Forensic psychology and its role in parenting matters
In the recent case of Halloran & Halloran [2018] FCCA 2825 (5 October 2018), an executive summary of relevant matters under the Family Law Act as they applied to this case was prepared by the appointed forensic psychologist:
The Reports of Dr A
- Dr A is a consultant forensic Psychologist appointed by the Court to provide a Single Expert Report in this matter. The interviews with the family were conducted on 3 and 4 October 2017, and her Report dated 19 October 2017 was released to the parties on 23 October 2017. At the time of the interviews, Dr A had available to her all of the evidence of the parties, including a substantial volume of documents produced on subpoena.
- Dr A’s executive summary, found at pages 6 and 7 of her Report, is a very useful digest of her evaluation and is reproduced below:
|
Issue
|
Evaluation
|
|
All children will benefit from a lasting sense of family belonging. Meaningful relationships between mother & [V], [W] or [X] seem impossible now
|
|
Whether the children are at risk of any physical or psychological harm from abuse, neglect or family violence.
|
At risk of neglect of medical needs ([W]) & emotional needs in care of father (all); at risk of physical harm in care of mother (older three).
|
|
The nature of the parents’ relationship, the impact of this relationship on the children.
|
Toxic. Source of trauma for all the children. No prospect of co-parenting.
|
|
Any views expressed by the children and any factors that may affect the weight to be accorded to those views.
|
[V] has run away; [W] cannot speak; [X] asks for no contact with mother /residence with father: [Y] & [Z] show some interest in seeing mother. These are traumatised children who cannot evaluate their best interests objectively.
|
|
The relationship between the children and with each of their parents and any other relevant person.
|
[V]: hostile to mother, father cannot control her; [W]: physically dependent, non-verbal; [X] close to g/p/parents & father; [Y] seems closest to p/g/parents; [Z] has affectional ties to both parents.
|
|
The willingness & ability of parents to facilitate/ encourage relationships between children & the other parent.
|
Apparently neither willing nor able during the marriage or since.
|
|
The likely effect of any changes in the children’s circumstances, including the likely effect on the children of any separation from either parent/ other person
|
[Z] (and perhaps [Y]) might draw inferences harmful to their self-esteem if they had no contact with mother.
|
|
The capacity of each parent or any other person to provide for the needs of the children, including emotional and intellectual needs.
|
Suboptimal due to their intrinsic personal characteristics. Abuse of older siblings was previously substantiated for the mother. The father is not authoritative, cannot parent strategically and seems not to be a proactive advocate for [W].
|
|
The attitude to children/ responsibilities of parenthood of parents /relevant persons.
|
Father- marginally adequate for [X], [Y] and [Z]. with support. The p/g/parents seem committed to the children.
|
|
The extent to which each parent participates in children’s lives/decisions
|
Court findings about whether the father has been negligent about the NDIS/wheelchair will cast light
|
|
The effect on children of spending equal/significant time with each parent
|
Deleterious. Out of the question
|
|
The mental state of the both parents in so far as it relates to parenting issues.
|
Neither is sufficiently stress-hardy to effectively parent 5 children, one of whom is seriously disabled
|
|
Whether parents have any psychological issues affecting parenting capacity
|
Both show warped information-processing and evasiveness of responsibility. See previous point.
|
|
Whether or not any treatment or therapy is recommended for parents or children. If so, the nature of any treatment or therapy.
|
1:1 adult counselling has not been helpful for the family situation in the past and is unlikely to be helpful now. The children benefit from supportive counselling
|
|
Whether the practical difficulty & expense of the children spending time with other parent will substantially affect the children’s direct contact with both parents
|
Interim – no, Long-term-probably. Supervision by grandparents on either side is unsuitable. Agency supervised contact will be costly long-term
|
|
The maturity, sex, lifestyle, background (including lifestyle, culture and tradition) .
|
Not a determining issue
|
|
Any family violence order that applies or has applied to the children/ family member
|
Not currently in force
|
|
Any other matter the Court Expert considers relevant.
|
This is a child protection matter better suited to the Children’s Court. [W] needs advocacy to obtain NDIS benefits. She urgently needs a wheelchair.
|
Read more here
Family Lawyers Sunshine Coast
Family Law Sunshine Coast
Sunshine Coast Family Lawyers
Sunshine Coast Family Law
Best family lawyers