Rowles & Alderman (No 2)
[2025] FedCFamC1F 326
•22 May 2025
FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA
(DIVISION 1)
Rowles & Alderman (No 2) [2025] FedCFamC1F 326
File number(s): TVC 1272 of 2020 Judgment of: BAUMANN J Date of judgment: 22 May 2025 Catchwords: FAMILY LAW – CHILDREN – Part-heard final hearing – Where interim Orders were previously made – Final orders now made in the child’s best interests Legislation: Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) ss 60B, 60CC, 61DA, 65DAA Cases cited: Goode & Goode (2006) FLC 93-286
Hall & Hall (1979) FLC 90-713
Rowles & Alderman [2023] FedCFamC1F 732
Division: Division 1 First Instance Number of paragraphs: 77 Date of hearing: 8 – 9 August 2024 and 18 – 20 March 2025 Place: Townsville Counsel for the Applicant: Mr A Collins on 8 & 9 August 2023 and Ms A Lawrence on 18 – 20 March 2025 Solicitor for the Applicant: Legal Aid Queensland Counsel for the Respondent: Mr R Pack on 8 August 2023 Solicitor for the Respondent: Norris Law on 8 August 2023, litigant in person on 9 August 2023 and 18 – 20 March 2025 Counsel for the Independent Children’s Lawyer: Mr N McGregor on 8 & 9 August 2023 and Mrs R Bassano on 18 – 20 March 2025 Solicitor for the Independent Children’s Lawyer: Collier Lawyers ORDERS
TVC 1272 of 2020 FEDERAL CIRCUIT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA (DIVISION 1)
BETWEEN: MS ROWLES
Applicant
AND: MR ALDERMAN
Respondent
INDEPENDENT CHILDREN'S LAWYER
ORDER MADE BY:
BAUMANN J
DATE OF ORDER:
22 MAY 2025
THE COURT ORDERS ON A FINAL BASIS:
1.That the Applicant mother, Ms Rowles, have sole responsibility for making decisions about major long-term issues for the child, Z born 2017 (“the child”).
2.That in exercising sole parental responsibility, the mother must inform the Respondent father, Mr Alderman, in writing of her decision within twenty one (21) days of making such decision, except in the circumstances of an emergency, whereby the mother shall inform the father as soon as reasonably practicable.
3.That for the purposes of these Orders, a major long-term issue shall include, but is not limited to issues about:
(a)the child’s education (both current and future);
(b)the child’s religious and cultural upbringing;
(c)the child’s health;
(d)the child’s name; and
(e)changes to the child’s living arrangements that make it significantly more difficult for the child to spend time with a parent.
Living arrangements
4.That the child shall live with the mother.
Term time
5.That unless otherwise agreed between the parents in writing, the child shall spend time with the father:
(a)commencing on Saturday 31 May 2025, from 9.00am until 4.00pm, with such time continuing on each alternate weekend thereafter;
(b)commencing on Saturday 20 September 2025, from 9.00am until 4.00pm and Sunday 21 September 2025 from 9.00am until 4.00pm, with such time continuing on each alternate Saturday thereafter;
Term one 2026
(c)commencing on 7 February 2026, from 9.00am on Saturday until 5.00pm on Sunday, with such time continuing on each alternate weekend thereafter;
Term two 2026
(d)commencing on 1 May 2026, from after school on Friday until 5.00pm on Sunday, with such time continuing on each alternate weekend thereafter;
Term three 2026 and thereafter
(e)commencing on 24 July 2026, from after school on Friday until before school on Monday, with such time continuing on each alternate weekend thereafter.
School holiday time
Term two 2026
6.That commencing at the end of term two (2) 2026 school holiday period, unless otherwise agreed between the parents in writing, the child shall spend time with the father from after school on Friday 26 June 2026 until 5.00pm on Wednesday 1 July 2026.
Term three 2026
7.That commencing the end of term three (3) 2026 school holiday period, the child shall spend time with the father (in addition to Order 5(e) hereof) from after school on Friday 18 September 2026 until 5.00pm on Thursday 24 September 2026.
2026/2027 summer holidays
8.That the child shall spend time with the father during the 2026/2027 school holiday period from after school on Friday 11 December 2026 until 5.00pm on Friday 18 December 2026, with such time to continue each alternate week thereafter during such holiday period and the child being return to the mother’s care at 5.00pm on Monday 25 January 2027, in anticipation of the school term commencing on Wednesday 27 January 2027.
2027 onwards
9.That commencing from term one (1) of the 2027 school year, the child shall spend school holiday time:
(a)with the father from after school on the last Friday of the schooling term until 5.00pm on the following Friday; and
(b)for the 2027/2028 Summer holidays and thereafter, week about provided the child is in the care of the mother by 5.00pm on the Friday before school recommencing for that year.
Special occasions
Christmas
10.That in 2025 and each odd numbered year thereafter, the child shall spend from 9.00am on Christmas Eve (24 December) until 9.00am on Boxing Day (26 December) with the mother and from 9.00am until 4.00pm on Boxing Day (26 December) with the father.
11.That in 2026 and each even numbered year thereafter, the child shall spend from 9.00am on Christmas Eve (24 December) until 9.00am on Boxing Day (26 December) with the father and from 9.00am on Boxing Day (26 December) until 4.00pm on 28 December with the mother.
Mother’s and Father’s Day
12.That the child shall spend time with the father on Father’s Day (if not otherwise in the father’s care):
(a)from 9.00am until 4.00pm 5.00pm in 2025; and
(b)from 9.00am until 5.00pm in 2026 and onwards.
13.That the child shall spend time with the mother on Mother’s Day and should the child’s time with the father fall on Mother’s Day, the child will be returned to the mother at 9.00 am on Mother’s Day.
