|
Attorney-General Robert McClelland says he wants community debate on
recommendations that would wind back shared parenting laws. Let's hope he
is prepared to truly listen up. This is an issue demanding careful
assessment based on data - and broad community wishes - rather than any
abrupt return to past practices that minimise the role of separated and
divorced fathers in the care of their children.
There is pressure, some of it from the Attorney-General's frontbench
colleagues, for a change to the Family Law reforms introduced by the Howard
government in 2006. But while there are clearly cases where violent and
abusive fathers must be denied access, this minority effect ought not
undermine the principle of equal parental responsibility.
The 2006 reforms were a long-overdue move to redress the gender imbalance
underlying the assumption made by the Family Court that children were
better off spending most time with their mothers. The changes have been
controversial, not only because the Family Court has sometimes struggled to
resolve conflicting claims from parents living in different locations or in
determining the risk of violence, but also because their scope has been
misunderstood.
Two reports released yesterday - the four-month review by Richard Chisholm
and the three-year assessment by the Australian Institute of Family Studies
- make that clear. Both argue that the Howard changes were never about a
50-50 split in the amount of time spent by each parent with their children,
but a 50-50 sharing of responsibility. This clarification is important, but
the government must now decide whether it needs to revisit the legislation
to spell this out, as suggested by Professor Chisholm. He also wants
amendments to "bring the focus back to what is best for the children", an
emphasis shared by the institute in its almost 400-page report, which
acknowledges the family law system "has some way to go" in dealing with
violence and associated issues. The institute offers only broad suggestions
about the way forward but its comprehensive review of the operation of the
law means there is now a solid body of data on which to base policy
development.
Family law is a fraught area: almost 20 per cent of separated parents, for
example, say their relationship is "full of conflict or fearful". It is
scarcely surprising that in this hothouse environment, shared parenting has
been hotly contested by people at both ends of the political spectrum and
from both mothers and fathers - even though only 16 per cent of children
from separated families are in shared care-time arrangements.
The government now has the research (including a third report released
yesterday by the Family Law Council) to decide what, if any, changes are
needed. The focus must indeed be on the children, but the opportunity for
both men and women to develop loving relationships with their offspring
must not be ignored.
|
|
