c
  



Justice Janine Patricia Hazelwood Stevenson‘
6 OCT 10

Case Situation
The case involved the father (H Madden) seeking final orders and a recovery application for his son
Oscar. The mother of the child (R Jackson) did not appear before the court and stated that she had
no intention of appearing, or talking to the father or the Department of Community Services (DOCS).
Justice Stevenson indicated that the court proceed on an undefended basis since the mother did
nothing to address the concerns raised in the report according the independent children͛s lawyers.
Stevenson J stated that even though the mother had no notice of the father͛s child care proposal,
there was an application in his particulars that the case would strive for final orders even if the
hearing was undefended.

Family situation

Madden and Jackson have had a long history of litigation with the matter surrounding the care of
their 7 yr old child, Oscar. They have been to court 16 times over the last 15 months. The mother
and father lived in Sydney but separated in 6003 with the local court in 6004 ordering a shared care
arrangement for Oscar. In 6009 the mother contravened a court order and refused to return Oscar
to the father for a period of time, alleging that the father sexually abused Oscar. The mother is on
social security and living in a boarding house with Oscar who is suffering from emotional stress.
The father is seeking final orders that discharge all previous orders, hand Oscar over to him and
prevent the mother from constantly accusing him of sexual abuse.

Report Findings and Judgement

According to two independent reports by the Joint Investigation Response Team (JIRT), the father
was taking into account the best interests of the child whilst the mother had limited parenting
capacity. It was stated in both reports that the mother lacked an emotional spectrum, struggled to
maintain herself independently, had a personality disorder and was unwilling to foster a relationship
between Oscar and his father.

With regards to the allegations, the doctor noticed that Oscar kept looking at his mother in
acknowledgement when he was alleging the sexual abuse. The reports also noted that when JIRT
officers interviewed Oscar at 6 years of age when living with his father, he was meeting emotional
and physical milestones. However, when interviewed 16 months later, where he was with his
mother, Oscar appeared nervous, confused and unfocused on his studies. It was clear that he was
being coached by a mother who simply saw her son as an extension of herself.

Stevenson J held that given the pervasive nature of the mother, there is a strong possibility the
allegations would resurface in the future. The court ordered Oscar be removed from his mothers
care and amended a provision in the fathers͛ proposal so that it read: ͞the mother can spend such
time with the child as agreed to by the father͟. Stevenson J mentioned that the likelihood of the
mother continuing with her beliefs and the risk it posed to Oscar͛s development outweighed the fact
she was closer to Oscar than the father.