Changeover
14.That changeover shall occur at the child’s school where changeover is to occur on a school day.
15.That where changeover is to occur on a non-school day, and unless otherwise agreed between the parents in writing, changeover shall occur at McDonalds Suburb L.
16.That the mother be permitted to use an agent to attend the changeover.
Telephone time
17.That the child shall communicate with the father each Thursday at 6.30pm by telephone, with the father to initiate such call to a mobile number nominated by the mother, and for the mother to facilitate the child receiving such call.
Information
18.That the parents shall inform each other as soon as reasonably practical in relation to any injury or illness affecting the child that requires any medical or hospital attention.
19.That the father shall inform the mother as soon as reasonably practical of the name of any adult person the father allows to live in the house where the child will spend time.
20.That the parents shall:
(a)keep the other informed of their current postal address/es, telephone number and email address and shall inform the other parent in writing within forty eight (48) hours of any change;
(b)communicate with each other about issues relating to the Child by the Talking Parents app; and
(c)not require the child to pass messages or information to the other parent.
21.That once time is unsupervised between the father and the child, the father is at liberty to attend the child’s school events to which parents are normally able to attend provided he informs the mother, in writing using the Talking Parents App, of his intention to attend at least seven (7) days beforehand. In that event, both parents will behave in a respectful manner towards each other at the event.
Authorities
22.That this Order shall be authority to the child’s school to provide each parent (at that parent’s expense) information about the child’s educational progress, school related activities, copies of school reports, photographs, photograph order forms, certificates, awards obtained by the child and other school communications ordinarily provided to parents and always at the discretion of the educational facility.
23.That this Order shall be authority to each of the child’s medical practitioners (including counsellors and psychologists) to provide each parent (at that parent’s expense) information about the child’s medical conditions, treatment and with copies of medical records and reports and always at the discretion of the medical provider.
24.That the mother shall ensure that the school/s attended by the child and the child’s usual treating medical practitioners (including counsellors and psychologists) are provided with a copy of this Order.
Restraints and requirements
25.That unless otherwise provided for in these Orders, the father is restrained from removing the child from any school or other activity the child is placed by the mother or her agent.
26.That unless the mother consents in writing, the father is restrained from having boarders or lodgers at his house when the child is spending time with him in accordance with these Orders.
27.That each parent shall positively encourage the child to maintain and improve their relationship with the other parent.
28.That during the time the child is with either parent, that parent shall:
(a)respect the privacy of the other parent and not question the child about the personal life of the other parent;
(b)speak of the other parent respectfully;
(c)not denigrate or insult the other parent or other parent’s family to or in the presence or hearing of the child; and
(d)use their best endeavours to prevent any other person denigrating or insulting the other parent or other family members in the presence or hearing of the child.
29.That the parents shall not consume alcohol to excess or any illicit substance while the child is in their care.
30.That the parents shall not expose the child to other persons consuming alcohol to excess or consuming or being under the influence of illicit drugs.
31.That the parents shall not allow the child to be exposed to domestic and family violence and will immediately remove the child from any situations where such is occurring.
32.That neither parent may relocate the residence of the child away from City C without the written consent of the other parent or an order of this Court.
33.That the child’s surname shall at all times be “Alderman” unless otherwise agreed in writing between the parents.
34.That the Independent Children’s Lawyer be discharged.
Note: The form of the order is subject to the entry in the Court’s records.
Note: This copy of the Court’s Reasons for judgment may be subject to review to remedy minor typographical or grammatical errors (r 10.14(b) Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth)), or to record a variation to the order pursuant to r 10.13 Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth).
Part XIVB of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) makes it an offence, except in very limited circumstances, to publish an account of proceedings that identify persons, associated persons, or witnesses involved in family law proceedings.
IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment by this Court under the pseudonym Rowles & Alderman has been approved pursuant to subsection 114Q(2) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
BAUMANN J:
The dispute that remains for determination by the Court relates to what orders are in the best interests of the child, Z born 2017 (now aged seven years).
These proceedings between the Applicant mother Ms Rowles (“the mother”) and the Respondent father Mr Alderman (“the father”) have been ongoing for some time.
The mother first commenced proceedings in the Federal Circuit Court of Australia (“FCC”) (as it then was) in early 2019, of which remained on foot for only several months before being dismissed by a Judge on 7 November 2019. I note there is no record of reasons in relation to those Orders.
Not long thereafter, the mother recommenced proceedings by way of her Initiating Application filed on 13 September 2020. Following which, the proceedings have been largely case managed by judicial officers of the FCC and thereafter within Division 2 of this Court.
On 19 May 2022, the proceedings were set down for a final hearing of not more than two days, commencing on 18 October 2022 at Townsville. On the first day of the scheduled hearing, the matter was transferred to Division 1 and ordered to travel with the proceedings initiated by the father in relation to his two children with Ms Greig, being X and Y.
Following the proceedings being transferred to Division 1, both matters in relation to Mr Alderman’s three children were set down before me for a four-day final hearing commencing on 8 August 2023, which resulted in interim Orders being made. I rely upon, but do not now repeat, some of the history in those Reasons (see Rowles & Alderman [2023] FedCFamC1F 732).
In short, the Orders made at that time, which I will refer to later, have not been complied with in all respects.
When it became apparent that the interim Order for the father’s time with both Z and her siblings by another mother, being X (now aged 12 years) and Y (now aged 11 years), had to be temporarily suspended, the matter was listed for further hearing before me commencing on 18 March 2025.
When the matter was due to commence, on the first morning of the second tranche I was informed that in respect of the children X and Y, their mother Ms Greig and the father had reached final consent orders in relation to their parenting dispute.
The effect of those Orders was that the children, X and Y, would live with their mother, who would have sole parental responsibility and that the children would spend time with their father as agreed between the parents. Put simply, the Orders not providing any prescribed time with the father probably means that X and Y will spend limited, if any, time with Mr Alderman.
