- Family law problems out in the open
- By Simon Lauder
- The World Today
- 06/02/2009 Make a Comment
- Contributed by: JohnnyBgood ( 6 articles in 2009 )
BRENDAN TREMBATH: The top judge of the Family Court of Australia has taken the extraordinary step of going on air to discuss the court in response to a family tragedy.
Four-year-old Darcey Freeman was allegedly thrown off Melbourne's West Gate Bridge by her father last week.
The girl's family says the judicial system failed her and will continue to fail families unless things change.
The Family Court Chief Justice Diana Bryant has told ABC radio the family court system needs to be better funded; it needs to be able to better help people enforce custody orders and it should also do more to help separated couples, after an order has been made.
Simon Lauder reports.
SIMON LAUDER: Family law issues usually have a very low public profile because of restrictions on reporting but there was widespread media coverage last week involving the tragic death of Darcey Freeman.
Her 35-year-old father will face a murder charge in the Melbourne Magistrates Court in May. The girl's uncle Tim Barnes has used a public statement to put the families legal struggle in the public arena and to plead for change.
TIM BARNES: For the past two years, the various authorities have been made aware of our fear for the safety of the children and unfortunately no one would listen.
We feel the judicial system has failed our family
SIMON LAUDER: The Commonwealth Attorney General Robert McClelland has responded by ordering his department to review the case. Mr McClelland says anything that can be learned from the tragedy will be acted on to improve the system.
Today the Chief Justice of the Family Court, Diana Bryant has also taken up the challenge appearing on ABC local radio in Melbourne. She says the court will cooperate with the review of the case but that won't involve explaining any of its decisions.
DIANA BRYANT: I'll go no further than saying two things.
One is that the orders were made by consent. That is they were not made by a decision of a judicial officer. Having said that, a judge can and often does refuse to make orders by consent if those orders do not appear to be in the interests of the child.
The second thing I would say in this case is that having reviewed all of the relevant material both administrative and what happened in court, the parties did not present to the judicial officer concerned as part of their case that this child was at risk of harm in the father's care.
SIMON LAUDER: In agreeing to discuss the case, Chief Justice Bryant makes it clear there are many stressful events when families break up and the court process is just one of them.
DIANA BRYANT: Everybody naturally wants to say well what was the last involvement and if the last involvement was an order of the court then people naturally want to say well it must be the court's fault but that is not necessarily the case. I mean it isn't the case.
There are so many factors that cause people to be distressed.
SIMON LAUDER: There's no shortage of suggestions on how the system can be improved.
This man says his wife killed herself and their child 10 years ago, as their custody dispute reached the court.
HUSBAND: Irrespective of whichever way the custody is being granted whether it be from mother to father or father to mother that on the day that the verdict is handed down, the child or children must be brought into the court and then left with the court councillor or administration and then the changeover is immediate. That there is no time frame for the parent who has lost custody to put plans in place to deal with the matter in their own way whether it by kidnapping the child or whatever it may be.
SIMON LAUDER: In the case of Ken Thompson, the family court has made an order allowing him to discuss his case publically. He's trying to track down his ex-wife and his four year old son who left the country after a parenting order was made.
KEN THOMPSON: I think people go into court sometimes with extremely high expectations and when the court doesn't deliver on those expectations, they sometimes take matters into their own hands as has happened in my case.
I think there could be a higher level or some kind of counselling provided during the process. Quite often people have to undergo mediation, compulsory mediation before getting to court. That wasn't the case in my case.
But I think once people get into court, they certainly need some kind of support and I think that could be provided through the court in some way.
SIMON LAUDER: Both of those cases have now been noted by the Chief Justice of the Family Court, and she says improvements can be made. Chief Justice Bryant says the court should give parents debriefing sessions after an order is made, to help them adapt.
Chief Justice Bryant is more than happy to identify the areas which need more resources.
DIANA BRYANT: Legal aid is essential. I think that funding of an appropriate counselling mediation system is essential and enough judicial officers to hear the cases in a timely way is essential.
SIMON LAUDER: Going into an under-resourced and adversarial court system with little support and no guarantee that orders will be complied with is a grim prospect for any parent. But Chief Justice Bryant says the Family Court is trying to bring in a less adversarial system in cases that have to go to trial.
And the fact that the court's problems are being openly discussed means it's possible some good may come from one tragic case, which has at least broken the usual silence surrounding Family Court affairs.
BRENDAN TREMBATH: Simon Lauder.
Four-year-old Darcey Freeman was allegedly thrown off Melbourne's West Gate Bridge by her father last week.
The girl's family says the judicial system failed her and will continue to fail families unless things change.
The Family Court Chief Justice Diana Bryant has told ABC radio the family court system needs to be better funded; it needs to be able to better help people enforce custody orders and it should also do more to help separated couples, after an order has been made.
Simon Lauder reports.
SIMON LAUDER: Family law issues usually have a very low public profile because of restrictions on reporting but there was widespread media coverage last week involving the tragic death of Darcey Freeman.
Her 35-year-old father will face a murder charge in the Melbourne Magistrates Court in May. The girl's uncle Tim Barnes has used a public statement to put the families legal struggle in the public arena and to plead for change.
TIM BARNES: For the past two years, the various authorities have been made aware of our fear for the safety of the children and unfortunately no one would listen.
