Child custody evaluations and domestic violence: case comparisons

The literature indicates that witnessing domestic violence is harmful to children, that them is a high overlap between domestic violence and child abuse, and that safety is an important issue for separating women because separation from abusive partners is a particularly dangerous time for victims of domestic violence. Further, child custody is often a contentious issue in domestic violence cases. Child custody evaluations are typically used to assist courts in deciding custody when custody is disputed and when the best interests of the child are unclear. The concept of "best interests of the child" does not specify evaluation techniques or approaches, however, and while custody evaluation standards generally address the best interests of the child, they offer little guidance in high-risk situations such as parental domestic violence. In addition, there has been limited research focused on understanding the custody evaluation process or the degree to which practitioners differ in their procedures and reporting for cases with and without parental domestic violence. This study is one of the first to examine characteristics of disputed custody cases and their custody evaluation reports differences between domestic violence and non-domestic violence cases. This study selected a 60% random sample of cases with custody evaluations in Fiscal Year 1998 and 1999 (n = 82 cases). Out of the 82 cases, 56% (n = 46) met criteria for classification into the domestic violence group and 44% (n = 36) did not. In general, results indicated that although there were some important differences in court records between cases with and without domestic violence, there were only minor differences between custody evaluation reported process and recommendations for the two groups. Implications for research and practice are discussed.     

Substantiation of Sexual Abuse Allegations

Professional practices and decision-making procedures in investigation of child sexual abuse were studied by interviewing child protection professionals in the southeastern U.S. regarding 175 allegations of abuse. Investigation procedures used, factors associated with the decision to substantiate, and the child protection workers' degree of confidence in their decisions were recorded for each allegation. It was found that substantiated cases: (a) involved significantly older children; (b) were more likely to involve intrusive types of abuse and children of minority race; and (c) were less likely to involve a visitation or custody dispute. Characteristics of the child's disclosure served as the primary basis for substantiation decisions, although medical evidence and affective and behavioral indicators also contributed to the decisions. Case workers were less certain of their decisions when allegations involved young children and adolescents and when allegations were made in the context of custody disputes. In terms of investigatory procedures, anatomical dolls and drawings were rarely used, alleged offenders were interviewed in fewer than one quarter of the cases, and medical and law enforcement consultations were obtained at a higher rate than mental health consultations.     

Misogynistic cultural argument in parental alienation versus child sexual abuse cases

This article argues that major advances in parental alienation (PA) theory, since its inception as the Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS), have not consistently been applied in custody litigation practice, because they do not serve advocacy needs; whereas, the misogynistic cultural argument in PAS, when relied on implicitly but not stated explicitly, can win cases. It first discusses advances in modern PA theory that eliminate misogyny. It then reviews feminist advances (1960s to 1980s) to show the threat to patriarchal power, and the fathers’ rights backlash, to explain their demand for legal redress. The hypothesis that a misogynistic cultural framework undermines evidence-based reasoning in child custody cases is supported with studies associating misogynistic beliefs with irrational thinking in multiple scientific areas, including child custody; and documents that show misogyny is a serious concern in the U.S. legal system. The article concludes by stating the need for evidence of misogynistic bias in custody decisions.     

Misogyny in New York custody decisions with parental alienation and child sexual abuse allegations

This article analyzes 24 New York (NY) published child custody cases decided between 2001 and 2017 that contained parental alienation and child sexual allegations. It addresses whether there was a tendency toward gendered decisions and the evidence on which the decisions were based. It reveals that most decisions favored alienation allegations over child sexual abuse allegations and transferring custody from mothers communicating sexual abuse allegations in court to fathers defending against them by alleging parental alienation. On appeal, these family court decisions were overwhelmingly upheld. The analysis also shows that the decisions were based as often on implicit misogynistic cultural assumptions in the absence of allegation-specific evidence as they were on allegation-specific evidence. The article adds to the growing understanding of sources of bias by proposing four errors that support biased reasoning. It concludes with suggestions about how experts, attorneys, and judges can question themselves and others to reduce bias.     

An Open Letter to a Young Lawyer as She Enters the World of Oz

Abstract

This editorial tries, through the use of an open letter format, to raise some of the problematic issues faced by both practitioners and judges who deal with the issue of child custody. One of the flaws occurs when battered women see the court as their potential savior from victimization, while, in reality, the court, with its inadequate available resources, cannot do so. This editorial raises awareness of the importance of qualified experts and the need for neutrality. It sensitizes the reader to the difficulty that judges have in making difficult decisions on minimal nformation when custody issues are brought to the court for resolution.     

