The Place for Custody Evaluations in Family Peacemaking

Custody evaluations can serve the dual purpose of providing neutral, objective information to the court while also contributing to the possibility of earlier settlement, which coincides with the therapeutic jurisprudence goal of more positive outcomes for children and families. Research suggests that most cases settle after custody evaluations. However, most of the literature is focused on the use of custody evaluations for litigation. Evaluators, attorneys, and mental health consultants can influence parents to focus more on children's needs and less on their conflict as they go through the evaluation process. This article urges family courts to develop processes and require professionals to learn skills needed for an interdisciplinary process to utilize evaluations in peacemaking.

Key Points for the Family Court Community:
• All custody evaluation processes should aim to reduce and/or shorten children's exposure to parental conflict.
• Evaluators, attorneys, and mental health professional consultants should use the evaluation process to influence parents to be more aware of their children's needs and less invested in their adversarial positions.
• Evaluators should learn to write and orally present information and state opinions with consideration of the parents themselves as consumers of the custody evaluation as well as the court.
• Attorneys and mental health professional consultants should help clients review the report, process their emotional reactions, and consider their options for settlement versus litigation in terms of emotional and financial costs to the family.
• Court processes should be developed to contain the time and cost of custody evaluations and provide dispute resolution after custody evaluations.

     

DIVORCING FAMILIES WITH YOUNG CHILDREN IN THE COURT'S FAMILY SERVICES UNIT Profiles and Impact of Services

Little is known about the families being served by court support services, or the effectiveness of the services provided. This study investigates 137 higher conflict, divorcing families with young children, who received services from the Family Services division. The study utilizes questionnaire data filled out by family services clinicians. The families presented with multiple mental health needs, including allegations of substance use and physical, emotional and sexual abuses of spouses and, to a lesser extent, children. Results detailed evaluation outcomes pertaining to joint legal and physical custody, showing an increase in joint legal custody, with little difference in physical custody arrangements. Evaluators did encourage less parental dropout. The data also profiled parents least likely to attend mandatory parenting education, accept evaluators' recommendations, and settle their case with mediation assistance. Identifying these families early can help family services clinicians track families into individualized service plans as needed.     

THE COLLABORATIVE DIVORCE PROJECT: A Court-Based Intervention for Separating Parents with Young Children

The role the legal process of separation and divorce plays in affecting outcomes for young children and their families was examined in the Collaborative Divorce Project (CDP), an intervention designed to assist the parents of children six years old or younger as they begin the separation/divorce process (married and unmarried couples). Evaluation and outcome data were collected from 161 couples, their attorneys, teachers, and court records. In addition to positive evaluations from both parents, intervention families benefited through lower conflict, greater father involvement, and better outcomes for children than the control group. Attorneys and court records indicate that intervention families were more cooperative and were less likely to need custody evaluations and other costly services. The CDP illustrates how prevention programs can be located within the courts, can be systematically evaluated, and can aid in helping the legal system function optimally for families with young children.     

CHILD CUSTODY EVALUATIONS

Judicial and legal changes in divorce rules and precedents over the last two decades have led to increasing involvement by mental health professionals in child custody disputes. This involvement usually entails an evaluation of the child and parents, along with a recommendation to the court regarding custody. To date, there is little empirical evidence supporting the efficacy of methods typically used by professionals in making recommendations to the court. This article presents a review of assessment methods currently used in resolving child custody disputes. It also reviews the limited number of outcome studies on child custody evaluation and methods used in litigation and mediation.     

Children Exposed to Domestic Violence: Making Trauma‐Informed Custody and Visitation Decisions

This article explores the risks for young children and the challenges for courts that emerge when parents who are victims or perpetrators of intimate partner violence seek court decisions on child visitation or custody matters. We focus particularly on children age five and younger, a group that is disproportionately represented in families affected by intimate partner violence, and especially vulnerable to its traumatic impact. We examine the literature on children's response to violence between their parents and the literature on parental alienation, a counter‐charge that may arise when one parent alleges violence as a reason to limit the other parent's access to the children. We look at challenges faced by both mental health professionals and courts involved in custody determinations and make policy recommendations to help courts make trauma‐informed decisions that best serve children.     

THE USE OF PSYCHOLOGICAL TESTING IN CHILD CUSTODY EVALUATIONS

Evaluation of families for purposes of assisting the court in making decisions about custody is perhaps the most complicated forensic evaluation. Mental health professionals conducting such evaluations must ensure that their evaluations validly assess areas of concern deemed relevant by the judiciary and legislature. Evaluators sometimes use psychological measures in the evaluation process, and in recent years, a number of tests designed specifically for use in child custody evaluation contexts have been developed. Because some published tests do not meet basic professional standards, child custody evaluators should carefully review any test and its supporting documentation before including it in their examination procedures. In this article, the authors discuss the rationale for using psychological tests in child custody evaluations, describe current testing practices, review and critique contemporary custody evaluation instruments, and offer a template for mental health professionals to use when considering use of a particular test.     

