

	Home > Custody Resources page

Custody Resources for Lawyers and Experts

The Gitlin Law Firm, Woodstock, Illinois © 2008
www.gitlinlawfirm.com

The following is my list of resources for custody lawyers who want to have an in depth knowledge of custody evaluations. This list is not limited to Illinois law but is national in scope. Many of these references should be mandatory reading for professionals conducting custody evaluations:

ETHICAL CODES AND GUIDELINES FOR CUSTODY EVALUATORS:

- Association of Family and Conciliation Courts (AFCC), May 2006, Model Standards of Practice for Child Custody Evaluation. The standards state in pertinent part:

Unless and until these Model Standards are incorporated into law, included in the
rules of a court system, or adopted by a licensing board or similar regulatory authority, they do not have the force of law. Nonetheless, the adoption of these Model Standards by AFCC, the sponsoring organization, should alert custody evaluators to the possibility that these Model Standards may be utilized in developing standards of care for custody evaluators.

American Psychiatric Association. (2001 edition). The Principles of Medical Ethics with Annotations Especially Applicable to Psychiatry (and addendums). Washington D.C.: American Psychiatric Association.

- American Psychological Association. (2002). "Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct 2002" Effective June 1, 2003. See: http://www.apa.org/ethics/code2002.html. The issue that generated the most comment and debate regarding the seen drafts of these updated standards addressed standard 9.04 "Release of Test Data." It defines test data as, " raw and scaled scores, client/patient responses to test questions or stimuli, and psychologists' notes and recordings concerning client/patient statements and behavior during an examination." The 2002 APA Guidelines provide:

Those portions of test materials that include client/patient responses are included in the definition of test data. Pursuant to a client/patient release, psychologists provide test data to the client/patient or other persons identified in the release. Psychologists may refrain from releasing test data to protect a client/patient or others from substantial harm or misuse or misrepresentation of the data or the test, recognizing that in many instances release of confidential information under these circumstances is regulated by law.

(b) In the absence of a client/patient release, psychologists provide test data only as required by law or court order.

See also, Forensic Matters and the New APA Ethics Code, which summarizes certain of the new provisions of the 2002 Code. A good article regarding multiple relationships (potential conflicts) under the 2002 is also by Celia Fisher, titled "Multiple Relationships and the New APA Ethics Code."

- American Psychological Association. (1994). "Guidelines for Child Custody evaluations in Divorce Proceedings." American Psychologist, 49, 677-680.
See: http://www.apa.org/practice/childcustody.html I refer to this as the APA Guidelines. It is an important resource for divorce lawyers and psychologists who handle custody cases.

- American Psychological Association. (1998). "Guidelines for Psychological Evaluations in Child Protection Matters.” http://www.apa.org/practice/childprotection.html

- Rights and Responsibilities of Test Takers: Guidelines and Expectations. Developed by Joint Committee on Testing Practices of the American Education Research Association, the American Psychological Association and the National Counsel on Measurement.
See: http://www.apa.org/science/ttrr.html

ARTICLES AND BOOKS RELEVANT TO CHILD CUSTODY EVALUATIONS INCLUDE:

- Ackerman, Marc J and Kane, Andrew W. Psychological Experts in Divorce Actions, Fourth Edition, Aspen Publishers. Last Supplemented Date: 4/25/2008. To order: Call 1-800-638-8437. This is what I consider the leading book regarding psychological experts in divorce. It is a treatise that I have on my bookshelf. *

- Ackerman, Marc J. Clinician's Guide to Child Custody Evaluations, Third Edition. John Wiley & Sons (January 2006). *

- Amundson, J.K., Daya, R., & Gill, E. (2000). "A minimalist approach to child custody evaluations." American Journal of Forensic Psychology, 18(3), 63-87. Summary: In addressing over or underdependence on psychological expertise in custody/access matters, a "minimalist" approach is offered. This professional stance in custody/access work neither trivializes nor denies the complexity of evaluation related to children's best psychological interest but seeks to define the boundary between expertise and ultimate issues.

