Wednesday, November 30, 2005

Counselor overstated qualifications, charges say - KY

Counselor overstated qualifications, charges say

If your custody evaluation was administered by G. Steven Alexander you should look into whether his opinions will now be reconsidered.

Excerpts:

Officials are looking into whether the charges against G. Steven Alexander could force them to reopen cases in which he testified, including child custody, domestic violence and guardianship cases.

"I intend to fight the charges, and I will not roll over and play dead," said Alexander, who is licensed as a clinical professional counselor in Kentucky.

Alexander acknowledged that he is not licensed by the state as a psychologist. He admits he has testified in court that he holds a doctorate in psychology. He said the degree came from Madison University in Gulfport, Miss., an online correspondence school, and that he wrote a dissertation for the degree but did not take courses.

Madison University is not recognized by The Southern Association of Colleges and Schools in Decatur, Ga., one of six regional academic accrediting organizations, said Belle Wheelan, president of the association.

Foust said the charges against Alexander raise questions about every case in which he testified and presented his resume. But Foust said it will be up to lawyers in those cases to ask to reopen them or have the verdicts or judgments set aside.

Labels: , , ,

Thursday, October 06, 2005

Bad Representation in Arizona

East Valley Tribune Daily Arizona

Excerpts:

Gary Karpin

A grand jury indictment lists 14 victims representing about $500,000 in losses, but since Karpin’s July arrest more than 100 people have called and complained about him, Thomas said.

A case summary states that Karpin, a divorce mediator who did business under various names, claimed or implied to his clients that he was a lawyer.

Karpin would claim to file paperwork that never was filed or was incorrectly prepared, the summary states.

Thomas said anyone who has done business with Karpin should check their state of affairs because there is a chance some clients might not actually be divorced or might not actually have child custody because Karpin may have completed the paperwork incorrectly or not at all.

If you believe you have been victimized by Gary Karpin, who has done business as Divorce with Dignity, Divorce Associates, Relationships with Dignity and A Dignified Divorce, the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office wants you to call (602) 372-7777

Labels: , ,

Wednesday, February 02, 2005

The Psychiatrist's Role in Divorce Custody Battles

Excerpts below, full article at Psychiatric Times

My comments are intermingled in italics...

The Psychiatrist's Role in Divorce Custody Battles
By William Bernet, M.D.

Even before parents anticipate their divorce, their child may already be seeing a psychiatrist or other clinician. Once the divorce is imminent, each parent's first impulse is to ask the therapist to take that parent's side in the ensuing custody dispute. The therapist may feel it is obvious that one of the parents should have custody of the child and may readily agree to send a report to the court or to testify. However, that path has many dangers and should be avoided.
Rather than try to influence the outcome of the custody dispute, it is better to simply continue as the child's therapist and help the child cope with the changes in the family. After the parents separate and divorce, it will be particularly important for the therapist to communicate with and have a good relationship with both parents. That is unlikely to occur if the therapist has sided with one of the parents in an angry custody dispute.

A psychiatric custody evaluation is not for everybody--the vast majority of parents who separate and divorce do not need an elaborate and costly evaluation. In most instances, thankfully, parents work these issues out between themselves or with the help of a mediator. Table 1 indicates the circumstances in which a forensic psychiatric custody evaluation may be indicated.

A forensic custody and visitation evaluation usually consists of psychiatric and/or psychological assessments of the child and both parents. There is no standard method for conducting custody and visitation evaluations. Many psychiatrists, psychologists and legal professionals have published on this topic (e.g., Bernet, 2002; Galatzer-Levy and Kraus, 1999). The American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry published a practice parameter on child custody evaluations (Herman, 1997). Table 2 provides the usual components of a psychiatric custody evaluation.

