[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":3,"doc-seo-294962-105":59,"doc-detail-294962-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",[7,13,18,23,28,33,38,43,48,51,55],{"id":8,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":10,"show_sort_weight":11,"slug":12},1,"Document","Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":14,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":15,"show_sort_weight":16,"slug":17},2,"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":19,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":20,"show_sort_weight":21,"slug":22},4,"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":24,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":25,"show_sort_weight":26,"slug":27},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":29,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":30,"show_sort_weight":31,"slug":32},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":34,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":35,"show_sort_weight":36,"slug":37},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":39,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":40,"show_sort_weight":41,"slug":42},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":44,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":45,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":47},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":46,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":49,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":50},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":52,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":53,"show_sort_weight":52,"slug":54},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":56,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":57,"show_sort_weight":24,"slug":58},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":60,"data":61},"ok",{"site_id":62,"language":63,"slug":64,"title":65,"keywords":66,"description":67,"schema_data":68,"social_meta":123,"head_meta":125,"extra_data":127,"updated_unix":129},105,"en","protecting-children-from-incompetent-forensic-evaluations-and-expert-testimony-vol-19","Protecting Children From Incompetent Forensic Evaluations and Expert Testimony - Vol. 19","","Mental health professionals appointed as child custody evaluators influence custody litigation through recommendations that courts often accept with little challenge. The article argues that many custody evaluations fall below American Psychological Association standards due to weak scientific methodology, limited empirical grounding, and inadequate psycholegal relevance. It also addresses how expert testimony must satisfy legal admissibility requirements under Daubert/Frye and highlights distinctions between therapeutic and forensic assessments to protect children and avoid harm during divorce-related conflict.",{"@graph":69,"@context":122},[70,84,105],{"@type":71,"itemListElement":72},"BreadcrumbList",[73,77,79,82],{"item":74,"name":75,"@type":76,"position":8},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":78,"name":9,"@type":76,"position":14},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/",{"item":80,"name":35,"@type":76,"position":81},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/healthcare/",3,{"item":83,"name":65,"@type":76,"position":19},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/protecting-children-from-incompetent-forensic-evaluations-and-expert-testimony-vol-19/294962/",{"url":83,"name":65,"@type":85,"image":86,"author":91,"headline":65,"publisher":94,"fileFormat":97,"inLanguage":63,"description":67,"dateModified":98,"datePublished":99,"encodingFormat":97,"isAccessibleForFree":100,"interactionStatistic":101},"DigitalDocument",{"url":87,"@type":88,"width":89,"height":90},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/protecting-children-from-incompetent-forensic-evaluations-and-expert-testimony-vol-19/294962.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":92,"@type":93},"Logic","Person",{"url":74,"name":95,"@type":96},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-22","2026-09-18",true,{"@type":102,"interactionType":103,"userInteractionCount":52},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":104},"ViewAction",{"@type":106,"mainEntity":107},"FAQPage",[108,114,118],{"name":109,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":111},"Why do child custody evaluations significantly affect custody litigation?","Question",{"text":112,"@type":113},"Custody evaluation recommendations often receive substantial weight from courts and may be accepted without challenge. The evaluator’s findings can also influence settlement and concessions as parties respond to the recommendations.","Answer",{"name":115,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":116},"What criticisms are raised against custody evaluations that fall below APA standards?",{"text":117,"@type":113},"Commentators criticize their quality, reliability, and utility, citing lack of scientific methodology, insufficient empirical grounding, and weak psycholegal relevance.",{"name":119,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":120},"How should expert testimony standards be understood in child custody evaluations under Daubert/Frye?",{"text":121,"@type":113},"Expert testimony regarding parenting competency and comparative custodial suitability must meet legal admissibility standards. The article frames this requirement through legal tests such as Frye v. United States for novel scientific evidence.