- Austin, W.G. (2002). "Guidelines for utilizing collateral sources of information in child custody evaluations." Family Court Review, 40(2), 177-184.

- Bagby, R.M., Nicholson, R.A., Buis, T., Radovanovic, H., & Fidler, B.J. (1999). "Defensive responding on the MMPI-2 in family custody and access evaluations." Psychological Assessment, 11(1), 24-28.

- Benjamin, G. Andrew, et. al. Family Evaluation in Custody Litigation: Reducing Risks of Ethical Infractions and Malpractice (Forensic Practice Guidebook). APA 2003. Comment: This is a dangerous book to rely upon in part because it does not distinguish between what I consider to be the standard of care and actually provides very bad advice in part. More dangerous, it recommends the destruction of video taping that is made during the evaluation process prior to court proceedings. For this reason, this is not a recommended text.

- Brodzinsky, D. (1993). "On the use and misuse of psychological testing in child custody evaluations." Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 24, 213-214.

- Erickson, Lilienfeld and Vitacco (April 2007), A Critical Examination of the Suitability and Limitations of Psychological Tests in Family Court: A Dialogue, Family Court Review, Volume 45 Issue 2 Page 157, Issue 2-174.

- Faigman, D.L. (1992). "Struggling to stop the flood of unreliable expert testimony." Minnesota Law Review, 76, 877-889.

- Fisher, Celia (2003). "Decoding the Ethics Code: A Practical Guide for Psychologists." Sage Publications. See sample chapter titled, "A Code of Ethics for Psychology: How did We Get Here?"

- Flens, Jay R. (2005), The Responsible Use of Psychological Testing in Child Custody Evaluation: Selection of Tests, 2 Journal of Child Custody, page 23.

- Flens, Jay R. (2005), Psychological Testing in Child Custody Evaluations (Published simultaneously as the Journal of Child Custody, Vol. 2, Nos. 1/2)

- Galatzer-Levy (editor) (1999). The Scientific Basis of Child Custody Decisions. Wiley.

- Graham, John R. (2005) MMPI-2: Assessing Personality and Psychopathology, 4/e, Oxford University Press, Oxford Univ. This is what I consider the Bible regarding interpretation of the MMPI-2. ISBN 0195168062. * This is also a treatise on my bookshelf. I also recommend reviewing from time to time the Pearson Assessment Web Site regarding updates to the test. See also the Restructured Form. This provides an alternative but not a replacement to the standard form.

- Goodman-Delahunty, J. (1997). "Forensic psychological expertise in the wake of Daubert." Law and Human Behavior, 21, 121-140.

- Gould, J.W. (2005), Use of Psychological Testing in Child Custody Assessment, 2 Journal of Child Custody, 49-69. This article summarizes the work of other authors.

- Gould, J.W. (2002) "Clinicians in Court: A Guide to Subpoenas, Depositions,Testifying, and Everything Else You Need to Know." Paperback edition (2004), Guilford Press. See pdf of review in American Journal of Psychiatry.

- Gould, J.W. (2006). Conducting Scientifically Crafted Child Custody Evaluations. Second Edition. PRP.

- Gould, J.W. & Bell, L.C. (2000). "Forensic methods and procedures applied to child custody evaluations: What judges need to know in determining a competent forensic work product." Juvenile and Family Court Journal, 38(2), 21-27.

- Gould, J.W & Stahl, Philip M., "Never Paint by the Numbers: A response to Kelly & Lamb (2000), Solomon (2001), & Lamb & Kelly (2001)." This is a discussion of studies that apply to overnight parenting time for the noncustodial parent when there are very young children. A good quotation states:

[T]he art of child custody evaluations is applying the results from aggregate research results to the specific, ideographic (and idiosyncratic) needs of a particular family. Research results are important in their ability to guide our thinking about how specific results might be relevant to a particular family system. However, there is never any substitute for exploring the parenting history and relevant dynamics of a particular family and then integrating that data with current research. Of course, evaluators will include collateral contacts along with interviews and direct observations in evaluating the above dimensions.

