Paternal Aunt Joins Battle for 3-Year-Old's Future: Parenting Orders Dispute Heads to Trial

The case involves a 3-year-old child named X and the question of whether the child's paternal aunt, Ms D, should be allowed to participate in and seek parenting orders.  The main applicants are the child's father, Mr Charr, and mother, Ms Dalton, who each seek a primary live-with order.  The child currently lives with the mother and spends supervised time with the father.  The case was scheduled for a final hearing, but an extra day has been added due to the addition of Ms D as a respondent.

The hearing will take place over 7 days starting on February 13, 2023, and will be held in person in the Newcastle Registry of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia.  It has been specified that Ms D's affidavit must not exceed 50 pages of text.  As a result of the addition of Ms D as a respondent, an extra day has been added to the previously scheduled final hearing.  The final hearing has been confirmed to take place over 7 days starting on February 13, 2023, and will be held in person at the Newcastle Registry of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia.

A family report was ordered and prepared by Dr J, which raised serious concerns about the mother's and father's parenting capacities.  The report made recommendations for X to live with the father or alternatively, with the aunt.  The aunt has filed an application to intervene in the proceedings and be named as the second respondent, which is supported by the father and Independent Children's Lawyer, but opposed by the mother.  There are significant factual disputes and the expert's opinion needs to be tested in court.

The mother claims that Ms. D was not involved in X's life until their relationship broke down in June 2021.  The mother reported that X was cared for by the paternal aunt, Ms. D, or the paternal grandmother when she was working night shifts.  The mother raised concerns about Ms. D's involvement in family violence against her and X's exposure to it, as well as Ms. D's mental health.  However, these issues are for trial and will be determined in court.

The mother also objects to Ms. D's involvement on the basis that she has not disclosed her mental health status and that Ms. D's position is that X should live with the father, potentially leading to a conflict of interest.  The court has listed the matter for trial starting next February.  The court finds that Ms. D has a meaningful relationship with X and is concerned with X's care, welfare, and development and therefore is entitled to participate and be heard in court.  Joining Ms. D will not result in delay and is in X's best interests.