California Family Law Attorney
California Family Law Lawyer Attorney Profile
Click here to visit our blog Links Resources
Contact the Law firm of Thurman W. Arnold III
California Family Law Areas of Practice
Contact the Law Office of Thurman W. Arnold III




225 South Civic Drive Suite 1-3 Palm Springs, CA 92262

Recent Posts in Parenting Evaluations Category

June 03, 2010
  "PARENTAL ALIENATION" at the 2010 AFCC Conference
Posted By Thurman Arnold
The topic of the 47th Annual Association of Family and Conciliation Court Conference is "parental alienation."  Over 1,000 lawyers, judges, mediators, and mental health professionals (psychologists, therapists, counselors, and court personnel) have converged in Denver for plenaries and dozens of educational and training sessions to share wisdom and views not just about alienating parents, but also concerning many other topics including mediating high conflict partner breakups, understanding how the brain works in conflict and why people behave irrationally and reactively, the effects of parental conflict upon children, children's best interests and parenting plans, domestic violence, and much more.     

This is reportedly the largest AFCC Conference turn out ever. 

The AFCC a is multi-disciplinary and highly collaborative organization, made up of members of overlapping professions who are passionately cross-pollinating the international social landscape - but particularly within the U.S. - in fertile ways.  AFCC is dedicated to facilitating the healthy resolution of family conflict.  AFCC's most important function is to serve as a forum for mental health professionals and family scientists and legal scholars to educate and train all of us who are in the day to day trenches of the legal and social struggles surrounding, and consequences of, relationship breakup.  It is a natural marriage of a number of related professions, and probably the most important organization affecting family law trends today both in and outside the courtroom.

The concept of "parental alienation" is a highly controversial subject. There is much debate and disagreement nationally and in Denver this week whether parental alienation is really a "syndrome" or "disorder" and whether it deserves its own category in the upcoming DSM-V. 

The DSM is short for the Diagnostic Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders.  It is published is by the American Psychiatric Association.  The current DSM-IV was first released in 1994 and has since been updated.  It appears that the DSM-V may be released as early as 2012.  It is the APA and not AFCC that determines what is and what is not included.

Mental Health Professionals (MHP's) use this manual when working with patients as a common ground for better understanding their illness and potential treatment, to communicate between themselves, and to help insurance companies and other payors decide whether to cover treatments.  It is considered the ‘bible’ for any professional who makes psychiatric diagnoses in the United States and many other countries, and hence what gets in and what does not has long ranging consequences about how MHP's and judges and lawyers view certain behaviors and functioning.  In effect it constitutes a consensus over what is and what is not a 'mental illness.'  

The parental alienation question in this context is essentially whether there are predictable and discrete behaviors that in combination and given certain levels of intensity can form an identifiable mental illness that can be credibly diagnosed, distinguished from other disorders, and treated?

Hence, the DSM has important consequences to families who find themselves within the Family Court systems, even though that is not what the manual is necessarily intended to be used for. 

For instance, in forensic parenting evaluations the DSM-IV may be used to label parents in ways that can seriously impact and impede their parenting rights.   Therapists, psychologists, social workers and others who must employ and rely upon its system of coding often provide diagnoses and recommendations to judges and other MHP's derived from the DSM that are used to establish parenting rights and parenting plans in custody disputes and move-away situations. 

I will attempt to Blog some information about current parental alienation research soon.  In the meantime, consistent with my goal of providing free educational materials to individuals and families who are investigating legal questions involving families, my hope here is to introduce people to these important concepts.  Given the nature of Blogs it is easiest to do this in 'layers.'
Thurman Arnold
http://www.ThurmanArnold.com


Continue reading ""PARENTAL ALIENATION" at the 2010 AFCC Conference" »

Permalink  | Comments(0)
 
June 02, 2010
  Proposed Text for a new diagnosis of PARENTAL ALIENATION in the DSM-V
Posted By Thurman Arnold

The following text was taken from the AFCC materials provided in Denver.  The DSM-V has not been adopted, nor is there any agreement that the following diagnosis should be added.  I will provide commentary in a later Blog.

