Testing in Child Custody Evaluations–Selection, Usage, and Daubert Admissibility: A Survey of Psychologists

ABSTRACT A survey of psychologists (N = 89) was conducted examine issues regarding test selection, usage rates, and Daubert admissibility in child custody evaluations. Findings revealed that respondents used selection criteria commonly cited in the forensic literature. They viewed the major purposes of testing as ruling out psychopathology and assessing personality functioning. Interestingly, less emphasis was placed on generating and testing hypotheses. In general, a limited number of tests and inventories were endorsed as meeting the Dauber standard. Implications for practice are addressed, particularly strategies for defending child custody testing practices against Daubert challenges.

[1]  J. Gould,et al.  An Analysis of Administration, Scoring, and Interpretation of the MMPI-2 and MCMI-II/III in Child Custody Evaluations , 2006 .

[2]  Rosemary Flanagan,et al.  The Rorschach: A Comprehensive System (4th ed.) , 2006 .

[3]  M. Connell.  Review of “The Ackerman-Schoendorf Scales for Parent Evaluation of Custody” (ASPECT) , 2005 .

[4]  Mary Connell EdD and Abpp.  Review of “The Ackerman-Schoendorf Scales for Parent Evaluation of Custody” (ASPECT) , 2005 .

[5]  J. Edens,et al.  THE USE OF PSYCHOLOGICAL TESTING IN CHILD CUSTODY EVALUATIONS , 2005 .

[6]  F. A. Quinnell,et al.  A CRITICAL REVIEW OF CHILD CUSTODY EVALUATION REPORTS , 2005 .

[7]  David E. Bernstein,et al.  The Daubert Trilogy in the States , 2004 .

[8]  D. J. Hynan.  Unsupported Gender Differences on Some Personality Disorder Scales of the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory-III. , 2004 .

[9]  Ian Lambie,et al.  Sparking Up: Family, Behavioral and Empathy Factors in Adolescent Firesetters , 2004 .

[10]  Stephen J. Lally,et al.  What Tests Are Acceptable for Use in Forensic Evaluations? A Survey of Experts , 2003 .

[11]  D. Medoff.  THE SCIENTIFIC BASIS OF PSYCHOLOGICAL TESTING: Considerations Following Daubert, Kumho, and Joiner , 2003 .

[12]  E. Zillmer,et al.  Principles of Forensic Mental Health Assessment , 2003, Assessment.

[13]  Catherine M. Lee,et al.  Controversial and questionable assessment techniques. , 2003 .

[14]  F. A. Quinnell,et al.  Assessment of Sexual Abuse Allegations in Child Custody Cases , 2002 .

[15]  R. Erard,et al.  PROTECTING THE INTEGRITY OF RORSCHACH EXPERT WITNESSES A Reply to Grove and Barden (1999) Re: The Admissibility of Testimony Under Daubert/Kumho Analyses , 2002 .

[16]  W. Grove,et al.  Failure of Rorschach-Comprehensive-System-based testimony to be admissible under the Daubert-Joiner-Kumho standard. , 2002 .

[17]  J. Mccann.  Guidelines for Forensic Application of the MCMI-III , 2002 .

[18]  R. Otto.  Use of the MMPI-2 in Forensic Settings , 2002 .

[19]  D. Viglione,et al.  The Rorschach in Forensic Practice , 2002 .

[20]  C. Gacono,et al.  The Psychopathy Checklist-Revised: PCL-R Testimony and Forensic Practice , 2002 .

[21]  R. Erard,et al.  PROTECTING THE INTEGRITY OF RORSCHACH EXPERT WITNESSES A Reply to Grove and Barden ( 1999 ) Re : The Admissibility of Testimony Under Daubert / Kumho Analyses , 2002 .

[22]  K. Heilbrun,et al.  The practice of forensic psychology. A look toward the future in light of the past. , 2002, The American psychologist.

[23]  J. M. Wood,et al.  Problems of the Comprehensive System for the Rorschach in Forensic Settings , 2001 .

