Social Workers Doing Custody Evaluations for Family Court

Standards and Guidelines for Child Custody Evaluations in New York State.^1,2

This commodity is authored past Neil S. Grossman, Ph.D., ABPP, who practices on Long Island.

---

STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES FOR CHILD CUSTODY EVALUATIONS IN NEW YORK STATE.^i,2

past Neil S. Grossman, Ph.D., ABPP

The standards and guidelines for child custody evaluations in New York State are reviewed, relevant parts summarized and based on the elements identified, recommendations are made for child custody evaluations.

Conceptual Issues

There is a need for agreed upon norms for Kid Custody Evaluations (CCE), and forensic evaluations in general, that inform professionals, members of the legal organization and the public nigh what should be included, and how the information should be gathered, analyzed and reported (Zelechoski, 2010). The utilise of these norms helps provide consistency between forensic psychologists and should consequence in a higher degree of accurateness in their evaluations.

Information near how to behave forensic evaluations is contained in the standards and guidelines written and propagated by professional organizations on national and land levels. Standards bespeak what is expected and specify that anything beneath this standard is non acceptable. The ethical code of the American Psychological Association (APA) (2002) states what is expected of psychologists in general areas of practice. Upstanding standards stand for a broad consensus in the field of psychology and are informed by practice guidelines and the results of enquiry (Zelechoski, 2010). Guidelines on the other hand are aspirational and establish principles and parameters. Inquiry and conceptual writings in books and professional journals also inform u.s. virtually conducting and reporting CCE (Ackerman, 2006; Bow & Quinnell, 2002 & 2004; Gould & Martindale, 2007; Heilbrun, et. al., 2007; Kirkpatrick, 2004; Melton, et. al., 2007).

A number of guidelines are written specifically about forensic bug that inform psychologists: APA Guidelines for Kid Custody Evaluations in Family Police Proceedings (2010); Specialty Guidelines for Forensic Psychologists, revised (in press), from the Forensic Partition of APA; and the New York State Part of the Professions which has established Guidelines for Kid Custody Evaluations (updated, 2009).

Psychologists who conduct CCE also should be informed by the guidelines from other professions: e.grand. Clan of Family and Conciliation Courts (AFCC) (2006) and psychiatrists (Herman & Bernet, 1997). (A set up of guidelines have been written for social workers only these were published by a group of social piece of work practitioners and were not created or sanctioned by the social piece of work organizations.)

Standards for Psychologists

The American Psychological Clan (APA) Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Carry (2002) is general and applies to psychologists beyond their diverse roles (this will be referred to every bit the "Code of Ethics")^{3, four}. The standards most relevant to CCE involve the exercise of psychology, multiple relationships, third-party request for services, maintaining records and selecting assessment textile.

The Code of Ethics states that the practice of psychology should exist based on established scientific and professional knowledge. Psychologists should exist competent in areas of their exercise and this competency should be maintained over fourth dimension. While the content for areas of professional practice is not specified, it is noted that in the forensic area, psychologists should be knowledgeable of judicial and administrative rules of the court.

The Code of Ethics (along with other guidelines for forensic psychologists) state that multiple relationships should be avoided. (While the criteria for this is demanding, it is noted that there may be situations where the psychologist could enter into a multiple relationship when information technology was non expected to be harmful.) The concept of multiple relationships is also discussed nether the heading "conflict of interests." The Code of Ideals mandate that psychologists should avoid roles where at that place is a conflict of interest that would impair their objectivity, etc. (Information technology is usually best to avert roles where there may be even the appearance of such conflict.)

Of particular concern to psychologists in forensic roles is the department on "Third-Party Requests for Services". Psychologists must determine who their customer is, how the data will be used and whether at that place are limits to confidentiality. Psychologists in all areas of professional person practice should provide data about their services and obtain an informed consent. When services are court ordered, at the outset psychologists must inform people they are working with most the services they are providing and any limits of confidentiality, even if these people are not officially the "customer".

The Code of Ethics likewise stipulates that appropriate records should be maintained about the services psychologists provide; confidential information should only exist disclosed when there is proper consent unless such disclosure is required by law; and fees and other financial arrangements should be discussed as early on as possible in the professional relationship.

Under the topic, "Assessment", the Code of Ethics states that the opinion of psychologists should be based on the substantive information that is obtained. This includes forensic testimony. In selecting assessment fabric, validity and reliability in relation to the specific population should exist considered. Psychologists notation and explicate any limitations of the data and conclusions. Confidential examination data, including test manuals and materials, may not be released unless mandated by law.