We feel the judicial system has failed our family
SIMON LAUDER: The Commonwealth Attorney General Robert McClelland has responded by ordering his department to review the case. Mr McClelland says anything that can be learned from the tragedy will be acted on to improve the system.
Today the Chief Justice of the Family Court, Diana Bryant has also taken up the challenge appearing on ABC local radio in Melbourne. She says the court will cooperate with the review of the case but that won't involve explaining any of its decisions.
DIANA BRYANT: I'll go no further than saying two things.
One is that the orders were made by consent. That is they were not made by a decision of a judicial officer. Having said that, a judge can and often does refuse to make orders by consent if those orders do not appear to be in the interests of the child.
The second thing I would say in this case is that having reviewed all of the relevant material both administrative and what happened in court, the parties did not present to the judicial officer concerned as part of their case that this child was at risk of harm in the father's care.
SIMON LAUDER: In agreeing to discuss the case, Chief Justice Bryant makes it clear there are many stressful events when families break up and the court process is just one of them.
DIANA BRYANT: Everybody naturally wants to say well what was the last involvement and if the last involvement was an order of the court then people naturally want to say well it must be the court's fault but that is not necessarily the case. I mean it isn't the case.
There are so many factors that cause people to be distressed.
SIMON LAUDER: There's no shortage of suggestions on how the system can be improved.
This man says his wife killed herself and their child 10 years ago, as their custody dispute reached the court.
HUSBAND: Irrespective of whichever way the custody is being granted whether it be from mother to father or father to mother that on the day that the verdict is handed down, the child or children must be brought into the court and then left with the court councillor or administration and then the changeover is immediate. That there is no time frame for the parent who has lost custody to put plans in place to deal with the matter in their own way whether it by kidnapping the child or whatever it may be.
SIMON LAUDER: In the case of Ken Thompson, the family court has made an order allowing him to discuss his case publically. He's trying to track down his ex-wife and his four year old son who left the country after a parenting order was made.
KEN THOMPSON: I think people go into court sometimes with extremely high expectations and when the court doesn't deliver on those expectations, they sometimes take matters into their own hands as has happened in my case.
I think there could be a higher level or some kind of counselling provided during the process. Quite often people have to undergo mediation, compulsory mediation before getting to court. That wasn't the case in my case.
But I think once people get into court, they certainly need some kind of support and I think that could be provided through the court in some way.
SIMON LAUDER: Both of those cases have now been noted by the Chief Justice of the Family Court, and she says improvements can be made. Chief Justice Bryant says the court should give parents debriefing sessions after an order is made, to help them adapt.
Chief Justice Bryant is more than happy to identify the areas which need more resources.
DIANA BRYANT: Legal aid is essential. I think that funding of an appropriate counselling mediation system is essential and enough judicial officers to hear the cases in a timely way is essential.
SIMON LAUDER: Going into an under-resourced and adversarial court system with little support and no guarantee that orders will be complied with is a grim prospect for any parent. But Chief Justice Bryant says the Family Court is trying to bring in a less adversarial system in cases that have to go to trial.
And the fact that the court's problems are being openly discussed means it's possible some good may come from one tragic case, which has at least broken the usual silence surrounding Family Court affairs.
BRENDAN TREMBATH: Simon Lauder.
Comments:
Firstly, it's obvious the Family Court is more worried about being sued and keeping its precious money making and anti-family policy system intact. They are not being neither open or accountable by a long shot, as they and vested parties would have you believe.
Bryant says: More funding is all that's needed...to enforce custody orders...The system only helps after an order has been made...HA... All this a joke! Do they really believe what they preach? Or is it theatre as usual?
Are we (the people), all blind and stupid all of the time?
To be blunt, these court affiliated people clearly don't think their own shit stinks.
When are people and thes court officials ever going to get it?
99% of families in breakdown don't need courts, orders, usleless anti-family lawyers, anti-family psychologists. ilLegal Aid and the many other affiliated organisations that don't help a family, but destroy it.
Most people after just a short period of time in the 'Whole Family Breakdown System' have their lives made emotionally, psychologically or financially worse, to the point where you never fully recover.
Hereon after, the so called 'Good Life' can be difficult to find, if ever!
Firstly, it's obvious the Family Court is more worried about being sued and keeping its precious money making and anti-family policy system intact. They are not being neither open or accountable by a long shot, as they and vested parties would have you believe.
Bryant says: More funding is all that's needed...to enforce custody orders...The system only helps after an order has been made...HA... All this a joke! Do they really believe what they preach? Or is it theatre as usual?
Are we (the people), all blind and stupid all of the time?
To be blunt, these court affiliated people clearly don't think their own shit stinks.
When are people and thes court officials ever going to get it?
99% of families in breakdown don't need courts, orders, usleless anti-family lawyers, anti-family psychologists. ilLegal Aid and the many other affiliated organisations that don't help a family, but destroy it.
Most people after just a short period of time in the 'Whole Family Breakdown System' have their lives made emotionally, psychologically or financially worse, to the point where you never fully recover.
Hereon after, the so called 'Good Life' can be difficult to find, if ever!
Source: https://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2008/s2484354.htm
1Will not be visible to public.
2Receive notification of other comments posted for this article. To cease notification after having posted click here.
3To make a link clickable in the comments box enclose in link tags - ie.<link>Link</link>.
4To show an image enclose the image URL in tags - ie.. Note: image may be resized if too large
To further have your say, head to our forum Click Here
To contribute a news article Click Here
To view or contribute a Quote Click Here