[24]  F. A. Quinnell,et al.  Psychological tests used in child custody evaluations. , 2001, Behavioral sciences & the law.

[25]  F. A. Quinnell,et al.  Psychologists' current practices and procedures in child custody evaluations: Five years after American Psychological Association guidelines. , 2001 .

[26]  T. Lazzaro,et al.  The MCMI-III in Child Custody Evaluations , 2001 .

[27]  R. Lanyon,et al.  Multimodal Assessment of Self-Serving Misrepresentation During Personal Injury Evaluation , 2001 .

[28]  B. Sales,et al.  Legal standards, expertise, and experts in the resolution of contested child custody cases. , 2000 .

[29]  S. Lilienfeld,et al.  The Scientific Status of Projective Techniques , 2000, Psychological science in the public interest : a journal of the American Psychological Society.

[30]  R. Salekin,et al.  The MCMI-III and the Daubert Standard: Separating Rhetoric from Reality , 2000, Law and human behavior.

[31]  P. Retzlaff.  Comment on the Validity of the MCMI-III , 2000, Law and Human Behavior.

[32]  G. Meyer.  On the Science of Rorschach Research , 2000, Journal of personality assessment.

[33]  J. Mccann,et al.  The Millon Clinical Inventories, Research Critical of Their Forensic Application, and Daubert Criteria , 2000, Law and human behavior.

[34]  R. Salekin,et al.  Validation of the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory for Axis II Disorders: Does It Meet the Daubert Standard? , 1999, Law and human behavior.

[35]  D. Strong,et al.  Taxometric analysis of impression management and self-deception on the MMPI-2 in child-custody litigants. , 1999, Journal of personality assessment.

[36]  W. Grove,et al.  Protecting the integrity of the legal system: The Admissibility of Testimony from Mental Health Experts under Daubert/Kumho Analyses , 1999 .

[37]  J. Mccann.  Assessing Adolescents with the MACI: Using the Millon Adolescent Clinical Inventory , 1999 .

[38]  W. Grove,et al.  Protecting the integrity of the legal system , 1999 .

[39]  J. Gould.  Conducting Scientifically Crafted Child Custody Evaluations , 1998 .

[40]  B. Carpenter,et al.  Custody evaluations: a survey of mental health professionals , 1998 .

[41]  J. Mccann.  Defending the Rorschach in Court: An Analysis of Admissibility Using Legal and Professional Standards , 1998 .

[42]  Robert D. Hare,et al.  Psychopaths and their nature: Implications for the mental health and criminal justice systems. , 1998 .

[43]  A. E. Gottfried,et al.  Normative Data for the MMPI-2 in Child Custody Litigation. , 1997 .

[44]  M. Ackerman,et al.  Custody evaluation practices: A survey of experienced professionals (revisited). , 1997 .

[45]  Terri Gullickson.  Forensic Assessment With the Millon Inventories. , 1997 .

[46]  I. Weiner,et al.  Is the Rorschach welcome in the courtroom? , 1996, Journal of Personality Assessment.

[47]  T. Grisso,et al.  Review of Instruments Assessing Parenting Competencies used in Child Custody Evaluations , 1996 .

[48]  J. Morgan.  D M DIARY , 1995 .

[49]  D B Marlowe,et al.  A hybrid decision framework for evaluating psychometric evidence. , 1995, Behavioral sciences & the law.

[50]  Guidelines for child custody evaluations in divorce proceedings. American Psychological Association, Committee on Professional Practice and Standards (COPPS). , 1994, The American psychologist.

[51]  K. Heilbrun.  The role of psychological testing in forensic assessment , 1992 .

[52]  Committee on Ethical Guidelines for Forensic Psychologists.  Specialty guidelines for forensic psychologists , 1991 .

[53]  J. Graham,et al.  MMPI-2 : Assessing Personality and Psychopathology , 1990 .

[54]  L. Bloom,et al.  Child custody evaluation practices: A survey of experienced professionals. , 1986 .