TAS 9-Year-Old Left Unsupervised for Hours - Breach of Family Court Orders?

[Lennon]

Docs are following up as allowing children as young as 9 to cross roads is illegal.

Which law makes it illegal for 9 year olds to cross roads?

 

[Rod]

The closest I get is:

QLD Criminal Code 1899 - Sect 364A Leaving a child under 12 unattended

(1) A person who, having the lawful care or charge of a child under 12 years, leaves the child for an unreasonable time without making reasonable provision for the supervision and care of the child during that time commits a misdemeanour.

Penalty: Maximum penalty—3 years imprisonment.

(2) Whether the time is unreasonable depends on all the relevant circumstances.

 

[thatbloke]

Letting your child walk to school on their own: What does the law say?

There is no definitin of time, thats why the OP is on a losing wicket. I would love to be there when he says
"Your Honour, I want my ex to be punished because i consider 1 second over the two hours unreasonable"

 

[sammy01]

Actually, I think he is far more likely to get a cost order against him for wasting the courts time. Make the complaint to Doc's. If they think it serious enough they will do something.

But they won't - because it isn't.

 

[John Myer]

Legal advice is not offered via this forum.

For a contravention application to succeed, you need to prove that Mum has, without reasonable excuse, intentionally failed, or made no reasonable attempt to comply with, the orders.

First, how can you prove the children were unsupervised for 2.5 hours? Nine-year-olds don’t make for reliable witnesses in a Court of law, and unless there was an observer who is also willing to provide an affidavit and face cross-examination in Court, any evidence you have from other observers is hear-say, which is not admissible in Court. On top of that, what is considered ‘supervised’? Presence of another person? Presence of a sibling? Presence of an adult? Presence of an adult known to the children? Presence of an adult known to the children and agreed by the parents?

Second, even if you do prove it, what outcome are you expecting? It would be considered a minor contravention, so at best, the Court will order Mum enter into a bond; at worst, the Court will remove the order all together. Since the Court is not in the business of micro-managing parents and must try and make orders that minimise conflict, I would say it’s more likely the Court will remove the order, or at least amend it to clarify what’s considered supervised or unsupervised.

The Criminal Code in Queensland does limit children being left unsupervised for an unreasonable amount of time, but the police obviously don’t have any interest in prosecuting because they, too, will have a lot of trouble proving beyond reasonable doubt that the children were left unsupervised for an unreasonable amount of time when the only evidence available is your word.

Parenting orders remain in force until a child turns 18. May I ask, what happens when the child turns 15 or 16 or 17? Will she not be allowed to see a movie with her friends unless escorted by one of her parents? Will she not be able to attend a concert without invoking her father’s wrath against her mother and risk having him call police/DOCS/Family Court? Have you considered what impact that might have on her friendships? Her personal development toward independence? Her self-esteem? Her identity?

Have you considered what impact your actions will have on your daughter’s relationship with you?

Thanks for the well considered reply.

The order suspends when she turns 11, which I personally think is a year too young but I'm a "helicopter parent". I personally don't think it reasonable to allow a 9-year-old to be left unsupervised in this type of location for this long. Sure play in the park across the street, wait at home or in the car whilst you go get milk and bread no worries.

The whole concept of this order was that the child has 2 x step siblings aged 14 and 15 who are supposed to provide supervision. Evidence is available in the form of text messages between the child and mother saying she was ready for collection. So very poor in terms of quality and given the lack of evidence I didn't push it when in court.

Considering the multiple late returns and pick ups, unsolicited messages and other contraventions we had more than enough to do off otherwise to prove contravention. By lodging the contravention I was able to at least get the mother into mediation.

In regards to the contact with DOCS, then that was a fruitful discussion, whilst the mother denied the wrongdoing her case file remains open, due to ongoing issues with the supervision of the step-children. Just thought I'd provide an update so everyone could smugly sitting behind their monitors saying I told you so.

 

[thatbloke]

Thanks for the well considered reply.

The order suspends when she turns 11, which I personally think is a year too young but I'm a "helicopter parent".
I personally don't think it reasonable to allow a 9 year old to be left unsupervised in this type of location for this long. Sure play in the park across the street, wait at home or in the car whilst you go get milk and bread no worries.
The whole concept of this order was that the child has 2 x step siblings aged 14 and 15 who are supposed to provide supervision.
Evidence is available in the form of text messages between the child and mother saying she was ready for collection. So very poor in terms of quality and given the lack of evidence I didn't push it when in court.
Considering the multiple late returns and pick ups, unsolicited messages and other contraventions we had more than enough to do off otherwise to prove contravention.
By lodging the contravention I was able to at least get the mother into mediation.
In regards to the contact with DOCS, then that was a fruitful discussion, whilst the mother denied the wrongdoing her case file remains open, due to ongoing issues with the supervision of the step-children.
Just thought I'd provide an update so everyone could smugly sitting behind their monitors saying I told you so.

I have seen Helicopter parents lose all access to their kids for being too overpoweringly obsessively over the top. Methinks this could be your fate unless you change your ways. As for DOCS keeping a file open, in reality they did nothing yes? You simply cannot be this controlling and not eventually come unstuck, if not via the courts, then via your own child.

 

[John Myer]

I have seen Helicopter parents lose all access to their kids for being too overpoweringly obsessively over the top. Methinks this could be your fate unless you change your ways. As for DOCS keeping a file open, in reality they did nothing yes? You simply cannot be this controlling and not eventually come unstuck, if not via the courts, then via your own child.

How am I controlling? By not wanting my child to hang out at a skate park by herself for several hours where there are teens and adults, smoking weed, drinking alcohol, fighting etc. I meant that sound like a fun weekend and all but probably not until she's 18.

I mean gee, i'm such a horrible parent for wanting my child to be returned to me when the orders say so.

God forbid I actually want the respondent to abide by the orders, I mean they're only court orders, they obviously aren't worth anything in your eyes, which see everything up on that high, high horse.

 

[AllForHer]

I personally don't think it reasonable to allow a 9 year old to be left unsupervised in this type of location for this long.

That's fine that you think that, and you're certainly within your right to parent as such when the child is in your care. However, mum may think differently and is within her right to parent as such when the child is in her care. Neither you, nor mum, have any capacity or right to control what happens in the other household.

As to the commentary about high horses and smugness, I find this a little perplexing. To me, it seems like your application for contravention orders ended up proceeding on perfectly valid grounds, those being that mum over-kept the child outside of the Court orders, and had you asked this forum if those were valid grounds for filing an application for contravention orders, we would have said yes.

But you didn't ask about those grounds. You asked about an unsupervised visit to a skate park. It seems a stretch to conclude that we will somehow be smug when your matter a) proceeded on grounds that we didn't comment on and b) actually resulted in a reasonably good outcome.

I don't know that I agree with the commentary that the DOCS notice was 'fruitful' because the case against mum remains open. As a parent, I would, and do, rejoice in the fact that my daughter's other parent is as capable as I am, so I can't imagine being excited about DOCS investigating him. DOCS finding him capable would bring relief to me, I think, not despair.

 

[Lennon]

How am I controlling? By not wanting my child to hang out at a skate park by herself for several hours where there are teens and adults, smoking weed, drinking alcohol, fighting etc. I meant that sound like a fun weekend and all but probably not until she's 18.

So you think she shouldn't go to a skate park unsupervised until she's 18? Good luck with that!

 

[thatbloke]

How am I controlling

In so many ways I actually sort of don't believe you are a real person.