It is almost always assumed that decisions regarding custody and visitation are guided by seeking the best interests of the child. However, parents and attorneys may disagree and argue about exactly what constitutes the best interests of the child in their particular set of circumstances. There is no standard list of factors that should be taken into consideration and what weight should be given to each factor. Not only does each state have its own laws and precedents, but it is likely that evaluators and judges are influenced by their personal values when they make recommendations and hand down decisions in these cases. The factors that many legislatures, courts and mental health care professionals consider important are listed in Table 3.

Assessing attachment. The psychiatrist should be able to assess the child's relative attachment to the two parents. This is important because the child's attachment is an issue that the average judge is not able to determine through ordinary testimony in court. The psychiatrist has access to many sources of data that relate to the child's attachment, including information collected from parents and stepparents and observing the child together with each parent. In interviewing the child, the psychiatrist may determine the child's perception of the parents through direct questions ("Who helps you best with your homework, your Mom or your Dad?"), indirect questions ("Tell me the things you like and the things you don't like about your Mom.") and projective questions ("Let's make up a story about a baby bird that lives in a nest with a mommy bird and a daddy bird."). I think these are terrible and leading questions - ones that assume there is a preferential parent, and go as far as to force the child to choose which parent is "better" at the described task. Just because a child doesn't like that his Mom is cranky about the child cleaning their room or that Dad is better at helping with homework - does not in any manner indicate that child should spend less or more time with that particular parent. Further, considering all of this is fair game to come out in court, the "evaluator" is just helping to breed tension between the parents by requiring the child to make salacious statements about them. The child's attachment to the parents can also be assessed through psychological tests such as the Family Relations Test (FRT), the Bricklin Perceptual Scales (BPS) and the Perception-of-Relationships Test (PORT) (Bricklin, 1995).

Indoctrination and alienation. Mental health care professionals have noticed that children of divorce may greatly favor one parent over the other and may greatly resist visiting the nonresidential parent. There are several possible explanations for the child's active rejection of visitation, including: abuse or neglect by one parent, so it is natural that the child would not want to visit that household; purposeful or accidental indoctrination of the child to favor one parent and reject the other parent; and/or the child is caught between battling parents and the tension in the child is resolved by believing that they love one parent and hate the other. Gardner (1998) used the term "parental alienation syndrome" for some of these cases, specifically, those in which one parent has consciously or unconsciously induced the child to reject the other parent.

Joint legal custody and parenting plans. In joint legal custody, both parents have equal rights and responsibilities regarding issues such as the child's education, medical care and religious upbringing. Joint legal custody works if the parents are able to communicate with each other and are willing to take each other's opinions into consideration. Joint LEGAL custody is almost always awarded unless there is some history of mental illness, abusive behavior or chemical dependence. Both parents have a right to have a say in the religious, medical and educational decisions made about their child. To act as though a fit parent could arbitrarily have their right to joint legal custody taken simply because they were not agreeable enough is a clear indication of this author's bias. The laws of some states strongly favor joint legal custody; the laws of a few states limit it by requiring consent of both parents before joint custody can be ordered. On the other hand, some states have laws that favor or require parenting plans. Both concepts--joint custody and parenting plans--envision that children of divorce should be nurtured and raised by both parents. Although the operational outcomes may look the same, these are different concepts. Joint legal custody emphasizes the legal end result (i.e., the judge orders the parents to share certain rights and responsibilities). The concept of parenting plans emphasizes the process by which divorcing parents sit down and work out an agreement regarding important aspects of their child's life. In some states that require parenting plans, the terms custody and visitation are no longer used, but the laws simply refer to each person's "parenting time." Although parenting time is discussed, this author makes absolutely NO reference to joint physical custody, when and how it should be awarded, the benefits, etc... Everybody take note and DO NOT have this man render your evaluation, other than brief lip service in the next paragraph, he has absolutely no interest in shared parenting, a child's right to maintain equal contact with both of those people responsible for their creation, a parents right to PARENT THEIR CHILD...

