ALASTAIR NICHOLSON (Chief Judge of the Family Court), “Neither children nor their parents shpuld expect access visits to be granted by the Family Court as a given right”. Herald Sun, Friday, September 8, 1995 P.9. (Melbourne).
ALASTAIR NICHOLSON (Chief Judge of the Family Court), “Alastair Nicholson branded his crits dysfunctional malcontents, claiming they most belonged to fathers groups unhappy with access and custody decisions. Herald Sun, Thursday, September 21 1995 (Melbourne).
HUMAN RIGHTS AND EQUAL OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION AND AUSTRALIAN LAW REFORM COMMISSION,
“Advocacy for children – Taking account of the child’s wishes in applying the ‘best interest’ principle 3.15 The credibility and weight given to children’s wishes is a matter for the court and will vary from case to case. A legal representative acting on instructions from an adult client must generally follow those instructions even where it appears to be against the client’s interests. A lawyer’s assessment…. of the merits of his client’s case are irrelevant and it is left to the judge to make a decision upon the cases presented to him’. In many cases involving children, however, the representative for a child may discount, editorialise or reject his or her client’s wishes and argue the case in accordance with his or her own views of the child’s best interest. “Speaking for ourselves – children and the legal process ISSUES PAPER 18 MARCH 1996.
ALASTAIR NICHOLSON (Chief Judge of the Family Court), “children are not the property of their parents – we have moved beyond such an attitude and I hope we never shift back again”. CHILDREN ARE NOT THE PROPERTY OF THE STATE, Herald Sun, September 8 1996 (Melbourne).
ALASTAIR NICHOLSON (Chief Judge of the Family Court), “We’ve emphasised time and time again there is on preference to the mother in our decisions”. NON-CUSTODIAL PARENTS: males 91.6%, females 8.4% Herald Sun, Wednesday, January 22 1997 P.19 (Melbourne).
Nevil ABOLISH CHILD SUPPORT AND FAMILY COURT (Secretary) B Eng(Civil), Dip Ed
