Re: Chloe

In the matter of *Re: Chloe*, Cleary J considered an application concerning the welfare of a child, Chloe. The applicant sought authorisation for the administration of Phase 1 treatment for childhood gender dysphoria. The Minister for the relevant Government Department, acting as the child welfare officer, was identified as the party with parental responsibility for Chloe.

The central legal issue before the court was whether the Minister, in his capacity as child welfare officer, possessed the authority under section 67ZC of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth) to authorise the commencement of Phase 1 treatment for Chloe's gender dysphoria. The court also considered the appointment of an Independent Children's Lawyer (ICL) to represent Chloe's interests, as provided for by section 68L of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth).

Cleary J reasoned that the Minister, as the child welfare officer with parental responsibility, was empowered by section 67ZC of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth) to authorise the treatment. The court also granted leave for the applicant to relist the matter if difficulties arose with the child's use of the name "Chloe," noting that an order for a change of birth certificate had not been made and that Chloe's school supported her preferred name.

The court ordered that the Minister may authorise the administration of Phase 1 treatment for Chloe's gender dysphoria on a date to be determined by the treating medical team. Strict non-publication orders were made to protect Chloe's identity, with only anonymised reasons for judgment and orders to be released to non-parties. An Independent Children's Lawyer was appointed, and parties were directed to facilitate Chloe's attendance on the ICL.