Child custody evaluation practices: A survey of experienced professionals.

Abstract

In recent years, mental health professionals have had an increasingly important role in the assessment and resolution of disputed child custody cases. There currently exist little empirical data to guide the professional in this process. In this study the activities, beliefs, and experiences of professionals were investigated in three primary areas: custody evaluation procedures, custodial decision making in joint and single-parent custody, and custodial recommendations. An extensive questionnaire was developed and mailed to professionals experienced in child custody evaluations. Results of the survey are presented, and implications for future research are discussed. WILLIAM G. KEILIN, MS, is currently a doctoral candidate in counseling psychology at Colorado State University. His current research interests include the areas of child custody and psychological responses to the threat of nuclear war. LARRY J. BLOOM, PhD, received his doctorate in clinical psychology from the University of Kansas in 1975. He is currently Professor of Psychology at Colorado State University and engaged in private practice. His clinical and research interests are in the areas of psychotherapy outcome, behavioral medicine, and child custody.

A Survey of Psychological Test Use Patterns Among Forensic Psychologists

“…For example, the predominant popularity of the MMPI-2 among multiscale inventories in this study is consistent with prior reports by Keilin and Bloom (1986), Ackerman and Ackerman (1997), and Hagen and Castagna (2001) who found the MMPI (Hathaway & McKinley, 1943) to be the most widely used test in child custody evaluations and the findings by Borum and Grisso (1995) that the MMPI and MMPI-2 were the dominant instrument in their survey used to evaluate competence to stand trial. Furthermore, Boccaccini and Brodsky (1999) also reported that the MMPI/MMPI-2 is the most widely used instrument among forensic psychologists performing personal injury evaluations.…”

“…In general, these surveys have shown a mix of traditional clinical assessment instruments with more specifically focused forensic instruments in these settings. In the civil forensic realm, test usage in child custody evaluations has received particular attention, with surveys that have been conducted by Ackerman and Ackerman (1997) ;Ackerman, Ackerman, Steffen, and Kelley-Poulas (2004); Bow and Quinnell (2001); Hagen and Castagna (2001); Keilin and Bloom (1986);. These surveys have found generally similar patterns of test usage among custody evaluators, with broadband, self-report personality inventories; intelligence tests; and the unstructured personality tests being most commonly used.…”

Evaluating Parenting Capacity: Validity Problems With the MMPI-2, PAI, CAPI, and Ratings of Child Adjustment.

“…Arguments have been made that projective techniques, such as the Rorschach Inkblot Method, which are much less susceptible to such bias, are useful in complementing objective personality tests in such situations (e.g., Weiner, 1999). Indeed, the Rorschach and other projective techniques are often used in postdivorce child custody assessments (Ackerman & Ackerman, 1997;Hagen & Castagna, 2001;Keilin & Bloom, 1986;Quinnell & Bow, 2001). These authors also reported the common use of standardized intelligence tests in custody and access cases, and along with the clinical information provided, these tests have the benefit of being immune from the positive self-presentation bias because the demand characteristics of intelligence tests are for people to do their best.…”

“…In contrast, in the postdivorce custody literature, there have been reviews of test utilization, presentations of normative data, and examinations of positive self-presentation by parents. It is noteworthy that the reviews of test utilization have consistently indicated that the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 (MMPI-2) is the most commonly used instrument (e.g., Ackerman & Ackerman, 1997;Hagen & Castagna, 2001;Keilin & Bloom, 1986;Quinnell & Bow, 2001), that normative data on the MMPI-2 have been presented (Bagby, Nicholson, Buis, Radovanovic, & Fidler, 1999;Bathurst, Gottfried, & Gottfreid, 1997;Ollendick & Otto, 1984), and that the issue of defensive responding has been specifically addressed (Bagby et al, 1999;Bathurst et al, 1997;Medoff, 1999;Posthuma & Harper, 1998;Siegel, 1996). These authors have generally reported that MMPI-2 measures of positive selfpresentation tend to be slightly or moderately elevated in this population, although the clinical significance of the elevations has been questioned (Medoff, 1999).…”

A Critical Review of Child Custody Evaluation Reports

“…For example, a number of these studies have surveyed the practices and procedures of mental health professionals conducting such evaluations (Ackerman & Ackerman, 1997;Bow & Quinnell, 2001a;Keilin & Bloom, 1986;LaFortune & Carpenter, 1998). Findings indicate that significant improvements have occurred over the past 15 years.…”