Divorce is common, so it is important to find ways to minimize the psychological trauma that is experienced by children of divorced parents. Ideally, divorcing parents would not fight so much over the children, in front of the children and through the children. When disputes do arise regarding custody and visitation, mental health care professionals can inform and assist judges by performing competent custody evaluations. These evaluations should be conducted in a systematic and unbiased manner, should consider the critical factors that are relevant to the court, and should result in recommendations that promote the best interests of the children. Almost always, the goal is for the children to have strong, healthy relationships with both parents. This is the aforementioned lip service. Note - strong, healthy relationship - fairly subjective, don't you think. Still no mention of possible true joint physical custody scenarios. It is usually possible to make recommendations regarding custody, parenting arrangements, and forms of counseling and therapy that will be helpful to the family members.

Labels: , , , ,

Wednesday, August 18, 2004

Psychologists play large role in child custody battles

This is a link to an article discussing the use of child psychologists in custody battles...

While it does call attention to some of the problems associated with these evaluators, it does precious else. Apparently this author took the title of reporter in the most literal sense, there is virtually nothing indicating whether these evaluations are necessary or just outside of a resigned sense of "well, what else can we do."

I'll tell you what you can do - stop assuming that there has to be a "primary parent" and allow children to have equal access to both parents. Christ, if only this wasn't some a novel concept for people - 2 Parents Before A Divorce Means There Are 2 Parents After Divorce - WHY ON EARTH SHOULD ONE BE RELEGATED TO BI-MONTHLY VISITS!? DOES THIS SOUND LIKE IT WOULD BE TO ANYONE'S BENEFIT OUTSIDE OF THE ONE ON THE RECEIVING END OF THE SUPPORT CHECKS?

Sorry about the caps - don't know how else to scream online...

NapaNews.com

Labels: , , ,

Thursday, April 15, 2004

Enter the Custody Evaluator

For those of you going through a divorce, it is likely that you have seen a custody evaluator in one form or another. They might be titled as a G.A.L, Children's Advocate, (more directly) Custody Evaluator or any other conglomeration of words made to sound impartial and inherently good.

In my personal experience I have been "lucky" enough to be involved with two custody evaluators. Luckily for us, the results from both were positive for our side. However, that in no way eliminates the emotional and mental stress (i.e. - anguish, dread, debilitating fear) that came while the evaluations were being rendered. Further, both of the evaluators that I had experience with truly did seem to place great importance on their position, attempt in every way to be as thorough and impartial as possible, and be smart enough to see through some of the bull-shit that inevitably comes with this process.

All of this aside, many people do not feel as though they had a positive experience with their evaluator - even those who were on the favorable end of the recommendation. There is no universal standard for custody evaluators. Varying from county to county they can have vastly different backgrounds and levels of education. In my county, not all of the evaluators have children, not all have college degrees, not all are married (or have even been married)... And all are women. This is not to point fingers at any of them in particular; I believe they all do the best they can. But the question remains - how does one render an opinion when there are so many differences within the decision maker population. How does a never married woman with no children effectively assess the breakdown of a marriage - particularly in terms of child placement?

As problematic as those questions are to me they do not even begin to touch the real problem that I have with these evaluators. I suppose it could be summed up this way - Is there really a need for this position?

Granted, in cases where both parents have been accused of physical, mental, or emotional abuse, substance abuse, abandonment or something of that ilk - an impartial third party is probably absolutely necessary. The judge obviously cannot dedicate the investigative time needed to slog through these types of accusations. In this respect, a custody evaluator is an invaluable resource and may be able to recommend help for the parents as well as best case scenarios for the children. (Here then we come back to the question of qualifications - For some reference here is a study printed in Professional Psychology - Custody Evaluation Practices:
A Survey of Experienced Professionals (Revisited)
. Caveat, this study only includes licensed psychologists - meaning more often than not, it would not include branches of the court dedicated to custody evaluations.) In terms of how often this would be necessary I found this article from the Daily Herald, but I'll summarize some of the points here:
"The one research project on the issue that experts cite most often was conducted 13 years ago by the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts in Denver.