The balance of these Reasons now deal with Z, the child of in the relationship between Ms Rowles and the father.
STATUTORY PATHWAY
In circumstances where the final hearing in these proceedings commenced prior to the legislative changes of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) (“the Act”) commencing in May 2024, the following principles shall apply.
In all cases involving parenting orders, the child’s best interests are the Court’s paramount consideration. In determining those interests the Court must consider not only the objects of s 60B of the Family Law Act1975 (Cth) and the right of a child to have a meaningful relationship with all those people significant to them, but also the primary considerations under s 60CC(2) and the additional considerations under s 60CC(3) which will be analysed below to ensure that the order I propose will serve the best interests of the children.
To the extent possible, the Court should ensure orders made do not expose a party or a child to unacceptable risk of harm through family violence, abuse or neglect.
In certain circumstances, the Court applies a statutory presumption that it is in the children’s best interests for parents to have equal shared parental responsibility (s 61DA(1)), which relates to making major decisions and not about the time a child spends with each parent.
In Goode & Goode (2006) FLC 93-286, the Full Court made it clear that the presumption that equal shared parental responsibility is in the best interests of the child (s 61DA) does not carry with it any presumption about time. The issue of equal time is dealt with in s 65DAA and:
when the presumption is applied the first thing the Court must do is to consider when making an order whether it is consistent with the best interest of the child and reasonably practicable for the child to spend equal time with each of the parents. If equal time is not in the interest of the child or reasonably practicable the Court must go on to consider making an order whether it is consistent with the best interest of the child and reasonably practicable for the child to spend substantial and significant time with each of the parents.
HISTORY SINCE INTERIM ORDERS WERE MADE
Progression of time
The interim Orders that were made on 9 August 2023 in relation to Z are prescribed as follows:
Parental responsibility
1.That the mother shall have sole parental responsibility for making major long-term decisions for the child, [Z] born […] 2017 (“the child”).
2.That in exercising sole parental responsibility, the mother must inform the father in writing of her decision within seven (7) days of making such decision.
Living arrangements
3. That the child live with the mother.
4.That the child’s time will commence as at Order 5 herein, conditional upon the father’s compliance with the following:
5.The father engaging a psychologist and remaining so engaged, for the period of this Order, for management of the father’s mental health diagnosis, and in relation to alcohol relapse prevention; and
a. engaging a psychiatrist if so directed by his psychologist; and
b.informing the mother and the Independent Children’s Lawyer of the name of the psychologist and/or psychiatrist engaged within seven (7) days of the engagement.
6.That commencing immediately, the child spend time with the father on one (1) occasion per fortnight (on the alternate week from the time the father may spend with his other children, [X] born […] 2012 and [Y] born […] 2013) for a period of not more than two (2) hours on the following basis:
a.The child’s time is supervised at the [B Contact Centre] or by such other professional supervision services as the parties may agree;
b.The day on which the time occurs is as agreed between the parents in conjunction with the supervision service is not to interfere with the child’s educational or extracurricular requirements and activities; and
c. The cost of the supervision is met by the father;
7.That the father is to initiate contact with the [B Contact Centre] or such other agreed professional supervision service.
8.That the father shall obtain a report by 1 February 2024 from his treating psychologist and/or psychiatrist confirming:
a. the father has been attending sessions as directed;
b. what treatment he has received;
c. what progress he has made if any;
d. what further treatment is required;
e. the psychologist’s prognosis; and
f.whether, in the view of the psychologist and/or psychiatrist, the father does not pose a risk of harm to the child if time was unsupervised.
9.That the Independent Children’s Lawyer have leave to provide a copy of these Orders and any Reasons for Judgment of the Honourable Justice Baumann to the father’s treating psychologist and/or psychiatrist.
10.That the father shall authorise his treating psychologist and/or psychiatrist to provide information to the Independent Children’s Lawyer upon her request as to whether the father is attending his sessions.
11.That the Independent Children’s Lawyer has liberty to contact the chambers of the Honourable Justice Baumann to seek an urgent re-listing in the event either of the parties are not complying with these Orders.
12.That where the child is spending time with the father pursuant to these Orders on Mother’s Day, then the time the child spends with the father that day shall be suspended and the child shall spend time with the mother in lieu thereof.
13.That once six (6) visits in accordance with Order 5 herein have occurred, the child shall communicate with the father on a day and time as agreed once per week, failing agreement each Thursday at 6.30pm by telephone, with the father to initiate that call and the mother to facilitate the child receiving that call.
…
On 5 June 2024, further interim Orders were made by consent:
1.That the child live with the mother.
2.That conditional upon the father’s compliance with Order 7 hereof the child spend time with the father as follows:
a.on one (1) occasion per fortnight as agreed but failing agreement, each alternate Sunday from 9.00am to 5.30pm;
b. On Father’s Day from 8:30am to 12:30pm;
3.That in the event the child wishes to return back to the mother’s care the father will communicate with the mother and the parents will make arrangements for the child to be returned to the mother’s care.
4. That prior to unsupervised time commencing:
a.the father will provide a Carbohydrate-Deficient Transferrin Test (“CDT” Test) which test result evidence the father has not been excessively consuming alcohol; and
b.provide a letter to the Independent Childrens Lawyer and the mother from his psychologist to confirm he remains engaged with the psychologist for management of the father’s mental health diagnosis, and in relation to alcohol relapse prevention.
…
9.That changeovers will take place at the residence of [Ms Greig], or other agreed location and the father will not attend the residence of [Ms Greig] before 9.00am or after 5.30pm. Noting that where [Ms Greig] is not available the parents are to agree on a different location.
