Cass Thorburn spills on difficulties of co-parenting with Karl Stefanovic

Divorcees stafanovic and thornurnCass Thorburn has opened up about the “massive challenge” of co-parenting with Karl Stefanovic following their acrimonious divorce.

Cassandra Thorburn has opened up about the struggles of co-parenting three kids with ex-husband Karl Stefanovic.

The ex-Today host split with his wife of 21 years in late 2016, sparking a bitter and public divorce.

The former couple have three children together — Jackson, 20, Ava, 14, and River, 12.

Speaking on this week’s The Juggling Act podcast, Thorburn admitted that sharing them with her ex-husband was a “massive challenge”.

“Co-parenting I think is a massive challenge. Even if there’s an amicable agreement between the parties, it still becomes hard,” she told co-hosts Sarah Harris and Melissa Wilson.

“You’re leading separate lives, you’re no longer in a co-environment. So co-parenting … that’s a big word.”

However, Thorburn also explained that working through it was possible.

“There obviously is a way to navigate it,” she said. “I don’t think there’s a textbook of instructions in point form (where) you can guarantee you’re going to get that end result.”

Months after splitting from Thorburn, Stefanovic met shoe designer Jasmine Yarbrough at a yacht party in Sydney and sparked up a relationship.

The couple went on to marry in a lavish ceremony in Mexico last December.

Related Family Law Videos

Single dad adopts girl with Down syndrome who was rejected by 20 families

 

reddit-gold-award

This Reddit Gold Award has been awarded to this article for ‘exceptional contribution’ on the 27th Sept, 2019

Luca-Trapanese-Down-Syndrome-Adopted-by-single-gay-dad

 

Italy: When Luca Trapanese learned there was a little girl with Down syndrome in need of a home, he did what any single, 41-year-old gay guy would do… He adopted her!

A young girl’s fortunes have changed after she was rejected first by her mother, who disowned her the moment she was born, then by her biological father, and finally by 20 potential adoptive families.

But, her life took a significant turn when Luca held her in his arms and decided to give her a home.

Luca had been a part of many social service programs since his teenage years. He came forward to adopt Alba after he was told about people’s unwillingness to adopt her.

“Since I was 14 years old, I have volunteered and worked with the disabled so I felt I had the right knowledge and experience to do it,” he said.

Luca Trapanese is gay, catholic and single – a year ago, he adopted a baby girl with Down’s Syndrome

“Mine and Alba’s story shatters so many stereotypes about fatherhood, religion and family. But I didn’t mean it to be that way.”

Luca is highly experienced when it comes to volunteering in various social service programs including “A Ruota Libera” Foundation, a group that provides assistance to children with Down syndrome.

Luca further said that for him a disabled child is not a second choice solution, but a conscious choice with respect to his vocation and his abilities.

The story of Luca Trapanese’s journey to adopting baby Alba has gone viral for several reasons, paramount of which may be the fact that social services don’t often grant custody to a single, homosexual man.

Nevertheless, they made an exception in Luca’s case … and we’re so very happy they did.

According to the BBC, 41-year-old Italian Luca published a book wherein he recounts his journey to becoming the father of Alba, a girl with Down syndrome.

During a radio interview, Trapanese explained that his case is special because it “destroys stereotypes about fatherhood, religion and family.”

luca-and-albaIn Italy, adoptions for homosexual and single parents have traditionally been a complicated affair.

Luca adopted Alba back in 2017, when she was just 13 days old and had already been passed up on by 20 families because of her condition.

Luca himself had worked in a host of care centers for people with special needs, and always wanted to become a father.

That was why, despite not having a partner, he decided to press forward with the adoption of Alba, who now enjoys a happy home with her father.

According to the BBC, Alba is a determined young child who can be stubborn on occasion. She loves to play and dance, and enjoys the company of other people.