After studying 9,000 contested custody cases, the organization flagged 169 - about 2 percent - in which one parent levied sexual abuse allegations during the proceedings. Of those, the study found, about half were substantiated. The rest were classified as either false or unsubstantiated."


Now this quote only deals with sexual abuse - but what it effectively (if the numbers hold up) says, it that in roughly 2% of cases a custody evaluator would be needed. For arguments sake let?s add another 13% to account for physical, emotional or substance abuse claims as well. Also, this article says that half of that 2% turn out to be either false or at least improvable. To me this means that these evaluators needed to be highly trained in tactics that allow them to identify false accusations as well as identifying when a child has been prompted to make untrue claims. So using very rough numbers, I would from here see a need for an evaluator in 15-20% of custody cases. (If you would like more information on abuse charges and the problems faced by children who have been involved in false allegations try SPARC) Admittedly, this is all very rudimentary math and based on statistics that I have not seen follow-up support for... but even bumping the numbers up substantially to 50% is still only half of the contested cases.

Custody evaluators can take several forms. There may be a branch of government that handles evaluations- and these will be the most lacking in professional qualification but most often will be free or substantially cheaper than an independent alternative. There are licensed psychologists or psychiatrists who can be obtained either through an order of the court or as an "expert" by one of the parents. More recently, some attorneys seem to be turning to this field and advertising themselves as custody evaluators. Generally, while they have legal experience, their experience with custody evaluations will be strictly practical and not based in any type of schooling or preparatory methods. (One such attorney is the catalyst for this post and I will link to her article later on...)

Effectively - two of the three groups mentioned above will make money on your case. The branch of the court evaluators will be paid by the government and their payment will not be dependent on how much time, resources, etc... they devote to your case. The other two will receive payment directly contingent upon the time they dedicate to your case. You will have to decide for yourself if that presents a conflict. It seems to me these two groups have a vested interest in performing these evaluations and would likely see no reason to limit the cases in which they are used. From the study I cited above: "The average fee for a custody evaluation is $2,646; almost triple what it was 10 years ago." (Keep in mind that study was published in 1997 so I feel it is a safe assumption to say they cost even more today, 7 years later)

The most inherent question here (to me anyway) is if you have two parents who are both willing and able to take care of their children - why do we send them to a custody evaluator instead of simply giving them joint custody. If I were such an evaluator the first question I would ask both parties would be why on earth do you not want joint custody? Or more succinctly, what do expect to gain by having primary custody? And in what way will that be beneficial to your child?

This argument simply goes back to my bigger thoughts on presumptive joint custody. If we had presumptive joint custody, evaluators would only be needed in the most extreme cases. Granted, presumptive joint may lead to more abuse allegations initially as one parent hopes to trump the system. Yet, by effectively training evaluators to identify false allegations and having some form of punishment (be it monetary, community service, parenting classes or all of the above) for parents who levy false claims I would think these claims would subside to virtually just those that are warranted.

The public can no longer deny that the government (all while it promotes the Healthy Marriage Initiative, the Fatherhood Initiative, ...) has a vested financial interest in the destruction of marriage, particularly those where children are involved. The Federal Government provides the states extra funding in correlation with the amount of child support each state collects. This is why in many states you now see even when there is agreement on support, the state will still mandate the checks first go through their system. For more info try: Limit Federal Child Support Enforcement to Welfare Cases. Or the White House: Enhance Child Support Enforcement. Finally, this article is lengthy but the most thorough: Child Support Enforcement Program.

The government is now in the business of creating and staffing "visitation centers" for those parents ordered to have supervised visitation. Two articles: Mothers, Interrupted and A State Agency With the Power to 'Kidnap With Impunity'. Now, I am not going to say these have no benefit. But again I go back to the relatively low percentage of abuse claims and even lower rate of those substantiated and I wonder - how many of these centers do we actually need?