10.That in the event the father ceases to spend time with the child by not attending a scheduled visit on three (3) consecutive occasions without a reasonable excuse such as but not limited to illness (in which case the father will file a medical certificate), then the child’s time with the father will cease.
…
13.That the child communicate with the father each Thursday at 6.30pm by telephone with the father to initiate the call to 04[…] and the mother to facilitate the child receiving the call.
…
In essence, the time progressed broadly in accordance with the Orders, and where Z was accompanied by her older half-siblings, X and Y, initially supervised, and then between July and November 2024, the time was unsupervised. The father says, and I accept, that the time that occurred until November 2024 progressed well. It had been hoped, of course, that having set that foundation for time, particularly for Z at her age, that time could progress so that the father’s time with the child was more extensive.
Interruption of time
What is apparent, however, is that the flow of time was interrupted by an allegation that had been made by X to X’s mother and older sister (of whom Mr Alderman is not the father of) that the father had sexually inappropriately touched her. When this allegation was brought to the attention of the Court, the Court unsurprisingly made Orders on 15 November 2024 that the child Z’s time with the father was to be suspended, and the matter was listed for an interim hearing.
It should be acknowledged in these Reasons that there was no allegation that the father had in any way inappropriately dealt with or touched Z. Rather, as the earlier interim Orders made clear, there was a protection for Z that arose from spending time with her father (because of her age) with her siblings being present.
Following the initial suspension on 15 November 2024, the urgent interim hearing occurred on 5 December 2024. At that time, the father remained unrepresented, and being aware of the untested allegations which had apparently been reported to police but had no result (or significant progress) as at that date, he accepted that the time between himself and Z had to be suspended. Under those circumstances, the proceedings were set down for a further final hearing before me in Townsville for three days commencing on 18 March 2023.
As will be identified, the police did not pursue or further investigate the alleged allegations made by the child X against the father and the father was not the subject of any interview by police.
At the trial before me, it was conceded by Mrs Bassano, Counsel appearing on behalf of the Independent Children’s Lawyer (“ICL”) and Ms Lawrence, Counsel appearing on behalf of the mother, that the evidence would not permit a finding to be made based on the untested, vague and frankly uncertain allegations of X. The trial in respect of Z proceeded on that basis.
COMPETING PROPOSALS
ICL
At the end of the evidence, the ICL tendered a minute of order which is marked as Appendix One to these Reasons.
The effects of the order, broadly, were that the child would live with the mother, who would exercise sole responsibility for making decisions about major long-term issues but must inform the father in writing of a decision within seven days of making such a decision.
The Orders provided (Order 5) that the father would have, until final orders were made, professionally supervised time at B Contact Centre, after which, by Order 6, Z would spend time with the father:
a.Each fortnight from 10.00 am to 2.00 pm on Sunday until the commencement of the 2025 Christmas school holidays; and
b.From the commencement of 2025 Christmas holidays, each fortnight from 9am until 5pm on Sunday, until the Term 1 school holidays in 2026;
c.On the weekend of the child’s time that falls in the Term 1 2026 school holidays the child’s time increases to include one overnight from Midday on Saturday until 5pm on Sunday fortnightly, until the Term 2 2026 school holidays.
d.On the weekend of the child’s time that falls in the Term 2 2026 school holidays the child’s time increases to include one further overnight from 3pm on Friday until 5pm on Sunday fortnightly; with such time to remain from the commencement of Term 3 but with changeovers to take place at school on Friday.
School holiday time was to be incorporated with the addition of a one-week block during the Christmas 2026/27 school holidays, as the appended order provides, together with special occasion time.
The mother
Although the mother’s initial position was that the child Z should spend no time at all with the father, to her credit and no doubt with the benefit of her legal advice, her position was modified in final submissions. The orders the mother sought were, broadly, that Z’s time with the father would be supervised until the end of 2025, and then gradually increase, but that would never reach a level of overnight time because of the risk the father presents. A failure to be able to have overnight time, of course, effectively meant there was no opportunity for extended weekend or holiday time to be spent by the child with the father.
The father
Throughout the majority of the proceedings before me, Mr Alderman represented himself. Mr Alderman had the benefit of obtaining a grant of Legal Aid pursuant to s 102NA of the Family Law Act 1975 (“the Act”) under the Commonwealth Family Violence and Cross-Examination of Parties Scheme, had he applied. He made no such application and therefore was unable to cross-examine the mother during the trial.
The father’s stated position at the commencement of the hearing was that, as a result of the emotional risk presented of the mother, it would be in the best interests of Z for her to live with him. Perhaps more realistically, however, in final submissions the father, when invited to make an alternate submission if that was not to occur and that the child was to live with the mother into the future, the transcript will reveal that he engaged with that alternate proposition and expressed the position that if he could not have sole residence, then he believes “fifty-fifty care” was appropriate, and in the end result, he wants to be involved in Z’s life and wants as much time as the Court will permit him.
EVIDENCE RELIED UPON
The additional evidence available to the Court that was relied upon in this case between the first tranche of the hearing (of which resulted in the earlier interim decision), and the finalisation of the matter, was limited.
Ms Rowles relied upon:
(a)her affidavit filed 29 April 2024; and
(b)a further affidavit filed 7 May 2025.
The father relied upon:
(a)his affidavit filed 14 March 2025; and
(b)continued to rely upon (and he was permitted to do so) an affidavit by a military friend Mr M sworn on 21 April 2022 and who was also cross-examined.
The ICL relied upon several reports prepared by psychologist Dr G, which were filed on 30 April 2023, 21 May 2024 and 13 March 2025 respectively. The report filed 30 April 2023 was procured by the ICL in anticipation of the first tranche of the trial, and the reports filed 21 May 2024 and 13 March 2025 were procured by the ICL following the implantation of the interim orders. Dr G was the subject of cross-examination.
