The objective of this study was to examine defensive underreporting on the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 (MMPI-2) with a sample of parents involved in custody dispute litigation. With a composite score derived from 2 nontraditional validity indicators-the Wiggins Social Desirability scale (WSD) and the Superlative scale (5), which had previously been identified as the best predictors of fake-good responding, 74% of litigants were identified as underreporting compared with 52% identified using traditional Lie (L) and Correction (K) scale criterion. Litigants identified as underreporters, whether using either the WSD-S criterion or the L-K criterion, had clinical scale profiles that were similar to those identified as nonunderreporters. The outcome of this study suggests that the WSD and S scales are perhaps more useful in the identification of defensive underreporting than the L and K scales.In many situations, individuals undergoing psychological assessment have much to gain by altering their responses to disguise or otherwise minimize their psychopathology; this is commonly referred to as defensive or fake-good responding. Clinicians may encounter fake-good responding in a variety of settings, including personnel selection, correctional and hospital settings, and family access and child custody evaluations (Pope, Butcher, & Seelen, 1993). In a recent article outlining the legal basis for forensic applications of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 (MMPI-2; Butcher, Dahlstrom, Graham, Tellegen, & Kaemmer, 1989), Ogloff (1995 reported that the MMPI-2 was cited more frequently in custody access and parenting cases than in any other causes of action reaching the appellate level of review, including workers' compensation and employment disability, criminal responsibility, and sexual offenses. In a national survey of custody evaluation practices, Ackerman and Ackerman (1997) reported that the MMPI-2 was the most frequently used instrument in the

The influence of interparental verbal and physical aggression, children's coping styles, and relevant demographic factors on children's adjustment was examined in a group of 52 families who were disputing custody and/or access arrangements after separation. It was hypothesized that parental conflict and specific children's coping strategies (i.e., cognitive redefinition and social support seeking) would be important predictors of children's adjustment. Consistent with previous research, aggressive styles of resolving conflict between parents were related to more frequent and severe behavior problems and diminished competence among children. Conversely, greater flexibility in coping and greater use of cognitive coping strategies among children were related to decreased behavioral disturbance. The unique and combined influence of these variables is discussed.

With the increasing demand on the courts to “manage” parental disputes, coupled with the dwindling of publicily funded resources, briefer interventions to service some highly conflicted families become necessary. This article describe an innovative, brief intervention for examining access‐based disputes between parents before the courts in two public services in Ontario. Included will be a description of the model, the selection criteria, and the results of preliminary outcome data. Offering a differential intervention to a sample of 40 families has shown that less time was spent on the intervention and that no further court intervention was necessary. Parents reported satisfaction with the expeditious handling of their disputes.

In this pilot study, 49 parents who had been involved in a custody and/or access assessment several years previously responded to a structured telephone survey. Information about eventual settlement processes, custody and access arrangements, satisfaction with the clinical assessment, children's adjustment, family relationships, and ongoing family problems was gathered an average of two and one half years after the assessment. Sole custody arrangements evidenced the greatest degree of stability from assessment to follow‐up, while joint custody arrangements were more unstable. Visitation was not occurring for a substantial number of children (35%) at follow‐up, even when it was recommended on a regular and frequent basis. Although parents reported little or no ongoing contact with their ex‐spouse, they also reported continuing concerns and new problems with respect to the other parent or their children. The impact of this form of “parallel parenting” is discussed within the context of high‐conflict, multiproblem families.

No abstract