Introduction
Choosing the right school is rarely simple and, for separated parents, it can quickly become a battleground. Strong feelings about education, distance, cost and lifestyle often collide, making agreement difficult. When parents cannot resolve the issue, the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia may step in. However, it is important to understand what the Court does – and does not – do. Judges will not declare one school ‘better’ than another. Their task is to decide what outcome is in the child’s best interests.
The Court’s role and limits
Under the Family Law Act 1975, decisions about a child’s education fall within ‘major long-term issues’. If parents share parental responsibility but cannot agree, the Court may need to decide. However, the Court has consistently said that it will not engage in comparisons of schools by prestige, reputation or academic ranking. Instead, judges examine how each proposed option will affect the child’s daily life – considering factors such as continuity, routines, friendships and practical arrangements.
Case examples
In Medina & Joon [2024] FedCFamF2F 1647, the parents disagreed about whether their children should move schools following separation. The mother sought a change, but the Court held that stability and continuity were more important at that stage. Because there was no compelling evidence that a new school would benefit the children, they were ordered to remain at their existing school, at least on an interim basis.
A different issue arose in Allinson & Eadie [2020] FCCA 3558, where both parents put forward new schools that would meet the child’s needs. The real point of difference was travel. The mother’s choice was closer to her home, where the child spent most school nights, while the father’s option involved significantly longer travel. The Court concluded that reducing travel and preserving a manageable daily routine was in the child’s best interests. The mother’s proposal was therefore preferred.
The principles guiding these outcomes can be traced back to the leading authority of Re G: Children’s Schooling [2000] FamCA 462. In that case, the Full Court rejected the idea that the parent with whom the child primarily lived should automatically determine schooling. Instead, it confirmed that the best interests of the child must always come first. Matters such as disruption to friendships, travel burdens, financial implications and the quality of supporting evidence all play a role in the assessment.
Practical guidance for parents
Parents facing a dispute about schooling should begin with open, child-focused discussions. Each parent should consider not only the academic aspects of the schools in question, but also the child’s social connections, extracurricular activities and how practical arrangements will work.
As family lawyers, we often hear parents explain their school preferences by referring to their own experiences as former students, or to long-held family traditions. While these stories may carry some personal meaning, the Court is only interested in how each option will affect the child, not the parent.
If agreement proves difficult, mediation can be a constructive way forward. A neutral mediator can help parents test their assumptions and focus on the child’s needs rather than entrenched positions. Parents may also find value in obtaining independent input – for example, from teachers, school counsellors or allied health professionals – so that the decision is informed by more than parental opinion.
It can also help to put in place clear decision-making processes within parenting plans or orders. These might include timelines for making school choices, requirements for consultation, or agreed steps, such as obtaining a family report before going to Court. Parents who can show they have engaged seriously in problem-solving are often looked upon more favourably by the Court.
If court action becomes unavoidable, parents should focus their evidence on the child’s needs rather than the school’s reputation. Practical matters such as travel time, financial affordability and stability of routines, carry more weight than general claims of one school being ‘better.’
Final thoughts
Schooling disputes are difficult for parents and stressful for children. The Court will only intervene if necessary and will not try to judge which school is superior. Its sole concern is which option is most consistent with the child’s best interests. Parents should therefore approach these disputes with the same focus – working together wherever possible and keeping the child’s wellbeing at the centre of every decision.
If you are facing a dispute about your child’s schooling, early advice can make all the difference. Please contact one of our experienced family lawyers for guidance tailored to your situation.
