This document outlines the legal rights and responsibilities of parents and children under family law. It discusses the rights of children to safety, care, and protection, as well as the responsibilities of parents to financially support and care for their children. The rights of parents to make decisions for their children are also described. The document then discusses circumstances where the state may intervene to protect children's welfare. Specific legislation and notable court cases related to family law and children's rights are also summarized.

1. Legal rights and obligations of
parents and children
The Nature of Family Law

2. Rights of Children
 Include things like:
 the right to be safe
 to be treated with affection
 to be educated
 to have medical care, and
 to be protected against cruelty and abuse.
 Parents are there to protect children’s rights until
they are old enough to make their own way in the
world.

3. Responsibilities of Parents
 Parents have a duty to:
 protect their child from harm
 provide their child with food, clothing and a place to live
 financially support their child
 provide safety, supervision and control
 provide medical care
 provide an education.

4. Rights of Parents
 The law allows parents to bring up their children
according to their own values and beliefs. This
means that parents have the right to make decisions
about how they bring up their children without
interference unless there are very good reasons and
the child’s wellbeing is at risk.
 Decisions such as religion, schooling, discipline,
medical treatment and where a child lives are a
parent’s right and responsibility to make. These
decisions will not be interfered with unless, for
example, a child is badly treated, is not receiving
education, is not allowed medical treatment when it
is needed or there is an order by a court.

5. STATE INTERVENTION
 When the family is not able to, or fails to provide
adequate care and protection for children, the State
may intervene in various ways.
 These include:
 assessing and determining parents’ obligations to support
children financially and enforcing those obligations
 mandating school attendance for school-age children
 initiating investigations and court action to determine
whether there is any need to intervene to protect the child
 (as a last resort) by removing children from the care of
their parents.

6. Specific Legislation
Children and Young Persons (Care
and Protection) Act 1998 (NSW)
Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) - see
Division 10 for sexual offences
against children
 Relates to guardianship
and care of children,
and also reporting of
children who are at risk
of harm
 Also outlines Children's
Court Proceedings
Includes specific items outlawing:
 Sexual intercourse-child under 10
 Attempting … to have sexual
intercourse with child under 10
 Sexual intercourse-child between
10 and 16
 Attempting … to have sexual
intercourse with child between 10
and 16
 Persistent sexual abuse of a child
 Procuring or grooming child under
16 for unlawful sexual activity
 Sexual intercourse with child
between 16 and 18 under special
care

7. UN CONVENTION ON THE RIGHTS OF
THE CHILD
 Explicit recognition of State responsibility for children and its
duty of care towards them.
 Australia has ratified UNCRC; is committed to recognising and
implementing the provisions of the Convention, and in
particular the three P’s:
 provision
 protection
 participation.
 The main provisions of the Convention concern children’s
rights to:
 grow up in a family environment
 health care
 education
 be protected from violence and exploitation
 have the opportunity to express their views and influence decision
making that concerns them.

8. NGO - National Association for Prevention
of Child Abuse and Neglect (NAPCAN)

9. Relevant Cases

10. Marion’s Case Secretary of the Department of Health
and Community Services v JWB and SMB
 “Marion” was a 14yo girl with intellectual disabilities,
severe deafness, epilepsy and other disorders
 Her parents asked the Family Court for permission to
give Marion a hysterctomy
 Was not an issue of “is this in the best interests of the
child”, but “who has the right to make this decision” – the
parents, Marion, or the Family Court.
 The parents argued argued that the decision to sterilise a
child is not too different from other major decisions that
parents and guardians have to make for children . Their
argument was that, provided such a procedure is in the
best interests of the child, parents as guardians can give
lawful consent to a sterilisation on behalf of a mentally
incompetent child.

11.  In the case, the High Court ruled that whilst parents
may consent to medical treatment for their children,
this authority does not extend to treatment which is
not in the child’s best interests.
 Second, the Court held that where medical treatment
has sterilisation as its principal objective, parents do
not have the authority to consent on behalf of their
child.

12. Re Alex
 Alex was a 13yo female, and a ward of the state (Victoria)
 Alex was diagnosed as experiencing the condition called
"Gender Indentiy Disorder" (known commonly as
"Transsexualism")
 Alex applied to the Family Court for permission to undergo
hormonal medical treatment to “affirm” his male sexual identity.
 The key issue was whether the Victorian State Government
Department responsible for Alex's care and welfare or the
Family Court of Australia should be responsibile for the
authorisation of medical treatment involving the administration
of hormonal therapies to assist Alex to have a body with
secondary sexual characteristics most appropriate to his
innate affirmed male sex and, in so doing, relieve him of the
extreme suffering he was experiencing as a result of female
pubertal development.

13. The judge decided:
 The medical treatment sought by Alex was "Special
Medical Treatment" as per the High Court of Australia's
decision in Marion's Case and therefore only the Family
Court of Australia, and not parents or legal guardians,
has the legal authority to authorise such treatment.
 Neither Alex nor any adolescent with transsexualism was
capable of authorising such medical treatment on their
own behalf.
 Alex's treating doctors were ultimately authorised by the
court to commence a form of hormonal treatment –
although this was not administered until after Alex began
puberty; Alex later applied to the Family Court fir a double
masectomy
 Alex was permitted to be enrolled in school under a male
name

14. DOCS let little girl Ebony starve -
Ombudsman
 “Ebony”, a seven-year-old girl, starved to death on a
urine-soaked mattress. Her body weighed just 9kg when
she was discovered at her home in November 2007.
 There were 17 separate reports lodged with DoCS,
stretching back to 1993, indicating that Ebony and her
siblings were at risk from their dysfunctional parents.
 Of those 17 reports made to DoCS by concerned
neighbours, teachers, doctors and other agencies, 13
occurred between 2005 and 2007.
 DoCS relied on a report by a work-experience student to
assess Ebony’s situation; filed other reports as
“information only”
 Ebony's mother was sentenced to life in prison for
murder (later reduced to 30 years) and Ebony's father to
16 years behind bars for her manslaughter
http://www.news.com.au/national/docs-let-little-girl-ebony-starve-ombudsman/story-e6frfkvr-1225783609933

15. Judge allows blood transfusion for Jehovah’s
Witness boy, against parents’ wishes
 The boy, J, is likely to require a liver transplant within
the next 2 to 3years and Justice Douglas said
without it “death would be inevitable’’.
 Justice Douglas said the parents were concerned
about their son’s health and were willing to agree to
a liver transplant, but opposed the application for an
order allowing blood transfusion.
 “It seems to me appropriate to conclude that the
sanctity of J’s life, in the end, is a more powerful
reason for me to make the orders than is respect for
the dignity of beliefs so sincerely held by his parents
and him,’’ Justice Douglas said.