Man ordered by Family Court to make weekly video call to woman who killed son with a knife

Should a man be forced to make a weekly video call to his son’s killer for the sake of a child? The Family Court of Australia says yes.

The family of a man who was stabbed to death will be forced to make weekly video and phone calls to his killer – his wife – following a custody battle over the couple’s child.

The woman was jailed for the manslaughter of her husband after she threw a knife at him during an argument that pierced his heart.

Their child, who was under the age of 5, was at the home during the incident and effectively lost both parents.

The woman was jailed after pleading guilty to manslaughter and the child was placed into the care of his ­paternal grandfather.

After her release, the woman launched legal action in the Family Court of Australia in an attempt to get full ­custody of her child.

None of the parties can be identified due to laws that protect the identities of people involved in Family Court cases.

The court heard the deceased man’s family were troubled by the prospect of the mother coming back into the child’s life.

But they were able to overcome the emotions surrounding the man’s death to understand that the child needed and wanted to have some sort of relationship with his mother.

The Family Court heard that the deceased man’s family were troubled with the prospect of the mother coming back into the child’s life.

Justice Catherine Carew made orders that the child was to live with the paternal grandfather, but he had to facilitate contact with the child’s mother. This included through video or phone calls every Monday at 4pm and on the child’s and mother’s birthday.

The grandfather was also ordered to facilitate visits by the mother to her child during school holidays by communicating with her as to when she was flying into town and for handovers for monitored visits at designated locations.

The mother asked for full custody of the child and for the paternal family to be granted visiting rights during holidays.

But Justice Carew ruled this out after finding the woman posed a danger to her child if they were left alone together.

This included the fear the woman could lash out at the child during times of stress – as she had when she killed her husband – especially during the child’s teen years.

But the judge found that the child, who expressed a desire to have a relationship with the mother, should still have some contact with the woman.

“Even if the mother is assessed as posing an unacceptable risk of harm to the child, it is probably better for him to spend some time with the mother if it is safe to do so,” Justice Carew told the court.

“Otherwise the child may build an unrealistic image of the mother and potentially ­become antagonistic towards the paternal grandfather if he feels he has prevented him from having a relationship with the mother.”

The other factor that prevented the mother from being granted custody was that she still harboured “feelings of hostility” towards her deceased husband’s family, the court heard.

She called her former mother-in-law “a witch” and directed “vitriol” to other members of the paternal family.

The mother “demonstrated little empathy or understanding of the havoc and devastations her actions had caused”, Justice Carew told the court.

But the paternal family showed an “extraordinary ability to put their own feelings aside” for the child’s benefit.