Skip to main content

A Judge’s Heartfelt Letter to a Child

By Susan Miranda, Special Counsel

Issues of risk that arise in family law matters are many and varied. One area of risk that is a particularly nuanced and often less overt and objectively measurable is the risk of emotional and psychological harm to a child when one or both parents involve the child in the family law dispute.

In a recent case of Sevinc & Ikram [2025] FedCFamC2F 961 Judge Harland was deciding a Review of an interim parenting decision that involved this category of risk allegation. On an interim basis, the Court Ordered that the 10 year old child was to live with the Mother (in circumstances where the child had been living with the Father). The Father filed a Review application, raising numerous issues including risk of family violence (allegedly perpetrated by the mother and the mother’s brother towards the father), and that the child should be returned to live with him. Note – an Application for Review is determined as an original hearing and must be filed within 21 days after the order or decision is made (see Part 14.3 of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021).

When deciding the Father’s Review Application, Judge Harland determined that the greatest and immediate risk for the 10 year old child was the emotional and psychological harm, due to:

  • both parents inappropriately involving the child in the dispute; and
  • the likely conflicting loyalties the child was feeling as a result.

Some of the evidence Judge Harland considered particularly important in determining the matter was:

  • The child had expressed concern to his school counsellor about what the counsellor may tell his parents.
  • The child had expressed worry to the Independent Children’s Lawyer (ICL) about the Court’s ‘expectations’ of him.
  • Both parents had inappropriately written to the child’s school principal informing the principal about the dispute. In this regard, Judge Harland issued an injunction, restraining the parents from unilaterally writing to the child’s school in the future. In so doing, His Honour commented that “When parents separate, often school is a safe and neutral place for children.” His Honour went on to say that the communications both parents sent to the school had put a lot of pressure on the school and had inappropriately involved the school in the parties’ parenting dispute.
  • The child had informed his school counsellor that he thought his parents were back in Court and that he ‘tries’ not to worry.

Judge Harland also referred to various evidence where the child had expressed clear and consistent views to different people, that he wanted to remain living with his Father and that he did not understand why he could not see his Father.

His Honour found that the events (including the parents attending, unannounced, at the child’s school, and a police attendance when there was a dispute at the Mother’s home about the Father seeing the child) and the general exposure of the child to his parents’ conflict likely left the child feeling insecure with his Mother. In that regard, His Honour said “He may not be trusting of her and be worried that she might suddenly take him away again”.

Upon making the Order that the child live with the Mother, Judge Harland also Ordered that:

  • the ICL speak to the child about the interim decision that had been made; and
  • the ICL give the child a letter the Judge had written to the child.

**The Judge’s letter is produced in full at the bottom of this article (anonymised) as practitioners and parents alike might find it helpful to read the complete letter.

Whilst very rare, this is not the first case where the Judge has written to the child (see also Lavigne & Gavin (No 2) [2024] FedCFamC2F 737). The letter is a powerful reminder of the impact that separation and exposure to parental conflict and pressures can have on a child, and the depth of care the Court has for the children whose lives their decisions impact.

This case is also a timely reminder for family lawyers to advise their clients:

  • of the importance of not involving their children in their family law dispute and the risks in so doing.
  • that children should not be able to overhear telephone calls between the parent and their lawyer; and
  • that children should not be brought to the lawyer’s office.
  • There is also information on the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia website to assist children in preparing to see a Family Consultant.

Dear X,

My name is Judge Harland. Your parents have asked the court for help to work out the best living arrangements for you and I have been asked to make a decision about what happens for now. I have thought a lot about you when making this decision.

When parents decide to end their relationship, it can be really hard for everyone. There isn’t just one reason parents separate, and it isn’t anyone’s fault. Nothing you said or did caused it. You may have a lot of big feelings about your parents’ separation and you might express them in different ways. It can be a sad and confusing time, sometimes people might also feel angry. Everyone in the family might feel differently about it and that is alright.

I think the separation has been hard for you and your parents. At times your parents have put you in the middle of their disagreement which isn’t fair on you. They have also involved your school.
I think both your mum and dad have felt hurt and have not thought about how hard it is for you when they involve you and your school in their disagreement. Hopefully this will stop now.

I know you have talked to a lot of people and have told a lot of people you want to stay with
your dad. You have talked with a few counsellors and I have read notes from them. You told
your school counsellor you are worried about the expectations the court has of you. You don’t
need to worry about that. The court expects your mum and dad to think about how they can
support you better. You should be able to focus on school and the people and things that are
important to you and make you happy.

Your mum and dad and your lawyer agree that it would be good for you to talk to a counsellor who won’t tell your parents or your lawyer what you talk about. This means you can talk about things you need to talk about without worrying about anything else.

I have decided that for now you should stay with your dad most of the time but spend some more time with your mum. You will still stay with mum every second weekend but will stay with mum until Monday morning so she can take you to school. You will also stay overnight with your mum every second Wednesday instead of spending only a few hours with her. During school holidays you will spend a week with each of your parents.

Court cases can take a long time which can be hard for everyone. I am glad that your lawyer has been explaining things to you and asking what you want. Her job is to tell the court what she thinks is best for you and to help your mum and dad agree on the best arrangements for you long term.

In a while you might be asked to see someone from the court so they can get to know you and what it is like to be you in your family at this time. They will also meet with your mum and dad to talk about your family and find out more about you. This will help the court decide what living arrangements will be best for you into the future.

X, I want you to know that you are not responsible for your mum and dad breaking up or what happens next for everyone. Your parents love you so much and want what is best for you.

I have made this decision, not your mum or dad. While it is important for me to know what you think about things, please know you are not responsible for the decisions being made. I hope things get easier and that you have fun swimming and doing jujitsu.

Judge Harland

Recent Posts

Book a Consultation