Donate Child Support Calculator
Skip navigation

"Family Law - Time for Change"

Comments on the SPCA Discussion Paper "Family Law - Time for Change".

I believe that the SPCA document "Family Law - Time for Change" has a lot of merit. The SPCA needs to be congratulated for the production of this document..

I also personally agree with 99 per cent of the document.

However one query that I had is with he wording of the clause - "these are to be tested in the local the existing ADVO system where an interim order is made pending further examination".

The clause seems to have a double meaning, which could be mis-interpreted.

Does this clause mean that the existing ADVO* (i.e. restraining order) system works well? In fact, it does not work well at all.

As we know, if the claimant has a reasonable fear, then a the issue of an ADVO* is mandatory

Alternatively does the clause mean that interim orders would generally be made pending further order? That is, this interim hearing would be a procedural type of hearing. After that any allegations would need to be both tested and proven in a final hearing.

Subject to the above clarification, the "Family Law - Time for Change" document is exactly what we need.

I note that the document also dovetails into our Equal Parenting Party (NCPP(EP)) family law policyquite well.


John Flanagan
Deputy Registered Officer,
Non-Custodial Parents Party (Equal Parenting).

* ADVO - the words "apprehended domestic violence order or ADVO are used in NSW - whereas a different wording for that type of restraining order is used in other states of Australia.

Last edit: by John Flanagan

1 guest and 0 members have just viewed this.

Recent Tweets