Custody and Access to Children

  • Lenore E. WalkerEmail author
  • David Shapiro
  • Stephanie Akl


Most people who divorce with children are able to decide what is in the best interests of their child without having to go to court to have the judge make the decision for them. In fact, it is usually a whole industry of health care and legal professionals who make the decisions and most family court judges merely ratify their recommendations, which more likely than not will be to share custody and access. Each parent is required to support themselves and their children which is presumed to be 50/50 unless there has been a disparity in income levels. In custody cases there are several presumptions that are believed to be in the best interests of the child although research in this chapter challenges most of the presumptions that are not supported by scientific research. We give examples of how shared parental custody and responsibility may not be in the best interests in families where there is domestic violence and child abuse or when one parent is not as available or competent as the other. Nor is the friendly parent in front of the judge or the child custody evaluators necessarily the best parent as many who abuse their power and control can manipulate and harass to get what they demand. Keeping siblings together may be harmful in families where sibling rivalry or mental illness in one of the children will compromise the development of the others. Forcing a parent to remain in the same geographic location even when better opportunities are elsewhere may also not be in the best interests of the child. The chapter is critical of the current child custody process and makes suggestions on other types of access to children. Research shows judges have  bias against women when they allege abuse to themselves or their children by the fathers. The bias is shown to be worse when the father claims the mother is alienating him from the children and negates the reports of abuse placing both the mother and child in danger (Meier, 2019). Unfortunately child custody evaluators are recommending dangerous custodial arrangements attempting to conform with the law even though most laws have room for modification of the presumptions. Assessment of competent parenting skills and a thorough model custody and parental fitness evaluation is included. Resolving the Hague International Convention cases where children reside in two countries is also discussed.


Child custody evaluation Parental fitness evaluation Best interests of the child Equal time-sharing presumption Hague Convention Parental alienation Child abuse Domestic violence 


  1. Bala, N., Mitnick, M., Trocme, N., & Houston, C. (2007). Sexual abuse allegations and parental separation: Smokescreen or fire? Journal of Family Studies, 13, 26–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bancroft, L., & Silverman, J. (2003). The Batterer as Parent. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  3. Benjamin, G. A., Beck, C. J., Shaw, M., & Geffner, R. (2018). Family evaluation in custody litigation: Promoting optimal outcomes and reducing ethical risks. Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chesler, P. (2013). An American bride in Kabul. New York, NY: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  5. Dallam, S. J., & Silberg, J. L. (2014). Six myths that place children at risk during custody disputes. Family & Intimate Violence Quarterly, 7, 65–88.Google Scholar
  6. Dallam, S. J., & Silberg, J. L. (2016). Recommended treatments for “parental alienation syndrome” (PAS) may cause children foreseeable and lasting psychological harm. Journal of Child Custody, 13, 134–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Drozd, L. M., Olesen, N. W., & Saini, M. (2013). Parenting plan and child custody evaluations: Increasing competence and preventing avoidable errors. Sarasota, FL: Professional Resources Press.Google Scholar
  8. Edleson, J., & Lindhorst, T. (no date). Battered mothers seeking safety across international borders: Examining Hague Convention cases involving allegations of domestic violence. The Judges’ Newsletter, XVIII. Available at
  9. Emery, R. E., Otto, R. K., & Donahue, W. T. (2005). A critical assessment of child custody evaluations: Limited science and a flawed system. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 6, 1–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Felitti, V. J. (2001). Reverse alchemy in childhood: Turning gold into lead. Health Alert, 8, 1–4.Google Scholar
  11. Gardner, R. A. (1987). The parental alienation syndrome and the differentiation between fabricated and genuine child sex abuse cases. Cresskill, NJ: Creative Therapeutics.Google Scholar
  12. Gewirtz, A. H., & Edleson, J. L. (2007). Young children’s exposure to intimate partner violence: towards a developmental risk and resilience framework for research and intervention. Journal of Family Violence, 22, 151–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kalmus, D. (1984). The intergenerational transmission of violence in the family. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 46 11–19.Google Scholar
  14. Kleinman, T., & Pollack, D. (2019, November 18). How to select an expert in a custody case. New York Law Journal.
  15. Lamb, M. E., Orbach, Y., Hershkowitz, I., Esplin, P., & Horowitz, D. (2007). Structured forensic interview protocols improve the quality and informativeness of investigative interviews with children: A review of research using the NICHD Investigative Interview Protocol. Child Abuse and Neglect, 31, 1201–1231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Leadership Council on Child Abuse and Interpersonal Violence. (2008). How many children are court-ordered into unsupervised contact with an abusive parent after divorce? Retrieved from
  17. Meier, J. S. (2019). Child custody outcomes in cases involving parental alienation and abuse allegations. George Washington University Law School Legal Theory Paper No. 2019-56. Obtained from the Social Science Research Network:
  18. Milchman, M. (2017). Misogynistic cultural argument in parental alienation versus child abuse cases. Journal of Child Custody, 14, 211–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Parker, T., Rogers, K., Collins, M., & Edleson, J. (2008). Danger zone: Battered mothers and their families in supervised visitation. Violence Against Women, 14, 1313.
  20. Saunders, D. G. (2011). Child custody evaluators’ belief about domestic abuse allegations: Their relationship to evaluator demographics, background, domestic violence knowledge and custody visitation recommendations. Final Technical Report. NIJ, USDOJ.Google Scholar
  21. Shapiro, D. L., & Walker, L. E. A. (2019). Forensic practice for the mental health clinician. New York, NY: TPI Press.Google Scholar
  22. Silberg, J., & Dallam, S. (2019). Abusers gaining custody in family courts: A case series of over turned decisions. Journal of Child Custody, 16. Downloaded from
  23. Stark, E. (2007). Coercive control: The entrapment of women in personal life. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  24. U.S. Department of Health & Human Services. (2010). Child Maltreatment 2010. Washington, D.C. Administration on Children, Youth & Families, Children’s Bureau. Downloaded from (Google Scholar).
  25. Vandell, D. L., & Duncan, R. J. (2019). Stimulating-responsive mothering in first three years is vital for child development. Child Development Research, Insights, and Science Briefs to Your Inbox. Child & Family Blog.Google Scholar
  26. Van Haasselt, V. (2013). Murder-Suicides in Florida. Presentation at the American Psychological Association Annual Conference. August.Google Scholar
  27. Walker, L. E. A. (2017). The battered woman syndrome (4th ed.). New York, NY: Springer.Google Scholar
  28. Walker, L. E., Cummings, M., & Cummings, N. (2013). Our broken family court. New York, NY: Ithaca Press.Google Scholar
  29. Wallerstein, J. S., & Kelly, J. B. (1996). Surviving the breakup. New York, NY: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  30. Wolfe, D. A., Crooks, C. V., Lee, V., McIntyre-Smith, A., & Jaffe, P. G. (2003). The effects of children’s exposure to domestic violence: A meta-analysis and critique. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 6, 171–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lenore E. Walker
    • 1
    Email author
  • David Shapiro
    • 2
  • Stephanie Akl
    • 3
  1. 1.Nova Southeastern UniversityFort LauderdaleUSA
  2. 2.Nova Southeastern UniversityFort LauderdaleUSA
  3. 3.Nova Southeastern UniversityFort LauderdaleUSA

Personalised recommendations