Children's Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: DFaCS re Lilly, Wade and Caleb [2012] NSWChC 21 Hearing dates: 24/4, 17 & 25/5, 18/6 and 5/10/12 Decision date: 29 November 2012 Jurisdiction: Care and protection Before: Magistrate Keogh Decision: See [90] - [125] Catchwords: CHILDREN - Care and protection - parental responsibility - permanency planning- realistic possibility of restoration - contact Legislation Cited: Children and Young Persons (Care and Protection Act) 1998 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Department of Family and Community Services (DFaCS) CD (Mother) PC (Father) Caleb, Lilly and Wade (Children) Representation: Mr Wilson, solicitor (Department) Ms Williams of counsel (Mother) Mr Nasti, solicitor (Father) Ms Miller, solicitor (Lilly and Wade) Mr Whelan, solicitor (Caleb) Mr Gordon, solicitor instructing Ms Williams File Number(s): 88/2011 & 11/2012 Publication restriction: Pseudonyms have been used in order to anonymise the children and parties Judgment 1These proceedings are in respect of 3 children Caleb, Lilly and Wade. They are the children of CD and PC. 2CD and PC are no longer together. The children are all separated and none are in the care of either parent. 3The matter first commenced in relation to the two younger children in April 2011, when they were removed from the care of their mother. 4In January 2012 a further application was made in respect of the older sibling, Caleb, when the Director-General sought a supervision order in respect of the mother's care of him. 5Since the commencement of these proceedings the natural mother has formed a new relationship with NM. They reside together and have had a child Sally, who is only a few months old. That child is not the subject of any care proceedings. History 6In February 2011 Lilly complained that her brother Caleb, sexually abused her. 7This complaint has been substantiated. 8There was also a significant history of domestic violence with the mother being physically assaulted and verbally abused by the father. 9The domestic violence resulted in the mother suffering physical injuries and a domestic violence order being obtained against the father that excluded him from the household. 10The father has had a longstanding problem with substance abuse particularly alcohol. He has since acknowledged this and acknowledged his need for treatment and is not seeking restoration of any of the children to his care. 11Despite the restriction on the father returning to the home, he did return on occasion and the abuse continued, primarily in the form of verbal abuse. 12It is documented that the mother sought assistance for her children by requesting that they be referred for counselling at school. 13There were periods of separation when either the mother or father was absent from the home. 14The mother remained in part time employment as a nurse and on occasion sought the assistance of her own mother in relation to child-care particularly in relation to the youngest child, Wade. On occasion she also sought refuge with her family as a consequence of the domestic violence at home. However the relationship between the mother and her family is and was extremely dysfunctional and has now become quite hostile. 15The maternal grandmother, who is now the Director-General's placement of choice for the two young children, has a history with the Department because of the care of her own children many years ago. This history includes concerns in relation to sexual abuse and physical abuse within the family and her ability to protect her own children. 16She and another daughter appear to have engaged in public criticisms of the natural mother, via "facebook". This has resulted in the intervention of the Department in the children's lives, and the reasons for it, becoming potentially public knowledge with apparently little thought being given to the impact this may have on the children. 17The circumstances are such that there could be little confidence that contact between family members could ever be harmonious and it is extremely doubtful that the grandmother would actively facilitate it. There is also concern that the level of hostility that exists carries with it the possibility of the maternal family being unable to refrain from denigrating the mother. The potential for an emotionally charged environment that could cause difficulties, to say the least, for the children if they were placed in her care, is apparent. 18Caleb led a particularly disjointed existence after Departmental intervention, at times living with his father and at other times with his mother. 19There were allegations of physical abuse at the hands of his father, particularly when the father was intoxicated. 20There were allegations of him being the victim of excessive physical discipline by his mother and father prior to intervention. He was also the victim of assault at the hands of his father after intervention when he was placed with his father and later, self placed with his father. 