Pinson & Pinson (No 4)

This case concerned parenting arrangements for a child, X, born in 2011, between the child's parents, Mr Pinson (the Father) and Ms Pinson (the Mother). The dispute involved the child's residence, parental responsibility for major long-term issues, and the specific time the child would spend with each parent. The matter came before Judge Cassidy in the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia.

The court was required to determine the best interests of the child, X, in accordance with sections 60CC(2) and (2A) of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth). This involved weighing the benefit of a meaningful relationship with both parents against the need to protect the child from physical or psychological harm. Specifically, the court had to consider the impact of the Mother's mental health on her capacity to parent and the potential risks to the child.

Judge Cassidy applied the principles of best interests of the child, giving greater weight to the protection of the child from harm. While acknowledging the benefit of a meaningful relationship with both parents and noting that the Mother's mental health issues did not currently pose an unacceptable risk requiring supervised time, the court found that it was not clear the Mother could manage the care of the child as a resident parent. The court considered expert evidence regarding the Mother's mental health, including diagnoses of schizophrenia and ADD, and the differing opinions of treating and forensic psychiatrists. Ultimately, the court ordered that the child live with the Father, with the Father having sole parental responsibility for major long-term issues, subject to a notification process for the Mother. Specific time arrangements were detailed, including provisions for communication, holidays, and changeovers, along with orders restraining the Mother from taking the child to a particular psychologist and requiring the Father to complete a parenting program.