A brother and sister who have been in foster care for over nine years have been legally adopted by their carers after a judge in the New South Wales Supreme Court decided it was the best thing for their future. The children, aged 13 and 11, see their foster parents as their real mum and dad and wanted to take their surname to feel like a proper family. Even though their birth mother was worried about losing her connection to them, the court found that the stability and security of a permanent adoption was clearly better than any other option, especially given the birth parents’ troubled history.
Key details of the case
- Case Name: The Adoption of Richard Henry Winter and Camilla-Alice Papen
- Case Number: 2025/00156525
- Court: Supreme Court of New South Wales
- Place: Sydney, New South Wales
- Judge: McGrath J
- Hearing Date: 22 September 2025
- Decision Date: 8 October 2025
- Children Involved: Richard Henry Winter (aged 13) and Camilla-Alice Papen (aged 11)
- Proposed Adoptive Parents: Lydia Gloria Corcoran and Edmund Charles Macauley (the children’s foster carers)
- Birth Parents: Barbara Margot Winter (mother) and Julian Andrew Papen (father)
- Plaintiff: The Secretary of the New South Wales Department of Communities and Justice (DCJ)
- Institutions Involved: Department of Communities and Justice (DCJ), St Saviours (Anglicare Australia), Children’s Court of New South Wales
Simple summary of the case
This case is about two kids, Richard, who is 13, and his sister Camilla, who is 11. For the last nine years, they have been living with their foster parents, Lydia and Edmund. The Department of Communities and Justice, or DCJ, asked the Supreme Court to make an order so that Lydia and Edmund could officially adopt them. The children had been taken away from their birth parents, Barbara and Julian, a long time ago because of some very serious problems. These problems included drug and alcohol use, neglect, and very worrying child protection concerns about their birth father, Julian, who had a criminal history involving child abuse.
The main reason for going to court was to give the children a safe and permanent home for good. Both Richard and Camilla told everyone that they wanted to be adopted. They call Lydia and Edmund ‘mum’ and ‘dad’ and wanted to change their last name to Macauley, which is Edmund’s surname, so they could all be one family. Because Richard is over 12, he was old enough to legally agree to his own adoption, and he did.
The birth mother, Barbara, was initially against the adoption because she was scared she would lose her children forever. However, the birth father, Julian, didn’t really get involved in the court case. The judge, Justice McGrath, had to decide what was in the best interests of the children. He looked at all the options, like them just staying in foster care until they turned 18. The judge decided that adoption was clearly preferable. This means it wasn’t just a little bit better, but a lot better than any other choice. He said it would give Richard and Camilla the feeling of security and belonging that they really needed. The judge made the adoption order, allowed their names to be changed, and also approved plans for how the children could safely keep in touch with their birth mother’s family in the future. The full details of this decision can be found in the original judgement, a comprehensive resource for understanding the legal reasoning.
A key legal step was the court deciding to go ahead without the formal consent of the birth parents for Camilla’s adoption. Because she is under 12, she couldn’t consent for herself. The judge made a consent dispense order, which is a legal way of saying the parents’ permission wasn’t needed because the adoption was so important for the child’s welfare. This case shows how the legal system prioritises a child’s need for a stable and loving home above all else. For those interested in similar matters, you can explore more NSW Supreme Court cases.
Questions and answers
- Is it legal for foster parents to adopt the children they care for?
Yes, it is legal. As this case shows, long term foster carers who have formed a stable and loving family with the children can apply to adopt them, especially when it is seen as being in the child’s best interests. - Can a child decide if they want to be adopted?
Yes, if they are old enough. In NSW, a child aged 12 or over who is considered mature enough to understand what adoption means can give their own consent. Richard, being 13, formally consented to his adoption. - What happens if the birth parents don’t agree to the adoption?
The court can overrule them. If the court is satisfied that it’s in the child’s best interests, it can make a ‘consent dispense order’. This means the adoption can go ahead without the birth parents’ formal permission. - Is it illegal for a birth parent to hide a child from child protection services?
While the act of hiding itself might not be a specific crime, hindering an investigation and failing to protect a child from harm can lead to authorities taking action to remove the child, as happened in this case. - Can an adopted child still see their birth family?
Yes, and this is often encouraged if it is safe. The court approved ‘adoption plans’ which set out arrangements for future contact, like regular visits and phone calls with their birth mother and siblings. - Why is an adoption order considered better than long term foster care?
An adoption order provides legal permanency. It means the children legally become part of their new family forever. Long term foster care ends when the child turns 18, and doesn’t provide the same level of legal security or sense of belonging. - Can an adopted child change their name?
Yes. The court can approve a change of name. In this case, both children wanted to take the surname of their adoptive father, and the judge approved it because it was important for their sense of family identity. - Does a parent’s criminal history affect an adoption case?
Absolutely. The birth father’s criminal history, especially child related offences, was a major reason why the court believed the children needed to be protected and why adoption was the safest option. - What is an ‘adoption plan’?
An adoption plan is a written agreement about how the child will stay in contact with their birth family after the adoption. It covers things like visits, phone calls, letters, and sharing information. - Can an adoption plan be changed in the future?
Yes. A party to the plan can apply to the court to have it reviewed and changed if circumstances change or if it is no longer working in the child’s best interests. - What does ‘best interests of the child’ actually mean in court?
It is the most important factor in any decision about a child. The judge has to weigh up many things, including the child’s wishes, their physical and emotional needs, their relationships with their families, and the need to protect them from harm. - What happens if a child involved in an adoption has special needs?
This is a very important consideration. In this case, both children had conditions like ASD and ADHD. The court saw that the adoptive parents were excellent at managing these needs and getting the right support, which was a strong argument in favour of the adoption. - Is it a priority to keep siblings together in adoption?
Yes, courts and child protection services see the sibling relationship as very important. The fact that Richard and Camilla were being adopted together and wanted to share a surname to strengthen their bond was a key part of this case. - How long do children have to be with foster parents before they can be adopted?
There isn’t a strict minimum time, but the law requires a stable relationship to have been established. In this case, the children had been with their carers for over nine years, which demonstrated a very strong and stable bond. - Does the court have to correct mistakes on a birth certificate?
Yes, the court can order the Registrar of Births, Deaths and Marriages to fix errors. In this case, the judge ordered corrections to Richard’s original birth certificate to make sure it was completely accurate.