21 Placement (whether by the Department or by self placement) of any child with the father before he addresses alcohol and substance abuse together with his history of domestic violence carries a risk of harm to them. 22Caleb's behaviour seemed to follow a downward trajectory even after the intervention of the Department and the removal of the two younger children from the home, not only were there the concerns about his sexual abuse of his sister and, therefore, the safety of his two younger siblings (including this sister), but there were also concerns about his aggression within the home and his conduct at school, together with his own anxiety and expressions of self-harm and attempts at self-harm. 23Because the mother did not at first accept Lilly's complaint the Director-General feared that the mother would not be protective of her two younger children around Caleb. 24Until she accepted that her son had been the perpetrator of inter-sibling sexual abuse, it could be predicted that her son and her daughter and the family would not receive the expert intervention that was required to address this issue. 25In these circumstances the Director-General identified the need for the younger children to be removed and eventually for Caleb also to be the subject of an application. 26Removal of the children resulted in Lilly being placed in out-of-home care and in Wade remaining with his maternal grandmother, whilst Caleb remained in the home. 27The Director-General initially only sought a supervision order in respect of Caleb, but the period after removal of the other children proved to be a tumultuous one for Caleb with his behaviour as noted above becoming increasingly difficult. The Director-General finally amended the application in respect of Caleb to one seeking that parental responsibility be allocated to the Minister. Caleb has led a peripatetic existence now for more than a year. 28The mother seeks restoration of the two younger children and now concedes to an extent the Department's stance in relation to parental responsibility in respect of Caleb. 29The maternal grandmother who, as indicated earlier, was identified as the preferred placement for the two young children, initially sought only the placement of Wade into her care, but she has now apparently been convinced of the benefits and importance of the placement of both Wade and Lilly with the same carer. This was the position she took in her sworn evidence before the court but it was not the position that she held in the material that was filed in the proceedings. 30I note the father is of the view that the grandmother is his preferred placement option for the children, but that he would prefer the mother caring for his children to a stranger. 31Lilly does not wish to live with her maternal grandmother and would prefer to live with her current carers but more importantly wants to live with her little brother Wade and her new born younger sister Sally. 32Caleb would now like to live permanently with the family of a friend. 33These proceedings have been long and protracted. They have been adjourned to find or arrange a placement for Caleb. Unfortunately numerous placements fell through. They were also adjourned when the mother had difficulty giving evidence because of the discomfort she was experiencing in the later stages of her pregnancy. They were later adjourned because the mother had given birth. They have taken their toll on everyone and only added to the what the children endured by living in what the Independent Children's Representative, Ms Miller, accurately referred to as "a violent, dysfunctional and chaotic household characterised by domestic violence, substance abuse and poor attention to the serious difficulties young Caleb and later Lilly faced". 34Lilly is a child who was a victim of inter-sibling sexual abuse and who was initially disbelieved. She should not ever be in the position of having to shoulder the blame for the disintegration of this family. 35Wade has remained with his maternal grandmother and if the Court removes him from her care no doubt the separation he will feel will be traumatic. 36Caleb is almost 14 years old and had had an extremely traumatic and turbulent past 20 months since the sexual abuse was first complained of. His identification as the perpetrator of sexual abuse marked the commencement of the intervention of the Director-General with this family, but that intervention uncovered a domestic situation that carried as many risks to him as to his sister. 37He has been the victim of domestic violence not just by witnessing it but also by experiencing physical assault himself at the hands of his father. 38He has had some expert intervention but he has suffered significantly from the dysfunctional situation he found himself in. His conduct has degenerated to the extent that numerous placements have broken down, education has been intermittent, and institutions that might otherwise have offered him the structure and regulation that were missing from his life over the past years have not been available or unsuitable because of the history of sexual abuse and self placement with his father. This has all exposed him to risk of harm. The Director-General's case 39The Director-General submits that the following matters have compromised the care of the children: 1.The mother's attitude to the disclosure by Lilly of sexual abuse by Caleb. Initially she did not accept the truth of the complaint. Therefore she did not acknowledge the risk and consequently the safety, security and well being of Lilly and Wade could not be assured. Without acceptance of the risk that existed, Caleb could not remain in the same household as his younger siblings. If there was going to be any return to the original configuration of the family unit, or something like it, Caleb's behaviour, its causes and the family's reaction, in particular the mother's, had to be dealt with appropriately. 