THE FATHER’S HOUSEHOLD
Mental health
The father did not cavil with the finding open to the Court that the evidence before the Court, particularly the notes, being Exhibit 7 (session notes of Dr N) and Exhibit 8 (mental health practitioner notes of the father) raise real issues about his functioning.
Those reports reveal that the father has had a compromised upbringing; engaged in military service, which he hoped would give him a structure and support that he had not experienced during childhood, but that his experience in the armed services was such as to create issues for him relating to bullying and inappropriate behaviour.
The father tendered and relied upon:
(a)a recent report from this general practitioner, Dr O dated 19 July 2024 (Exhibit 15);
(b)importantly, a note from Dr N of which had been available at the first tranche of the final hearing (Exhibit 16); and
(c)subsequently, a report of Dr P dated 2 August 2024 (Exhibit 18).
That medical evidence suggests that the father had spent significant time seeking to deal with his mental health challenges; had complied with the recommended treatment (including prescribed medication) and that he was functioning better now than he had in the past. The evidence now before the Court would suggest that he has support both medically and from a friendship group (although he lives a somewhat isolated life) and that these issues in the past have subsided at this point in time.
The father is financially secure, in part supported by his availability to use a Department of Veterans’ Affairs Veteran Gold Card, which allows him to have subsidised health treatment which in certain circumstances, can also support Z.
The father’s new partner
One issue about the father’s household which was difficult to come to grips with was the nature of a relatively new relationship with a lady named Ms Q. She did not give evidence, nor had she been presented to me as Dr G for interview.
The father says that she is an academic working in a university environment; that she has an eight-year-old son who continues live in Country R with family and that she is pregnant with the father’s child who is due to be born in 2025.
Because of the timing of the father’s commencement of his relationship with Ms Q, being around the time that Orders for time between the father and Z were suspended in late 2024, Z has not had the opportunity to meet the father’s new partner.
Rental tenants
Another issue in the father’s household is that he relies on the rental income of boarders to assist him with his financial situation. When he was asked to consider if this was appropriate, particularly if Z was spending time in the home with people unknown to the mother, he accepted that that would not be appropriate, and he would agree to an order that he not have boarders in the home. That was an order sought by the ICL.
THE MOTHER’S HOUSEHOLD
The mother has also had issues in the past with suicidal ideation, alcohol abuse and substance abuse. The mother maintains regular counselling to assist with her functioning, is an enrolled nurse and continues to remain employed.
The mother has now been in a relationship with her husband Mr S for some time. Mr S also gave evidence at the earlier stages of this litigation. They appear to have a solid and mutually supportive relationship, the best evidence of which may well be that Z presents to Dr G as a very happy child, content and thriving in the mother’s home.
An additional benefit within the mother’s home is that because of the good relationship that exists between Ms Rowles and Ms Greig (the mother of Z’s half siblings, X and Y). This affords Z the opportunity of regularly connecting with X and Y. I am satisfied on the evidence that that will continue into the future.
THE FAMILY REPORT
The most recent family report of Dr G dated 13 March 2025, was to some degree limited by the uncertainty at the time of interviews of the result of the alleged sexual abuse allegations made, it is said, by X against the father. The recommendations of Dr G (noting again that she had prepared three reports in this matter) as set out in her final report, were subject to that assessment of risk. When informed that those allegations were not being pursued and no finding would be made, Dr G ultimately indicated in cross-examination that:
(a)having read the father’s affidavit, and although being concerned by the number of negative elements in his affidavit (albeit self-prepared by him), she would find it difficult to recommend that there be no contact between Z and the father;
(b)noting the father’s partner Ms Q is to give birth in 2025, it would be highly speculative to opine as to how Z would adjust to a new sibling in her life, although the likelihood would be that the child would be excited by having a younger sibling;
(c)she could not recommend, on the data available to her, a change of residence for Z, and she did not accept the father’s criticism of the mother as to the level of her care. She further opined that a change of residence would be disruptive and distressing to Z, and that distress could be very significant in respect of her long-term development;
(d)as Z appeared to be enjoying the unsupervised time before November 2024 (noting that she had the comfort at least of one of her siblings for most visits) and that apparently went well, she could support the child spending unsupervised time with the father, now that the issue in relation to X cannot be taken further. In that respect, when she observed Z with the father, everything was fine, and that it is her wish to spend time with him;
(e)she accepts that one of the risks that the Court must consider is the capacity of the father to expose the child to his negative views of the mother which he strongly holds; and
(f)She also accepts that a new child in the household of the father will be a further stressor in that household, although without seeing Ms Q and understanding the situation of with their relationship, she could take that matter no further.
Ultimately, in her final recommendations, and in the circumstances of the changed position, Dr G supported the child living with the mother and with the mother to have sole decision-making. Notwithstanding that, she also supported the child spending time with the father, which could continue to progress and increase without the need for supervision in the absence of any evidence that there were difficulties that would need to be ameliorated by supervision.
Under cross-examination by Counsel for the mother, Dr G identified and re-emphasised that the father appears, on the evidence (including the recent evidence of Dr T who prescribes medication for him with his PTSD), functioning well. Although some residual difficulties are likely to remain, the major risks to Z of spending time with the father arise from the father’s past behaviour, negative views of the mother and the emotional damage that that could cause the child, who is primarily attached to the mother, if the father was to:
(a)maintain openly to the child denigration of the mother; or
(b)allow matters in the past between the parents to erupt again in a way that destabilises the child and causes her anxiety.
Dr G also took account of the report of the father’s psychologist, Ms U (dated 31 January 2025) being Exhibit 17, which she regarded as positive in respect of the father’s functioning. She further opined that Z would most likely pick up on tensions between the parents, and if she is not aware at her tender age now, she will certainly be aware if the tensions between the parents continue, and this could cause her significant confusion and anxiety.
