Moriarty & Dee, Attorneys at Law, in Buffalo, New York.

Custody Evaluation Guidelines (page 2):

III. PROCEDURAL GUIDELINES: CONDUCTING A CHILD CUSTODY EVALUATION

8. The Scope of the Evaluation is Determined by the Evaluator, Based on the Nature of the Referral Question.

The scope of the custody-related evaluation is determined by the nature of the question or issue raised by the referring person or the court, or is inherent in the situation. While comprehensive child custody evaluations generally require an evaluation of all parents or guardians and children, as well as observations of interactions between them, the scope of the assessment in a particular case may be limited to evaluating the parental capacity of one parent, without attempting to compare the parents or make recommendations. Likewise, the scope may be limited to evaluating the child. Or a p[psychologist may be asked to critique the assumptions and methodology of the assessment of another mental health professional. A psychologist also might serve as an expert witness in the area of child development, providing expertise to the court without relating it specifically to the parties involved in the case.

9. The Psychologist Obtains Informed Consent from All Adult Participants and, as Appropriate, Informs Child Participants

In undertaking child custody evaluations, the psychologists ensures that each child participant is aware of : 1)m the purpose, nature, and methods of the evaluation; 2) who has requested the psychologist's services; and 3) who will be paying the fees. The psychologist informs adult [participants about the nature of the assessment, instruments and techniques and informs those participants about the possible disposition of the data collected. The psychologist provides this information as appropriate, to children, to the extent that they are able to understand.

10. The Psychologist Informs Participants about the Limits of Confidentiality and the Disclosure of Information.

A psychologists conducting a child custody evaluation ensures that the participants, including children to the extent feasible, are aware of the limits of confidentiality characterizing the professional relationship with the psychologist. The psychologist informs participants that in consenting to the evaluation, their consenting to disclosure of the evaluations findings and the context of the forthcoming litigation, and any other proceedings deemed necessary by the courts. A psychologist obtains a waiver of confidentially from all adult participants, or from their authorized legal representatives

11. The Psychologist Uses Multiple Methods of Data Gathering.

The psychologists strives to use the most appropriate methods available for addressing the questions raised in a specific child custody evaluation, and generally uses multiple methods of data gathering, including, but not limited to, clinical interviews, observations and/or psychological assessments. Important facts and opinions are documented from at least two sources whenever their reliability is questionable. The psychologist, for example, may review potentially relevant reports, e.g., from schools, health care providers, child care providers, agencies, and institutions. Psychologists may also interview extended family, friends and other individuals on occasions when the information is likely to be useful. If information is gathered from third parties that is significant and may be used as a basis for conclusions, psychologists corroborate it by at least one other source wherever possible and appropriate, and document this in the report.

12. The Psychologist Neither Overinterprets Nor Inappropriately Interprets Clinical or Assessment Data.

The psychologist refrains from drawing conclusions not adequately supported by the data. The psychologist interprets any data from interviews or tests, as well as any questions of data reliability and validity, cautiously and conservatively, seeking convergent validity. The psychologist strives to acknowledge to the court any limitations in methods or data used.

13. The Psychologist Does Not Give Any Opinion Regarding the Psychological Functioning of Any Individual Who had not Been Personally Evaluated.

This guideline however, does not preclude the psychological from reporting what an evaluated individual (such as parent or child) has stated, or from addressing theoretical issues or hypothetical questions, so long as the limited basis of the information is noted.

14. Recommendations, If Any, are Based Upon What is in the Best Psychological Interest of the Child.

While this profession has not reached consensus about whether psychologists ought to make recommendations about the final custody determination to the courts, psychologists are obligated to be aware of the arguments on both sides of this issue, and be able to explain the logic of their position concerning their own practice.

If the psychologist does not choose to make custody recommendations, they should be derived from sound psychological data, and must be based upon the best interest of the child, in this particular case. Recommendations are based on articulated assumptions, data, interpretations, and inferences based upon established professional and scientific standards. Psychologists guard against relying upon their own biases or unsupported beliefs in rendering opinions in particular cases.

15. The Psychologist Clarifies Financial Arrangements.

Financial arrangements are clarified and agreed upon prior to commencing a child custody evaluation. When billing for a child custody evaluation, the psychologist does not misrepresent his or her services for reimbursement purposes.

16. The Psychologist Maintains Written Records.

All records obtained in the process of conducting a child custody evaluation are properly maintained and filed in accord with APA Record Keeping Guidelines (APA, 1993) and relevant statutory guidelines.

All raw data and interview information are recorded with an eye towards their possible review by other psychologists or the court, where legally permitted. Upon request, appropriate reports are made available to the court.

Melton, G.B., Petrila, J., Poythress, N.G., & Slobogin, C. (1987) Psychological evaluations for the courts; A handbook for mental health professionals and lawyers. New York: Guilford Press

Mills, D.H. (1984). Ethics education and adjudication with psychology. American Psychologist, 39, 669-675.

Mnookin, R.H. (1975). Child-custody adjudication: Judicial functions in the face of indeterminacy. Law and Contemporary Problems. 39, 226-293

Ochroch, R. (1982). Ethical pitfalls in child custody evaluations. Papers presented at the American Psychological Association, Washington, D.C.

Okapaku S. (1976). Psychology: Impediment or aid in child custody cases? Rudgers Law Review, 29, 117-1153.

Weithorn, L.A. (ed). (1987). Psychology and child custody determinations: Knowledge, roles and expertise. Lincoln, NE, University of Nebraska Press.

Other Resources: State Guidelines

Georgia Psychological Association. (1990). Recommendations for psychologists' involvement in child custody cases. Atlanta, GA: Author

Metropolitan Denver Interdisciplinary Committee on Child Custody. (1989). Guidelines for child custody evaluations. Denver, CO: Author.

Nebraska Psychological Association. (1986). Guidelines for child custody evaluations. Lincoln, NE: Author.

New Jersey State Board of Psychological Examiners. (1993). Specialty guidelines for psychologists in custody/visitation evaluations. Newark, NJ: Author

North Carolina Psychological Association. (draft, 1993). Child custody guidelines. Unpublished manuscript.

Back to Top - Go To Back to Other Page