2.The mother had issues herself with emotional regulation and depression and anxiety. She had a history of abuse and neglect in her own childhood. The mother had not had any intervention in relation to these things. 3.Caleb's behavioural decline highlighted the other concerns within the family, in particular a significant history of domestic violence and substance abuse. The hostility between maternal family members contributed to the dysfunction. 40The Director-General assessed that there is no realistic possibility of restoration of the children to the mother. The Director-General's assessment reflected the court clinician's assessment of the mother. The Director-General proposes that the two younger children be placed with the maternal grandmother and in coming to this position the placement assessment of the maternal grandmother conducted by a Ms McCullough, that they commissioned, was relied upon. 41This placement assessment was obtained by the Director-General and was based substantially on information from the Department and self-reporting by the maternal grandmother. She reported for instance that she had no issues with her health that would impact on her capacity to care for the children. However, it is apparent that the maternal grandmother does suffer from a number of medical issues that would affect her care of the children, such as osteoporosis and rheumatoid arthritis, as well as irritable bowel syndrome and hypertension. 42Although she did not need the assistance of a walking frame when she gave evidence at court, the Phoenix Rising contact reports do note her reliance on a walking frame at contact visits and also document that the grandmother was late for contact on at least one occasion because she needed an ulcer on her leg dressed because she couldn't reach it and had to wait for her husband so he could attend to it for her. 43The maternal grandmother reported that the mother suffered from a mental illness and the assessor seemed to accept this opinion without further inquiry, when in fact this is not the case. 44Ms Geddes, a psychologist who counselled the mother, was of the view that not only was the mother likely to have the capacity to parent the younger children because she had left a violent relationship, received counselling and was willing to continue counselling, but also, she did not appear to have a mental health diagnosis that would prohibit her functioning as a parent. Ms Geddes in her affidavit noted that she had insight into the importance of the younger children not having contact with Caleb. 45Furthermore the mother's psychiatrist, Dr Kaplan, reported that she did not suffer from a mental illness or psychiatric disorder. In fact he said that she would be able to manage individual difficulties in her children as well as any future risk of sexual abuse. 46Dr Kaplan also noted that the mother's attitude in relation to placement was that she would rather a stranger look after her children than the maternal grandmother "in view of her concerns about the environment in which they would be placed". 47Both Lilly and Caleb share the same attitude as the mother in respect of placement with the maternal grandmother. 48The maternal grandmother revealed a history of hostile relations with neighbours and a past history of abuse within her own home when her children resided with her. She was not entirely frank about this history and she had not taken any steps to have dealt with it by any professional intervention. 49In evidence under oath the grandmother was adamant that she was also prepared to care for Lilly. But despite Lilly's experience of sexual abuse and the maternal grandmother's experience of it in her own home, she did not appear to have considered obtaining any professional intervention herself, or at least had not taken steps in relation to that. 50Recent allegations made by a neighbour's child (which have a disturbing similarity to some earlier experiences of Caleb with his grandmother) do not allay the fears I have that she has not addressed any of the past issues that led to Departmental intervention when she was caring for her own children nor the doubts I have about her ability to be protective towards Lilly and Wade in this regard in the future. 51She and her other daughter are clearly hostile to the mother to the extent that it is doubtful that there could be any commitment to ongoing positive contact with the mother and her new grandchild. 52Taking into account all of these circumstances, and although she loves Wade, placement of the children with her is not advisable. The Mother's case 53The mother submits that she has addressed the concerns that led to the removal of her children and that there is a realistic possibility of restoration of them to her. 54In respect of each of the areas of concern I am satisfied the mother has taken significant action. 