I give the evidence of Dr G, who has had the benefit of a longitudinal assessment of this family, some weight. Although not, of course, bound by her recommendations (see Hall & Hall (1979) FLC 90-713), the fact that she supports the child Z spending unsupervised time with the father is an important recommendation.
ONGOING RISK OF PSYCHOLOGICAL HARM
I agree with the evidence of Dr G that if the child is exposed to ongoing parental conflict, this is likely to be a deterrent to the child reaching her potential.
The Court is always conscious that an unrepresented litigant, who does not have the benefit of the filter that a skilled practitioner might bring to an affidavit finally filed in the Court and may include material such that allegations can be quite raw and expressed in very unambivalent terms. However, I remained concerned at the trial that if the father’s attitude to the mother is as he expresses it in his affidavit, then this presents as a long-term psychological risk, notwithstanding his strong desire to have a relationship with his daughter. In particular, at paragraph 6 of his affidavit, the father said that he sought “100% Sole care of [Z]” because:
(a)at paragraph 6(a), “the [mother] has an Emotional Unstable Borderline Personality Disorder”. I am not satisfied that the mother is so diagnosed at this stage or that her functioning reflects any mental health issue of that level that is not being moderated by her ongoing counselling;
(b)at paragraph 6(b), the mother is “fixated on the [father] and is continually seeking [the father] out to punish” him. I am not satisfied that the evidence supports that conclusion that the father feels;
(c)at paragraph 6(c), consistent with that general proposition, the father says (perhaps directed to both the mothers who he was preparing the affidavit for at the time it was sworn) that they “desire to punish and control the [father] outweigh their claim of wanting [Z] to have any form of relationship with the [father]”. I disagree;
(d)at paragraph 6(e) the father says that the mother has not “addressed [her] drinking and this negatively affects [her] ability to co-parent”. I agree with Dr G that the current evidence does not support a finding that either party, although having had a vulnerability to excessive drinking in the past, is excessively drinking at this stage and that the parents’ use of alcohol presents as a current risk to the child;
(e)at paragraph 6(f), the father asserts that the mother “abuses prescription or illicit substances and that negatively affects [her] ability to co-parent”. On the evidence, in my view, whilst the mother has had difficulties with substance and prescription use in the past, there is no evidence that she is in any way affected by those issues now. In fact, in my view, her ongoing stable relationship with Mr S and the fact that she has maintained responsible employment is contra-indicative of any such difficulties;
(f)I do not accept the father’s bland assertion at paragraph 6(h) that the mother “has breached family court orders hundreds of times”. I do not, further, accept (the assertion at paragraph 6(i)) that the mother “is a liar and manipulates people and agencies to achieve [her] own selfish goals with complete disregard to any collateral damages to others.”; and
(g)the father alleges at paragraph 6(m) that the mother directly sought to have the father’s Veterans’ Affairs card removed. The difficulty with that allegation is there is no evidence or support that assertion for it. In any event, the father maintains his Department of Veterans’ Affairs Gold Card and there is no suggestion that he will not be able to retain it into the future.
The father says, at paragraph 11 of his affidavit, that Z’s primary attachment is to him because of the extent of his care for the child when she was an infant until 2020. I am not required to make a finding about the level of his care at that stage, but I am absolutely satisfied at this stage that the child’s primary attachment is to the mother.
At paragraphs 9 and 10, the father raises concerns about the behaviour of the adolescent child K as against the mother. In my view, those issues do not impact upon the mother’s capacity now to manage the day-to-day rigours of a parent so far as it relates to Z.
The father also suggested that the mother had caused the father’s candidacy to be discontinued and therefore denying him the opportunity of what he would regard as a promising political career. The evidence does not support such a finding.
I am satisfied that the mother was aware that the father was a candidate. I find that the mother may have spoken to friends and expressed a concern that he was not an appropriate person to stand for political office. It is clear, on the evidence, that somebody contacted the political party, after which the father’s candidacy was withdrawn. It is clear that whoever contacted the political party had some information about part of the history of the father, including allegations of family violence, antisocial behaviour and alcohol abuse. I am not satisfied, however, that the mother directly spoke to the political party, or that the mother had any particular interest in the father’s candidacy for a political party.
The difficulty with the highly negative criticisms of the father in his self-prepared affidavit are, as Counsel for the mother made clear, a concern that unless those views are modified, they could cause emotional distress to Z if shared with the child. There is, however, no evidence to date, even when the time was unsupervised, that he is sharing his views about the mother with Z. Z, for example, is not returning to the mother’s home indicating that she is hearing negative comments from the father directed towards her mother.
The father’s fixation with the past conflict with Z’s mother is a concern that also manifests in his expressed desire, apparently, to commence defamation proceedings against her. Why he would think that is a good idea is hard to know. Whether he ultimately gets advice that cautions him about engaging in such proceedings is a matter for him. He could, of course, be putting his financial security at risk if he is unable to be successful. At the very least, he will be distracted from his core desire to be a functional parent and spend time with his daughter Z by being involved in more litigation.
During the course of the final submissions, in which I was then dealing with the topic of not whether the father would spend time with the child, but how that time could progress, I made it clear to the father, who was listening intently, that if time was to be ordered, even as the ICL suggests, then any future evidence of the child receiving negative views from the father, such that it was distressing her and causing her anxiety, could prompt an application to be made to the Court invoking section 65DAAA of the Act, the ultimate result of which could quite well be a suspension or cessation of any future time between Z and the father.
SECTION 60CC FACTORS
I have already explained that Z has both demonstrated in her behaviour and her comments to Dr G, a desire to spend time with the father, although she is young, and I could not attribute determinative weight to those wishes. Whilst I accept that the father’s views are concerning and, in my view, without foundation, the risk that the father might present if these views are unmanaged has to be weighed against the benefit to Z of an ongoing relationship with her biological father.