Related Family Law Videos

  • No items found in feed URL: https://www.familylawexpress.com.au/family-law-express-media/aiovg_categories/child-adoption/feed/. You requested 15 items.
  • Women lie about DV to get kids in Family Court, Hanson claims

    Senator Pauline Hanson

    Senator Pauline Hanson

    One Nation leader Pauline Hanson has accused women of making up domestic violence claims in order to get custody of their children, as she defended a new parliamentary inquiry into the family law system.

    Domestic violence campaigner Rosie Batty meanwhile has called on Labor and the Greens to block the inquiry –  of which Senator Hanson is set to be deputy chair – saying it is “completely unacceptable” for “politicians with their own agendas” to lead parliamentary investigations.

    In an interview on ABC’s Radio National on Wednesday, Senator Hanson said she was hearing “too many cases” where “parents are using domestic violence to stop the other parent from seeing their children”.  Asked if she was saying mothers were going into the Family Court and making up accusations of family violence, the One Nation leader replied, “I am”.

    Senator Hanson was pressed several times by host Hamish Macdonald to provide evidence for her claim.

    The One Nation leader said people phoned her office with similar stories “on a weekly, if not daily basis sometimes”.

    While she did not point to any research about the problem, she said: “Why do you think we’ve got three men suiciding a day and we’ve got one woman being murdered a week?

    “Don’t you believe that this needs to be addressed?”

    She added: “I’m sick of hearing about this gender bias. You get rid of the gender and you treat everyone equally.”

    According to anti-violence group, Our Watch, violence against women is a serious and widespread problem in Australia. On average, one woman a week is murdered by her current or former partner.

    Mental health organisation Beyond Blue says men are at least three times more likely to die by suicide than women. In Australia, every day, almost six men die by suicide. Beyond Blue says evidence suggests men are far less likely to seek help for mental health conditions than women.

    Prime Minister Scott Morrison announced a parliamentary review into the family law system on Tuesday. The inquiry will be chaired by former social services minister, Kevin Andrews. It follows years of pressure from Senator Hanson to overhaul the system.

    The inquiry will examine concerns including the onus of proof required to gain an apprehended violence order, the cost of the court process and claims of false evidence being used against former partners.

    Mr Morrison told Channel Seven on Wednesday that relationship breakdown had a “devastating impact” on parents, children and grandparents. He said the Family Court and child support processes can “add greater difficulty”.

    “We want to look to see whether there are ways where we can improve how that situation works.”

    Campaigners against family violence are outraged by the inquiry, saying it is driven by an agenda that questions the “reality of domestic violence”. They note there have been two high profile, recent inquiries into the family law system. The Australian Law Reform Commission completed an inquiry in April, making 60 recommendations to the federal government.  Parliament also conducted an inquiry as recently as December 2017.

    On Wednesday, Ms Batty, whose son Luke was killed by his father, told ABC Radio it was “completely unacceptable” to have another inquiry into the family law system.

    “It is completely unacceptable for these politicians with their own agendas to head up any inquiry,” she said, calling on Labor and the Greens to block the inquiry in the Senate.

    “We know the failings, we need to start investing in this court system that is broken, overwhelmed and failing. And it is continuing to put families and particularly children in danger,” Ms Batty said.

    The Senate is due to consider the inquiry on Wednesday afternoon. It is understood the Labor Party is currently considering its position. The Greens are strongly opposed to the inquiry, with the party’s spokesperson for women, Larissa Waters, describing it as a “dangerous invitation to continue victim shaming, blaming and denial”.

    Beyond Blue 1300 224 636 | National sexual assault, domestic and family violence referral service 1800 737 732

    Gender diverse people exposed to high rates of sexual violence

    Co-investigator of the Kirby Institute's 2018 Trans and Gender Diverse Sexual Health Survey Shoshana Rosenberg.

    Co-investigator of the Kirby Institute’s 2018 Trans and Gender Diverse Sexual Health Survey Shoshana Rosenberg.

    More than half of transgender and gender diverse Australians have been victims of sexual violence or coercion – almost four times the rate of the general population.

    These are Australia’s long-hidden intimate partner violence statistics revealed on Tuesday in the largest study of its kind.