TWA

Proposed Text for Parental Alienation Disorder in DSM-V

DIAGNOSTIC FEATURES

The essential feature of parental alienation disorder is that a child - usually one whose parents are engaged in a high-conflict divorce - allies himself or herself strongly with one parent (the preferred parent) and rejects a relationship with the other parent (the alienated parent) without legitimate justification. The primary behavioral symptom is the child's resistance or refusal to have contact with the alienated parent (Criterion A).

The behaviors in the child that characterize parental alienation disorder include a persistent campaign of denigration against the alienated parent and weak, frivolous, and absurd rationalizations for the child's criticism of the alienated parent (Criterion B).

The following clinical features frequently occur in parental alienation disorder, especially when the child's symptoms reach a level that is moderate or severe (Criterion C). Lack of ambivalence refers to the child's belief that the alienated parent is all bad and the preferred parent is all good. The independent-thinker phenomenon means that the child proudly states the decision to reject the alienated parent is his own, not influenced by the preferred parent. Reflexive support of the preferred parent against the alienated parent refers to the pattern of the child's immediately and automatically taking the preferred parent's side in a disagreement. The child may exhibit a disregard for the feelings of the alienated parent and an absence of guilt over exploitation of the alienated parent. The child may manifest borrowed scenarios, that is, rehearsed statements that are identical to those made by the preferred parent. Also, the child's animosity toward the alienated parent may spread to that parent's extended family.

The diagnosis of parental alienation disorder should not be used if the child's refusal to have contact with the rejected parent is justifiable, for example, if the child was neglected or abused by that parent (Criterion D).

ASSOCIATED FEATURES

Parental alienation disorder may be mild, moderate, or severe. When the parental alienation disorder is mild, the child may briefly resist contact with the alienated parent, but does have contact and enjoys a good relationship with the alienated parent once they are together.

When the parental alienation disorder is mild, the child may have a strong, healthy relationship with both parents, even though the child recites criticisms of the alienated parent.

When the parental alienation disorder is moderate, the child may persistently resist

contact with the alienated parent and will continue to complain and criticize the alienated parent during the contact. The child is likely to have a mildly to moderately pathological relationship with the preferred parent.

When the parental alienation disorder is severe, the child strongly and persistently resists contact and may hide or run away to avoid seeing the alienated parent. The child's behavior is driven by a firmly held, false belief that the alienated parent is evil, dangerous, or worthless.  The child is likely to have a strong, severely pathological relationship with the preferred parent, perhaps sharing a paranoid worldview.

While the diagnosis of parental alienation disorder refers to the child, the preferred parent and other persons the child is dependent on may manifest the following attitudes and behaviors, which frequently are the major cause of the disorder: persistent criticisms of the rejected parent's personal qualities and parenting activities; statements that influence the child to fear, dislike, and criticize the alienated parent; and various maneuvers to exclude the rejected parent from the child's life. The behavior of the preferred parent may include complaints to the police and child protection agencies with allegations about the rejected parent.

Parental alienation disorder may be the basis for false allegations of sexual abuse against the alienated parent. The preferred parent may be litigious to the point of abusing the legal system. The preferred parent may violate court orders that are not to his or her liking. Specific psychological problems - narcissistic personality disorder, borderline personality disorder, traumatic childhood experiences, and paranoid traits - may be identified in these individuals.  Also, the rejected parent may manifest the following attitudes and behaviors, which may be a minor or contributory cause of the disorder: lack of warm, involved parenting; deficient parenting skills; and lack of time dedicated to parenting activities. However, the intensity and duration of the child's refusal to have contact with the rejected parent is far out of proportion to the relatively minor weaknesses in the rejected parent's parenting skills.

Although parental alienation disorder most often arises in the context of a child custody dispute between two parents, it can arise in other types of conflicts over child custody, such as a dispute between a parent and stepparent or between a parent and a grandparent. Sometimes, other family members - such as stepparents or grandparents - contribute to the creation of parental alienation disorder. On occasion, other individuals - such as therapists and child protection workers - contribute to the creation of parental alienation disorder by encouraging or supporting the child's refusal to have contact with the alienated parent. Also, parental alienation disorder does not necessarily appear in the context of divorce litigation, but may occur in intact families or years following the divorce.

