A COURT has ordered a mother not to breastfeed her six-year-old son.

During a custody battle over the little boy in a Melbourne court, it was revealed he had complained that the mother wanted him to suckle her breasts during a visit with her last year.



The mother denied she had breastfed the child, then five, saying that they were lying down and he wanted to touch her breasts, according to court documents.



She allegedly told him that she had breastfed him when he was young.



The court rejected her explanation and restrained the mother from exposing her breasts to the child, requiring him to suckle or permitting him to touch her breasts.



The court also ordered that the boy live with his female carer and spend time with his Fijian parents interstate during school holidays.



The boy has lived with the carer since 2004, but she says that in 2009 the mother told her they wanted him back, the court was told.



The carer's solicitor said yesterday that it was a very rare case in the Federal Magistrates' Court where a person who was not a relative was awarded custody of a child over the biological parents.



"I really can't remember one where a non-parent or relative has been granted custody of someone's else's child," the solicitor said.



"This woman had been looking after this little boy for some five years and he had come to look upon her as his mother even though he knew the difference."



In her judgment, a federal magistrate said the carer and the boy's parents came to an agreement in 2004 that she would have full responsibility for him until the mother wanted to resume full responsibility for him.



The boy continued to have contact with his parents.



But after staying with his parents for six weeks last year, the carer said the boy told her his mother had hit him with a belt and still wanted him to suckle her breasts.



The court determined that the carer had intended the boy to live with his parents, but became concerned about their care of him.



She took him home with her. The carer applied to the court for parenting orders. The parents also sought sole parental responsibility.



The federal magistrate decided it was in the child's best interests that he continue to live with his carer.



She was confident that the carer would continue to promote the boy's relationship with his parents and his Fijian culture.



The parents are living in Australia on bridging visas and it is possible they may be deported.