Warnett & Amerson

In the matter of *Warnett & Amerson*, Harper J of the Family Court of Australia considered a dispute between a mother and father concerning parenting orders for their child, Y. The central issue arose from Y's disclosures of sexual abuse against several male relatives, including the father. The mother sought sole parental responsibility and proposed that supervised time with the father continue until Y turned 18. The father sought unsupervised time, while the Independent Children’s Lawyer (ICL) recommended supervision continue until Y commenced Year 8, with Y undertaking counselling.

The court was required to determine the extent to which the father posed an unacceptable risk of harm to Y, and consequently, what parenting orders were in Y's best interests. This involved assessing the onus of proof, which rested on the mother to establish an unacceptable risk on the balance of probabilities, and considering the specific needs of Y, who presented with a "very troubled presentation." The court also had to decide on the appropriate level of parental responsibility and the nature and duration of contact between Y and the father.

Harper J found that the mother should have sole parental responsibility for long-term decisions, with a requirement to consult the father. Y was ordered to live with the mother. The court made detailed orders regarding Y's time with the father, commencing with supervised contact and gradually transitioning to unsupervised time as Y progressed through high school. These orders included specific provisions for supervision costs, undertakings from the father regarding his conduct during contact, and extensive requirements for counselling and parenting courses for both parents, as well as protective behaviour work for Y. The court also made orders permitting the mother to obtain a passport for Y and to take Y on a family holiday with specific notice requirements.