Senate debates

Thursday, 30 March 2006

Family Law Amendment (Shared Parental Responsibility) Bill 2006

In Committee

9:34 pm

Photo of Chris EllisonChris Ellison (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Justice and Customs) Share this | Hansard source

It is a hypothetical question. I think that there are certainly circumstances where, if a child has been abused by a parent, one would not allow that contact to occur. I have seen examples where contact has been allowed to occur under supervised circumstances and I have seen certain other limitations placed on contact where there has been violence involved.

It is an extremely serious situation where a child has been abused or the subject of violence—there is no question of that. But to give you a ruling to say that in any case where there has been violence you should not allow any contact whatsoever is really a question which has to be found in the facts. You and I cannot sit here in this chamber today and say, in an arbitrary fashion, that a relationship between a child and a parent is destroyed forever because there has been an element of violence, unless we know of the particular circumstances which have occurred. And that is all I am saying. To rule a line over human affairs is always very dangerous and that is what I am saying here: these two fundamental or primary considerations give direction to the court as to what it has to consider. I think that, when you look at the additional considerations, you can see that they definitely are secondary to those two primary considerations that I have been speaking of.

Certainly, it is in interests of any child to have a meaningful and loving relationship with a parent. That is a fundamental goal, but the contrast of that—or the opposite to that—is that you should protect a child from abuse and harm. I see no conflict in having those two as primary considerations. They are guiding stars, if you like, to navigate by and, again, it is for the courts to judge. I could well conceive of situations where there was such abuse or violence that you would not allow contact with the parent; I could envisage that. But I think it would be very brave of any one of us to say that because there was an element of violence you would rule out automatically any further contact between a child and a parent—that is all I am saying.

Comments

No comments