In that regard, the mother’s final submission, I feel, identified, although perhaps with some degree of reluctance, that the balance lies in supporting Z having the opportunity to spend time with the father and that she will have to deal with some of the father’s excesses, which, provided they are not too extreme, she probably can do as a very robust and sensible child. Clearly, this child’s primary attachment to the mother is the source of her security and sense of identity to a large degree. I have no doubt that she has formed a close and positive relationship with Mr S. It is difficult to know what the nature of the relationship with the mother’s older children, K and H, is, but they are at a quite different developmental stage.
I have already mentioned the importance that has been developed over recent times of Z’s relationship with her older female siblings X and Y. It seems unlikely for some time that the father will be able to facilitate and promote that relationship, but I am satisfied the mother will.
The father’s relationship with Z is currently established but is in a tenuous state because of the reduction and then cessation of time that has occurred since separation. Nonetheless, given the opportunity, I believe that relationship will continue to develop if it is nurtured.
If the father’s relationship with Ms Q continues and their baby becomes a regular member of the father’s household as a result, then I have no doubt that Z will appreciate and enjoy the engagement with a baby sister - a quite different dynamic to that of being the baby in a sibship group.
I have already indicated I have no difficulties or concerns about the mother’s parenting capacity or attitude to parenting.
In this case, making an order which is least likely to lead to further proceedings presents a real challenge because of the conflictual dynamic of the parents. Once the shadow of the Court is removed from their relationship and orders are pronounced, I could not, in view of the history, be absolutely satisfied that enforcement or contravention proceedings may not ultimately flow. However, after such a journey of litigation as these parties have undertaken, it is to be hoped that the parents will see some benefit in complying with the orders I pronounce.
FORM OF ORDER
In my view, it is in the best interests of the child for the mother to have sole parental responsibility, but I would require her to give notice to the father of any decisions she has made within 21 days, other than in an emergency. These parties are unable to communicate at any reasonable level. Furthermore, there is no evidence at all that the mother has, in exercising sole parental responsibility, to date, in effect since separation, made any decisions with which the father strongly disagrees.
On all of the evidence, I am not satisfied that further supervision is required. While there have been some months since Z had unsupervised time with the father, albeit, interrupted by the events of November 2024, and by the delay in having this matter listed for trial, and delivery of this judgment). I believe that she will cope with unsupervised time recommencing.
The Reasons which I pronounce today, which I believe are in the best interests of the child, provide a transition from initially spending daytime-only time each alternate fortnight for approximately four months, before graduating to each alternate weekend on a Saturday and Sunday, but not overnight, after which, overnight time can commence.
I do not accept the mother’s submissions or proposition that Z can never have overnight time with the father, but I am taking a cautious approach to when it commences. The unsupervised weekend time shall continue till the end of the 2025 calendar year.
Thereafter, in school year 2026, I would order that the child spend time with the father for the first term from 9.00am Saturday until 5.00pm Sunday; from the second term, from after school Friday until 5.00pm Sunday, and for the third term and thereafter, from after school Friday till before school Monday, to continue on alternate weeks.
School holiday time, which is an extension of what will then be increasing overnight time, should commence in the June 2026 school holidays, during which there will be an extended period of five nights, followed in the September 2026 school holidays for a period of six nights, and then commencing the 2026 Christmas school holidays for blocks of one-week, alternate weeks. From the 2027 year and thereafter, unless otherwise agreed between the parents, the end of term one, two and three school holidays shall be shared equally.
At her age, I cannot reasonably anticipate when it would be in Z’s best interests to move to a greater block time of holidays with the father (for example half of the Summer school holidays – the usual three weeks), but it will be in the child’s best interests, in my view, if she has the opportunity to spend Christmas with the father in 2026 and each alternate even numbered year thereafter. They are the orders which I propose.
I regard the Orders as set out, at the commencement of these Reasons, together with various specific issues orders and other ancillary orders contained within the minute of the Independent Children’s Lawyer proposed in an earlier case outline, to be in the child’s best interests. In respect of changeovers that do not take place at school, unless the parents otherwise agree in writing, I have selected a McDonalds restaurant halfway between the parents’ current addresses. I received no specific submissions on where changeovers should occur, if not at school.
I discharge the Independent Children’s Lawyer.
I certify that the preceding seventy-seven (77) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment of the Honourable Justice Baumann. Associate:
Dated: 22 May 2025
APPENDIX ONE
MINUTE OF ORDER PRPOSED BY THE INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’S LAWYERParental Responsibility
1.The Mother have sole responsibility for making decisions about major long-term issues for the child Z born 2017.
2.In exercising sole parental responsibility the Mother must inform the Father in writing of her decision within 7 days of making such decision.
3.For the purposes of these Orders, a major long-term issue shall include, but is not limited to, issues about: -
a. The child’s education (both current and future);
b. The child’s religious and cultural upbringing;
c. The child’s health;
d. The child’s name; ande.Changes to the child’s living arrangements that make it significantly more difficult for the child to spend time with a parent.
Living Arrangements and Spend Time with
4. The Child live with the Mother.
5.Until such time as final orders are made, the Child spend time with the father with such time to be supervised at B Contact Centre or by such other professional supervision services as the parties may agree with the Father to pay for such costs of the professional supervision. In the event the Father does not pay for such supervision, the remainder of these Orders do not come into effect until the Child and Father have spent at least two (2) professionally supervised sessions together.
