Customer Reviews

The Art and Science of Child Custody Evaluations

5 star:		(4)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

Back in the dark ages, a psychologist hired by one parent or the other in a child custody case could just waltz into court and give a subjective clinical opinion. Thankfully, while such practices may still occur here and there, it is no longer the norm. Such a psychologist might be legally barred due to inadequate training or experience, or might face legal action by the other parent. Back in 1998 (and revised last year), Jonathan Gould wrote a really helpful manual called Conducting Scientifically Crafted Child Custody Evaluations, Second Edition, to help custody evaluators avoid the many pitfalls and landmines in this litigious subfield of forensic psychology. Now, he has teamed up with fellow expert David A. Martindale to bring us even more of the latest information and advice in this rapidly evolving area.

The authors focus both on the law and on the clinical practicalities. Clear and well-written chapters explore ethics and bias, child interviewing, child development research, assessing parents, child sexual abuse allegations, domestic violence, and child alienation. The authors carefully explain the primary legal standard in child custody work, "The Best Interests of the Child" standard. Of special use to the practitioner, the appendix contains sample letters and statements of understanding, all with permission to freely photocopy.

The overall messages here are ones worth repeating: Know the law, know the science, remain unbiased, and be humble. This updated reference book will be useful not only to child custody evaluators but also to attorneys and to students of forensic psychology.

For those of you interested in learning more, another good resource is Ackerman and Kane's Psychological Experts In Divorce Actions, which summarizes empirical data on child custody evaluation practices. It was published in 2005, but the publisher puts out annual supplements summarizing new research.

Martindale and Gould are well known leaders in this area, and anyone looking to go into custody evaluations would be well advised to follow Martindale and Gould. Anyone already doing them should follow these guidelines, too. After several years of doing CCE's, I am still learning and improving, and this book really helps.

This area is one that requires high expertise, high tolerance for conflict, and a hide made of Rhino skin. Still, many kids really need good services. By following this book's recommendations, you lessen the chance of being successfully grieved against.

I am pretty sure the evaluator in our child custody battle never saw this book, or had these high ideals. She came in with an attitude and a decision already set in stone. Every question was an attack fully weaponed by the children's mom. The evaluator would not look at the background check for wants and warrants the police department ran for me. The glance she gave the letters from my employer and long time friend were cursory. No help here.

Drs Gould and Martindale do nothing to calm a parent's fear by explaining that many mental health professionals seek to avoid managed care by offering to perform child custody evaluations. They, state that many of them have a poor understanding of the differences between clinical and forensic roles and responsibilities. They further advise the professionals to construct their forensic practice in anticipation of an eventual and inevitable complaint. Alleviating the professional's fear, they mention that a complaint is unlikely to result in a finding of formal fault or in a revocation. That does not instill confidence in the system for parents. In addition, Drs Gould and Martindale admit that the most innovative change in the child custody arena, collaborative law, is beyond the scope of this book. For parents the best use of this book is to use it to challenge the education, credentials and procedures of the person doing your evaluation. Much to the surprise Drs Gould and Martindale, if anyone bothers to let them in on it, a child custody evaluation is never used by a family to rehabilitate itself. It will never show specific family members how to gain the management skills and emotional competencies needed to help the children. The evaluation report may help a judge make a decision. Not the book that will help parents during a child custody battle.

The evaluations done for our child custody case were much more Art than Science, and a great deal of the evaluators personal Bias. Before court, and after we saw the finished report that was to be presented to the court, I showed the evaluator Art-Science-Child-Custody-Evaluations. Our evaluator said, "No one can do all the procedures and processes in that book." There doesn't seem to be anything a parent can do about a bad evaluation. This book is a pipe-dream. Check it out at the library.

I have labeled and highlighted many sections of the book. For those that are entering the field or those needed a refresher course..this covers it all

Gould and Martindale's seminal book is a godsend for divorced parents who are victims of rejection by "child alienation." None of the previous "customer reviews" of this book were posted by a "rejected" parent - I am the first.

This "customer review's" message is that Gould and Martindale's book is a vital resource and should be required reading for "rejected" parents of alienated children.

Karen Franklin, a forensic psychologist, posted a "customer review" of this book, which begins by stating "BACK IN THE DARK AGES" the norm was that child custody evaluations were SUBJECTIVE CLINICAL opinions - the notorious IPSE DIXIT.

The facts of my involvement in the child custody case involving my daughter are an extreme set of facts, far worse than the "DARK AGES" - involving indictable criminal corruption, by the court-appointed custody evaluator, and by the presiding judge. The presiding judge, I believe, is a POLITICAL APPOINTEE - this wasn't impartial and blindfolded justice. It was a KANGAROO COURT, by a criminally-indictable judge.

A further problem with the Maryland judiciary is that judges hearing family law cases are not "dedicated" family law judges permanently assigned to hear only family law cases, but are rotated from judicial division to judicial division - at least the judge which handled my daughter's custody case was incompetent to handle a child custody case, in addition to being corrupt.

I am a "rejected" father, by my estranged daughter. I have not seen my daughter for over four years, although my daughter lives only ten minutes from me.

I could not afford a lawyer to represent me in the child custody case against me. My adversarial ex-wife was represented by a lawyer. The court appointed no lawyer to be GUARDIAN AD LITEM to represent the "psychological best interests" of my daughter.

The court evaluator in this child custody case was COURT APPOINTED, and was a CLINICAL social worker. This court-appointed social worker's custody evaluation was 100% biased in favor of my daughter's mother. Furthermore, this custody evaluation was thoroughly dishonest, and was a thoroughgoing "abusive ad hominem" character attack on me. The judge was completely corrupt.

Contrary to Karen Franklin's suggestion, there are only a handful of licensed forensic psychologists in Maryland (a half a dozen?), the State in which I live. The Maryland judiciary's family law division only employs CLINICIANS to perform child custody evaluations. These clinicians are social workers to boot - the bottom of the barrel.

To reiterate, the facts involved in the completely adversarial and contested child custody case involving my daughter are an extreme set of facts. However, contested child custody cases are known to be the most contentious type of litigation in the U.S.

When a "rejected" parent has no lawyer, is viciously attacked by a court-appointed custody evaluator, the corrupt judge refuses to protect a child's best interests, and no GUARDIAN AD LITEM is protecting the best interests of the child, Gould and Martindale's THE ART AND SCIENCE OF CHILD CUSTODY EVALUATIONS will not only be the best friend a "rejected" parent has, this book will be their only friend - to guide parents through the maze of contested child custody litigation.

An early U.S. President once cogently remarked: "TO BE OUR OWN GOVERNORS, we must ARM OURSELVES WITH THE POWER THAT KNOWLEDGE GIVES." Gould and Martindale's book gives "rejected" parents that power that comes from FORENSIC knowledge.

For "rejected" parents like me, who are at the extreme end of the scale of rejection, the knowledge imparted in Gould and Martindale's book is likely not to have any remedial effect on the damaged or destroyed relationship a rejected parent has with their alienated child. However, after reading THE ART AND SCIENCE OF CHILD CUSTODY EVALUATIONS, at least a rejected parent will no longer be completely in the dark about the nature of their contested child custody case.

In closing, I want to emphasize that forensic psychology is a brand new professional field - something like two decades old. Both Gould and Martindale are "board certified" in forensic psychology. Discovering the existence and nature of forensic psychology - versus "clinical" psychology or social work - was the greatest revelation of this book. This discovery was a tremendous catharsis for me.