What to think about this story from yesterday’s Sydney Daily Telegraph:

http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,25807134-5001021,00.html

Can anyone make anyone sense out of this? (Here are the main parts of the article, but by all means read the whole thing; there’s at least one nugget of insanity tucked away in almost every paragraph:

A 62-YEAR-OLD lesbian has been awarded access by the Family Court to the three-year-old child of her former partner, despite the couple splitting after living together for less than a year and a judge ruling the woman was not legally the child's parent.

The child's 44-year-old mother has been ordered to allow her 62-year-old former partner, who has suffered from psychiatric conditions and has a history of self-harm, to have access to the child.

The Family Court has ruled that, although the 62-year-old did not live in a de facto relationship with the woman and was not legally a parent of the girl, she could have court-ordered access because she was a significant person in the child's life.

[…] [A] full bench of the Family Court last month dismissed an appeal by the child's mother over access and granted the older woman visitation rights to the child for three hours a week, which will increase to overnight stays.
[bold type in the original]

Reginaldvs Cantvar
Feast of St. Lawrence of Brindisi, Confessor, Doctor of the Church, A.D. 2009