National Guidelines for Psychologists

APA has established guidelines specifically for CCE (APA Guidelines for Child Custody Evaluations in Family Law Proceedings, 2010). Guidelines also have been established for psychologists practicing in forensic areas (Specialty Guidelines for Forensic Psychologists, in press).

The key principles of the Guidelines for Child Custody Evaluations are that the evaluation should: exist impartial; focus in on the best interests of the child; and consider parenting attributes, the child's needs and resulting fit relative to what each parent can provide. The evaluation should utilise multiple methods of information drove: one) direct data gathering (psychological testing, clinical interview, and behavioral ascertainment); two) document review (school, medical, agencies, etc.); 3) information obtained from collateral sources; and 4) efforts may be fabricated to seek corroboration of information from tertiary parties. Also emphasized is that the evaluator should strive to avoid multiple relationships.

The guidelines for psychologists practicing in forensic areas⁵ (The Specialty Guidelines for Forensic Psychologists, 2011) are informed by the APA Code of Ethics. Most relevant to CCE are impartiality, procedures in forensic evaluations and communicating the findings.

The responsibleness of forensic psychologists is to be impartial, fair and to avoid conflicts of interest. Forensic psychologists should be competent in the areas in which they provide services. They should have knowledge of the legal system, the legal rights of individuals, and the scientific foundation of their opinions and testimony. Setting of fees, the need for informed consent, possible conflicts in the exercise of forensic psychology, and privacy, privilege and confidentiality are discussed.

The methods and procedures used in conducting forensic evaluations are particularly important. A broad diversity of information should exist sought and alternate hypotheses considered. Multiple sources of information should be used and data corroborated when possible. Opinions should not exist given about people who were not evaluated.

Forensic assessments should focus on the psycho-legal issues of the case. Forensic reports and testimony typically provide "information about the examinee's functional abilities, capacities, cognition, and beliefs, and address their opinions and recommendations to the identified psycho-legal issues" (p13). Assessments are designed based on the validity, reliability and relevance to the population existence assessed. The strengths and limitations of the assessment should be explained.

When communicating information in written reports or testifying, data should exist presented in a fair manner with relevant data bachelor regardless of whether it supports the hypotheses of the forensic psychologist. An effort is made to distinguish observations, inferences and conclusions. The relationship between adept opinions and legal issues should exist explained. All sources of data used in reaching conclusions should exist identified.

Specific Guidelines in New York Land

In New York State the Office of the Professions has published Guidelines for Kid Custody Evaluations (updated, 2009). These guidelines state that the child's best psychological interests should be of primary concern and include information about how CCE should be conducted.

Psychologists should be impartial and non take other roles (multiple roles) with the child or parents. This helps ensure that the evaluation is independent and off-white and not necessarily reflect the desired outcome of the person or agency requesting the evaluation.

Kid custody evaluations should be based on a diversity of data including information from the various settings in the child'southward life and the child's relationship with all parental figures, and the resulting fit of these relationships with the child'due south needs. The psychologist should determine the scope of an evaluation based on the all-time interests of the child and not exist limited by requests to evaluate specific areas of child custody. Efforts should be made to minimize the number of sessions in evaluating the child, but should allow an authentic agreement and recommendations about the child. The report should exist rendered in a timely mode and if custody recommendations are made they should be derived from the available information.

The psychologist should exist knowledgeable and accept feel in the areas of child and family evolution, variant forms of families, child corruption and fail, family unit dynamics of divorce, court procedures, and legal options in obtaining a divorce. Additionally, psychologists are mandated child abuse reporters and they should follow appropriate procedures if any abuse is suspected. Informed consent should be obtained from the participants of the evaluation and the limits of confidentiality should exist discussed. Finances should be established before starting a kid custody evaluation.

Other Material in New York State

The Matrimonial Commission Written report to the Chief Judge of the State of New York (2006) recommended guidelines for child custody evaluations. The committee concluded that the use of forensic evaluations in child custody cases has been of import and that they should continue to be used when the outcome of custody is complicated or there are specific needs in a case, east.k., a question almost the mental health of the parents; needs of the kid that would exist difficult for the court to consider; or allegations of alienation or child corruption. The qualifications of the forensic good, i.eastward., didactics, training and experience, should friction match the needs of the case. In the long run, minimum standards and qualifications of the forensic expert should be established. The California Rules of the Court are cited as an instance of specifying the qualifications of the evaluator and the desired content of evaluations (Report Appendices, 2006).