Family court caseloads are constantly growing. For example: Fight over last name helps jam isle courts, Fathers push for equal custody and Children, Courts and Custody - the last article is a PDF so you will need Adobe Reader. There are plenty more where these came from... While it does seem obvious from many of these articles that many of the people staffing these courtrooms would like to see their workload reduced to a manageable level, one could hardly presume they would like to see divorce/custody cases cease all together. The destruction of marriage and the subsequent allocation of children is their very livelihood.

Here we come back to the idea of presumptive joint custody. Do our current custody laws and practices encourage contentious divorce and custody proceedings? There is evidence that in states that have a presumption of joint custody both divorce rates and custody proceedings go down in number. Relevant studies (courtesy of gocrc.com):
Kuhn and Guidubaldi (1997) showed a significant correlation between joint physical custody awards and reduced divorce. They conjectured that a parent who expects to receive sole custody is more likely to file for divorce than one who may be awarded shared custody. Sole custody allows one parent to hurt the other by taking away the children, and usually involves higher child support transfers than shared physical custody. Sanford Braver discusses the implications of their findings in his book Divorced Dads.

Brinig and Buckley (1998) independently found the same correlation between joint physical custody awards and reduced divorce. They conjectured that fathers are more likely to form strong bonds with children if they know that their relationship would be protected through joint physical custody in the even of a divorce. This would reduce the likelihood that fathers would initiate divorce.

Brinig and Allen (1998) showed that the parent who receives custody is more likely to be the one who files for divorce. That is, among cases where the mother received custody, the mother usually filed for divorce, and where the father received custody, the father was more likely to be the one who filed. They concluded that filing behavior is largely driven by attempts to "exploit the other partner through divorce." Significantly, they found that custody had a stronger relationship with filing than financial factors, although these factors are of course comingled through child support.


Also Child Custody Policies and Divorce Rates in the United States, The Determination of Child Custody in the USA and Benefits of Joint Custody.

A quote from the Washington Post Article Joint Custody Discourages Divorce (1/25/98): Divorce rates have dropped dramatically in the states that promote joint custody, says the January 25th issue of the Washington Post. Richard Morin's article cites research in nineteen states, by Richard Kuhn of the Childrens' Rights Council and John Guidubaldi of Kent State University.

Overall, divorce rates declined nearly four times faster in high-joint custody states, compared with states where joint custody is relatively rare. One big reason is that joint custody "removes the capacity for one spouse to hurt the other by denying participation in raising the children."


Okay, so let's get back to what started this in the first place. I ran across this article: Lawyer works for children in tough spots. I'll copy my favorite parts for you: No more adversarial family law practice for Bader. No longer will the attorney represent one parent or the other in a child custody dispute.

Instead, she will perform, on behalf of Manitowoc County, home studies and present her findings to the court about the condition of a child's home, the parenting abilities of the parties involved and any other relevant factors.

This allows me to still work with the families and be in a neutral position. There is a lengthy questionnaire that is filled out, (which) asks the parents how they have been involved in different areas of the child's life, Bader said.

What are the child's favorite activities? What do they do together as parent and child? What do they believe is their greatest strength as a parent the other parent's strengths?

Bader said it makes the warring parents stop and recognize there are positives about their ex.

I?ll meet with the kids, observe interaction at home. I'll see how they are doing in school, get copies of report cards to look for trends, Bader said.

Grades clue to stress

She noted one of the quickest ways to see if a child is affected negatively by parental squabbling is a sudden drop in grades.

Bader tends to see neat houses, neat bedrooms, no dirty dishes and polite children, with everyone on their best behavior so she might make a favorable report to the judge.

She said it can be a challenge to get past the coaching of mother or father telling little Susie or Johnnie to only say nice things about them to the legal system visitor.

You learn to read between the lines, detect influences that maybe shouldn't be there, Bader said.

You really encounter a whole spectrum of different types of individuals and environments and children. Some of it is truly heartbreaking, said Bader, who has been involved in domestic violence issues and causes.