    The Kirby Institute’s 2018 Australian Trans and Gender Diverse Sexual Health Survey of 1,613 people also exposes the harmful assumptions made by healthcare services about the gender, bodies and sex lives of these individuals.

    More than 53 per cent had been forced or frightened into doing something sexually that they did not want to do; fourfold higher than the general population (13.3 per cent).

    “It’s shocking and uncomfortable and sad, but it’s also affirming for those people whose experience of sexual violence was isolating and left them feeling like no one else understood them,” co-investigator Shoshana Rosenberg said.

    Almost 70 per cent of respondents who experienced sexual violence or coercion reported multiple episodes of the abuse, compared to 45.3 per cent among the general population.

    “The reality is that this is happening to such an extent that most people don’t report and simply internalise it because they are too scared or too underresourced – emotionally or otherwise- to seek justice or reparations or recovery,” Mx Rosenberg said.

    People assigned female at birth were significantly more likely to experience sexual violence compared to those assigned male (61.8 per cent versus 39.3 per cent) and non-binary participants (not exclusively masculine or feminine) were most likely to report it (66.1 per cent).

    Trans women were the least likely to report sexual violence but their rate of 36 per cent was still almost double that of the general population.

    Mx Rosenberg said some perpetrators sought out vulnerable trans and gender diverse individuals to control and denigrate.

    “This is something that bleeds into many of our experiences and how we talk to each other and how we negotiate relationships and our mental and sexual health,” they said.

    More than half of respondents reported experiencing insensitive sexual healthcare, ranging from bureaucratic issues like not having appropriate gender options on forms to inappropriate touching and invasive questions.

    “I went for a mental health assessment and was asked ‘What’s in your pants?’ and if I had any work done,” they said

    “We are highly resilient in the face of extreme odds and that’s something that needs to be celebrated. But we should be allowed to have off days without the fear that if we drop our guard … that we will still have our humanity respected.

    “So we are resilient but we are tired.”

    Medical director of Northern Sydney Sexual Assault Service Dr Eleanor Freedman said services must be more inclusive and responsive to the needs of trans and gender diverse people.

    Manager of Trans and Gender Health Equity for ACON Teddy Cook said sexual health professionals need avoid making assumptions about their patients’ genders, bodies and sexual orientations.

    The report was presented at the Australasian Sexual Health Conference in Perth on Tuesday.

    Government to review Family Court after pressure from Pauline Hanson

    One Nation Leader Pauline Hanson

    One Nation Leader Pauline Hanson asked the government to make her the co-chair of the parliamentary committee.

    Prime Minister Scott Morrison has angered domestic violence campaigners with a surprise decision to hold an inquiry into the Family Court after years of pressure from One Nation leader Pauline Hanson to overhaul the system.

    The government launched the inquiry to look into concerns including the onus of proof required to gain an apprehended violence order, the cost of the court process and claims of false evidence being used against former partners.

    Senator Hanson applauded the move and asked the government to make her the co-chair of the parliamentary committee alongside former social services minister Kevin Andrews, the Liberal MP who will lead the year-long inquiry.

    Campaigners against family violence greeted the decision with dismay just as they arrived in Parliament House to lobby MPs to change the family law system to protect women and children.

    “Yet again we have another inquiry set up with people who are not experts in domestic violence,” said Queensland Women’s Legal Service chief executive Angela Lynch.

    “I’m exasperated and outraged. This is just kicking the issue down the road again.

    “How many more women and children have to die before they do something?”

    Government MPs insisted the review would not take sides in the dispute over whether the Family Court was unfair to men who sought access to their children in custody disputes.

     “I’ve have many women come to me and they’ve had appalling decisions against them, when they’ve had their children taken from them,” Liberal MP Craig Kelly said.

    “I don’t think this is an issue where the men get the best decisions or the women get the best decisions.”

    Mr Kelly, who represents the electorate of Hughes in south-western Sydney, said he had heard from constituents who had to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to navigate the Family Court.