Bonding and Attachment in Adoption

SUMMARY

The meaning of the words “bonding” and “attachment” as terms related to human connections are examined from an historical perspective and as important tools in the field of adoption. For over three decades there has been confusion between the two words and about the processes which they represented. Because adoption, by definition, changes the usual patterns of family connections, it is especially important that there be common agreement about terminology. Clinical observations have led to the discrete definitions proposed here. The words are defined, for utilitarian purposes, in a way that underscores the qualitative differences. The result is a tool that can improve placement decisions, help resolve controversial custody cases, reduce tensions among the families to which an adopted child has connections, and provide concrete assistance to children in their efforts to learn how to make significant attachments.     

Safety First

Abstract

A substantial percentage of contested child custody cases involve allegations of domestic violence. The impact on the psychological health and physical safety of the child exposed to domestic violence has only recently become a focus of the courts' and child custody evalu-ators' attention. Currently, the majority of state statutes include consideration of domestic violence in “best interests” child custody criteria. However, many of the statues do not provide the child custody evaluator the specific criteria to consider, especially if the domestic violence allegations have not been previously reported to authorities prior to the commencement of separation and divorce proceedings. This article presents the first three steps of the six-step Safety First Model, designed to assist the legal and psychological professions to focus on the priorities on the safety of children exposed to domestic violence.     

Pop Goes the Woozle: Being Misled by Research on Child Custody and Parenting Plans

Mental health professionals, lawyers, and judges whose work involves child custody decisions are often presented with social science research on issues related to which parenting plan is in the children’s best interests. Unfortunately, this research can be misrepresented in ways that mislead these professionals and the children’s parents, leading to child custody decisions that are not the most beneficial for the children. The process of misrepresenting the research in ways that create myths and misconceptions has been referred to as woozling. This article describes how social science data can be woozled, illustrating this with examples related to parenting plans for children under the age of 5 whose parents have separated.     

Child Custody in Transition

This paper focuses on four major areas of child custody in transition: parental preference, child preference, rights and responsibilities of custodial and noncustodial parents, and joint custody. These issues are addressed with regard to parent vs. parent custody decisions. Current legal and psychological trends in custody contests are reviewed.     

An Integrated Approach to Child Custody Evaluation

This paper provides an integrated approach to child custody evaluations through utilizing the "best interests" of the child and family systems frameworks. Although these frameworks differ in their basic orientations to conceptualizing the process of evaluating child custody cases, this article proposes that each model contributes to a comprehensive understanding of the complexities related to such conditions. In addition, these two perspectives offer a basis for making differential decisions based on the unique aspects related to a particular child custody case. The underlying assumptions and theoretical orientations of both models are identified and explored. Based on a discussion comparing and contrasting the two models, this paper offers a framework for utilizing both perspectives as well as a method for selecting the most appropriate approach to employ depending on the unique aspects of a child custody case. Recognizing the significant interplay between the legal and mental health professions, the authors identify the various issues that often impede successful collaborative efforts between these professional groups. In addition, guidelines are offered that can enhance the likelihood that these professions can work more effectively together.     

Representation of children's views in court hearings about custody and parental visitations — A comparison between what children wanted and what the courts ruled

PurposeFollowing the UN convention on the rights of children, a shift in policy towards greater emphasis on child participation in child protection case processing has occurred. A growing body of research has emerged concerning participation processes in child protection cases and the experiences of children in child protection cases. Very few studies have looked into if and when children get what they want, however. The aim of this study is to assess children's views about living arrangements and visitations in dependency court hearings and to compare these views with the rulings of courts.MethodThe study uses a retrospective cohort design. Cases where child welfare board rulings are in line with the wishes of children are compared to cases where rulings differ from the wishes of children. Data were collected from regional social welfare board archives. The study included 151 cases that were randomly drawn from a total population of 2481 cases. Simple and multivariate logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with the rulings being in accord with the child's wishes in each sample case.ResultsA child advocate was appointed in almost 95% of the cases (n = 142). Fifty-nine percent of the children did not want a change in care. Rulings about care were in line with the wishes of the child in 39% of the cases. Rulings about care were most likely to be what the child wanted, if the child was presently living in public care and did not want to move. Children wanted more visitations with their mothers in 60.5% of the cases and with their fathers in 39.8% of the cases. Whether children wanted more visitations with their mothers was associated with more visitations being granted. What a child wanted was not associated with the ruling on visitations with the child's father.ConclusionThe impact of children's views on visitations on dependency court rulings depends on what a child wants and how these desires coincide with what is proposed by child protection services. Children's views can be quite effective in blocking certain decisions but are less effective if the child requested a specific change. If a child does not want to stay with his or her birth parents, then the odds that the birth parents will be granted custody is minimal.     