An Exploratory Study of Custody Challenges Experienced by Affirming Mothers of Transgender and Gender‐Nonconforming Children

Family courts have lacked familiarity with evidence‐based recommendations regarding the best interests of transgender and gender‐nonconforming (TGNC) children, resulting in some affirming parents losing physical and/or legal custody. This exploratory, qualitative study with 10 affirming mothers of TGNC children who had experienced custody‐related challenges reported on salient themes, including “blame” for causing children's gender nonconformity, coercion by ex‐partners, bias in the courts, negative impact on children, emotional and financial toll on participants, and the critical importance of adequate resources. Findings indicate the need for better‐educated family court professionals, as well as socioemotional support and financial and legal assistance for affirming parents of TGNC children.     

LEGAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL MANAGEMENT OF CASES WITH AN ALIENATED CHILD

Cases entering the family court with an alienated child require intensive and coordinated case management to intervene effectively. It is critical to link the authority of the court with the delivery of mental health services to address the complex systemic factors that may entrench a chilďs unwarranted rejection of a parent. This article provides principles of legal and psychological case management for families with an alienated child, followed by various structural interventions, including sample court orders, for managing these cases as they progress through the family court process. Finally, criteria for making custody recommendations in the most severe cases of child alienation are provided.     

Proponents Bear the Burden of Proof

Richard Gardner claimed to be able to diagnose parental alienation among contentious parents disputing custody, and asserted that his "syndrome" is supported by scientific and legal authority. Despite influencing many custody proceedings, Gardner's ideas fail to meet even minimal scientific standards. The burden of proving any new hypothesis falls on its proponents, and given the complete absence of objective replication, parental alienation syndrome (PAS) must be viewed as nothing more than a hypothesis. The lack of clear guidance in the law allows concepts like PAS to gain temporary credibility, as judges look to mental health professionals for help in making decisions under the vague best interests standard.     

Definitions and terminology regarding child alignments,estrangement, and alienation: A survey of custody evaluators

Parental alienation (PA) is a highly consequential family dynamic that causes harm to children and parents. While many mental health and legal professionals agree that PA is common and potentially very harmful to children, there is still the appearance that there is controversy and discord in the field. The purpose of this study was to test the extent of consensus in the field regarding the basic tenets of PA theory. Specifically, 11 key terms related to PA were identified through expert input and preliminary field-testing. An on-line survey was created specifically for the study to assess level of agreement with these key terms among custody evaluators. This profession was selected because of their high degree of training and experience with a variety of family conflict situations; 119 child custody evaluators selected as members of a professional custody evaluator listing (88% response rate) rated their endorsement of these 11 key definitions with response options including: strongly agree, agree, neither agree nor disagree, disagree, and strongly disagree. Results revealed that roughly 80% of respondents agreed or strongly agreed with each of the 11 definitions. These results demonstrate a high degree of consensus and should guide future trainings of legal and mental health professionals to ensure a common language and understanding of this phenomenon.     

CUSTODY EVALUATIONS

The procedures used to conduct custody evaluations and the purpose of such reports are currently under review by mental health and legal professionals. This article describes (a) the limitations inherent in clinical assessment and (b) characteristics of the adjudication process which necessarily limit the evaluator's thoroughness and the potential usefulness of evaluations. Given the primitive methods available for assessing families and predicting outcomes, the inability and unwillingness of the courts to process large amounts of clinical data, the conflicting motives surrounding evaluations, and the biases inherent in custody recommendations, the author argues for limited, well-defined, and objectively supported assessment procedures and evaluation criteria.     

TO RECOMMEND OR NOT TO RECOMMEND: THAT IS NOT THE QUESTION

Tippins and Wittmann provide a cogent argument for custody evaluators not to make recommendations to the court. From their forensic and scientific perspectives, they have identified some important issues, which will certainly stimulate interesting discussion among custody evaluators. In response to their article, it is my view that public sector custody evaluations offer a philosophical and procedural alternative to forensic evaluations. This article proposes that recommendations should be viewed as part of the process of evaluations rather than the outcome. Based on a qualitative and interpretive model, recommendations are judged based on their applicability, transferability, and transparency. Recommendations viewed in qualitative terms provide parents with opportunities to step out of litigation and provide guidance for parents' ongoing roles postseparation.     

Providing Interdisciplinary Services to At‐Risk Families to Prevent the Placement of Children In Foster Care

Grandparents need support to take on the responsibility of children whose parents cannot care for them due to drug addiction, mental health issues, HIV illness, or other health problems. Without support and assistance, these families and children are likely to end up enmeshed in the already overburdened child abuse and neglect system. The University of Maryland has created a model program providing social work and legal services to at‐risk grandparent families to help avoid the unnecessary placement of these children in foster care. In this new program, student attorneys and student social workers worked with the grandparent client to help stabilize the family, providing representation or advice on housing, public benefits, custody, and school‐related issues. Joint education of student attorneys and student social workers in a clinical experience enhances their understanding of their roles and those of the other profession and prepares them for a more thoughtful and informed approach to family law, child welfare cases, and at‐risk children.     

