Melbourne Law School - Theses

Permanent URI for this collection

http://hdl.handle.net/11343/383

Filters

1992 1
1 1
Reset filters

Settings
Statistics
Citations
Type: Masters Research thesis × Subject: Australia × Subject: Family Court ×

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Sterilisation decision making and the Family Court: the far bridge or the fields?
    RHOADES, HELEN ( [1997])
    This thesis is about the "sterilisation" jurisprudence of the Family Court of Australia. It is also about the nature of "judging" and the stories that have been told about young women with intellectual disabilities in sterilisation cases. The focus of the thesis is on the ways in which particular stories selected by judges have come to tell the "truth" about those young women, even though there are other versions that could lead to different conclusions. In recent years critical legal scholars have become attentive to the role that "storytelling" plays in the law, and especially in the judicial context. The justification for such an approach in this thesis is a belief that the consequences of judicial decision making are not just legal, but include the possibility of "particularly grave" material effects for the particular women in sterilisation cases, and for all young women described as "intellectually disabled". At the time of writing there have been 7 reported sterilisation decisions of the Family Court. In none of the judgments is the "voice" of the young woman heard. What is known about her has been told by others. Some of the stories are told by people who know her well, some are told by "expert witnesses" who have never met her. The people whose views have been privileged by the Court are doctors and parents. Ironically, the need for court based sterilisation decision making arose out of a desire to ensure that the views of doctors and parents did not displace the interests of children with disabilities. (From introduction)
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    The parens patriae and wardship jurisdiction of the Family Court of Australia: its history and current status
    Coleiro, Joseph J. ( 1992)
    Before the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) came into operation, the Supreme Court of each State exercised a complete jurisdiction over a child of a marriage. That jurisdiction included the jurisdiction conferred by the Matrimonial Causes Act 1959 - 1973 (Cth) and the state Supreme Courts' inherent parens patriae jurisdiction and wardship of court jurisdiction. With the passing of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth), the Commonwealth Parliament did not include in that Act provisions that created a parens patriae jurisdiction and a wardship of court jurisdiction in the Family Court. Consequently, the jurisdiction over children of a marriage became fragmented between the Family Court exercising jurisdiction conferred by the Family Law Act, and the state Supreme Courts exercising their inherent parens patriae jurisdiction and wardship of court jurisdiction. This paper discusses the question whether it is a valid exercise of the Commonwealth's Marriage Power and the Matrimonial Causes Power for the Commonwealth to pass enactments creating a parens patriae jurisdiction and a wardship of court jurisdiction and vesting them in the Family Court of Australia.