A REPORT commissioned by the Rudd government recommends major changes to the controversial shared parenting law introduced by former prime minister John Howard, saying it has put women and children at risk.

The report by retired Family Court judge Richard Chisholm says the law has also set fathers up to believe they are entitled to a 50-50 time split with their children after divorce, when this was never the parliament's intention, nor part of the law. The report into family law was ordered by Attorney-General Robert McClelland, in response to the shocking death of four-year-old Melbourne girl Darcey Freeman, who was thrown to her death from the West Gate Bridge one year ago.

Her father, Arthur Freeman, is now facing a murder charge.

In launching the report yesterday, Mr McClelland said it was "motivated at least in part by the very tragic events, in the case of Darcey Freeman".

It has previously been reported that Darcey's mother was too frightened to raise allegations of violence in the Family Court, lest she be considered an "unfriendly" parent determined to interrupt the relationship between the children and their father.

She ultimately agreed to a custody arrangement that gave her former husband access to all three of their children.

It is alleged that Mr Freeman threw Darcey from the bridge on her first day of school.

Mr McClelland said it was clear from the Chisholm report, and from two other reviews of the shared parenting law, also released yesterday, that women had become reluctant to raise allegations of violence, in part because the court can now punish them by hitting them with the entire bill for proceedings if the allegations are not proved.

The court is also thought to take a dim view of women who raise allegations of violence that are not substantiated, describing them as "unfriendly".

Professor Chisholm said many fathers believed the shared parenting laws entitled them to a 50-50 time split with their children, when in fact that was never part of the Howard government's changes.

Mr McClelland agreed that "misunderstanding needed to be addressed". "The question is whether you need legislation to get that information out," Mr McClelland said. The government would be looking at the "lighter touch" approach of public education, before diving into the "deeper waters of legislative change".

The Chisholm report angered men's rights groups, who believe shared parenting is working well for the vast majority of couples that enter into the arrangement.

That view is supported by a separate 400-page Australian Institute of Family Studies review of family law, also released yesterday, which found overwhelming public support for the idea of shared parenting. More than 80 per cent of people surveyed said they supported shared parenting.

More than 70 per cent of couples who were in a shared parenting arrangement even said it was working well.

Mr McClelland agreed that there had been some positive developments from the 2006 changes, chiefly that fathers no longer assumed that they had to accept an 80-20 time split with their children after divorce.

"We've moved past that, but we are now in a situation where . . . the misconception (that each parent is entitled to a 50-50 time split) has taken hold," Mr McClelland said.

"Our task now is to clarify that. The focus has to be on the best interests of the children, and not the rights of parents."

Professor Chisholm's report says legislative change is necessary to make it clear that judges won't apply a one-size-fits-all approach to custody and will consider "what is best for the child".

Former Family Court chief justice Alistair Nicholson said the recommendations were "absolutely the way I would have gone". "The fault lies with the legislation," he said. "I have great sympathy for the judges trying to interpret it.

"Absolutely, yes, it must be up to judges and magistrates to decide what is best for each child in each case."

Family Court of Australia Chief Justice Diana Bryant and Acting Chief Federal Magistrate Michael Baumann said they, too, had identified "some ways in which the (system) could be improved or were not working as well as was anticipated".


http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/call-to-end-shared-custody-chisholm-report/story-e6frg6nf-1225824495340





Comments (6)