There are those parents who may seek additional custody or overnights because of financial reimbursement linked to time spent with the child.


What I am getting at is this - if you have two parents who are splitting up for no other reason except that THEY no longer get along what right does the state have to not promote joint custody and to send this type of evaluator into their respective homes!? What on earth gives this woman the qualifications, but more importantly the right, to determine and dictate the future of a child based upon her "feelings" of a mandated parenting survey! This woman has virtually unchecked powers - she can summons school records, medical records and decide if she feels if one parent is lying or encouraging the children to lie. Her experience for this insurmountably important job: She came from a divorced family, is divorced herself and is a lawyer. Yippee! She has spent the past several years helping the courts destroy families and now she is going into private practice (read: this is how she will support herself) to make judgments about other parents. Most telling, no where in the interview did this woman ever discuss how important it is to encourage both parents to be involved and cooperative. Oops, if parents did that, she might be out of a job.

I shouldn't be so hard on this woman, I am sure her intentions are good. And just like every other mother on the verge of a divorce, we cannot fault them for taking advantage of a government that works in their favor. For women divorcing, they know (generally) they have an advantage in family court. You can't expect them to go in front of the judge and request the bias for mothers be thrown out in their particular case. Women have largely inoculated the idea that they are owed the children, the assets and financial support. We are not going to change these assumptions by discussing their fallacies with the women; we will have to change the system that perpetuates these assumptions. The government is ultimately the decision maker and if your ex-wife exercises every available option she has to screw you - you can call her evil but you also have to call her smart enough to capitalize on all the available avenues at her disposal. The government is truly the one who should answer for this lack of justice.

And just like divorcing mothers, this attorney turned custody evaluator is likewise capitalizing on a government system that advocates completely unqualified people to render some of the most important decisions in the lives of the children affected by divorce. The saddest part is that children of divorce are already at a disadvantage regarding emotional, educational and physical well being - then we turn their fate to the arbitrary decision making process of an "evaluator." While the article would like you to believe that there is no money in this line of work, I would refer you to the statistic above concerning the cost of these evaluations. They do not come cheap from a private party. Let's just say she won't be hitting the welfare doles any time in the foreseeable future.

There are very big problems in our system and they are extremely detrimental to the well being of all children. With 50-60% of marriages resulting in divorce these days it seems a safe assumption that if you didn't come from one, you will have one or someone very close to you will. Only through watching this completely horrendous process and the aftermath for the children can you ever get a formidable idea of how bad this really is. But I assure you, once it becomes personal - it is something you will never understand fully and something you will never forget.

Labels:

Wednesday, March 10, 2004

Retaining Custody - Step Two

Okay, so what it step two? Well that is a little bit more difficult. It is largely dependent on where you are in your case. Are you simply talking about divorce, have you moved out, have you filed any papers...

Visit this website uptoparents.org and complete the exercises. Take this seriously and ask your ex to do the same. If you both go through the exercises before a court battle begins it will help you both focus on who really suffers when a family breaks-up. Hopefully it will also help prevent full out war.

My gut instinct is to say not to leave the home unless court ordered. However, with the myriad of circumstances and emotions surrounding each individual case, this may be impossible. If you do leave the home, make sure to have a schedule set up to see your children beforehand. For court purposes you want to demonstrate that you have continued to be paramount in their lives and have remained intrinsically involved with them after the separation. See your children as often as possible, attend all functions, let their teachers know how you can be reached, etc...

It is also very important to stay upbeat for the children who will undoubtedly be confused and extremely upset about your separation as well. Never speak negatively about your ex in front of the children and refrain from discussing anything about the divorce or custody arrangement in front of the children.

