Editors --- "Youth allowance rate: whether unreasonable to live at home" [2012] SocSecRpr 13; (2012) 14(2) Social Security Reporter, Article 4

• BURNS and SECRETARY TO THE DEEWR
• Background
• Issues
• Discussion
• Formal decision

---

Youth allowance rate: whether unreasonable to live at home

BURNS and SECRETARY TO THE DEEWR

(2012/267)

Decided: 7th May 2012 by R. J. Groom

Background

Burns applied for youth allowance at the higher independent rate, on the basis that it was unreasonable for him to live at home. Centrelink rejected the application, and Burns applied for a review of the decision. The SSAT affirmed the decision, and Burns applied to the AAT for a review of that decision. Burns stated that, following a heated argument with his mother on or about 25 May 2011, he decided that it was getting ‘too hard’ to live at home. He said that, because of the constant arguments with his mother, he was getting depressed and having trouble with his school work.

After he had packed his belongings but before Burns left the house, his mother told him to get out. She had since refused to allow him to return to live at home. At the time of the hearing, Burns was living with his brother and sister-in-law, as he had no contact with his biological father and his mother refused to allow him to live at home.

In support of his claim that there had been an extreme family breakdown, Burns provided evidence from his mother’s treating general practitioner, who stated that Burns’ mother had been suffering anxiety and depression for a number of years, which could be quite severe. It was the doctor’s opinion that if Burns returned home, his mother’s medical condition would deteriorate.

Issues

The issue for determination by the AAT was whether it was unreasonable for Burns to live at home and, in particular, whether there had been an ‘extreme family breakdown or other similar exceptional circumstances’.

Discussion

Section 1067A (9) of the Social Security Act 1991 (the Act) provides as follows :

Unreasonable to live at home

‘A person is independent if:

(a) The person cannot live at the home of either or both of his or her parents:

because of extreme family breakdown or other similar exceptional circumstances; ...

The AAT had regard to section 3.2.5.40 of the Social Security Guide, concerning the assessment of extreme family breakdown and other similar exceptional circumstances. The AAT noted that, under the Guide, the existence of ongoing conflict alone is insufficient grounds to grant payment at the independent rate. The AAT also noted that, under the Guide, a refusal to allow a young person to live at home does not of itself constitute extreme family breakdown.

In this case, the AAT found the evidence of the general practitioner of Burns’ mother to be persuasive. The AAT was satisfied that the conflict between Burns and his mother occurred frequently and was sufficiently serious to cause harm to the mother’s mental health.

The AAT further accepted the general practitioner’s opinion that the mother’s mental health, as well as her ‘emotional well-being’ would be seriously jeopardised if Burns was to return to live at home. The AAT found that if he did return to live at home, his mother’s anxiety and depression would become ‘much worse’.

The AAT was also satisfied that if Burns was to return to live at home with his mother, it would adversely impact on his own mental well-being.

The AAT noted the Secretary’s reliance on a written report by a social worker and some reported comments by the principal of Burns’ High School. However the AAT noted that neither witness was called to give evidence and, in the circumstances, the AAT found that the oral evidence of Burns and the mother’s general practitioner was more persuasive.

The AAT further found that the cause of the conflict between Burns and his mother was a combination of factors and that it could not be said that Burns’ behaviour alone was the cause of the ongoing arguments. The AAT found that the principle cause of the serious breakdown in the relationship was the mother’s health problems and her resultant inability to cope with Burns’ behaviour. The AAT considered that even if Burns did adjust his behaviour, this would not resolve the conflict between himself and his mother.

The AAT was satisfied that this was not a case of a normal family disagreement or conflict, and that there had in fact been extreme breakdown in the family relationship.

Formal decision

The AAT set aside the decision under review and remitted the matter to the Secretary for the purposes of assessing Burns’ entitlement to youth allowance on the basis that it had been unreasonable for Burns to live at home since 25 May 2011. [S.O.]