Judgments regarding parental alienation when parental hostility or child sexual abuse is alleged

Abstract

Allegations of Parental Alienation (PA), the systematic disparaging of one parent by the other parent aimed at alienating their child’s affections, as a basis for child custody decisions are highly controversial. Claims of parental hostility or allegations of child sexual abuse in custody cases may trigger concerns about PA. Family court professionals (N?=?280) rated young children’s accuracy of report (e.g., suggestibility, honesty) in general and also read three custody scenarios varying as to whether or not they included allegations of parental hostility or child sexual abuse, or no such allegations. For each scenario, the alleged alienating parent’s gender was experimentally varied between subjects. Participants rated the likelihood that each case involved PA. For the scenario that included allegations of child sexual abuse, professionals who viewed young children as more inaccurate reporters or who read about the mother (rather than a father) as the alleged alienator were more likely to rate the scenario as involving PA. For the scenario that described parental hostility but no child sexual abuse allegations, professionals who were older or female were more likely to judge the scenario as involving parental alienation when a mother (rather than a father) was the alleged alienator, whereas there were no significant predictors of responses to the no-allegation scenarios. Findings are discussed in relation to the difficult task of evaluating custody cases for PA when parental hostility or child sexual abuse is alleged.     

Ethical Violations: What Can and Does Go Wrong in Child Custody Evaluations?

Child custody evaluations can have a significant impact on the adjustment and well-being of children and family members. Custody evaluators must be qualified and held to the highest professional standards. The authors of this article review custody evaluations and often witness inadequate and unprofessional evaluations. In this article, ethical mistakes seen regularly are highlighted. Many mistakes occur when cases are complex and include allegations of child maltreatment or intimate partner violence. Therefore, it is important that custody evaluators be trained in family and child psychology, attachment dynamics, psychological assessment, child abuse, and intimate partner violence. Child custody work needs to be monitored closely to ensure that mistakes can be eliminated in order to avoid unnecessary harm to children and families.     

Practice Guidelines In Child Custody Evaluations for Licensed Clinical Social Workers

Child custody evaluations and decisions are often complicated and emotionally charged. The following guidelines are offered as a framework for clinical social workers who are asked by the judicial system to undertake these evaluations. The historical background of child custody and the theoretical considerations that have guided the courts are reviewed. The traditional areas of consideration and the empirical data related to these areas are examined. The guidelines present pertinent information regarding ethical considerations, parent–child relationship, parenting style, gender issues, parental conflict, parental alienation, domestic violence, race, religion, sexual preferences, geography, parental psychopathology, substance abuse, child’s preference, physical health of the child, and behavioral health of the child. A format for the evaluation process is described and includes the role of the clinician, confidentiality, fees, and review of documents, interviewing, home visits, psychological testing, and the actual written report. Making recommendations to the court regarding child custody is an area of practice that clinical social workers encounter in ever-increasing numbers. Clinical social workers are called upon to give recommendations regarding child custody in neglect or abuse cases, in termination of parental rights proceedings, and in the area divorce and of guardianship. In an effort to provide clinicians with scientifically grounded parameters for rendering these recommendations, the following guidelines are recommended. These guidelines provide a framework of scientific principles, along with established and accepted clinical practice, to enhance the practitioner’s decision making in these challenging and complicated cases. The guidelines are specifically designed for clinical social workers doing custody evaluations in cases of marital divorce and are restricted to that area of practice.     

Decision-Making Criteria in Child Custody Disputes That Involve Requests for Overnight Visits with Infants and Toddlers: Derived from a Review of the Literature

ABSTRACT

The court, child custody evaluators, and mediators are often faced with difficult decisions regarding how to best meet the needs of children from families who are involved in child custody disputes. In some cases, the court, child custody evaluators and mediators are asked to make decisions about parenting plans for infants and toddlers. When decision makers are faced with actual cases, they are likely to be assisted by lines of inquiry that help them gather the most relevant data to answer the question at hand. A review of the literature has led to the development of 13 criteria that decision makers can use to reach conclusions about whether overnight visits would be advisable with a given infant or toddler. The criteria are considered neutral and are not based on any bias or preconceived opinion about whether overnights with infants and toddlers are or are not advisable. Instead, the criteria proposed provide the decision-maker with an objective way of structuring their thinking about a particular case to insure that all pertinent information has been considered before reaching a conclusion about whether overnight visitation is in the best interest of a given child.     

The child welfare service's assessments in custody cases that involve minors

The percentage of breakdowns in marriages, cohabitations and civil partnerships is increasing in the Western world, resulting in questions of child custody. In Norway and other Western countries, there is little knowledge of the support system's work in child custody cases. This article focuses on the assessments Norwegian child welfare service employees conduct in 37 cases about child custody. We explain why they sometimes conduct investigations of reports and at other times do not.

‘Street-level bureaucracy’ is the theoretical reference framework for interpreting the interviews. Assessments and decisions of the child welfare service in custody cases vary from one service to another. It is relatively difficult to predict whether the notifications will be investigated or dropped. Decisions are the result of a jigsaw puzzle of risk assessment, interpretations of legislation, cooperative procedures and an understanding of the county social welfare board. Notifications concerning violence and notifications from family counselling offices stand out since generally they result in investigations.

Child welfare services' handling of notifications regarding custody questions is challenging as these cases are in the grey zone between the Children Act and the Child Welfare Act. Child welfare workers want clearer guidelines for the cases on which they are to work. However, new rules cannot replace the professional and ethical assessments the child welfare service workers have to make in each individual case.     

Social Psychopathy,Social Distress,Family Breakdown,and Custody Disputes in the 1990s: Implications for Mental Health Professionals

The decade of the 1990s will probably contain more challenges to the role of the mental health practitioner in child custody cases than ever before in history. Because of increasing social stress and family disintegration, custody disputes are destined to become more frequent, bitter, and traumatic for all parties. Mental health professionals, in particular, need to develop a coherent structure regarding their own participation in this process. Issues of moral changes among our leadership and our citizenry are examined and guidelines for the behavior of the mental health practitioner in the courtroom are formulated and illustrated as they pertain to custody decisions. Parlicular attention is paid to custody decisions as an a11 rather than a science, the role of empirical research, the need to anticipate certain unintended circumstances, the need for the application of mental health principles on an individual case-by-case basis, the nature of the mental health professional’s expertise, and the problems with the concepts of “parental unfitness” and the use of psychiatric diagnosis as a way of defining such alleged unfitness.     

Securing Children’s Best Interests While Resisting the Lure of Simple Solutions

The best-interest-of-the-child standard for child custody policy and decisions has benefits and hazards, the latter related to the exercise of judicial discretion in custody disputes. This article examines alternatives to the status quo, including the primary parent presumption, the approximation rule, shared parenting, an exact even split of custodial time, sole custody for couples labeled as in high conflict or those with young children, the friendly parent presumption, and decisions that defer to children’s stated preferences. Each alternative promises simpler paths to securing children’s welfare, but some have more support than others in the social science literature.     

Does joint legal custody increase child support for nonmarital children?

Nonmarital children account for two fifths of births in the US, and close to two thirds of these children do not live with their fathers by age five. Although nonmarital children primarily live with their mothers, joint legal custody has emerged as an option for their parents. Parents with joint legal custody are expected to make major decisions for their child together, regardless of their prior marital status. This study investigates whether joint legal custody increases child support payments in the first year of a child support order among fathers of nonmarital children who live with their mothers, using a unique sample of court records in 2000–2009 in Wisconsin. It finds consistent and statistically significant positive associations across different methods; joint legal custody is associated with higher child support payments by about $170 a year and a higher compliance ratio by 5 percentage points. Paying child support is only one way nonresident parents can contribute to their children. Therefore, more studies are needed to understand whether and how joint legal custody affects other aspects of parenting and conditions under which it should be encouraged.     

Who’s minding the kids? An economic comparison of sole and joint custody

We examine the allocation of spending by divorced parents on both private goods and goods which they share with their child. Sole and joint custody arrangements differ in the pattern of shared goods. Parents play a non-cooperative game. We compute and compare the outcomes under sole and joint custody, and examine the effects of income redistribution.