    The terms of reference for the inquiry include the legal standards for domestic violence orders and apprehended violence orders, the powers to ensure truthful evidence, the financial costs to families, the impact of the process on children and any issues that arise for grandparents.

    Senator Hanson said she was “pleased to announce” the inquiry was happening after her attempts to get the government to act.

    Mr Morrison has overseen a fourth wave of funding for national programs against family violence, committing $328 million in March in a policy backed by campaigners against violence against women.

    But the new inquiry took campaigners by surprise and raised fears it would be a vehicle for Senator Hanson’s concern that the system is unfair to men.

    Michelle Dörendahl, a Queensland woman whose daughter, Eeva, was murdered by her father, said the courts needed to do more to guard against abusive men who manipulated the system.

    “Part of the manipulation of the abuser is to use the system to discount the truth,” Ms Dörendahl said.

    “The system is used a lot by perpetrators to continue that control and manipulation of their victims.”

    Ms Dörendahl and her former partner, Greg Hutchings, took their dispute to the Family Court in July 2013. Hutchings killed himself and Eeva during a court-approved access visit seven months later.

    In a contrast with the fears about the inquiry, the Law Council of Australia welcomed the move as a way to fix “systemic failures” in the family law system due to underfunding over decades.

    “This inquiry must involve the whole community – not just politicians, lawyers and bureaucrats,” the Law Council said.

    “Those who witness the impacts of the broken system on a daily basis, including families, judges and family violence service providers, must be included.”

    But the new inquiry comes at a time when the government is yet to respond to a review of the system by the Australian Law Reform Commission, which handed down 60 recommendations in March.

    It is less than three years since the government heard from an earlier parliamentary inquiry, chaired by Victorian Liberal Sarah Henderson, that urged changes to make the system less complex and expensive.

    The government is also part-way through an attempt to merge the Family Court with the Federal Court.

    Attorney-General Christian Porter has vowed to proceed with the plan by the end of this year even though it was rejected by Labor and criticised by the Law Council.

    Divorce Hotel (Weekend Collaborative Divorce) is coming to Australia

    divorcehotelAfter 35 years of being married to Jan, Paul came to the realisation he was gay.

    While there was no bad blood between the pair, it was clear they could no longer stay married.

    However, the idea of getting a divorce seemed cumbersome. Jan, a 56-year-old optical advisor from the east of England, visited a divorce lawyer to gather information but left with a bitter taste.

    “I just got the feeling that he would have been all out to get as much [money from Paul] as possible, and I didn’t really want that.”

    When Jan was scrolling through Facebook one day she stumbled across a different solution – an ad for a company called DivorceHotel.

    The premise is simple: couples check in to a hotel in two separate rooms for two nights, where they undergo mediation processes behind closed doors and away from outside responsibilities.

    The idea is that, over the course of a 48-hour hotel stay, all divorce arrangements can be made.

    Jan and Paul booked in for their DivorceHotel in December 2017.

    “I know it might sound strange but I actually looked forward to going away for those two days,” says Jan.

    “It meant we had 48 hours where we were not going to be disturbed by children, not having to think abut shopping, food, cooking, anything, to have no distraction.”

    She also liked the idea that the proceedings would occur on neutral ground.

    While they’d “loosely” agreed on the terms of their divorce beforehand, Jan said it gave them the opportunity to “get down to the nitty gritty and get it sorted right down to the last thing”.

    And, within their time at the hotel, they did just that. “Everything was all done.”

    While Jan had a successful experience, she’s quick to note this kind of proceedings will only work for people on amicable terms when parting.

    DivorceHotel is the brainchild of CEO Jim Halfens.

    He came up with the idea after witnessing his best friend’s “extremely messy” divorce, says David Leckie, global director of DivorceHotel International.

    “This led Jim to think that there just had to be a better way to do divorce.”

    His idea involves providing all the professional support a couple need to arrange their divorce (“lawyer, mediator, financial advisor, maybe therapist”) all under the same roof at the same time.