In conducting the forensic evaluation, records and documentation should be carefully reviewed and considered. There should be a minimum number of interviews with the parents and children. The evaluation should include the parent'due south family, personal, marital and medical histories, a mental status examination and a discussion of the present issues. Besides included should be a description of the functioning of parents and children, the interaction betwixt each parent and the children, a word of which parent best meets the children's emotional needs. There should be an evaluation for the presence of domestic violence and the possibility that a parent will interfere with the other parent'south relationship with the children.

The committee recommended that reports focus on the "emotional" all-time interests of the child and contain an indication that the parties, children and collateral sources were informed that there is no confidentiality or privilege in these evaluations.

Other National Guidelines

Psychologists should likewise be familiar with the guidelines of the Association of Family unit and Conciliation Courts (AFCC) Model Standards of Exercise for Child Custody Evaluation, 2006 (note these are aspirational guidelines although the discussion "Standards" is used in the title). Some of the areas covered in these guidelines are:

1. training, educational activity and competency
2. cognition of law as related to child custody and the legal questions involved
3. data gathering which should involve diverse methods, a balanced process, and bespeak when in that location is incomplete or missing data and country how it effects of evaluation
4. use of formal assessment instruments
5. role conflicts and dual roles - take reasonable steps to avert multiple relationships and discloses potential conflicts of interest
1. exercise not offer therapeutic advice
2. evaluators shall refrain from offer interim recommendations and negotiating settlements
6. interviews with children and parent/child observations
7. utilize of collateral source information

Recommendations Regarding Psychologists Conducting and Reporting CCE⁶

Based on this review of standards and guidelines, and informed past research and conceptual writings, it is recommended that when conducting and reporting CCE psychologists should: General

1. base procedures and conclusions on scientific and professional knowledge*
2. exist competent in the areas of their evaluation*
3. take knowledge of judicial and administrative rules of the courtroom*
4. avert multiple relationships* (APA ideals acknowledges that there may be exceptions to this standard)
5. should avert conflicts of interest*
6. maintain advisable records*
7. not release confidential test data, manuals and material unless mandated by police force*
8. consider validity and reliability in relation to the specific population being assessed when selecting assessment fabric*

Before Evaluation Begins or Shortly Afterwards

1. determine who is the customer, how the information will exist used and limits of confidentiality*
2. describe their services, obtain an informed consent, and discuss any limits of confidentiality to the client and the person who they are evaluating if this person is not the client*
3. discuss fees and whatsoever other financial arrangements as early equally possible*

During the Evaluation

1. be fair, objective, and impartial (independent of agency or people requesting the evaluation)
2. focus on the best (psychological/emotional) interests of the child
3. consider parenting attributes, the child'southward needs and relative fit of the child with what each parent tin provide
4. notice parent/child interactions
1. is the parent kid-centered
2. how well does parent sympathize child's point of view and motivation
5. consider interviewing meaning others
6. consider information from various settings of the kid'south life
7. use multiple methods of information drove
1. obtain direct data such as clinical interview, behavioral observations and psychological testing - as much every bit possible use the same method of data collection for both parents
2. review relevant documents
3. obtain data from collateral sources and question sources near the data they provide
1. consider that some sources may provide biased information
2. be prepared to talk over relative credibility of each collateral source
4. try to corroborate information from tertiary parties
5. collect data in a counterbalanced process with respect to both parents
(Information technology is recommended that family unit, personal, marital and medical histories, a mental status examination and a give-and-take of present bug exist included in data collection)
8. consider alternate hypotheses
9. not offer opinions about people who were not evaluated
10. focus on psycho-legal problems
11. be warning for presence of child abuse or domestic violence
12. empathise the importance of convergent validity: when multiple collateral sources betoken similar opinions or point to the same conclusion
13. not offer therapeutic communication (from AFCC)
14. refrain from offering interim recommendations and negotiating settlements (from AFCC)

Written report of Evaluation or Court Testimony

1. base opinions on noun information obtained*
2. explain any limitations of data and conclusions* (explain strengths and limitations of assessment)
3. identify all sources of information used in reaching conclusions
4. try to distinguish between observations, inferences and conclusions
5. explain relationship between expert opinions and legal issues
6. necktie conclusions and recommendations, if any, to the information
7. render the report in timely manner

Notes

¹Grossman, N. S. (2012). Standards and Guidelines for Child Custody Evaluations in New York State. New York State Psychologist: Forensic Psychology, 14(2), 7-10.