55Firstly, she and Caleb attended a psychologist Ms Geddes, for counselling. She bore the financial burden of this during the period of supervision of her parental responsibility. 56Ms Geddes gave evidence in these proceedings and was a most impressive witness. 57Ms Geddes' intervention identified a number of behavioural issues that Caleb had and also uncovered the greater depth of the abuse Lilly had suffered. 58The mother was fully engaged with the therapy with Ms Geddes. 59Her commitment to this therapy illustrated her concerns for her son and for her other children. Ms Geddes noted in her affidavit that she had insight into the importance of the younger children not having contact with Caleb and in her evidence she said that although at first she had not accepted, or had difficulty accepting the allegations of abuse, she eventually did. (See pp73, 78 and 83 of the transcript dated 17/5/12) 60The Director-General drew the Court's attention to the clinician's report authored by Ms Zhofova and her observation that the mother was not able to be protective enough of the children. However, it is also noted that this assessment was conducted 5 weeks before the mother started her therapy with Ms Geddes in July. The clinician's assessment is now over 16 months old. 61Ms Geddes advised the Court that a significant amount of work was done with the mother about Lilly's experiences. (p84) 62Ms Geddes indicated that the mother acknowledged her own past and that she identified intergenerational child abuse as having occurred in her family and she was adamant that it would cease. (page 63) 63Ms Geddes said that the mother was not in denial over what had occurred. 64She also observed that criticism of the mother for wanting to have the younger children restored to her care at the same time as focusing on Caleb seemed misplaced because "she was in a very difficult and conflicted situation - trying to do the best for Caleb and for the children". (p 64) 65The mother also took Caleb to Headspace in Wollongong. 66She was aware of his interest in art and in an effort to encourage his education she, together with NM, organized his enrolment at Wollongong High School of the Performing Arts. 67I am satisfied from the report provided by Dr Kaplan that the mother does not suffer from any mental illness and that she has taken steps to address what she identified as being a problem with her depression, anxiety and emotional regulation (p 59). 68In this regard Ms Geddes said that the mother seemed to have worked as hard on herself as she could and noted that "she will do any programme or anything that you ask of her...she's compliant - she demonstrates that she is caring about her children and wanting her other children with her". 69Ms Geddes, though, noted that any mother in this situation would need a considerable amount of support around her. In this regard the steadying and stable influence of NM was noted however, she would still need support by way of counselling and parenting assistance particularly in light of the birth of Sally only a few months ago. 70The mother's domestic situation has changed dramatically. Her partner, NM, impressed as a patient and caring man who had a sincere and genuine interest in the well-being of Caleb and the mother's other children. The efforts he made in seeking programmes for Caleb and attending interviews etc was testament to that. His willingness to assume the responsibilities of the role of partner to the mother and a type of father figure to her children was and is commendable and the family could only benefit from his influence. The mother definitely recognises his value. He is recognised by the Department as grounded and as a good role model for Caleb. Caleb respects him and the other children appear to have regard for him. 71So, in summary, the mother has addressed every issue identified as causing concern about her capacity to parent her children. 72Her task isn't complete but I agree with the children's Independent Legal Representative that there is a realistic possibility of restoration to the mother of Lilly and Wade. 73Unfortunately, the younger children cannot reside in the same place as Caleb, and in the circumstances where Caleb has self placed with a family of his choice I agree with the Director-General's assessment that there is no realistic possibility of restoration to the mother's care of Caleb. 74The mother and her partner, NM, now have the added responsibility of the care of their infant, Sally. The Director-General's view is that there is no risk to her in the care of her parents and that her safety, welfare and well-being are assured. It is difficult not to regard this stance as providing support to the assessment that there is a realistic possibility of restoration of the other children to her care so long as she has adequate support and provides undertakings to continue with and comply with all the appropriate interventions. Caleb 75Ms Geddes was involved in counselling him for a significant period of time and unfortunately, because of his changes in residence, she has not been able to continue with this counselling. She observed that Caleb staying within the family may not be the best thing for the family as a whole. She noted that separation of the victim from the family rather than the perpetrator can engender a sense of unfairness. She also noted that Caleb needs to come to terms with what he has done. Her observation though is that Caleb has known or recognized from the outset that it might be better for him not to be with his mother (p65). However, she emphasised the importance of finding a good placement and the need to ensure that he does not feel as if he has been abandoned. 