On 7 December 2011 new amendments to the Family Law Act were passed. The new legislation commences on 7 June 2012.

The amendments include an updated definition of family violence to include violent, threatening or other behavior by a person who coerces or controls a member of the person’s family (the family member) or causes the family member to be fearful.

The Amendment then goes on to give specific examples of behavior that may constitute family violence.

There is a focus on what circumstances may expose children to family violence, including hearing violent behavior, comforting family members following an assault, and cleaning up after property has been intentionally broken.

Other additions include violence or threatened violence to family pets, unreasonable withholding of financial support and isolating the family member from their own family.

There is an emphasis on abuse of children and the circumstances in which a child may be considered to have been exposed to family violence are detailed in the new amendments.

Considering the above, the response from certain sectors of the community may be that domestic relationships are over controlled. At some time during the life of many relationships haven’t we all done a least one of those prohibited acts?

Haven’t we argued in front of the kids about money? Haven’t we told our partners that we can’t stand their brother/sister/mother and have refused to have them over to Christmas lunch?

Whether this is true of our own, or any relationship, is irrelevant, and this is not what the amendments seek to address.

Somehow the belief that the way we treat family members should be allowed to be different from the way we treat our peers has seeped into our culture.

 Family violence is about power. Relationships which are founded on power imbalances are especially vulnerable to family violence.  The private nature of family relationships in western culture protect abusers and silence their victims.

 Amendments to the Family Law Act provide a framework to assist the courts when family violence is an issue.

 Real change in family violence statistics will only be seen when community attitudes towards women and children progress to a point where violence perpetrated against them in the home is seen by the community as more than simply a private family matter.

FAMILY LAW LEGISLATION AMENDMENT
(FAMILY VIOLENCE AND OTHER MEASURES)
act 2011 (189/2011)

A recent article “Lifting the veil on the true cost of saying I do” in The Age on claims that current statistics show that the average spend on today’s wedding is up to $35,000 and nowadays most couples are paying these costs themselves.

Couples planning a wedding or considering moving in together are looking forward to starting their lives together. However, many couples may not have considered what might happen when the honeymoon period is over and the relationship breaks down.

So, what are the real costs of separating?

Separating couples who are unable to resolve their dispute may end up fighting it out in the Family Law Courts spending in excess of $35,000 each just to have the Court make a decision for them.

Couples starting their lives together can take preventative measures to overcome these problems. Many are entering into Financial Agreements where they can control what does or doesn’t happen in the event their relationship breaks down. Spending a little extra on legal advice at the start of the relationship may turn out to be the best investment for the future.

If you would like further information about Financial Agreements please telephone our office to speak with one of our experienced Family Lawyers.

Same sex, or gay marriage has been a topic of discussion by Australians for many years. The recent dinner hosted by the Prime Minister has once again highlighted the issue and the fact that where other countries such as Canada have legislated in favour of gay marriage, Australia has not.

One wonders what the rationale for such a dinner may be. The discussion is reported to have been positive, but the Prime minister has not changed her stance on the topic.

The inclusion of one of the couples’ two sons as guests, with their articulate support of their mothers’ right to marry, added an emotional and real life touch to the event as reported in the media.

In contrast to the current ban on gay marriage is the somewhat opposite circumstance in which de facto heterosexual and gay couples can now access the Family Court in the event of separation with respect to division of assets between them.

Doesn’t this seem paradoxical? Gay couples have the same rights as heterosexual couples when it comes to separating, but not when it comes to getting together – and marrying – in the first place.

Maybe it’s time that the rules governing togetherness should catch up with the rules governing splitting up.

Adele Horin’s article “Parental ‘poison’ of kids on rise” in the Age on 6 February 2012 claims a study has found that warring parents in Family Court disputes are claiming former partners are poisoning their children against each other.

Parenting is for life. Great care should be taken to preserve parenting relationships for the children’s benefit. Research tells us the biggest risk factor for children’s wellbeing during separation and divorce is high levels of parental conflict.

Non adversarial processes such as collaborative law, mediation or family dispute resolution provide an opportunity for parents to work together to reach amicable solutions for their family without the need for Court. These processes assist in the preservation of family relationships rather than their destruction.

Parents involved in serious cases of parental alienation or cases involving children who are at significant risk of harm or abuse may have no option but to involve the Family Courts. However, litigation should be the option of last resort.

Further information about collaborative law, mediation or family dispute resolution is outlined in our website or telephone our office to speak with one of our experienced Family Lawyers.