A Warning for School Counsellors
School Counsellors have certain obligations as professionals when disclosures are made to them by children. A family law case (Parker and Grams [2012] FMCAfam 401) has considered a school counsellor’s behaviour and the consequential impact on the child’s care arrangements, where the counsellor failed to comply with their professional obligations.
The Facts:
- The parties had a 10 year old daughter who, following separation, had lived primarily with the mother.
- The parties lived 3 hours apart and therefore, the child was only spending block holiday time with the father.
- The child commenced seeing the school counsellor approximately 6 months prior to the commencement of court proceedings.
- During the counselling sessions, the child made a variety of disclosures to the school counsellor, including that:
– her mother had punched her in the face;
– she was made to do significant chores;
– her step-father used to be ‘fun’ to be with, until her half-sister was born;
– she had stolen money from her step-father’s wallet and tried to run away but the police had collected her and returned her home; and
– the step-father threatened to break her wrist.
- Over the sessions the school counsellor provided the child with some advice about the Family Court process.
- The school counsellor contacted the biological father numerous times to discuss the disclosures the child had made. At no time did the school counsellor contact the mother to discuss the disclosures made by the child.
- The school counsellor ultimately decided that she had a ‘duty of care’ to the child and, as there were no Court Orders in place, assisted the father to unilaterally remove the child from school and the mother’s care.
Court Found:
- By the time that the matter was listed before the court, the child had withdrawn a number of allegations of abuse that she had previously made (including that the step-father had attempted to break her wrist and that she had run away).
- The court concluded that the child had an active imagination, given the significant detail in her stories and the subsequent withdrawal of the allegations.
- The court found that the child’s stories would have been fanciful to an ordinary person. (Such examples included the child’s allegation that the mother punched her in the face the day prior to making the disclosure to the school counsellor, yet the child showed no bruising. Also, that a police officer would not have made a formal report, if a child had run away from home).
- Nothing in the Family Law Act provides that the duty of care of a teacher’s or social worker overrides the parental responsibility that by law is vested in the parents.
- The court was also particularly concerned that when the child had made disclosures to the school counsellor that she had then received some sort of reward. These included being able to watch her favourite TV program, or getting breakfast.
- The court was critical of the school counsellor treating the child as an adult, by attempting to provide her with legal advice.
Court Order:
- The child was ordered to be returned to the mother.
- The court did not order any restraints on the school counsellor from having continued discussions with the child. However, the court did order that a copy of the decision be provided to the Department of Education.
To receive a professional family law advice from Michael Lynch Family Lawyers, please call on (07) 3221 4300 or fill out the Appointment Form here.
