Each year at least 1 in 5 Aus­tralians over the age of 16 expe­ri­ence men­tal ill­ness. The most com­mon men­tal ill­ness­es are depres­sion and anx­i­ety and oth­er forms include bipo­lar dis­or­der and schizophrenia.

It is com­mon for peo­ple to expe­ri­ence men­tal ill­ness dur­ing dif­fi­cult times in their lives such as sep­a­ra­tion and divorce.

In par­ent­ing mat­ters before the Fam­i­ly Court the pri­ma­ry con­sid­er­a­tion is the best inter­ests of the chil­dren and pro­tect­ing them from harm, includ­ing psy­cho­log­i­cal and emo­tion­al harm. Any dis­tress or anx­i­ety expe­ri­enced by chil­dren as a result of a par­en­t’s health issues are rel­e­vant con­sid­er­a­tions for the Court.

In cir­cum­stances where the men­tal health of a par­ent is being man­aged and their con­di­tion does not impact adverse­ly on the chil­dren then there is no rea­son why the chil­dren should not spend time or live with that parent.

If the chil­dren are like­ly to be affect­ed by a par­en­t’s men­tal health issues then the time between that par­ent and the chil­dren is like­ly to be reduced or stopped. Usu­al­ly grad­u­al­ly increas­ing time with the chil­dren as the par­en­t’s health improves and the chil­dren become more set­tled, may be in the best inter­ests of the chil­dren. Where the par­en­t’s men­tal health is such that there is a risk to the chil­dren, then pro­tect­ing the chil­dren from any risk will be the Court’s pri­or­i­ty and that they may mean that con­tact with the chil­dren needs to be super­vised or stopped.

If you would like to repub­lish this arti­cle, it is gen­er­al­ly approved, but pri­or to doing so please con­tact the Mar­ket­ing team at marketing@​swaab.​com.​au. This arti­cle is not legal advice and the views and com­ments are of a gen­er­al nature only. This arti­cle is not to be relied upon in sub­sti­tu­tion for detailed legal advice.

Publications

Putting the West­pac Work­ing From Home Case in Perspective

Can employ­ees real­ly work from home if they want to? In a recent Fair Work case an employ­ee won the right to…

The risk of builder insol­ven­cy mid way through a con­struc­tion project is real (and will prob­a­bly be expensive)

Intro­duc­tionThis arti­cle pro­vides guid­ance to those under­tak­ing con­struc­tion works and iden­ti­fies a num­ber of con­tract pro­vi­sions which, if includ­ed in the…

Cross-Com­pa­ny Secu­ri­ty and Liq­uida­tor Chal­lenges: Full Fed­er­al Court Restores Cer­tain­ty in CEG Direct Secu­ri­ties v Coop­er [2025] FCAFC 47

A sig­nif­i­cant deci­sion from the Full Fed­er­al Court has clar­i­fied the lim­its of liq­uida­tors’ pow­ers to unwind cross-com­pa­ny secu­ri­ty grant­ed…

In the News

What the West­pac flex­i­ble work rul­ing real­ly means for employers

Michael Byrnes’ arti­cle ​“What the West­pac flex­i­ble work rul­ing real­ly means for employ­ers”, was pub­lished on HRM Online on 2…

Michael Byrnes dis­cuss­es the West­pac WFH case on 2SM with Tim Webster

Michael Byrnes appeared on Break­fast with Tim Web­ster on 2SM on 27 Octo­ber 2025 to dis­cuss the West­pac Work from…

Michael Byrnes is quot­ed in the arti­cle, What hap­pens when an employ­ee runs out of sick leave?”, pub­lished in HRM Online on 21 Octo­ber 2025

Michael Byrnes is quot­ed in the arti­cle, ​“What hap­pens when an employ­ee runs out of sick leave?”, pub­lished in HRM…

Sign up for our Newsletter

*Mandatory information