Obney and Lagree
[2012] FMCAfam 619
FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA
| OBNEY & LAGREE | [2012] FMCAfam 619 |
| FAMILY LAW – Children’s matter – interim hearing – where parties have equal shared care for child aged 19 months – where mother recently on at least two occasions has left the child unattended at home to attend gym – where mother has had several changes of residence – order made for child to live with the father and spend extensive day time periods with mother. |
| Family Law Act 1975 |
| Applicant: | MR OBNEY |
| Respondent: | MS LAGREE |
| File Number: | DNC 115 of 2012 |
| Judgment of: | L. Turner FM |
| Hearing date: | 18 June 2012 |
| Date of Last Submission: | 18 June 2012 |
| Delivered at: | Darwin |
| Delivered on: | 18 June 2012 |
REPRESENTATION
| Counsel for the Applicant: | Ms Sivyer |
| Solicitors for the Applicant: | Bowden McCormack Lawyers & Advisors |
| Counsel for the Respondent: | Ms Coonan |
| Solicitors for the Respondent: | Withnalls Lawyers |
ORDERS
That order’s (2) and (3) made by consent on 5 April 2012 are hereby suspended.
That the child X born (omitted) 2010 live with the father.
That the mother spend time with the child as follows:-
a)Each Monday, Wednesday and Friday from 3.00pm to 6.00pm with the mother to collect the child from Daycare and return the child to the father’s residence;
b)Each Sunday from 10.00am to 4.00pm with the mother to collect and return the child to the father’s residence;
c)Each Tuesday and Thursday at the child’s Daycare as arranged with the Daycare centre.
IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment under the pseudonym Obney & Lagree is approved pursuant to s.121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).
| FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT DARWIN |
DNC 115 of 2012
| MR OBNEY |
Applicant
And
| MS LAGREE |
Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
EX TEMPORE
These reasons for judgment were delivered orally. They have been corrected from the transcript. Grammatical errors have been corrected and an attempt has been made to render the orally delivered reasons amenable to being read.
Introduction
I have before me today an application in a case, filed by the father on 12 June 2012, seeking the suspension of interim consent orders that were made in April 2012, and for an order that the child of the relationship, X, who is currently 19 months of age, live with the father and spend supervised time with the mother.
During the course of the interim hearing the father has also stated that the mother could spend time with the child at the day care centre and that this arrangement can be accommodated by the day care centre.
The reason why the application has been brought is concerns raised by the father that the mother has, on at least two occasions, left the child unsupervised.
The mother admits that there is one occasion where she did leave the child unsupervised for a period of some 40 to 50 minutes, and that the second occasion where the child was left unsupervised she thought that Mr S, who she was living with at the time, or his brother, was in the house at the time that she left the house, and left the child alone in the house.
On both occasions the reason why the child was left unattended was for the mother to attend gym.
Issues
The interim hearing today ran with some cross-examination.
Firstly, cross-examination in respect to the witness, Mr S, who provided the details to the court as to the periods of time that the child was left alone.
Secondly cross-examination occurred of the mother in respect to her evidence as to why she left the child alone and her view as to her feelings about that matter at this point in time.
The mother indicated to the court that she has now realised that what she did was wrong and that she is prepared to enter into an undertaking that it not happen again.
Where should the child live on an interim basis?
The parents in this matter are relatively young. The mother is 23 the father is 25.
The parties separated in March 2011.
I am informed that since separation in March 2011 until the interim consent orders were reached on 5 April 2012 that the father was spending time with the child, which gradually increased to overnight until the current arrangements which are now a week-about arrangement.
The parties further attended a mediation in May 2012 as a consequence of which a parenting plan was entered into, which provides also for an equal time relationship, save some special day time.
The issue that I have to deal with today is a simple issue in that what I have to decide is whether the actions of the mother in leaving the child unsupervised should lead to such a consequence that, on an interim basis, the child should no longer live with the mother on a week-about arrangement.
It is a difficult decision, as it is based on limited information, however at the end of the day I must make a decision which is in the best interests of the child.
There is no excuse whatsoever to leaving such a young child unattended even for a short period of time let alone for a period of what was admitted of some 40 to 50 minutes.
The child was in relatively unfamiliar surroundings, was left in a room with a bottle where there was potential in the room alone for injury to the child, and where there was potential, on a more serious level, for serious injury to the child, given that, left unattended at that age, anything could have happened. There is no drama in making that statement – it is just a reality.
Anyone that reads the newspapers on a daily basis are shocked and horrified by situations where children wander onto roads, where they drown, where they inflict injury upon themselves, where they set houses on fire, because they have been left unattended, even for a matter of minutes.
The mother shows signs of remorse, although it’s questionable as to whether that remorse is because she has been caught out or whether she has a genuine understanding of the seriousness of the situation.
Whilst I cannot make any findings, there are other incidents that the father is concerned about, with the child being left unattended and locked in a room in other accommodation while the mother is out.
For a number of weeks, since April 2012, the mother has had several changes of accommodation and will not be in a position to be in more secure accommodation until she secures employment, which she hopes to do so shortly.
The several changes of accommodation, the irresponsibility of the mother in leaving the child alone, the fact that the mother does not appear to comprehend how serious the situation is, leads me to believe that the current arrangement of week about cannot be left in place, even on an interim basis, until we have the family report back before the court and until we have some further indication from the mother as to her being more responsible in her role as a parent.
The best arrangement for the child in the interim is to have a regime in place whereby the child live with the father, but spend significant and regular time with the mother, and with the mother abiding by the orders.
The mother has indicated that she is prepared to do a parenting course, and I encourage that she do that immediately.
In the interim this matter is back before me in July 2012, which is only a matter of another six or so weeks, and by that time the family report would have been released.
Until the matter is back before me, I am going to suspend order 2 and order 3 of the orders made on 5 April 2012, and make orders for the mother to spend regular day time periods with the child.
I certify that the preceding twenty-seven (27) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of L. Turner FM
Date: 25 June 2012
0
0