Family Court of Australia
Re: Imogen (No. 6)  FamCA 761 (10 September 2020)
Parenting – medical procedures – Gender Dysphoria – where Imogen has been diagnosed with Gender Dysphoria, currently takes puberty suppression medication and wishes to move to stage 2 gender affirming hormone treatment – where the father supports Imogen’s wish – where the mother disputes Imogen’s diagnosis and her Gillick competence and does not consent to stage 2 treatment and seeks an order for alternate treatment – whether, if there is a dispute about consent or treatment, an application to a court is mandatory – where an application is mandatory – whether if Imogen is found to be Gillick competent, she can make her own decisions about her treatment – where, given there is a dispute about treatment, Imogen’s consent is not sufficient – where there is only a dispute about Gillick competence a declaration should be made under s 34(1) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) as to whether or not an adolescent is Gillick competent – where there is a dispute about treatment, an order authorising or not authorising treatment should be made under s67ZC of the Act, that is in the best interests of the adolescent – where Imogen is found to have Gender Dysphoria and found to be Gillick competent – where it is in Imogen’s best interests for an order to be made authorising stage 2 treatment – where medical practitioners should not administer stage 2 treatment for Gender Dysphoria absent consent from the adolescent’s parents or legal guardians, without court approval – discussion about the 2020 Australian Standards and guidelines and current research into the diagnosis and treatment of Gender Dysphoria.
Re: Imogen (No. 5)  FamCA 760 (10 September 2020)
Practice and procedure – whether the final hearing should be in a closed court – where the court shall be open – where the hearing will take place on Microsoft Teams due to COVID-19 – where because of concerns about the ability to appropriately warn members of the public about restrictions in relation to Imogen’s anonymity and concerns in relation to the wider electronic dissemination of the proceedings without anonymity, members of the public will not be given access to the Microsoft Teams link – where members of the public will be able to view the hearing conducted on the electronic platform from the courtroom.
Federal Circuit Court of Australia
Parenting – same-sex couple – applicant claimed the children were conceived by way of private artificial conception procedures – respondent claimed the children were conceived by way of sexual intercourse – determination of how the children were conceived – consideration as to how the legislative framework should be applied – consideration of parental responsibility – consent for children to live with the respondent and spend alternate weekends with the applicant – determination as to holiday and special occasion time orders – respondent unilaterally changed the children’s surnames after separation – determination as to whether the children’s surnames should be changed back to their original registration.
Parenting – interim hearing – application to exclude evidence – video recording of an altercation between the mother and the father taken by the father’s 14 year old child – whether the recording was illegally obtained – whether the altercation between the father and the mother was a “private conversation” – whether the probative value of the recording is outweighed – video recording admitted into evidence.