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":83,"og:type":124,"og:title":65,"og:site_name":95,"og:description":67},"article",{"robots":126,"canonical":83},"index,follow",{"doc_id":128,"site_id":62},294962,1789711376,{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":131},{"doc_id":128,"user_id":132,"nickname":92,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":34,"category_name":35,"doc_title":65,"doc_description":67,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":52,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":8,"is_downloadable":8,"audit_status":8,"page_count":139,"language":140,"language_code":63,"site_id":62,"html_lang":63,"table_of_contents":141,"faqs":142,"seo_title":143,"seo_description":67,"update_tm":129,"read_time":144},1099513958762,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/avatar/1000023916a998db790?x-image-process=image/resize,m_fixed,w_180,h_180&k=1784791008015729253","Vol. 19, 2005 Forensic Evaluations 277  \nProtecting Children From Incompetent Forensic Evaluations and Expert Testimony  \nMary Johanna McCurley* Kathryn J. Murphy** Jonathan W. Gould***  \nI. Introduction  \nMental health professionals are frequently appointed by courts to become involved in custody cases in the role of child custody evaluator. This role requires that the mental health professional assess the fit between a minor child’s emerging developmental and socioemotional needs and the parents’ comparative ability to meet those needs. Following that assessment, the mental health professional is expected to tender recommendations to the court regarding the extent to which various parenting plans will further the child’s best psychological interests.  \nA. Influence of the Evaluator  \nThe recommendations contained in child custody evaluations (“CCEs”) exert considerable influence on the course of ongoing custody litigation. Many courts accord significant weight to the opinions of child custody evaluators, often accepting theevaluator’s recommendations without challenge.1 An evaluator’s recommendations can also precipitate case settlement or material concessions once both parties become aware of the evaluator’s findings. Given the import of CCEs, it is imperative that these  \n* Partner, McCurley, Orsinger, McCurley, Nelson & Downing, L.L.P., Dallas, Texas.  \n** Partner, Koons, Fuller, Vanden Eykel, and Robertson, P.C., Dallas, Texas.  \n*** Forensic and Clinical Psychologist, Private Practice, St. Paul, Minnesota.  \n1 THE SCIENTIFIC BASIS OF CHILD CUSTODY DECISIONS (Robert Galatzer-Levy & Louis Kraus, eds., 1999); James N. Bow & Francella A. Quinnell, A Critical Review of Child Custody Evaluation Reports, 40 FAM. CT. REV.  \n164 (2002) .  \n278 Journal of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers  \nevaluations should be conducted with due regard for scientific methods, extant behavioral science research, ethical standards and professional practice guidelines. This responsibility is further heightened by the need to protect the well-being of children of divorcing parents2 and to avoid inadvertently harming families ata time of enormous stress and conflict.3  \nB. Criticism of Evaluations Falling Below APA Standards  \nUnfortunately, CCEs frequently fall below recommended practice methods promulgated by the American Psychological Association (“APA”) . Commentators have criticized the quality, reliability, and utility of CCEs by noting the lack of scientific methodology, empirical grounding, and psycholegal relevance common among these reports.4  \nThis article discusses the requirement that expert testimony regarding parenting competency and comparative custodial suitability must meet legal standards of admissibility. It builds on a prior article coauthored by Dr. Jonathan Gould.5  \n2 ROBERT H. WOODY, CHILD CUSTODY: PRACTICE STANDARDS, ETHICAL ISSUES, AND LEGAL SAFEGUARDS FOR MENTAL HEALTH PROFESSIONALS (2000) .  \n3 Marc J. Ackerman & Melissa C. Ackerman, Child Custody Evaluation Practices: A 1996 Survey of Psychologists, 30 FAM. L.Q. 565 (1996) .  \n4 THE SCIENTIFIC BASIS OF CHILD CUSTODY DECISIONS, supra note 1; GARY B. MELTON, JOHN PETRILA, NORMAN G. POYTHRESS, & CHRISTOPHER SLOBOGIN, PSYCHOLOGICAL EVALUATIONS FOR THE COURTS: A HANDBOOK FOR MENTAL HEALTH PROFESSIONALS AND LAWYERS (2nd ed. 1997); Daniel  \nA. Krauss & Bruce D. Sales, Legal Standards, Expertise, and Experts in the Resolution of Contested Child Custody Cases, 6 PSYCHOL., PUB. POL’Y & L. 843 (2000); Timothy M. Tippins & Jeffrey P. Wittman, Empirical and Ethical Problems with Custody Recommendations: A Call for Clinical Humility and Judicial Vigilance, 43 FAM CT. REV. 193 (April 2005); Ira D. Turkat, Questioning the Mental Health Expert’s Custody Report, 7 AM. J. FAM. L. 175 (1993) .  \n5 The authors wish to thank Dana Royce Baerger, Robert GalatzerLevy, and Sandra G. Nye for allowing us to liberally use their prior article: Dana Royce Baerger, Robert Galatzer-Levy, Jona","cbCaiqD2P4c4mCml","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaiqD2P4c4mCml","pdf",174766,44,"English","# I. Introduction\n## A. Influence of the Evaluator\n## B. Criticism of Evaluations Falling Below APA Standards\n## C. Differences Between Therapeutic and Forensic Mental Health Assessment\n# II. Expert Testimony in Child Custody Evaluations—Daubert/Frye\n## A. Frye v. United States","[{\"question\":\"Why do child custody evaluations significantly affect custody litigation?\",\"answer\":\"Custody evaluation recommendations often receive substantial weight from courts and may be accepted without challenge. The evaluator’s findings can also influence settlement and concessions as parties respond to the recommendations.\"},{\"question\":\"What criticisms are raised against custody evaluations that fall below APA standards?\",\"answer\":\"Commentators criticize their quality, reliability, and utility, citing lack of scientific methodology, insufficient empirical grounding, and weak psycholegal relevance.\"},{\"question\":\"How should expert testimony standards be understood in child custody evaluations under Daubert/Frye?\",\"answer\":\"Expert testimony regarding parenting competency and comparative custodial suitability must meet legal admissibility standards. The article frames this requirement through legal tests such as Frye v. United States for novel scientific evidence.\"}]","Protecting Children From Incompetent Forensic Evaluations and Expert Testimony - Vol. 19 | PDF",111]