    Halfens developed the idea in the Netherlands around seven years ago and the company is now operating in the US and the UK, with an Australian expansion planned for 2019.

    Psychologist Sharon Draper says a “weekend divorce” could help “soften the blow” of divorce.

    While 48 hours might seem quick, a married couple in Australia have to be separated for a year before they can file for such proceedings. Hopefully, in that time, she says both parties would have reconciled their differences emotionally so they’re ready to nut out the details of parting.

    However, she believes the process wouldn’t work for everyone.

    “If the situation is still an acrimonious one, this process might not be a good one to enter as one party may still feel extremely hurt… and not ready to go through with it,” says Draper.

    “Staying in a hotel alone might not be the best thing for this particular person as they would need the familiarity of their home and support of their extended family members and friends.”

    Draper says couples with older children may also benefit from involving them in decisions about splitting their time between each parent’s residence. However, such details could be worked out at the hotel and then confirmed with their offspring later.

     

    Finalising her divorce wasn’t exactly a pleasant experience, says Jan. Rather, she says it was a “positive” one.

    “It’s very intense and very emotional, obviously,” she says, although she thinks tackling the whole thing in a weekend was the best choice for her.

    Instead of hiring two separate lawyers and having a divorce “drag on for months and months with paperwork going backwards and forwards between [them]”, Jan was thrilled the whole process was over in a couple of days.

    “It was a good experience. I would definitely recommend it.”

    From Pre-Nups to Pet-Nups: Marriage Generation Z style

    pet-nupGeneration Z couples are crossing their Ts and dotting their Is before getting hitched, as research shows the rise of the ‘practical prenup’.

    A leading divorce lawyer has said that the young generation of future newlyweds are increasingly concerned with making sure assets like pets and alcohol collections are considered before saying ‘I do’.

    A recent study found that 42 per cent of women intend to sign a prenup with their partner before they walk down the aisle, compared to 36 per cent of men who feel the same.

    The research revealed the rise in what they are calling ‘practical prenups’: an update to the usual written contract a couple enter into before marriage that predetermines what will happen to assets in the event of a divorce.

    It was highlighted that 57 per cent of females think businesses should be included in a prenup, compared to 53 per cent of men.

    Interestingly, 42 per cent of females also said a future prenup that they would draft should contain pets, compared to 35 per cent of men.

    The term ‘pet nup’ actually began to circulate last year when lawyers saw an increase in couples determining what would happen to their beloved animals.

    Earlier this year, Direct Line Pet Insurance revealed that nearly 30,000 divorce cases that reach a courtroom involve conflict over a pet.

    The law firm believed that young women’s ‘top priorities’ proved to be ‘very sensible’ – with 75 per cent favoring a home and second home when considering what should be included in a prenup (compared to 71 per cent of men) and 69 per cent choosing savings and investments (in comparison to 63 per cent of men.)

    Thinking somewhat outside the box, men did seem to consider other material items, with 50 per cent electing for cars and motorcycles, although so too did 43 per cent of women.

    While many prenups the world over contain clauses about what happens if one party starts excessively drinking alcohol, it’s rather unusual for a prenup to actually outline who has a right to take ownership of a booze collection.

    Some 31 per cent of men surveyed said that wine, whisky and gin collections should be included (versus only 13 per cent of women).

    Amanda Rimmer, a Partner in the Family Law division at Stephensons Solicitors LLP, said that younger individuals are likely influenced by celebrity culture.

    Details of prenups for modern-day couples like Beyonce and Jay Z, as well as Nicole Kidman and Keith Urban, have been widely circulated online.

    Kanye West’s track Gold Digger immortalized the lyric, ‘Holla, We want prenup! We want prenup!’ – though ironically, when he wed Kim Kardashian in 2014, their agreement was that he would pay her $1 million a year for 10 years if the marriage didn’t work out. Back then Kim was worth $40 million, but today that net worth stands at a huge $370 million.