DIFFERENTIAL DIAGNOSIS

It is common for children to resist or avoid contact with the noncustodial parent after the parents separate or divorce. There are several possible explanations for a child's active rejection of contact. Parental alienation disorder is an important, but not the only, reason that children refuse contact.

In the course of normal development children will become polarized with one parent and then the other depending on the child's developmental stage and events in the child's life. When parents disagree, it is normal for children to experience loyalty conflicts. These transitory variationsin a child's relationship with his or her parents do not meet criteria for parental alienation disorder because they do not constitute "a persistent rejection or denigration of a parent that reaches the level of a campaign."

If the child actually was abused, neglected, or disliked by the noncustodial parent or the current boyfriend or girlfriend of that parent, the child's animosity may be justified and it is understandable that the child would not want to visit the rejected parent's household. If abuse were the reason for the child's refusal, the diagnosis would be physical abuse of child or sexual abuse of child, not parental alienation disorder. This is important to keep in mind because an abusive, rejected parent may misuse the concept of parental alienation disorder in order to falsely blame the child's refusal of contact on the parent that the child prefers. In shared psychotic disorder, a delusional parent may influence a child to believe that the other parent is an evil person who must be feared and avoided. In parental alienation disorder, the alienating parent may have very strong opinions about the alienated parent, but is not usually considered out of touch with reality.

When parents separate or divorce, a child with separation anxiety disorder may become even more worried and anxious about being away from the primary caretaker. In separation anxiety disorder, the child is preoccupied with unrealistic fears that something will happen to the primary caretaker, while the child with parental alienation disorder is preoccupied with unrealistic beliefs that the alienated parent is dangerous.

It is conceivable that a child with specific phobia, situational type, might have an unreasonable fear of a parent or some aspect of the parent's household. A child with a specific phobia is unlikely to engage in a persistent campaign of denigration against the feared object, while the campaign of denigration is a central feature of parental alienation disorder.

When parents separate or divorce, a child with oppositional defiant disorder may become even more symptomatic - angry, resentful, stubborn - and not want to participate in the process of transitioning from one parent to the other. In oppositional defiant disorder, the child is likely to be oppositional with both parents in a variety of contexts, while the child with parental alienation disorder is likely to focus his or her negativism on the proposed contact with the alienated parent and also to engage in the campaign of denigration of that parent.

When parents separate or divorce, a child may develop an adjustment disorder as a reaction to the various stressors related to the divorce including discord between the parents, the loss of a relationship with a parent, and the disruption of moving to a new neighborhood and school. A child with an adjustment disorder may have a variety of nonspecific symptoms including depression, anxious mood, and disruptive behaviors, while the child with parental alienation disorder manifests a specific cluster of symptoms including the campaign of denigration and weak, frivolous rationalizations for the child's persistent criticism of the alienated parent.

Parent-child relational problem (a V-code) is the appropriate diagnosis if the focus of clinical attention is on the relationship between a child and his or her divorced parents, but the symptoms do not meet the criteria for a mental disorder. For example, a rebellious adolescent may not have a specific mental disorder, but may temporarily refuse to have contact with one parent even though both parents have encouraged him to do so and a court has ordered it. On the other hand, parental alienation disorder should be the diagnosis if the child's symptoms are persistent enough and severe enough to meet the criteria for that disorder.

DIAGNOSTIC CRITERIA FOR PARENTAL ALIENATION DISORDER

A. The child - usually one whose parents are engaged in a high-conflict divorce - allies himself or herself strongly with one parent and rejects a relationship with the other, alienated parent without legitimate justification. The child resists or refuses contact or parenting time with the alienated parent.

B. The child manifests the following behaviors:

  • a persistent rejection or denigration of a parent that reaches the level of a
  • campaign
  • weak, frivolous, and absurd rationalizations for the child's persistent criticism of the rejected parent

C. The child manifests two or more of the following six attitudes and behaviors:

(1) lack of ambivalence

(2) independent-thinker phenomenon

(3) reflexive support of one parent against the other

(4) absence of guilt over exploitation of the rejected parent

(5) presence of borrowed scenarios

(6) spread of the animosity to the extended family of the rejected parent.

D. The duration of the disturbance is at least 2 months.

E. The disturbance causes clinically significant distress or impairment in social academic (occupational), or other important areas of functioning.

