COURT GRANTS ADOPTION APPLICATION; BEST INTERESTS OF THE CHILDREN
BRUCEDALE AND ANOR & VAULKS (NO. 4)
FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA
[2020] FamCA 651
This case is an application seeking to adopt children of the wife by the step-father.
FACTS:
Mr Bernati and Ms Brucedale (the Applicants) filed an Initiating Application on 31 October 2019 seeking the adoption of the children, X, born in 2009, and Y, born in 2007 (the children). Ms Brucedale is the Mother of the two children. The application seeks that Mr Bernati, the children’s stepfather, adopt the children. The Father of the children is Mr Vaulks.
The Applicants sought to change the surname of the children, that the matter be heard under the Jurisdiction of Courts (Cross-Vesting) Act 1993 (ACT) and the consent of the children’s biological father, Mr Vaulks, be dispensed with. Alternative to the adoption being granted, they sought that final orders, made by consent in the Federal Circuit Court on 22 June 2017, be discharged and that the Applicants have sole parental responsibility for the children, and that the children live with them and spend no time with Mr Vaulks.
The father has not participated in the proceedings, although he opposed the making of adoption orders.
ISSUE:
Whether or not the adoption order should be made in favor of the step-parent.
HELD:
An order for adoption carries with it long term consequences, as it, as a matter of law, changes a child’s parents. This involves the cutting off of a parent, and all that goes with a parent in terms of extended family, with potential consequences in how a child develops the child’s understanding of place in the world. At the same time, adoption carries with it the resolution of a relationship into a parent child relationship. It cements a relationship with legal status where, in a case such as here, the relationship already carries the practical hallmarks of a parent child relationship. Such a change carries with it, at least for these children, a sense of security in the relationship with Mr Bernati, being a security he cannot provide other than by the support of an adoption order.
If an adoption order is made, it cements the good arrangements and relationships that are in place now and that bode well for the development of both Y and X. In this case, importantly, an adoption order reflects the strong views of Y and X, being views formed in the understanding of what it is that they seek, being the formal status of being what they have terms as “Bernati boys.” It is in their interests that an adoption order be made.
Pursuant to s 39F of the Adoption Act 1993 (ACT), an adoption order was made for the children in favour of Mr Bernati.