76The possibility of Caleb ever returning to reside with the family is remote but there is a possibility of positive contact between Caleb and his siblings in the future. This cannot occur until Caleb' s counsellor indicates his readiness and Lilly's counsellor indicates the same. 77At the moment any contact between Caleb and Wade needs to be supervised because of Caleb's past aggressive behaviour. 78Caleb is now living with the family of a friend who has been assessed as a suitable placement for him. Caleb would like this placement to be permanent and to enable this he would like parental responsibility to be allocated to his carer. Although she consents to his placement with her, and is willing to work with the Department, she is not prepared to be allocated parental responsibility, or at least not yet. 79Caleb still has significant problems that need to be addressed and Ms Geddes noted that "although he may not yet have the courage to admit what he did was very wrong he will be a better man if he can do this ...". She went on to remind the Court that "he is only 13 and there is a lot at stake". (p56) 80He needs intensive support and weekly counselling would ideal (but it was too expensive for the mother). 81Ms Geddes gave evidence that when she worked for the Health Department in the area of inter-sibling abuse she would sometimes see her clients twice a week her evidence suggests that something as intensive is required for Caleb. She went on to say that the most important thing for Caleb is that he doesn't ever sexually abuse again. She said (p 81) "If he doesn't get this addressed at this time when he is becoming a sexual young man, that could become his identity...that is where he is a child at risk". She emphasised that his history as a perpetrator of sexual abuse must be addressed. It was clear that whatever placements are found and whether they fail or succeed priority must be given to ensuring that Caleb continues to receive counselling in this regard. 82It is obvious that his welfare needs, residence, care and therapy need to be met by the Minister. 83I understand that attendance at the specialist educational facility at Dunlea was not possible because of Caleb's history of sexual abuse. I do not understand why Caleb was not accepted into Youth of the Streets when that organisation has a specific programme for young people with a history of sexual behaviour or sexual offending. 84I am sure the community would be concerned if his unsuitability was due to the cost of that programme (which is expensive). 85Saving on cost now may potentially cost Caleb and the community dearly in the future. 86He has threatened family members and threatened self-harm and attempted self-harm and attempted suicide. He is a boy who needs considerable intervention and security. His age makes intervention difficult. It is obvious that his situation is precarious and that he needs resolute intervention. I suspect also that as much as he needs reparative care he needs to see his family repaired, if that is at all possible. Conclusion 87Section 9 of the Act requires the Court to consider the least intrusive intervention. In consideration of all of the above: * Maintaining Wade's placement with his grandmother is not the least intrusive intervention. * To leave Lilly with her carer is also not the least intrusive option. * To transfer Wade to Lilly's carer is a much more significant intervention than placing both the younger children with the mother, her partner, NM, and their baby sister, Sally. 88The least intrusive intervention is that which offers, so long as the children can be safe, the best semblance of a family unit. The mother can offer that but unfortunately not with Caleb residing in the home. 89I find as follows: There is a realistic possibility of restoration of the children Lilly and Wade to the mothers care. There is no realistic possibility of restoration of any of the children to the father's care. There is not a realistic possibility of restoration of Caleb to the mother or the father. The Director-General should prepare a new Care Plan. Orders 90In light of these circumstances it seems to me that the Court should make an order pursuant to s 74 requiring the Director-General to provide support to Caleb to ensure that he receives the specialist counselling he requires from a named service or the counsellor suggested by Mr Whelan, Mr Gerard Webster. 91I am giving the Director-General notice now of my intention to consider making that order. Such is their concern for Caleb I doubt that the Director-General would not consent to such an order and clearly Mr Whelan's instructions are that Caleb would consent to this intervention. 