²The information contained in this commodity is in part abstracted from original sources and is based on the interpretation of this author. The reader should consult the original standards and guidelines to insure an accurate understanding of these principles.

ⁱⁱⁱThe APA Lawmaking of Ethics may conflict with laws and regulations that utilise to psychologists. When this happens psychologist should effort to resolve the conflict and they should not use the APA ethics as a reason to disobey other authorities.

^fourThe APA Code of Ethics applies to all psychologists whether or not they are APA members.

^vThese guidelines apply to psychologists practicing in forensic areas whether or not they consider themselves forensic psychologists.

⁶Aspects that are derived from a standard and thus mandatory are marked with an asterisk. All other aspects are derived from guidelines and therefore should be considered aspirational.

References

Ackerman, M. 2006. Clinician'south Guide to Kid Custody Evaluations (3rd Edition). Hoboken, NJ: J. Wiley & Sons.

American Psychological Association. (2002). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. American Psychologist, 57, 1060–1073.

American Psychological Association. (2010). Guidelines for child custody evaluations in legal proceedings. American Psychologist, 65, 863-867.

Association of Family and Conciliation Courts. (2006). Model Standards of Practice for Child Custody Evaluation. Retrieved 7/26/2012 from http://www.afccnet.org/Portals/0/ModelStdsChildCustodyEvalSept2006.pdf

Bow, J. N., & Quinnell, F. A. (2004). Critique of child custody evaluations by the legal profession. Family Court Review, 40(1), 115-127.

Bow, J. N., & Quinnell, F. A. (2002). A critical review of child custody evaluation reports. Family Courtroom Review, 40(2), 164-176.

Gould, J. W. & Martindale, D. A. (2007). The Art and Science of Child Custody Evaluations. New York: Guilford Printing.

Heilbrun, 1000., Marczyk, G., DeMatteo, D. & Mack-Allen, J. (2007). A principles-based approach to forensic mental health assessment: Utility and update. In A.Thou. Goldstein (Ed.), Forensic Psychology: Emerging topics and expanding roles, (pp. 45-72). Hoboken, NJ: J. Wiley & Sons.

Kirkpatrick, H. D. (2004). A flooring, non a ceiling: Beyond guidelines-an argument for minimum standards for practise in conducting child custody and visitation evaluations. Periodical of Child Custody, 1(one), 61-75.

Matrimonial Commission. (2006). Written report to the Principal Approximate of the State of New York. Retrieved on 7/26/2012 from http://www.nycourts.gov/reports/matrimonialcommissionreport.pdf

Betrothed Commission. (2006). Report Appendices: California rules of the Court- Rules 5.220, 5.225, and 5.230. Retrieved on vii/26/2012 http://www.courts.state.ny.us/reports/matrimonialcommissionAPPENDICES.pdf

Melton, G., Petrila, J., Poythress, N., Slobogin, C., Lyons, P., & Otto, R. K. (2007). Psychological Evaluations for the Courts: A Handbook for Mental Health Professionals and Lawyers (third edition). New York: Guilford.

New York Country the Part of the Professions. (updated, 2009). Guidelines for Child Custody Evaluations. Retrieved on 7/26/2012 from http://www.op.nysed.gov/prof/psych/psychcustodyguide.htm

Herman, S. P. & Bernet, W. (1997). Do parameters for kid custody evaluation. Periodical of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry. 36 (10 Suppl.) 57S-68S.

Specialty Guidelines for Forensic Psychologists, (in press), American Psychologist. Retrieved vii/26/ 2012 from http://www.ap-ls.org/aboutpsychlaw/SpecialtyGuidelines.php

Zelechoski, A. (2010). Reconciling the practices of child custody evaluators with the needs of the legal community. Presentation at the Ninth Symposium on Child Custody Evaluations, Cambridge, Massachusetts.

---

Dr. Neil S. Grossman is a clinical and forensic psychologist who specializes in divorce and recovery working with children and families. Dr. Grossman serves all of Long Island.

elaminearry1967.blogspot.com

Source: https://divorcerecoveryrx.com/forensic%20articles/Standards%20and%20Guidelines%20for%20Child%20Custody%20Evaluations.htm

Share this post