    According to Amanda, it’s that openness had has led to a generation that are much more accepting of talking about contracts, net worth and assets with their significant other.

    ‘The stigma of consulting a solicitor ahead of getting hitched has long ago disappeared. Generation Z has grown up influenced by celebrity culture and take a realistic approach to marriage or civil partnerships.’

    ‘It’s encouraging that young people, especially women, feel comfortable talking about money and want to protect their assets,’ Amanda added.

    ‘If a relationship does end, and 42 per cent now do, then a prenup can help to protect you and your partner from greater financial and emotional stress. If prepared properly they are given substantial weight in court and while they are not an automatically binding legal document, they can help cut down areas of dispute,’ Amanda added.

    Without a prenup, the lawyer noted that individuals run the risk of having to divide ‘everything’ equally down the middle.

    ‘Deciding to sign-up to this kind of agreement is a very personal decision and one you should make as a couple. I’d always recommend instructing a specialist family law solicitor who has experience in this field and finalizing your agreement well in advance of your ceremony,’ she said.

    How to stop your new spouse from cheating your kids out of inheritance

    How to stop your new spouse from cheating your kids out of inheritanceHow would you feel if your estate went to a complete stranger, someone you’d never even met? It’s more likely than you might expect.

    Jack* and Jill* were married in 1981 and had two children. They were happily married for 32 years. In that time they both worked and saved and, with help of some late-career compulsory superannuation, built up a tidy nest egg.

    The assets Mary inherited from Jack included wealth that Jill had worked so hard for, believing that her kids would ultimately benefit.

    In their wills Jack and Jill left their respective estates to each other. They agreed the survivor would look after the children. Jill died from breast cancer at 68. Jack was heartbroken, alone for the first time in decades.

    Try as he might to fill his life with hobbies, kids, grandchildren and friends, Jack was lonely. He missed the closeness of a trusted, intimate partner; the companionship for those times when family and friends weren’t around. That’s when, at the age of 71, he met Mary*, 15 years his junior.

    For Jack nothing could replace the wonderful years he had spent with Jill. But his life with Mary alleviated that awful loneliness. They had been dating for about six months when Jack invited Mary to live with him. They became a de facto couple.

    New will

    After a while Mary began to feel that, as she was likely to outlive him, it would be only fair for him to make provisions for her in his will. She understood that Jack wanted his kids to have most of his estate but surely she should get something.

    As time passed, Jack became more reliant on Mary and very thankful for her care. He started to feel that leaving her a large portion of his estate was important. Then after Mary confirmed to him that she’d look after his children, Jack agreed to give everything in his estate to her. Her solicitor prepared Jack’s new will.

    When Jack died, Mary was his sole beneficiary. In her view Jack’s children, who’d never been very close to her, were doing well and didn’t really need any of Jack’s estate. Mary felt that she and her only child were much more in need, so she managed Jack’s estate for her benefit alone.

    The money and assets that Mary inherited from Jack included all the wealth that Jill had worked so hard for, believing that her kids would ultimately benefit. Jill’s estate had passed to a complete stranger.

    Is this case unusual? No, it is in fact quite common.

    There are a number of different estate planning strategies to avoid this – but first couples have to acknowledge that Jack and Jill’s story could happen to them. Couples need to have the conversation acknowledging that when one of them dies, things change forever.

    That change is not a reflection on the past. It does not alter in any way the importance of their relationship – the love and devotion given and received during decades of married life. It simply reflects a new situation, one that neither of them has ever been in and that is therefore unknown.

    Worth talking about

    Often couples are unwilling to focus on the issue. They may not understand the potential for the problem to occur. One or both may think that raising the issue would be a sign of distrust in their spouse, an indication their marriage was not strong, that they were trying to exert power over their spouse or “rule from the grave” or a view that fixing the problem would be too complicated or costly.

    As understandable as these thoughts are, they are not a good reason to put the children’s inheritance at risk. They can be partially overcome by a confidential chat with the family solicitor who could recommend the relevant solution to both members of the couple without needing to reveal the concern was initiated by one of them.

