Re:Karsen

In the matter of Karsen, Forrest J of the Family Court of Australia considered an application concerning the medical treatment of a child, Karsen. The proceedings involved the child's parents as applicants and the Director-General of a relevant Government Department as an intervener.

The primary legal issues before the Court were whether to grant leave for the child to sign an affidavit, for the applicants to file an affidavit, and for the intervener to file an affidavit. Crucially, the Court was required to determine whether to authorise the applicants, the child's parents, to consent to medical treatment on behalf of Karsen, specifically the administration of Intramuscular Primoteston (testosterone enanthate) to achieve male puberty, under the guidance of the child's treating medical practitioners. The Court also considered orders for the non-publication of identifying information and restrictions on accessing the court file.

Forrest J applied section 100B(1) and section 67ZC of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth). Section 100B(1) permitted the granting of leave for the child to sign an affidavit, which was granted *nunc pro tunc*. Section 67ZC, which deals with the welfare of children, was the basis for authorising the parents to consent to the specified medical treatment for Karsen, ensuring it was administered in consultation with the child's endocrinologist and psychiatrist. The Court also made extensive orders to protect the child's privacy and restrict access to the court file, reflecting the sensitive nature of the proceedings.