Welcome to Aussie Divorce

When the Family Court Reviews a Child’s Wishes and Parental Conflict

What Happens When Children Refuse Contact With a Parent Meta Description: In Sewell & Davie [2023], the Family Court considered high conflict, a child’s refusal to see a parent, and psychological harm. Learn how the court made its parenting orders and why.

When separated parents can’t agree and the child refuses to see one of them, the Family Court is faced with a difficult question: Is the child being influenced, or is there a genuine reason for fear?

In Sewell & Davie [2023], the Court had to navigate extreme parental conflict, allegations of coercive control, and a child who no longer wanted to see his father. This case provides a powerful example of how the court prioritises the child’s psychological safety above everything else.

Background

  • The parties had one child together, born in 2010.
  • The parents separated in 2018, and the child initially spent time with both parents.
  • Over time, the child refused to see the father and displayed distress around visits.
  • There were numerous allegations from both sides—each blaming the other for the child’s emotional struggles.


The mother alleged coercive control and said the father’s behaviour had harmed the child’s mental health. The father said the mother was alienating the child and undermining his parental role.

The matter returned to court to determine:

  • Who should have parental responsibility
  • Whether the father should continue to have time with the child
  • What orders would best protect the child’s wellbeing


The Child’s Views

The child, aged 13 at the time of hearing, made it clear to the independent children’s lawyer and to a family consultant that he did not want to see his father.

His reasons included:

  • Feeling anxious and afraid around his father
  • A belief that the father had been controlling and aggressive
  • A desire to avoid the emotional distress he experienced during previous visits


These views were supported by psychological reports and not just taken at face value.


What the Court Decided

1. Sole Parental Responsibility to the Mother

The court granted the mother sole parental responsibility. This meant she alone would make all major decisions about the child’s life.


Why?

Because the level of conflict was so high and the father had shown no ability to communicate constructively or act in a way that promoted the child’s wellbeing.


2. No In-Person Time with the Father

The court ordered that:

  • The child would not be required to spend any time with the father
  • There would be no supervised contact
  • The father could send letters or cards, but the child was not obligated to respond

This was not a punishment—but a protective measure based on the child’s clear emotional distress.


3. Court Recognised Psychological Harm

The court accepted that ongoing contact with the father was likely to cause significant psychological harm to the child.

It found that:

  • The father had a pattern of dismissive and controlling behaviour
  • The father did not show insight or change
  • The child’s refusal was not due to coaching by the mother, but rather his lived experience


Key Legal Considerations

Under the Family Law Act 1975, the child’s best interests are the main concern. The court considered:

  • Section 60CC(2)(b): The need to protect the child from physical or psychological harm
  • Section 60CC(3)(a): The views of the child, considering his age and maturity
  • Section 60CC(3)(c): The level of conflict between the parents

The court concluded that forcing contact would do more harm than good and could affect the child’s long-term emotional health.


What This Case Tells Us

1. The Court Takes Children’s Views Seriously
Especially once a child is mature enough (usually around 12 or 13), their views carry real weight—provided they’re supported by evidence and not coached.

2. Psychological Harm Is a Serious Risk
Even if there’s no physical violence, coercive control, anxiety, and emotional distress can lead the court to reduce or stop contact.

3. Parental Conflict Affects Outcomes
In high-conflict cases where one parent cannot regulate their behaviour, the court may award sole responsibility to the more stable parent—even if there are no findings of abuse.

4. No Contact Is Sometimes the Best Option
The court is reluctant to cut off contact entirely—but if a child is suffering, it will prioritise mental health over parental rights.

Practical Tips

If you’re involved in a parenting dispute:

  • Focus on how your actions affect the child’s wellbeing
  • If your child refuses contact, seek psychological support and independent evidence
  • Avoid blaming the other parent—courts look for cooperation, not conflict

More Posts

Better Places To Come up Fiat Diazepam Online No Prescription

The sound model that supports the no-ethical drug sales event of Diazepam in the UK is well-stacked upon Holocene epoch regulative amendments. These amendments direct to equilibrate the take for lenient get at to medicinal drug with the requirement of ensuring patient role refuge. These regulatory adjustments shine the UK’s

Read More »

Just How To Take Care Of Pornhd3x.

PornHD3X.tv is a premier free adult streaming platform that specializes in delivering high-definition, full-length adult film samples from some of the most renowned studios in the industry. Launched a few years ago, the site has quickly gained traction, attracting approximately 7 million visitors monthly. Its straightforward yet modern design offers

Read More »