Training parenting plan evaluators: Looking towards the future

Standards of practice for parenting plan evaluations continue to evolve, informed by advances in research and the development of innovative, evidence-based approaches to assessment and intervention. Parenting plan evaluators are asked to inform the court, parents, and other professionals on how to address the complex needs of increasingly diverse families amid reorganization, high conflict, and crisis. How can we attract and properly train new mental health professionals to do important work in an increasingly strained adversarial system? How can evaluators keep up with these advances over the course of their careers? How can they deepen and refine their skills to work with a diverse array of individuals, family constellations and an enormous range of family circumstances? And how can evaluators care for their own well-being and their colleagues? In this article, the authors describe a multi-dimensional approach to training both new and experienced custody evaluators that includes imparting baseline knowledge on how to conduct quality parenting plan evaluations as a starting point. We discuss a variety of modalities and approaches that can enable evaluators to deepen and expand their skills over the years, contribute to the diverse community of family law professionals, and manage the exceptional demands of working in this field.     

RELYING ON THE UNRELIABLE: HOW A COURT RULE COULD ALLEVIATE THE PROBLEMS INHERENT IN THE NEUTRAL MENTAL HEALTH EVALUATION PROCESS IN CHILD CUSTODY CASES

Many states lack standards as to who should be conducting neutral mental health evaluations in child custody proceedings and what these evaluations should be comprised of. This will occasionally result in an unqualified evaluator giving a recommendation to the court as to which parent should receive custody of their child[ren]. This Note advocates for courts to adopt a court rule which specifically enumerates the qualifications of neutral mental health evaluators in the hopes of regularizing the evaluation process. The first part of the proposal addresses who should conduct evaluations by establishing the required credentials of the evaluator and minimizing the amount of evaluator bias by screening the process. The second part of the proposal focuses on the training needed before an evaluator may conduct an examination, as well as the amount of experience required.     

Socializing Distrust of the Justice System through the Family in Juvenile Delinquency Court

Juvenile delinquency courts in the United States generally require parents to attend all court hearings, but little is known about how parents' experiences in the court process affect their discussions of the justice system with their court‐involved children. Using multiperspectival and longitudinal data combining observations with interviews of parents and youth in two courts, this research finds that many parents discuss the legal process in negative terms with their children when parents are outside the presence of legal authorities. This research adds to the literature on legal socialization by examining how parents' perceptions of law and their experiences with the court become part of the socializing content provided by parents to their court‐involved children. Creating a more meaningful role for parents in the juvenile justice process may potentially lead to more positive discussions of the court process between parents and juvenile defendants.     

BUILDING A MULTIDISCIPLINARY, COLLABORATIVE CHILD PROTECTION SYSTEM

The process of preparing lawyers and other professionals to work for the benefit of troubled children requires an understanding of concepts that extend far beyond the traditional course structure currently employed in American law schools. It is clear that mental health problems of children and families, compounded by substance abuse, influence behavior, resulting in children entering family and juvenile courts as victims of abuse or neglect and committing criminal acts. It is incumbent on law schools to incorporate training in fields far different from the traditional didactic experience in legal curricula if they are to address the current needs of children and familes who are ensnared in the nation's juvenile justice system. The beginning point of this process is within the legal training apparatus of America. Law schools must expand their curriculum to incorporate other disciplines to produce an advocate capable of serving the interest of children and society.     

PARENTING COORDINATION (PC) PRACTICE: A SURVEY OF EXPERIENCED PROFESSIONALS

This study summarizes a survey of experienced North American parenting coordinators (PCs). The survey was modeled after a similar seminal study of child custody evaluators ( Keilen & Bloom, 1986 ) and seeks to establish a similar baseline standard in alternative dispute resolution (ADR) court‐sanctioned PC practices. Results reveal that PC is being practiced across North America by highly experienced practitioners that are multidisciplinary across legal and mental health professions who work by court order. These PCs work with a specific written PC agreement that specifies basis of authority, scope of authority, terms of service, retainer/fees, and grievance procedures. Results characterize PC as an increasingly established hybrid ADR court‐sanctioned role that is effective precisely because of accessibility to families, the unique knowledge base of the family law professional concerning the dynamics of divorcing families, and the court‐granted authority to help families resolve disputes that are generally more familial and psychological than legal in nature.     

PARENS PATRIAE

This article discusses the role of the court in protecting children in Australia and provides a means for comparing this process in other jurisdictions. It addresses the different perspectives of mental health and legal professionals in obtaining insight into case law and precedent in the English-speaking countries.     

Psychiatric aspects of sexual abuse

Sexual abuse of children and adolescents has become an increasingly publicized phenomenon. Psychiatrists and other mental health professionals are often called upon to evaluate and treat children and adolescents who may have been sexually abused, to provide counseling or treatment to the families of such children, and to provide reports and testimony for proceedings about such cases in the child protection system, the criminal justice system, and in custody disputes. Clarity regarding the medical, psychiatric, and legal aspects of sexual abuse is essential in carrying out such professional activities and in evaluating and formulating research on sexual abuse. In this paper current knowledge regarding these aspects of sexual abuse is summarized, and the role of psychiatrists in clinical and forensic work involving allegations of sexual abuse is discussed.