Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Should Forensic Psychologists Make Custody Recommendations?
Forensic psychological assessments are often pivotal documents that can have a dramatic effect on the trajectory of a contested custody dispute and, ultimately, on the path a particular child's life will take post-disposition. These documents are often eagerly awaited because of their potential value in providing leverage for one side over the other and for their capacity to settle cases. Clients arrive at the clinician's office often feeling as if their lives are in the hands of the court-appointed expert. Forensic reports arrive at court as documents that represent the application of a behavioral “science” and there is therefore a common expectation that the recommendations will be weighted heavily because they will go beyond common public knowledge or subjective value choices. It is the recommendations section that is often read first by those involved in the dispute because of its perceived impact. This two-part article explores the limitations and applications of forensic psychology to custody evaluations.
Why Forensic Psychologists?
Those who argue that it is appropriate for psychologists to make specific custody recommendations offer, among others, the following rationales: An important component of a best-interests decision is the achievement of a family plan most likely to support a child's emotional health and happiness — who better to make such an assessment than a doctor skilled at understanding the factors that promote healthy emotional functioning in children? What professional, among those involved with a divorcing family, is better equipped to evaluate a child's emotional and developmental needs? Others state that it is simply unrealistic to assume that judges, professionals primarily trained in matters of law, can competently analyze and weigh the various issues related to the best interests of a child, issues that require a capacity to apply psychological knowledge. Judges need our recommendations, the argument goes, because psychologists know how to understand children and families in a way that judges do not.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
Removing Restrictive Covenants In New York
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?