92I would like to make an order under s 75 (which applies to children under 14 years of age). However I can't make such an order without a therapeutic treatment plan being provided to the Court. As Caleb will be 14 on 25 December I doubt that the Department will be able to provide this report in time. If they could or if the same purpose could be achieved by virtue of s 74, then I think the significant concerns about Caleb's future well-being and, therefore, permanency planning in respect of him, would be suitably addressed. 93I would ask the parties to discuss the formulation of final orders and the following considerations should be borne in mind during that exercise. 94I agree with the Independent Children's Representative that the only aspect of parental responsibility that should be shared between the mother and the Minister in respect of Caleb should be responsibility in respect of contact. 95I agree with the Caleb's Direct Legal Representative that contact should occur between Caleb and his mother and his father in accordance with his wishes. I also agree that contact should occur between Caleb and his sister Sally at the same time as Caleb has contact with his mother. 96In respect of the two younger children I agree that Lilly needs a slower transition back into her mother's care with the utmost effort to be made to protect the relationship she has formed with her new carer. Respite care is something that should be arranged to ensure Lilly's transition, her emotional and psychological well-being and to support the adjustment of the mother and NM and Sally to the changed circumstances. 97The children's contact with the father should be on a more liberal basis than the 6 times referred to in care plan. I agree with Mr Nasti that greater access should be considered on the father completing drug and alcohol counselling. 98I agree with the Independent Children's Representative that the grandmother should have 4 contacts per year and that the father should be able to attend these as well, which would have the effect of providing him with greater opportunity than the 6 contact visits suggested by the Director-General. 99My view is, though, that the grandmother's contact should be supervised because I have a real concern about the level of animosity and hostility between the grandmother and her daughter and it may not be something that the children could be protected from without supervision, at least for an initial period. 100I have some concerns that the father might take the children to the grandmother if his contact is not supervised, however an undertaking may suffice in that regard. 101An order allocating parental responsibility to the Minister for only 6 months in respect of Wade may ensure his more speedy transition to the mother's care. An order for the Minister to have parental responsibility in regard to Lilly for 12 months is required to ensure that respite care with the current carer is established or continued. A slower transition should achieve the object of assisting Lilly and her family to adjust to her changed circumstances and to ensure Lilly's counselling continues over this transition period. Otherwise if the Director-General is prepared to provide a notation to this effect, then parental responsibility in respect of both children could remain with the Minister for the same amount of time with a further supervision period of 12 months at the expiration of the period of parental responsibility to the Minister. 102Responsibility in regard to contact between the children and the father and the grandmother should be shared between the mother and the Minister. This is to ensure that it is facilitated and that counselling occurs in respect of Caleb and Lilly to the end of promoting future safe and positive contact between all family members and in particular between the siblings. 103Although I have some concerns about what I perceive to be some increasing animosity between the Department and the mother and NM, and because of this I am loathe to prolong their interaction for longer than is absolutely necessary, I am of the view that responsibility for contact should be shared for at least two years, or a minimum of 12 months, with a supervision order for a period of 12 months to address those things identified by Ms Miller in her submissions. Again, the purpose is to ensure that contact is facilitated, that it is positive, particularly in relation to the grandmother; that issues in relation to counselling are addressed so that the possibility of increased positive contact between Caleb and his family becomes a reality; and to ensure that Lilly is supported in light of the abuse she suffered. 104The Director-General should undertake to ensure that Lilly receives specific counselling to address the fact that she was a victim of sexual abuse. 105The mother should continue to attend counselling and any other programmes that are identified of assistance, and should give undertakings to this effect. 106The father should give undertakings that he will not attend contact under the influence of alcohol. 107There should be no denigration of the mother by the grandmother if she wishes contact to continue. The children should not have contact with their aunt and the grandmother should undertake that this will not occur. 