If you have or will be leaving your home, particularly if you are afraid things will get nasty between you and your ex, make sure you have copies of all relevant marital paperwork. This may include bills, loans, titles...whatever. It is also a good idea to work out an immediate plan with your spouse to separate financials. Get separate credit cards, work out a repayment arrangement on jointly held debts, decide who will pay the house, utilities, insurance, etc... Do not assume, work something out and try to put it in writing. Your credit rating does not have to go simply because your marriage is.

Discuss with your attorney how things should be split during the separation and what options you have to protect yourself financially. I realize this may be the last thing on your mind right now, especially if your divorce is amicable, but believe me, they go down hill very fast and if you have separated you MUST have some separation of finances.

You also want to have copies of anything they may be potentially detrimental to your case. I won't go into what they might be but anything that could be brought up against you. You want to aware your attorney of these factors immediately. Your attorney can advise you as to how damaging they might be and what you can do for damage control.

You want to be completely upfront with your attorney. They will not be happy if they are surprised in court with information you have neglected to share, nor will avoiding issues be helpful to your case. If your job required you to travel frequently, resulting in less time with your children than you may have liked, then you be the first to bring up the issue. Explain that while the job required you to be out of town at times you took it because it provided X for your family (whatever X may be... a better home/neighborhood, private schools, your ex to not work...). If you are upfront it becomes less of an issue than when you ex stands up in court and cries about being abandoned for your job. I am not guaranteeing that will be the linchpin to your case but you will always look better to the judge if you are forthright and honest. And your attorney will be better served if they understand all the factors of your marriage and divorce.

If you have to move, try to relocate into the same schools your children currently attend. If they can ride a bus to either home it will alleviate some of the scheduling difficulties. If you cannot, have a proposal in mind as to how you will get them to and from school on your days. MAKE SURE YOU CAN FULFILL THIS PROPOSAL. If your children are not yet in school, research the schools in your area and try to move into the best possible district. Have the documentation to show why your residence is in the better school district.

The most important thing is to try and remain civil with your ex. If there is no chance for reconciliation, grieve on your own. As much as you may blame them or hate them, remember your children. They don't want you to get divorced, but if you have to they don't want it to be contentious. They love you both and attacks on each equate to attacks on them. Their identify comes from their parents, they have grown up hearing how they have someone's eyes or coloring or temperament... if you attack each other they find fault in themselves. Continue to refer to your ex in the positive ways they contribute to your child. Do this even if your ex is unable to do the same for you, your children will be grateful they have somewhere to go that is not a war zone. Obviously, you and your ex will disagree at times, but what is important to remember is to keep the disagreements from becoming personal attacks and to never have any type of contentious discussion in front of your children.

Try to institute a plan for joint custody as quickly as possible. If you go into court, your best case scenario is joint legal and physical custody. If you can make an agreement without going to court you will both save countless dollars and emotional turmoil. The best thing for your children is continued, meaningful contact with both parents. Start reading up on joint custody and prepare some type of arrangement to propose to your ex. If you have managed to stay civil it will probably be better received. If you allow things to become heated and divisive between you and your ex it is much more likely they will want to go to court, in some sort of attempt to "punish you."

I will make step three information on joint custody. In the interim I will try to find relevant and helpful sites concerning joint custody.

Labels: , , , , , ,

Monday, January 26, 2004

Okay, okay... just one for the day. This is a link to the American Psychological Association's guidelines for custody evaluators: APA

Labels:

Wednesday, January 21, 2004

Custody Evaluator

I lied. Apparently NY has minimal guidelines which custody evaluators are supposed to follow (thanks to reader M.L.). Overview here: NY State Education Dept.

Makes me wonder though, these could hardly be called directives, more like guidelines. Are there any repercussions for not following these guidelines? Seems as though it would be quite difficult to prove a step was skipped, for example.

Anyone from NY, report on your experience with a custody evaluation. Do you feel as though your evaluator addressed this list in its entirety?

Also, maybe all states have these, but they are all equally weak and therefore useless in type of practical sense.

Labels:

Listed on Blogwise Blogarama - The Blog Directory Blog Directory