1. The primary purpose of the evaluation is to
assess the best psychological interests of the child.
The primary consideration in a child custody evaluation is to
assess the individual and family factors that affect the best
psychological interests of the child. More specific questions
may be raised by the court.
2. The child's interests and
well-being are paramount.
In a child custody evaluation, the child's interests and
well-being are paramount. Parents competing for custody, as well
as others, may have legitimate concerns, but the child's best
interests must prevail.
3. The focus of the evaluation is
on parenting capacity, the psychological and developmental needs
of the child, and the resulting fit.
In considering psychological factors affecting the best
interests of the child, the psychologist focuses on the
parenting capacity of the prospective custodians in conjunction
with the psychological and developmental needs of each involved
child. This involves (a) an assessment of the adults' capacities
for parenting, including whatever knowledge, attributes, skills,
and abilities, or lack thereof, are present; (b) an assessment
of the psychological functioning and developmental needs of each
child and of the wishes of each child where appropriate; and (c)
an assessment of the functional ability of each parent to meet
these needs, including an evaluation of the interaction between
each adult and child.
The values of the parents relevant to parenting, ability to
plan for the child's future needs, capacity to provide a stable
and loving home, and any potential for inappropriate behavior or
misconduct that might negatively influence the child also are
considered. Psychopathology may be relevant to such an
assessment, insofar as it has impact on the child or the ability
to parent, but it is not the primary focus.
4. The role of the psychologist is that of a
professional expert who strives to maintain an objective,
impartial stance.
The role of the psychologist is as a professional expert. The
psychologist does not act as a judge, who makes the ultimate
decision applying the law to all relevant evidence. Neither does
the psychologist act as an advocating attorney, who strives to
present his or her client's best possible case. The
psychologist, in a balanced, impartial manner, informs and
advises the court and the prospective custodians of the child of
the relevant psychological factors pertaining to the custody
issue. The psychologist should be impartial regardless of
whether he or she is retained by the court or by a party to the
proceedings. If either the psychologist or the client cannot
accept this neutral role, the psychologist should consider
withdrawing from the case. If not permitted to withdraw, in such
circumstances, the psychologist acknowledges past roles and
other factors that could affect impartiality.
5. The
psychologist gains specialized competence.
- A psychologist contemplating performing child custody
evaluations is aware that special competencies and knowledge
are required for the undertaking of such evaluations.
Competence in performing psychological assessments of
children, adults, and families is necessary but not
sufficient. Education, training, experience, and/or
supervision in the areas of child and family development,
child and family psychopathology, and the impact of divorce on
children help to prepare the psychologist to participate
competently in child custody evaluations. The psychologist
also strives to become familiar with applicable legal
standards and procedures, including laws governing divorce and
custody adjudications in his or her state or jurisdiction.
- The psychologist uses current knowledge of scientific and
professional developments, consistent with accepted clinical
and scientific standards, in selecting data collection methods
and procedures. The Standards for Educational and
Psychological Testing ( APA,
1985 ) are adhered to in the use of psychological tests
and other assessment tools.
- In the course of conducting child custody evaluations,
allegations of child abuse, neglect, family violence, or other
issues may occur that are not necessarily within the scope of
a particular evaluator's expertise. If this is so, the
psychologist seeks additional consultation, supervision,
and/or specialized knowledge, training, or experience in child
abuse, neglect, and family violence to address these complex
issues. The psychologist is familiar with the laws of his or
her state addressing child abuse, neglect, and family violence
and acts accordingly.
6. The psychologist is aware of personal and
societal biases and engages in nondiscriminatory practice.
The psychologist engaging in child custody evaluations is
aware of how biases regarding age, gender, race, ethnicity,
national origin, religion, sexual orientation, disability,
language, culture, and socioeconomic status may interfere with
an objective evaluation and recommendations. The psychologist
recognizes and strives to overcome any such biases or withdraws
from the evaluation.
7. The psychologist avoids multiple
relationships.
Psychologists generally avoid conducting a child custody
evaluation in a case in which the psychologist served in a
therapeutic role for the child or his or her immediate family or
has had other involvement that may compromise the psychologist's
objectivity. This should not, however, preclude the psychologist
from testifying in the case as a fact witness concerning
treatment of the child. In addition, during the course of a
child custody evaluation, a psychologist does not accept any of
the involved participants in the evaluation as a therapy client.
Therapeutic contact with the child or involved participants
following a child custody evaluation is undertaken with caution.
A psychologist asked to testify regarding a therapy client
who is involved in a child custody case is aware of the
limitations and possible biases inherent in such a role and the
possible impact on the ongoing therapeutic relationship.