- Greenberg, S.A. & Shuman, D.W. (1997). "Irreconcilable conflict between therapeutic and forensic roles." Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 28(1), 50-57.

- McCann, J.T., Flens, J.R., Campagna, V., Collman, P., Lazzaro, T. & Conner, E. (2001). "The MCMI-III in child custody evaluations: A normative study." Journal of Forensic Psychology Practice, 1, 27-44.

- O'Donohue, W., & Bradley, A.R. (1999). "Conceptual and empirical issues in child custody evaluations." Clinical Psychology: Science & Practice, 6 (3), 310 - 322.

- Otto, R.K., Edens, J.F., & Barcus, E.H. (2000). "The use of psychological testing in child custody evaluations." Family & Conciliation Courts Review, 38(3), 312-340.

Summary: Mental health professionals conducting psychological evaluations in custody proceedings 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 texts 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.

- Pope, Henneth S., Butcher, James N., and Seelen, Joyce. The MMPI, MMPI-2 and MMPI-A: A Practical Guide for Expert Witnesses and Attorneys in Court, Third Edition, May 2006. American Psychological Association. Includes detailed references. This is a treatise that I have on my bookshelf. *

-Gould-Saltman, Diane (2005, Testing 1, 2, 3 Testing: An Attorney Perspective. 2 Journal of Child Custody, 71-81.

- Shuman, D.W. & Sales, B.D. (1998). "The admissibility of expert testimony based upon clinical judgment and scientific research." Psychology, Public Policy, & Law, 4(4), 1226-1252.

Kelly, Robert F., Ph.D. et al., "Other Noteworthy Articles: Determinants of Sole and Joint Physical Custody Arrangements in a National Sample of Divorce Cases." American Journal of Family Law, Vol. 19, No. 1, p. 25-43.

WEB SITES:

American Academy of Forensic Psychiatry (AAFS)— Information providing an overview of AAFS, American College of Forensic Psychiatry, American Board of Forensic Psychiatry and American Board of Professional Psychology: www.aafs.org/

Attorneys Directory of Forensic Psychiatrists: http://www.forensicpsychonline.com/online.html

American Academy / Board of Forensic Psychology: www.abfp.com

American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law: http://www.emory.edu/AAPL/

American Academy of Psychiatry & the Law Ethical Guidelines for the Practice of Forensic Psychiatry — Adopted May 1987, Last Revised 1995: http://www.aapl.org/ethics.htm

American Association for Marriage and Family Therapy: www.aamft.org

American College of Forensic Psychology: www.forensicpsychology.org

American College of Forensic Psychiatry: www.forensicpsychonline.com

American Psychiatric Association: http://www.psych.org/

American Psychological Association: www.apa.org

American Psychological - Law Society: www.ap-ls.org/

OTHER WEB RESOURCES TO NOTE:

Marriage, Divorce and Children's Adjustment, Second Edition, Robert. E. Emery, Development Clinical Psychology and Psychiatry, Sage Publications, 1999.

Parental Alienation and Enmeshment Issues in Child Custody Cases by Daniel J. Rybicki, Psy.D. http://fact.on.ca/Info/pas/rybick00.htm

Summary of references (not links) re suggestability of child testimony. http://legalminds.lp.findlaw.com/list/child-court/msg01532.html

Relocation of Children After Divorce and Children's Best Interests: New Evidence and Legal Considerations (PDF: 134KB), June 2003

"Child Adjustment in Joint-Custody Versus Sole-Custody Arrangements: A Meta-Analytic Review"
Robert Bauserman (Journal of Family Psychology, 2002).

The Gitlin Law Firm provides the above information as a continuing legal education to other lawyers. A person's accessing the information contained in this web site, is not considered as retaining The Gitlin Law Firm for any case nor is it considered as providing legal advice.

The Gitlin Law Firm
Practice Limited to Family Law
663 East Calhoun Street
Woodstock, IL 60098
815/338-9401

www.gitlinlawfirm.com
Gitlin Law Firm, P.C.