what extent achieve justice for family members?

• Adoption Amendment Act 2010 (NSW)


  Amended the Adoption Act 2000 (NSW) to allow same-sex couples in NSW the right to adopt a child
• Sydney Morning Herald Article Benjamin Keats, 2010: '"The NSW government recognises that same-sex parents… are capable of providing loving and stable homes for children"'
• The law fails to achieve justice for same-sex parents and children


  As it is enforceable in protecting the rights of children and preventing discrimination
• Article 21 of CROC 1989 states "A blanket ban on adoption by same-sex couples prevents… individual child's best interests"
• ADVOs


  Aims to protect women and children living or spending time with the victim from violence, threat or harassment
• Family Law Amendment (Shared Parental Responsibility) Act 2006 (Cth)


  Introduced the presumption of shared parental responsibility which meant that both parents were presumed to have an equal role in making decisions about the child's wellbeing
• This was often misinterpreted by people as a presumption of equal shared parental time
• Family Law Amendment Act 2024 (Cth)


  Repealed the presumption of 'equal shared parental responsibility' and the provision that parents will continue to have parental responsibility for decisions after separation
• To focus on the child's best interests, so the parents can make decisions jointly or independently unless the court says otherwise
• s 60CC of the FLAA refines the list of 'best interests' factors
• The Guardian, 2024 article: '"The government has listened to and acted on concerns about safety which have been expressed over many years"'
• LCMID: "it will be harder for the dads to get equal shared parental responsibility, and if they want it the burden will be on them to prove they can cooperatively parent"
• The law has been highly effective in achieving justice for couples divorcing to a large extent, as it has reformed to achieve the best possible outcomes for those facing separation
• Married couples who wanted to divorce needed to apply under the Matrimonial Causes Act 1959 (Cth) (Repealed) on the grounds of 'fault' for one or both spouses and grounds for divorce were limited including severe factors such as adultery, cruelty, insanity, etc.


  Before 1975
• The Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) removed all other grounds for divorce, establishing the family court. Which allowed there to be one ground for divorcing, removing all the need to find fault


  1975
• Under section 50, the act

  Allows a reconciliation period, if they do not revive the marriage in this period, it may be dissolved
• 95% of divorces are settled outside of the family court(Fogelman Law, 2021)
• The Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)


  • Grants couples 'the kiss and makeup clause' under section 50
  • Removes the need to find fault
• The law


  • Protects the rights of the couple separating
  • Protects the paramount rights of any child involved
  • Ensures the best possible outcome for the children and parents
  • Saves costs through resource-efficient and cost-free mediation
• In the case of Easterfela and Giannopolous, they did not meet the required 'separation period'


  The enforceability of the act made their divorce invalid, so justice was not served for the couple separating
• Despite this, the family act 1975 (Cth) consistent framework makes it consistent in achieving justice for separating couples majority of the time
• Overall, the law is highly effective in achieving justice for separating couples to a large extent