Although the court may require the psychologist to testify as a
fact witness regarding factual information he or she became
aware of in a professional relationship with a client, that
psychologist should generally decline the role of an expert
witness who gives a professinal opinion regarding custody and
visitation issues (see Ethical Standard 7.03) unless so ordered
by the court.
8. The scope of the evaluation is determined by
the evaluator, based on the nature of the referral question.
The scope of the custody-related evaluation is determined by
the nature of the question or issue raised by the referring
person or the court, or is inherent in the situation. Although
comprehensive child custody evaluations generally require an
evaluation of all parents or guardians and children, as well as
observations of interactions between them, the scope of the
assessment in a particular case may be limited to evaluating the
parental capacity of one parent without attempting to compare
the parents or to make recommendations. Likewise, the scope may
be limited to evaluating the child. Or a psychologist may be
asked to critique the assumptions and methodology of the
assessment of another mental health professional. A psychologist
also might serve as an expert witness in the area of child
development, providing expertise to the court without relating
it specifically to the parties involved in a case.
9. The
psychologist obtains informed consent from all adult
participants and, as appropriate, informs child participants.
In undertaking child custody evaluations, the psychologist
ensures that each adult participant is aware of (a) the purpose,
nature, and method of the evaluation; (b) who has requested the
psychologist's services; and (c) who will be paying the fees.
The psychologist informs adult participants about the nature of
the assessment instruments and techniques and informs those
participants about the possible disposition of the data
collected. The psychologist provides this information, as
appropriate, to children, to the extent that they are able to
understand.
10. The psychologist informs participants
about the limits of confidentiality and the disclosure of
information.
A psychologist conducting a child custody evaluation ensures
that the participants, including children to the extent
feasible, are aware of the limits of confidentiality
characterizing the professional relationship with the
psychologist. The psychologist informs participants that in
consenting to the evaluation, they are consenting to disclosure
of the evaluation's findings in the context of the forthcoming
litigation and in any other proceedings deemed necessary by the
courts. A psychologist obtains a waiver of confidentiality from
all adult participants or from their authorized legal
representatives.
11. The psychologist uses multiple
methods of data gathering.
The psychologist strives to use the most appropriate methods
available for addressing the questions raised in a specific
child custody evaluation and generally uses multiple methods of
data gathering, including, but not limited to, clinical
interviews, observation, and/or psychological assessments.
Important facts and opinions are documented from at least two
sources whenever their reliability is questionable. The
psychologist, for example, may review potentially relevant
reports (e.g., from schools, health care providers, child care
providers, agencies, and institutions). Psychologists may also
interview extended family, friends, and other individuals on
occasions when the information is likely to be useful. If
information is gathered from third parties that is significant
and may be used as a basis for conclusions, psychologists
corroborate it by at least one other source wherever possible
and appropriate and document this in the report.
12. The
psychologist neither overinterprets nor inappropriately
interprets clinical or assessment data.
The psychologist refrains from drawing conclusions not
adequately supported by the data. The psychologist interprets
any data from interviews or tests, as well as any questions of
data reliability and validity, cautiously and conservatively,
seeking convergent validity. The psychologist strives to
acknowledge to the court any limitations in methods or data
used.
13. The psychologist does not give any opinion
regarding the psychological functioning of any individual who
has not been personally evaluated.
This guideline, however, does not preclude the psychologist
from reporting what an evaluated individual (such as the parent
or child) has stated or from addressing theoretical issues or
hypothetical questions, so long as the limited basis of the
information is noted.
14. Recommendations, if any, are
based on what is in the best psychological interests of the
child.
Although the profession has not reached consensus about
whether psychologists ought to make recommendations about the
final custody determination to the courts, psychologists are
obligated to be aware of the arguments on both sides of this
issue and to be able to explain the logic of their position
concerning their own practice.
If the psychologist does choose to make custody
recommendations, these recommendations should be derived from
sound psychological data and must be based on the best interests
of the child in the particular case. Recommendations are based
on articulated assumptions, data, interpretations, and
inferences based upon established professional and scientific
standards. Psychologists guard against relying on their own
biases or unsupported beliefs in rendering opinions in
particular cases.
15. The psychologist clarifies
financial arrangements.
Financial arrangements are clarified and agreed upon prior to
commencing a child custody evaluation. When billing for a child
custody evaluation, the psychologist does not misrepresent his
or her services for reimbursement purposes.
16. The
psychologist maintains written records.
All records obtained in the process of conducting a child
custody evaluation are properly maintained and filed in accord
with the APA Record Keeping Guidelines ( APA,
1993 ) and relevant statutory guidelines.
All raw data and interview information are recorded with an
eye toward their possible review by other psychologists or the
court, where legally permitted. Upon request, appropriate
reports are made available to the court.