| Abstract: | This paper examines judicial decision-making in the Family Court in custody and access disputes where allegations of child sexual abuse have been made. In seven cases examined judges took a sceptical view of such allegations and most commonly granted access in spite of strong evidence of abuse. The interpretation of the ‘best interests of the child’ often favoured continuing contact with both parents, and judges rarely denied access outright. Supervised access, the most common outcome, represents a compromise between familial ideology and child protection. |
