Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Ethical Issues in Child Custody Evaluations

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Handbook of Child Custody

Abstract

This chapter delineates the guidelines for child custody evaluators from a variety of associations and professional groups, including the American Psychological Association (APA), the APA specialty guidelines, the Association for Family and Conciliation Courts (AFCC), and various other professional associations. Issues covered include an understanding of Daubert and Frye, communication and confidentiality. In addition, the chapter discusses record keeping, release of records, informed consent, collateral interviews and record review, ex parte communication and the presentation of findings. Other issues addressed include the employment of diverse methods of data collection, the use of interviews and psychological tests, as well as telephone interviews. The assessment of domestic violence, substance abuse, child abuse, and sexual orientation issues are also covered from an ethical perspective. In addition, specialized areas for custody evaluation are explored. This includes removal/relocation cases, parental alienation, supervised visitation, and assessment of mental illness. Role conflict and dual role are also discussed. Finally, the role of bias, including gender bias, cultural bias, recency bias, and confirmatory bias are cited as significant issues.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 259.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 329.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 329.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry. (2011). Ethical issues. Washington D.C.: Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ackerman, M. J., & Ackerman, M. C. (1997). Custody evaluation practices: A survey of experienced professionals (revisited). Professional Psychology, 28, 137–145.

    Google Scholar 

  • American Academy of Adolescent Psychiatry. (1982). Principles of practice of child and adolescent psychiatry. Washington, DC: American Academy of Adolescent Psychiatry.

    Google Scholar 

  • American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law. (1995). Ethical guidelines for the practice of forensic psychiatry. Bloomfield, CT: American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law.

    Google Scholar 

  • American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law. (2005). Ethics guidelines for the practice of forensic psychiatry. Bloomfield, CT: American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law.

    Google Scholar 

  • American Association of Marriage and Family Therapy. (1991). Code of ethics. Washington, DC: American Association of Marriage and Family Therapy.

    Google Scholar 

  • American Medical Association. (1995). Principles of medical ethics. Chicago: American Medical Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • American Professional Society on the abuse of children. (1997). Code of ethics. Chicago: American Professional Society on the abuse of children.

    Google Scholar 

  • American Psychological Association. (1997). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • American Psychological Association. (2007). Record keeping guidelines. Washington D.C.: American Psychological Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • American Psychological Association. (2009). Guidelines for child custody evaluations in family law proceedings. Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • American Psychological Association. (2010a). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. American Psychologist, 57, 1060–1073.

    Google Scholar 

  • American Psychological Association. (2010b). Guidelines for child custody evaluations in family law proceedings. American Psychologist, 65, 863–867.

    Google Scholar 

  • American Psychological Association. (2011). Specialty guidelines for forensic psychology. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Association of Family and Conciliation Courts. (2006). Model standards of practice for child custody evaluation. Madison: Association of Family and Conciliation Courts.

    Google Scholar 

  • Austin, W. G., Dale, M. D., Kirkpatrick, M. D., Flens, J. R. (2011). Forensic expert roles and services in child custody litigation: Work product review and case consultation. Journal of Child Custody: Research, Issues and Practices, 3(1–2), 47–83.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bala, N. (2005). Tippins and Witman asked the wrong questions: Evaluators may not be “experts,” but they can express best interests opinions. Family Court Review, 43, 554–562.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brodsky, S. (1991). Testifying in court: Guidelines and maxims for the expert witness. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daubert v. Merrill Dow Pharmaceuticals. (1993). U.S. 579.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erard, R. E. (2006). Tell it to the judge: A reply to Witman and Tippins. National Psychologist, 15, 1.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frye v. United States. (1923). 293F. 1013, 114.

    Google Scholar 

  • General Electric Company v. Joiner. (1997). U. S. 136.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gorman, I. R. (2004). Ethical risks in child custody: Where is the Wizard of Oz when you need him? American Journal of Forensic Psychology, 3(4), 5–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grisso, T. (2003). Evaluating competencies: Forensic assessments and instruments. New York: Kluwer/Plenum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gutheil, T., & Simon, R. (2004). Avoiding bias in expert testimony. Psychiatric Annals, 34(4), 260–170.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hagan, M. A., & Castagna, N. (2001). The real numbers: Psychological testing in custody evaluations. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 32, 269–271.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamberger, L. K. (2000). Requests for complete record release: A three-step response protocol. Psychotherapy, 37, 89–97.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heilbrun, K. (2001) Principles of mental health assessment. New York. NY: Kluwer Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hess, A. K. (1998). Accepting forensic case referrals: Ethical and professional considerations. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 29, 109–114.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hetherington, E. M., & Kelly, J. (2002). For better or worse: Divorce reconsidered. New York: Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirkland, K., & Kirkland, K. C. (2001). Frequency of child custody evaluation complaints and related disciplinary action: A survey of the association of state and provincial psychology boards. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 30, 402–410.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirkpatrick, H. D., Austin, W. G., & Flens, J. R. (2011). Psychological and legal considerations in reviewing the work product of a colleague in child custody evaluations. Journal of Child Custody: Research, Issues and Practices, 8(1–2), 102–123.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kumho Tire Company v. Carmichael. (1999). U.S. 119 S. Ct. 1167.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luftman, V. H., Velkamp, L. J., Clark, J. J., Lannacone, S., Snooks, H. (2005). Practice guidelines in child custody evaluations for licensed clinical social workers. Clinical Social Work Journal, 33(3), 327–357.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martindale, D. (2005). Confirmatory bias and confirmatory distortion. Journal of Child Custody, 2(1–2), 31–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Montgomery, L. M., Cubit, B. E., Wimberley, T. K. (1999). Complaints, malpractice and risk management. Professional Psychology: Research, Issues and Practice, 30, 402–410.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Association of Social Workers. (1997). NASW Code of ethics. Washington, DC: National Association of Social Workers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stahl, P. (2006). Avoiding bias in relocation evaluations. Journal of Child Custody, 3(3–4), 109–124.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stahl, P. (2011). Conducting Child Custody Evaluations. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tippins, T. M., & Witman, J. P. (2005). Empirical and ethical problems with custody recommendations: A call for clinical humility and judicial vigilance. Family Court Review, 43, 193–222.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, A. D. (1992). Bias and debiasing techniques in forensic psychology. American Journal of Forensic Psychology, 10, 19–26.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 2324 Scott Rd, 60062, Northbrook, IL, USA

    Mark L. Goldstein Ph.D.

Authors
  1. Mark L. Goldstein Ph.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mark L. Goldstein Ph.D. .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Northbrook, IL, USA

    Mark L. Goldstein

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Goldstein, M. (2016). Ethical Issues in Child Custody Evaluations. In: Goldstein, M. (eds) Handbook of Child Custody. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-13942-5_1

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation