FATHER SEEKS UNSUPERVISED TIME WITH CHILD DESPITE ALLEGATIONS BY THE MOTHER THAT THE FATHER ABUSED THE CHILD
Angelis & Regoli [2020] FCCA 3138 (18 November 2020)
This is an application for care arrangement for child X where there are allegations by the mother that the father abused the child.
Facts:
The father seeks that he should spend time with her on each Friday and Sunday between the hours of 4.30pm and 7.00pm with X to be exchanged between the parties at the Suburb B CCC.
The mother proposes that any time the child spends with her father be subject to some form of professional supervision – either at a CCC or by an individual paid supervisor. She would want any such visits to be limited to one per month at most.
In her Notice of Risk, the mother alleged that the father had sexually assaulted X and that she suffers from mental health issues. The father denies these allegations, which he would characterise as florid and unbelievable in nature. It is his position that these allegations, of themselves, indicate that it is the mother who suffers from mental ill health rather than him.
It is his position that her compromised psychiatric health represents a threat to X’s welfare because she has and will continue to subject the child to unwarranted medical examination or police inquiry because of her persistent allegations that he has subjected X to abuse, and will further be incapable of supporting the child to have a proper level of relationship with him.
Issue: Should the court grant the order sought by the father?
Law:
- Family Law Act 1975 60B, 60CA, 60CC, 61DA, 67Z
Analysis:
Having considered all of the material currently available to the court, which is untested and possibly incomplete, the court does not consider that for X to spend time, with her father, in an unsupervised setting, would represent an unacceptable risk to her safety. Apart from the mother’s allegations, there is no cogent evidence to support a finding that the child has been subject to abuse.
The risk of X losing a potentially extremely valuable relationship is a much more extreme risk in the present case. This risk is heightened given the imprecise allegations made and the suggestion that X herself may have been subject to some form of emotional pressure.
One of the more significant risks to X’s long term emotional integrity is the deep mistrust and antipathy between her parents. In the short to medium term this must mean that the child should be exchanged between her parents in a secure setting in which each will have immediate recourse to independent verification and support.
Conclusion: Court orders that X spends time with the father from 9.30am until 2.00pm each Sunday and to be exchanged between the parties at the Suburb B Children’s Contact Centre and subject to the supervision of its director or her nominee.
