An Australian court grants a father unsupervised child access despite allegations involving AI-generated nude images of his wife and friends.
An Australian court has granted a father unsupervised access to his two children despite allegations involving AI-generated nude images of his wife and her friends.
Joseph Carbone reported that the court published the interim decision, issued in May. The father had pleaded guilty to two charges involving the recording of intimate images of his wife without her consent in mid-2025.
The couple separated after the mother discovered hundreds of sexually explicit images that her husband had allegedly altered using artificial intelligence. The images reportedly depicted the mother, her friends and several of the father’s workplace colleagues.
However, the father told the court that he had stored the images only on his computer. He also maintained that he had never shared them with anyone.
Judge Assesses Risk to the Children
Judge Suzanne Christie heard the case in the New South Wales Family Court. She acknowledged that the father’s conduct involving the AI-generated nude images could amount to family violence.
However, Judge Christie said the evidence did not satisfy her that the father posed a threat to the children’s safety.
The mother’s main concern was that the children could discover the images on devices without password protection. However, the judge found no evidence that this risk currently existed. She also noted that no similar incident had occurred previously.
Judge Christie said maintaining a continuing and close relationship with their father would benefit the children’s wellbeing. She concluded that he did not present a risk to them.
Mother Raises Concerns About Therapy
In an affidavit submitted to the court, the mother alleged that the father had used ChatGPT to mislead the therapist treating him over his previous offences.
The mother said she had expected authorities to refer him to a new therapist. She wanted someone who fully understood his conduct and could not be misled.
She also stated that she would not have allowed the father access to the children had she known he was still seeing the same therapist. However, she expressed hope that he would undergo rehabilitation for the children’s welfare.
After considering the allegations and the available evidence, Judge Christie appointed an independent children’s lawyer to represent the children’s interests.
The court also allowed the father to spend 24 hours with the children during weekends. In addition, he could contact them through FaceTime on one night each week.
The court scheduled the next hearing for July 2. However, the decisions made at that hearing have not yet been published.
The case highlights the difficult questions Australian family courts face when alleged digital sexual misconduct intersects with parental access and child welfare.