    To protect her estate for her children, and as a half-owner in the family home, Jill could have given Jack the right to live in their family home until his death or remarriage after which the home would be sold and the proceeds from Jill’s half share given to the children.

    She could also have arranged for Jack to receive only the income from Jill’s share of the couple’s assets and ensure the capital would go to the kids once Jack passed. She could appoint Jack and her two children as joint executors so that her wishes were met.

    Protecting your children’s inheritance is about good planning – and that can only happen through pragmatic awareness and recognition of what is possible.

    *Names have been changed to protect the privacy of the individuals.

    Related Family Law Judgments

    How to assist victims of financial abuse

    ending-financial-abuseThere are “strong indications” that somewhere between 50 per cent to 90 per cent of family violence cases involve economic abuse, and as such, it is imperative that lawyers know how to support clients through such traumatic incidences, argues one boutique practitioner.

    In conversation with Lawyers Weekly, Faigenbaum Family Lawyers principal Talya Faigenbaum said, as with other forms of family violence, financial abuse occurs “throughout the social spectrum and does not differentiate between class, culture, background or postcode”.

    What is financial abuse

    “The effects of financial abuse also cut across sectors: from the telecommunications industry, banking and finance, utilities and essential service providers to housing and tenancy, motor vehicles and visa and migration matters. Indicators of financial abuse can therefore appear in legal claims across a range of courts and tribunals, from the family court to small claims tribunals such as VCAT, local or magistrates courts and immigration tribunals,” she mused.

    It is therefore crucial, she surmised, that lawyers in all practice areas are able to identify the signs of financial abuse and take appropriate steps toward assisting their clients.

    Ms Faigenbaum explained that financial abuse is an “unlawful pattern of behaviour deliberately designed to undermine a victim’s financial security and autonomy”.

    “Commonly, perpetrators of economic abuse will take control of all household finances, restrict a victim’s access to bank accounts, incur debt in the victim’s name through coercion or deception or prevent a victim from gaining independent employment. Like other forms of family violence, economic abuse is highly gendered and can have significant long-term impacts on the lives of women and children,” she said.

    “There are some unique aspects to financial abuse, however, which make it distinctively destructive. Primarily this is because the abusive behaviour can continue even after a couple have separated. As a family lawyer I have seen countless situations where one partner uses mechanisms of financial control to inflict ongoing harm, long after a relationship has ended and when other forms of abuse are no longer at their disposal. In this context, victims can remain tied to their abusers for years as they attempt to disentangle complex financial relationships.”

    Protecting against financial abuse

    There are simple steps lawyers can take to assist a client that may be a victim of financial abuse, she outlined.

    “There are valuable resources available online, and for lawyers who do not ordinarily practice in the areas of family law or family violence, it may be helpful to cultivate a connection with frontline family violence specialists. Reaching out to a local community legal centre is a good place to start,” she suggested.

    “Financial counsellors also play a critical role in assisting victims of economic abuse as they have more direct access to hardship liaison officers at banks, utilities providers, telecommunications companies and Centrelink.

    “Lawyers can actively assist in these referral pathways or simply provide their clients with the information they need to access these services.”

    On the question of legislative protections, Ms Faigenbaum said that Australia has “some of the most expansive family violence provisions in the world”, with most Australian states and territories recognising financial abuse as a legislated form of family violence.

    “Yet despite this legal recognition, awareness of financial abuse and the remedial responses available are still limited,” she said.

    Identifying issues as lawyers

    Further, the lack of awareness and understanding of economic abuse among victims, the community, police and even within the legal profession, “all contribute to an ongoing exposure to harm”, she continued.

    “As lawyers we are often given intimate access to our client’s financial circumstances, whether we are directly assisting them in resolving a family breakdown, structuring their family trusts, preparing wills or assisting with estate planning or property acquisition and disposal.

    “Even as employers, we may encounter situations where a staff member is experiencing one or more variations of financial abuse.”

