how much it might cost her.
Because of her working hours (either now or if she changes to day shift) the mother will be less available than the father to take the boys during the week to groups such as the play group at [C] Public School or the early learning centre.
As well as adapting to a change in their routines, the boys would also have to adapt to seeing their father, with whom they have lived since [X] was eleven months and [W] almost three, far less frequently than they do now.
There is also the fact that the mother left her older children in the care of Mr C when she separated from him, and her younger children with the father when she separated from the father. On both occasions the mother left the children with their respective father’s in order to pursue employment. This creates a lingering concern about whether the mother might in the future again decide to leave the boys with someone else while she pursued her own life goals.
If the boys were at risk in the father’s care or were receiving sub-standard care, then it might be necessary to change where they primarily live, despite the unformed nature of the mother’s plans and the concern about the effect on the boys of being removed from the parent with whom they have primarily lived for the last two years and concern about the mother’s reliability. However I do not accept that the father has abused the boys, or that there are serious deficiencies in his ability to care for the boys on a day to day basis.
The boys are doing well in their father’s care. He has taken up admirably the challenge of caring for the children. He has been reliable and dependable in the last two years. Ms Tschanter emphasised that children of [W] and [X]’s age benefit from stability and routine. He has facilitated them having a relationship with their mother.
The father is available to care for the boys both during the day and at night. He is available to take them to and pick them up from the early learning centre and is available to take [X] to the playgroup which was recommended.
The mother cannot be criticised for her strong desire to work and earn an income. However[W] and [X] are quite young, and as children from a non-English speaking background they face some challenges as they grow older and are required to move outside their home and into the wider community. The fact that the father is prepared to care for them full time for the present is beneficial for [W] and [X].
Finally, Ms Tschanter noted that the mother was strongly critical of the father, and that she would prefer him to disappear. I cannot be confident that if the boys lived primarily with the mother, the mother would properly promote the father as a parent whose importance to the boys is equal to her own.
In my view the children’s best interests would be met by them continuing to live primarily with their father.
The father proposed that if the children lived with him they spend from Saturday to Sunday each alternate week and overnight each Wednesday until Thursday morning (provided the mother was available to care for them) with the mother. The mother did not put forward a proposal for her time with the boys in the event that they remained living with the father.
Ms Tschanter recommended in her report that the children spend each alternate weekend and two consecutive days each week with the mother. She added however the rider:
“the time to adjust for 2009 as [W] will be starting kindergarten.”
Ms Tschanter conceded that when making this recommendation she believed that the mother was working only between 4pm and 9pm each night, rather than the longer hours the mother actually works.
If viewed only from the standpoint of the mother having a good relationship with the children and having a keen wish to fulfil her parenting responsibilities and be more involved in the boys day to day., Ms Tschanter’s proposal of two consecutive days each week on alternate weekends has much to recommend it. It is not, however, a practical proposal given the mother’s actual working commitments and the distance the parties live apart.
The father’s proposal that the children spend each Wednesday overnight to Thursday is the most suitable proposal in the longer term, as it will ensure that the mother continue to spend time with [W] once [W] starts school. I am concerned that it may be difficult to implement if the mother commences day shift, as she will need to start work at 6am.
For the time being, while the mother is on evening/night shift, a day time arrangement as is happening at present seems the most desirable. However once [W] starts school if the day time arrangement continued the mother would only see [X] on the Wednesdays.
There is no entirely satisfactory solution available given the mother’s working hours. Doing the best I can I intend to order that the mother have the children during the day on Wednesday (rather than Tuesday) if she is working evenings/nights and overnight Wednesday to Thursday if she works day shifts. While the early mornings may present a challenge if the mother has an early start, the mother (and boys) will only need to deal with this difficulty once a week and it is better for the boys if they can spend some weekday time as well as weekend time with the mother.
The parties each proposed that Wednesday changeover of the children should take place at the school during school terms. I propose to order this from 2009 as the father could take [X] to the front gate of the school until he is of school age, so that both children could be exchanged at the same time.
The mother proposed that changeovers which could not take place at school take place at [C] Police Station. The father proposed that the mother collect the children from and return them to his home.
It is not desirable for changeovers to take place outside police stations unless this is the only available solution in a situation of high conflict.
The existing interim orders provide for changeover to take place at the father’s home. While it is clear that the mother and father do not especially like each other at present, there was no evidence that these changeover arrangements have resulted in the children being regularly exposed to conflict.
I am satisfied that it is appropriate for changeover to continue to take place at the father’s home, if it cannot occur at the school.
I will make the order the mother proposed, that each party be restrained from speaking badly of the other or being aggressive or argumentative in the presence of the children.
The parties proposed almost identical orders permitting each of them to take the children to Cambodia from time to time and I will make those orders. I will also make orders to allow a passport to be obtained if one party refuses to sign the necessary paperwork.
In their affidavits each parent said that they were willing to do a post-separation parenting course. However neither party specifically sought an order that they attend such a course. Ms Tschanter recommended that the parties “access counselling if conflict [between them] persists.”
Not without some misgivings, I do not intend to order that the parents attend a post-separation parenting course at this time.
For all the above reasons the orders of the court will be set out at the beginning of the judgment.

I certify that the preceding one hundred and sixteen (116) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of Terry FM

Associate: Rachel Hodgson

Date: 22 October 2008