Allegra Spender (Wentworth, Independent) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to support the Family Law Amendment Bill 2023 because of the crucial changes it makes to the Family Law Act and the focus on the best interests and wellbeing of children. Divorce is an incredibly challenging time for all parties involved, but the safety and wellbeing of children caught in the middle are the utmost priority.

However, I want to flag a concern: that we keep a close eye on the impact of these changes to make sure that they are working towards the end goal of achieving not only safe but also stable parenting arrangements. It is important that we remove the harmful presumption of equal shared parental responsibility, which has been a source of confusion and misinterpretation since its introduction in 2006. It is not okay that victims of family violence, often mothers, are reporting that this presumption has led them to agree to unsafe arrangements for them and for their children. Centring the conversation around the rights of parents conflicts with the primary purpose of the act, which is to protect children.

Still, we shouldn't lose sight of the intent of this presumption, which was to promote the role of both parents in the life of a child. I have heard from parents, particularly fathers, who are concerned that these changes will make it less likely that shared-care arrangements will be granted. Whilst it is essential that no parenting arrangement that would jeopardise the safety of a child could be made, it is also important that we continue to advocate for shared care when it is safe to do so. A 2014 study into shared-care parenting in Australia affirmed that, when family violence is not an issue, shared-time arrangements are better for children. Out of these shared-care arrangements, a fifty-fifty split is often the most durable and stable for a child. Often this comes from the 97 per cent of parents who reach an agreement outside the court system.

However, unfortunately, the three per cent of families that negotiate parenting arrangements through the courts are frequently the ones dealing with family violence. Shared-care arrangement are failing in these families, not because of shared care itself being harmful but because the high-conflict families in court are often the least equipped to manage the intense emotional and logistical requirements of managing shared care. That's why these changes are necessary. They're also a reminder of the systemic issues presenting barriers to stable parenting arrangements.

Whilst I am supportive of these changes today, I also encourage the government to closely watch the research over the next few years to make sure that we are on track to seeing an increase in safe shared-care arrangements. We want to make sure that this option is available to as many families as possible, not because the parents are entitled to it but because of the benefits that come when children have a meaningful relationship with each parent. In 2006, the culture around our perception of parenting roles was completely different. Since then, we have seen a welcome rise in the participation of women in the workforce as well as an increased understanding of the important role that fathers play in the lives of their children. It is my hope that these cultural shifts continue to be reflected in the trends towards more shared-care arrangements made without coercion after this bill.

See this speech in context