NSW Family Court - Likely Outcome of Interim Orders?

Australia's #1 for Law
Join 150,000 Australians every month. Ask a question, respond to a question and better understand the law today!
FREE - Join Now

Old Pop

Well-Known Member
29 December 2016
15
3
74
so let me give you a hypothetical.... WHAT IF mum accused YOU or the father of abuse... It happens. Now it takes time for the courts to check all the facts. Wouldn't you be wanting to see the child AND wouldn't the child want to see you...
Now - do you think the mum is happy with this set up? NOPE not a chance.
Oh and has the child been put at risk with the judges set up? not really...

I've nowhere said/written that we don't want mum seeing our grandson, just that we want to make sure he is protected while with her.

If I was accused? That's an impossible question to answer truthfully, but if I was to hazard a guess, with my values and ideals, I'd be completely disgusted with myself, and (for myself) wouldn't want the child near me until such time that I'd gotten professional help... If I wanted to ever see the child again.

Do I think mum is happy with the setup? I imagine no, but quite frankly, I couldn't give a toss how mum feels. My main concern is my grandson, then my son. Mum is an adult, knows right from wrong, and purposely - willingly - and knowingly hurting a completely defenceless baby just doesn't warrant any concern from me for the hurt or sadness of someone who could do that.

Do I think my grandson is still at risk with the Judge's "set up"? Yes. Knowing this girl, it's very possible
 

sammy01

Well-Known Member
27 September 2015
5,154
721
2,894
Mate I said 'accused' of abuse... Not found guilty.

Now the mum has seriously been put on notice here true... If she is that reckless that she causes the child harm after all this, well you can expect the courts will deal with her with gusto.
 

MartyK

Well-Known Member
4 June 2016
419
61
794
One of the issues I see here Old Pop, is that not only are there allegations being brought against the mother, which you appear to have proof of (or at least enough to warrant supervised visitation at this time in the Courts eyes), in your dissatisfaction with the mothers family now being the named supervisors in the orders, you seem to be tarring the entire maternal family with the same brush. Where is your proof of negligence in this regard?

Also, you refer to a Judge agreeing with the allegations of the mother being abusive? Is this the same Judge that ordered family member supervised time or a Judge of a different Court e.g. Children's Court?

None of us are coming from any position that a child's rights to a safe environment should be denied. The orders presently provide for the mothers time to be supervised, thus, at an interim stage, prior to any evidence being tested, this fullfills this requirement for safety. Should the child be returned with any further injuries after these visits, then yes, the maternal family may not be the best option as supervisors. If not, then the child is being protected.

If the Courts operated on only assumptions of a grandparent, parent or otherwise, or, on untested evidence, to reach final decisions, then there would be a hell of a lot more parents not seeing their children. Including the falsely accused.

As it stands, the Courts do err on the side of caution in the interim, and as such, even parents who have been falsely accused can wind up on the back end of supervised visitation orders.

Yes, for every post here there are two sides to every story. Many people however ask procedural questions. You on the other hand asked members to provide you with predictions of an outcome based on only your side of the story, which as I said, is impossible.

Keep in mind that Interim orders do not always reflect the Final orders.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hayder Shkara

Old Pop

Well-Known Member
29 December 2016
15
3
74
by sammy01

Mate I said 'accused' of abuse... Not found guilty.

True. Apologies.

If it was my son accused? Faced with the amount of authorities saying the they were purposely done injuries, I'd personally ask the Court to grant supervised contact by an authorised service, and I'd be strongly suggesting to my son to get professional help to address why he'd feel it's ok to harm a baby.

If it was me accused, what would be the point of arguing it was lies when the authorities in that field had me 'dead to rights'?


by MartyK

in your dissatisfaction with the mothers family now being the named supervisors in the orders, you seem to be tarring the entire maternal family with the same brush. Where is your proof of negligence in this regard?

No "proof" that would satisfy a Court, but from knowing the family, and hearing (from her) of her upbringing

by MartyK

Also, you refer to a Judge agreeing with the allegations of the mother being abusive? Is this the same Judge that ordered family member supervised time or a Judge of a different Court e.g. Children's Court?

Same Judge - Family Law Court. Has been the same Judge for each Court date.


by MartyK

Should the child be returned with any further injuries after these visits, then yes, the maternal family may not be the best option as supervisors. If not, then the child is being protected.

Herein lies my concern, to me it's a bit like russian roulette....lets take a 50/50 path where we HOPE the parties do the right thing! Where to me an authorised service reduces that risk considerably.


But yes, I posted my question for people's thoughts - and for those I thank you. Probably a bad analogy I suppose, but no different than asking someone's opinion on the outcome of a footy game based on the teams playing.
 

sammy01

Well-Known Member
27 September 2015
5,154
721
2,894
Yep, it is like punting on footy... So I reckon you're here looking for some peace of mind. So let me help you.

But lets look at what the law has to say...

Parenting cases - the best interest of the child - Federal Circuit Court of Australia

1 - Child has a supportive environment with you guys. Extended family matters (tick)

2- The need to protect the child from harm - well the interim orders do that and it is a tick for you..

So I will leave you to read through the others but one of them seems important to me right now
"The willingness and ability of each parent to facilitate and encourage a close and continuing relationship between the child and the other parent."

So Old Man - you guys wanna think about making sure you can tick that box. So while I understand that you're not at all happy that this woman has clearly harmed your grand child and I reckon that must make your bloody boil. But in family law you gotta put that aside and be strategic and that means working out how to make sure the magistrate at least thinks you're gonna invite her around for tea or whatever.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Old Pop

MartyK

Well-Known Member
4 June 2016
419
61
794
Same Judge - Family Law Court. Has been the same Judge for each Court date.

The advantage of having the same Judge preside over the same matter, as you would likely be aware, is that they will have the benefit of familiarity with the case, the parties et al when making their decisions.

Old Pop said:
Herein lies my concern, to me it's a bit like russian roulette....lets take a 50/50 path where we HOPE the parties do the right thing! Where to me an authorised service reduces that risk considerably.

In theory I do agree with this Old Pop, especially when we are talking about the safety of a child.

However, like you say, there is no proof that the maternal family will not be excellent supervisors, and as such, to eliminate them (or family for other litigants in the same boat) as prospective supervisors, would be to find them guilty of acts they have not yet, and may never, commit.

The previous orders were for 1 x contact centre supervised visit and 2 x playgroup? Did the contact centre provide a report in relation to these visits? If so, was it positive for the mother?

Old Pop said:
Probably a bad analogy I suppose, but no different than asking someone's opinion on the outcome of a footy game based on the teams playing.

lol bit different :)

Keep up the great support to your grandchild and son!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Old Pop