6.Following final orders being made, and conditionally upon the above Order being completed, the Child spend time with the father as follows:
a.Each fortnight from 10am to 2pm on Sunday, until the commencement of the 2025 Christmas school holidays;
b.From the commencement of the 2025 Christmas school holidays, each fortnight from 9am to 5pm on Sunday, until the Term 1 school holidays in 2026;
c.On the weekend of the child’s time that falls in the Term 1 2026 school holidays the child’s time increases to include one overnight from Midday on Saturday until 5pm on Sunday fortnightly, until the Term 2 2026 school holidays.
d.On the weekend of the child’s time that falls in the Term 2 2026 school holidays the child’s time increases to include one further overnight from 3pm on Friday until 5pm on Sunday fortnightly; with such time to remain from the commencement of Term 3 but with changeovers to take place at school on Friday.
7.The child’s time as set out at Order 6d continue through school holidays during the Christmas 2026/2027 school holidays with the addition of a one (1) week block of the holidays with the father with such time to be nominated by the Father in writing, using the Talking Parents App and provided to the Mother by the first day of Term 4 of 2026. Such extended time provided for in this Order may include Christmas Day.
8.In the Christmas school holidays in 2027/2028, the child spends two non-consecutive one (1) week blocks with the father with the first block to occur in the first week of the school holiday period and the second period to be on dates nominated by the father which do not include Christmas Day. The Father is to provide to the Mother in writing, using the Talking Parents App such notice of his intended dates by the first day of Term 4 each year.
9.From the Christmas school holidays in 2028/2029 the child spend half each school holiday with the father, for the first half in even numbered years and the second half in odd numbered years.
10.Unless agreed otherwise in writing the Child is to be returned to the Mother by Midday on the Saturday before the commencement of School Term 1 each year.
Special Occasions
11.The child will spend time with the father if not already with him on Father's Day, from 9:00 AM to 5:00 PM.
12.The child will spend time with the father if not already with him on the child's birthday, and the birthday of any paternal sibling of the child, for two hours on a school day and four hours on a non-school day.
13.Should the child's time with the father fall on Mother's Day, the Child will be returned to the Mother at 9 am on Mother’s Day.
14.Should the Child's time with the father fall on the child's birthday, or the birthday of any maternal sibling of the child, the child spend time with the mother for two hours on a school day or 4 hours on a non-school day.
15.Prior to Christmas 2027, the child will spend 4 hours on Christmas Day with the parent with whom the child is not ordinarily living with or not spending time with, in accordance with these orders, and that time will be from 10 am until 2 pm.
16.From Christmas 2027 if the child spends Christmas Day with one parent in accordance with order 7 unless agreed otherwise the child spend Boxing Day with the other parent from 9:00 AM to 5:00 PM.
Changeovers
17.Where a changeover is to occur on a school day, the location will be school. When it is a non-school day, the changeover location will be nominated by the Mother. The Mother will inform the Father by the Talking Parents App as to the changeover location and give the Father at least 24 hours notice of such location. The Mother is permitted to nominate an ongoing location and should she wish to do so, she is to inform the Father in writing using the Talking Parents Application and thereafter is not required to provide the Father with such details.
18. The Mother is permitted to use an agent to attend the changeover.
Information19.The parents shall inform each other as soon as reasonably practical in relation to any injury or illness affecting the Child that requires any medical or hospital attention.
20.The father shall inform the mother as soon as reasonably practical of the name of any adult person the father allows to live in the house where the child will spend time.
21. The parents shall:
a.keep the other informed of their current postal address/es, telephone number and e-mail address and shall inform the other parent in writing within 48 hours of any change.
b.communicate with each other about issues relating to the Child by the Talking Parents app.
c. not require the Child to pass on messages or information to the other parent.
22.Once time is unsupervised, the Father is at liberty to attend the child's school events to which parents are normally able to attend provided he informed the mother, in writing using the Talking Parents App, of his intention to attend at least seven (7) days beforehand; and in that event both parents will behave in a respectful manner towards each other at the event.
Authorities
23.This Order shall be authority to the Child’s school to provide each parent (at that parent’s expense) information about the Child’s educational progress, school related activities, copies of school reports, photographs, photograph order forms, certificates, awards obtained by the Child and other school communications ordinarily provided to parents and always at the discretion of the educational facility.
24.This Order shall be authority to each of the Child’s medical practitioners (including counsellors and psychologists) to provide each parent (at that parent’s expense) information about the Child’s medical conditions, treatment and with copies of medical records and reports and always at the discretion of the medical provider.
25.The mother shall ensure that the school/s attended by the Child and the Child’s usual treating medical practitioners (including counsellors and psychologists) are provided with a copy of this Order.
Restraints and Requirements
26.Unless otherwise provided for in these orders, the Father is restrained from removing the Child from any school or other activity the Child is placed by the Mother or her agent.
27.Unless the mother consents in writing, the Father is restrained from having boarders or lodgers at his house when the Child is spending time with him in accordance with these Orders.
28.Each parent shall positively encourage the Child to maintain and improve their relationship with the other parent.
29. During the time the Child is with either parent, that parent shall:
a.Respect the privacy of the other parent and not question the Child about the personal life of the other parent
b. Speak of the other parent respectfully;
c.Not denigrate or insult the other parent or other parent’s family to or in the presence or hearing of the child;
d.Use their best endeavours to prevent any other person denigrating or insulting the other parent or other family members in the presence or hearing of the child.
30.The parents shall not consume alcohol to excess or any illicit substance while the Child is in their care.
31.The parents shall not expose the Child to other persons consuming alcohol to excess or consuming or being under the influence of illicit drugs.
32.The parents shall not allow the Child to be exposed to domestic and family violence and will immediately remove the Child from any situations where such is occurring.
33.Neither parent may relocate the residence of the Child away from City C without the written consent of the other parent or an Order of this court.
34.The Child’s surname shall at all times be “Alderman” unless otherwise agreed in writing between the parents.
(As per the original)
0