108There should be a number of s 82 reports and s 76 reports to indicate the level of counselling and the progress of the family during restoration, and following restoration and the progress of Lilly and Caleb in regard to their counselling, and Caleb's education. 109There should be at least monthly supervised contact between Wade and Caleb. The mother and NM will be capable of exercising this supervision. 110Contact between the father and the younger children should be the responsibility of the Minister and mother for two years. 111Whether contact between Lilly and Caleb is something that should occur needs to be assessed by their respective counsellors and should only occur when both assess it as being appropriate. The recent Facebook episode 112This episode exposes the grandmother's inability to behave in the children's best interests and reveals how the hostility between family members or rather the hostility that is directed by the maternal family to the mother, poses a risk to the children and why placement with the grandmother is not an appropriate option. 113I accept the Director-General's concern about the appropriateness of the mother and NM discussing the entry with Caleb. However, I accept that the parents took this step after considering what they thought was the inevitability of this entry coming to Caleb's attention. 114It would have been better if Caleb never learnt about it, but that possibly is an unrealistic scenario in this day and age. 115It may have been better if the mother and NM had been physically present when they told Caleb about it, to enable them to give immediate emotional and physical support to him. If that wasn't possible it would have been better to ensure that Caleb's carer was present and aware of the news that was to come to offer the support that Caleb might have needed. 116It's unfortunate that wasn't done but I accept that NM's intention in the future is to ensure that such incidents are discussed with Caleb's carer so she is aware of the stress Caleb might experience and can have some input into how it may be handled. 117Perhaps an undertaking can be given in this regard. 118It is easy with the benefit of hindsight to identify the mistakes made by parent's in difficult circumstances such as this where they are also victims and no doubt experiencing their own anger or resentment over the incident. I am satisfied that there was no malice and the action they took was after considering the alternatives of Caleb finding out in some other way, without warning, for instance from a taunt from a school associate or friend, that may have resulted in an unpredictable response. 119It doesn't help that all those involved in Caleb's care feel a need to lay blame or determine fault as each new crisis in his life unfolds. 120It is really a time for a new start with all those who care about his future trying to work together. 121Ms Geddes' opinion and observations should be heeded. She spoke of the mother having a genuine concern for Caleb that should be acknowledged and her evidence that a significant part of the mother's motivation in respect of her actions in regard to him spring from her love and concern should be accepted. She may also be angry, confused, hurt and annoyed and frustrated. She may also lose her patience and act out of self-interest and she may be difficult to deal with on occasions. She may make mistakes in her reactions to Caleb and how she interacts with him. The complexity of the situation is such that she needs continued guidance and support in relation to this and she should accept this guidance. 122The Department has been shown to be "slow off the mark" in their intervention in Caleb's life. Placing Caleb with his father where he suffered physical abuse and then allowing him to remain with his mother where she suffered abuse from him was also a mistake. 123Intensive counselling specifically addressed to his sexually abusive behaviour and the abusive domestic circumstances he has experienced should have been arranged as a matter of urgency. 124Caleb's carer should also be acknowledged for the commitment she has made. It would be a terrible failing if she was not offered intensive assistance and support in the task she has of navigating a pathway for Caleb to adulthood. This task poses complex challenges for a carer, particularly where she needs to be able to protect or respect the close bond he still has with his mother and the mother has with him and hopefully enhance the affection and concern he has for his siblings. 125I propose that all future reports pursuant to s 82 and s 76 be released to Caleb's carer, as well as the other parties in this matter, so long as she remains Caleb's carer. 126It is clear that every effort needs to be made to ensure that Caleb receives the intensive support he needs so that he and his family and particularly Lilly can put their history behind them. DISCLAIMER - Every effort has been made to comply with suppression orders or statutory provisions prohibiting publication that may apply to this judgment or decision. The onus remains on any person using material in the judgment or decision to ensure that the intended use of that material does not breach any such order or provision. Further enquiries may be directed to the Registry of the Court or Tribunal in which it was generated. Decision last updated: 20 March 2013