Are child custody evaluations beneficial to family law judges? A study from the judicial perspective

IF 0.7 Q4 FAMILY STUDIES
Tammi Axelson, Jennifer Gentile
{"title":"Are child custody evaluations beneficial to family law judges? A study from the judicial perspective","authors":"Tammi Axelson,&nbsp;Jennifer Gentile","doi":"10.1111/fcre.12772","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>There is a long history of dissension among legal and mental health professionals about the value of child custody evaluations. Despite frequent use by the courts, the lack of adequate empirical research impedes the ability to validate the efficacy of child custody evaluations. This study investigated the overall value of court-ordered child custody evaluations by surveying a diverse, national sample of judges to gather data regarding the usefulness, and validity of child custody evaluations. Two hundred and sixty-eight judges from 42 states completed an anonymous survey. The results indicated that judges find information voiced by the child in question, data obtained from the parent–child observations, and collateral data obtained about the litigants as most useful. Survey findings suggested judges perceived there to be a shortage of trained evaluators and also consider child custody evaluations too expensive and too time-consuming. Overall, judges find child custody evaluations useful and clearly desire experts to include recommendations on legal custody and parenting time schedules in their reports.</p>","PeriodicalId":51627,"journal":{"name":"Family Court Review","volume":"62 1","pages":"194-211"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Family Court Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/fcre.12772","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"FAMILY STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

There is a long history of dissension among legal and mental health professionals about the value of child custody evaluations. Despite frequent use by the courts, the lack of adequate empirical research impedes the ability to validate the efficacy of child custody evaluations. This study investigated the overall value of court-ordered child custody evaluations by surveying a diverse, national sample of judges to gather data regarding the usefulness, and validity of child custody evaluations. Two hundred and sixty-eight judges from 42 states completed an anonymous survey. The results indicated that judges find information voiced by the child in question, data obtained from the parent–child observations, and collateral data obtained about the litigants as most useful. Survey findings suggested judges perceived there to be a shortage of trained evaluators and also consider child custody evaluations too expensive and too time-consuming. Overall, judges find child custody evaluations useful and clearly desire experts to include recommendations on legal custody and parenting time schedules in their reports.

儿童监护权评估对家庭法法官有利吗?从司法角度的研究
长期以来,法律和心理健康专业人士对儿童监护权评估的价值一直存在分歧。尽管法院经常使用儿童监护权评估,但由于缺乏足够的实证研究,因此无法验证儿童监护权评估的有效性。本研究通过对全国法官的不同样本进行调查,收集有关儿童监护权评估的有用性和有效性的数据,从而调查法院下令进行的儿童监护权评估的总体价值。来自 42 个州的 268 名法官完成了匿名调查。调查结果表明,法官们认为由当事儿童提供的信息、从亲子观察中获得的数据以及从诉讼当事人处获得的附带数据最为有用。调查结果显示,法官们认为缺乏训练有素的评估人员,还认为儿童监护权评估过于昂贵和耗时。总体而言,法官们认为儿童监护权评估很有用,并明确希望专家们在报告中就法定监护权和育儿时间安排提出建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
12.50%
发文量
57
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信