Re: Mason - [2017] FamCA 453

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

RE: MASON

[2017] FamCA 453

FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – MEDICAL PROCEDURE –Where the applicant is the mother of a child diagnosed with Gender Dysphoria –where the applicant seeks a finding that the child is Gillick competent to consent to Stage Two treatment for Gender Dysphoria – where the child’s father supports the application – where the child’s treating medical experts support the child commencing Stage Two treatment – assessment of whether a 17 and a half year old child is Gillick competent to consent to the medical treatment – where the child is competent to consent medical treatment.

Evidence Act 2008 (Cth) s 140
Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)
Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth) rr 1.12, 4.10

Gillick v West Norfolk and Wisbech Area Health Authority [1986] AC 112
Re Jamie [2013] FamCAFC 110; (2013) 50 Fam LR 369
Secretary, Department of Health & Community Services (NT) v JWV and SMV (1992) 175 CLR 218

APPLICANT:

The Mother

FILE NUMBER: By Court Order File Number is suppressed

DATE DELIVERED:

29 June 2017

JUDGMENT OF:

Johns J

HEARING DATE:

23 June 2017

REPRESENTATION

By Court Order the names of Counsel and Solicitor have been suppressed

Orders

That pursuant to Rule 1.12 of the Family Law Rules 2004 (the Rules) the requirement pursuant to Rule 4.10 of the Rules that the Initiating Application filed 22 May 2017 be served on the prescribed Child Welfare Authority be dispensed with.
That the full name of the child K (also known as Mason) born … 1999 (“Mason”), Mason’s family members and their occupations, the hospital, Mason’s medical practitioners, Mason's school, this Court’s file number, the State of Australia in which the proceedings were initiated, the name of the parents, lawyers and any other fact or matter that may identify Mason shall not be published in any way, and only anonymised Reasons for Judgment and orders (with coversheets excluding the Registry, file number and lawyers names and details, as well as the parties’ real names) shall be released by the Court to non-parties without further contrary order of a Judge, it being noted that each party shall be handed one full copy of these orders with the relevant details included for provision to the treating medical practitioners and to enable their execution, and one coversheet of Reasons for Judgment that includes the file number and lawyers’ names.
That no person shall be permitted to search the Court file in this matter without first obtaining the leave of a judge.
That the applicant be at liberty to provide a copy of the un-anonymised and the un-anonymised Reasons for Judgment to all persons involved with Mason's treatment and welfare.
That upon the Court being satisfied that the child Mason is competent to consent to the medical treatment described in the Initiating Application filed 22 May 2017, the applicant’s Initiating Application be otherwise dismissed.

AND THE COURT NOTES

That the proposed medical treatment so described in the Initiating Application filed 22 May…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Re: Mason

Details

AGLC: Re: Mason [2017] FamCA 453
Case: [2017] FamCA 453
Decision Date: 29 June 2017

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of Re: Mason, Johns J of the Family Court of Australia considered an application concerning a child, identified as K (also known as Mason), born in 1999. The dispute involved an Initiating Application filed on 22 May 2017, which sought orders related to medical treatment for gender dysphoria.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether to dispense with the requirement to serve the Initiating Application on the prescribed Child Welfare Authority, and under what conditions the application should otherwise be dismissed. The court also had to determine appropriate measures to ensure the privacy and anonymity of the child, Mason, and their family, given the sensitive nature of the proceedings.

Johns J applied Rule 1.12 of the Family Law Rules 2004 to dispense with the service requirement under Rule 4.10, finding it appropriate in this instance. The court reasoned that the proposed medical treatment, described as hormonal, psychiatric, psychological, or complimentary treatment for gender dysphoria, necessitated stringent privacy protections. Consequently, the court made extensive orders to anonymise the judgment and prevent public access to the court file, while allowing for the provision of un-anonymised documents to those directly involved in Mason's treatment and welfare.

The court ordered that the Initiating Application would be dismissed once it was satisfied that Mason was competent to consent to the proposed medical treatment.

Orders

Orders of the court

That pursuant to Rule 1.12 of the Family Law Rules 2004 (the Rules) the requirement pursuant to Rule 4.10 of the Rules that the Initiating Application filed 22 May 2017 be served on the prescribed Child Welfare Authority be dispensed with.

That the full name of the child K (also known as Mason) born … 1999 (“Mason”), Mason’s family members and their occupations, the hospital, Mason’s medical practitioners, Mason's school, this Court’s file number, the State of Australia in which the proceedings were initiated, the name of the parents, lawyers and any other fact or matter that may identify Mason shall not be published in any way, and only anonymised Reasons for Judgment and orders (with coversheets excluding the Registry, file number and lawyers names and details, as well as the parties’ real names) shall be released by the Court to non-parties without further contrary order of a Judge, it being noted that each party shall be handed one full copy of these orders with the relevant details included for provision to the treating medical practitioners and to enable their execution, and one coversheet of Reasons for Judgment that includes the file number and lawyers’ names.

That no person shall be permitted to search the Court file in this matter without first obtaining the leave of a judge.

That the applicant be at liberty to provide a copy of the un-anonymised and the un-anonymised Reasons for Judgment to all persons involved with Mason's treatment and welfare.

That upon the Court being satisfied that the child Mason is competent to consent to the medical treatment described in the Initiating Application filed 22 May 2017, the applicant’s Initiating Application be otherwise dismissed.

AND THE COURT NOTES

That the proposed medical treatment so described in the Initiating Application filed 22 May 2017 is hormonal, psychiatric, psychological or any other complimentary treatment for gender dysphoria.

Note: The form of the order is subject to the entry of the order in the Court’s records.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.