    “Being able to identify and understand the impact of economic abuse and make appropriate referrals is not only an important part of our role as legal practitioners and business owners but will help drive a increased awareness of this often invisible form of family violence.”

    Ms Faigenbaum is looking to take meaningful action herself, however, adding she is currently leading “an exciting project” at West Heidelberg Community Legal Service to develop a smartphone app designed to assist victim-survivors and their support workers identify financially abusive behaviour and take steps toward reclaiming their financial security.

    “We are still in the early stages of iteration and user testing but it’s proving to be a very valuable tool to assist victims and survivors struggling to recover from the effects of financial abuse. We’re excited about taking it forward,” she said.

    Family Court Judge’s ruling overturned by Appeal Court as a ‘gross miscarriage of justice’

    judge-salvatore-vasta

    Judge Salvatore Vasta

    A Brisbane judge who sentenced a father of two to jail for contempt of court in a family law case has been sharply criticised by Family Court appeal judges, who described his decision as an “affront to justice”.

    Last December, Brisbane-based Judge Salvatore Vasta sentenced a man involved in a property dispute with his ex-wife to a maximum 12 months in jail for failing to disclose financial documents on time.

    The man, who has two children aged five and nine, spent six days in a maximum-security prison.

    He was released pending the outcome of an appeal on the decision.

    In a ruling handed down earlier this month, the  overruled Judge Salvatore Vasta’s decision, with Justice Peter Murphy, Justice Michael Kent and Justice Steven Strickland declaring they were comfortably satisfied that “what occurred here in the making of the declaration and order for the husband’s imprisonment constituted a gross miscarriage of justice”.

    “We are driven to conclude that the processes employed by the primary judge were so devoid of procedural fairness to the husband, and the reasons for judgment so lacking in engagement with the issues of fact and law to be applied, that to permit the declaration and order for imprisonment to stand would be an affront to justice,” they stated in their ruling.

    Judge Salvatore Vasta’s ruling was also roundly condemned by the Law Council of Australia.

    “The Law Council is gravely concerned by the conduct of the Federal Circuit Court judge in this matter and the devastating impact of this case on both the unrepresented parties and their young children,” Law Council president Arthur Moses said.

    “This case reinforces the fact that not only the outcome of a case but the very way in which family law matters are handled by the courts has direct, life-altering and irreversible consequences for the children and families concerned.”

    Judge Vasta has been approached for comment.

    ‘That’s what I do’

    During the initial court hearing, Judge Salvatore Vasta told the man that if he did not hand over the required documents on time, he should “bring your toothbrush”.

    “If there isn’t the full disclosure there will be consequences, because that’s what I do,” Judge Vasta told the man.

    “If people don’t comply with my orders there’s only one place they go … I don’t have any hesitation in jailing people for not complying with my orders.”

    But the Family Court judges determined Judge Salvatore Vasta had “no factual foundation” for the order to imprison the man and he had no legal power to do so.

    During the proceedings, the man’s wife told Judge Salvatore Vasta she did not want her former husband to go to jail.

    She told Judge Salvatore Vasta that “we have kids together that I have to think about as well, that this affects the kids of the rest of their lives”.

    Court merger concerns

    Last year, Attorney-General Christian Porter announced plans to merge the Family Court and the Federal Circuit Court, promising it would ease the significant delays and costs for people stuck in the system.

    The Australian Law Reform Commission (ALRC) is conducting a wide-ranging review of the system, which is due to be handed to the Federal Government next month.

    Many lawyers have been critical of Mr Porter’s merger proposal, which would be the most significant shake-up of the sector since it was established in the 1970s, arguing any changes should wait until the ALRC delivers its findings.

    Last October, Family Court Chief Justice John Pascoe told a law conference in Brisbane that family law had become increasingly complex.

    “In my view, if legislation and the ALRC report do not assuage public concerns about the family law system, it must surely be time to consider a royal commission into family law,” Family Court Chief Justice John Pascoe said.