F. The child's refusal to have contact with the rejected parent is without legitimate justification. That is, parental alienation disorder is not diagnosed if the rejected parent maltreated the child.




Continue reading "Proposed Text for a new diagnosis of PARENTAL ALIENATION in the DSM-V" »

Permalink  | Comments(0)
 
May 10, 2010
  What does it mean that a judge has ordered a 730 EVALUATION in my custody case?
Posted By Thurman Arnold
Q.  My ex wife and I are fighting over custody of our three children.  The judge decided to appoint a psychologist to interview us all.  How does this affect me and my case?

A.  In high conflict cases where two sides have entrenched and opposing views about what is in the best interests of their children in terms of custody and visitation, California Evidence Code section 730 provides judges the option of appointing an expert witness to investigate the matter and report to the Court.  This is often referred to as a forensic evaluation but in California we typically call them "730 evaluations."

What this means for you is that your family is likely in trouble, since these custody evals only are necessary where parents are failing to proactively resolve their parenting issues.  They can be quite expensive in every way.  I describe the process here in part to help encourage you avoid it. Still, there are times when it can lead to a lessening of conflict and it may be inevitable in move away situations.

Forensic evaluations can be used in a number of other settings as well, including valuing businesses or real estate.  It is extremely common in move away cases and in fact a strong argument can be made that to allow a parent to relocate with minor children in the absence of such a report (if it is requested) violates the due process rights of the non-moving parent [In re Marriage of McGinnis (1992) 7 Cal.App.4th 473, 9 Cal.Rptr. 2d 182]. 

In your situation the Court has likely appointed a Psychologist or Marriage and Family Therapist whose work is already known to the Court because that person is on a panel the Court uses, or possibly because one or both lawyers have worked with the expert and either recommended him or her to the Court.  Often the parties' lawyers will agree upon this third person. 

Reliable evaluators are not hired guns for either side.  However, like everyone else they can have their own biases.  To the extent that you can, it is always a good idea to get as much information as possible about a potential evaluator before a selection is made.  Courts generally don't impose someone on the parties where one of them objects to that person, but in smaller communities there may be fewer options in terms of qualified evaluators.

It can be very difficult for a judge to determine the truth of claims between family law litigants, what their underlying motives are, whether there is some mental health or substance abuse undercurrent, and whether one parent is more likely than the other to foster an ongoing relationship between the other parent and their children.  Courts don't have the time or resources to do much more than call balls and strikes based upon witness declarations or live testimony.  Therapists and psychologists are able to spend time interviewing parents and sometimes have them complete psychological testing, they meet children, talk to teachers, visiting homes, check with therapists who are seeing family members, and also interview significant others, new spouses, and other children in blended families.  A much more reliable picture may emerge than that which comes from the parties' own descriptions of themselves, their children, and the other parent.

These custody evaluations can be quite expensive, typically starting at about $2,500.   They seem to average between $4,000 and $6,000, but the costs skyrocket with the number of people other than the parents themselves (often called 'collaterols') whose input is required.

It typically takes at least three months for an expert psychologist or MFT to complete all the necessary interviews and write a detailed report.  In my experience the time frame is closer to four months.  This report is then submitted to the attorneys and to the Court. 

Most courts require this report to be submitted at least 10 days prior to a hearing, so that both sides have ample time to review it.  If you are involved in a custody dispute and you or your attorney receive the report late, if you disagree with its recommendations you may want to object that you have not had sufficient time if you want a continuance; otherwise, the Court may adopt the recommendations at that hearing.

In almost all cases where a 730 report has been completed, either side may request that an evidentiary hearing take place with live testimony and the ability to examine and cross-examine witnesses - including the custody evaluator whose recommendations are being considered.  Depending upon the urgency of the family's issues and the Court's availability, these hearings may not be set for weeks or months.

In addition, if you feel that the evaluator failed to adequately investigate the case, or did not meet the standards of practice for such evaluations, you may want to consider hiring your own Evidence Code § 733 expert to advise you or your attorney on how to point out the shortcomings to the Court.  This can be an expensive, but sometimes useful, way to challenge findings that you do not agree with.  The usefulness of 733 evaluators is limited by the fact they do not get to perform a second evaluation (for instance, they rarely meet with the other party), and without conducting full interviews with all relevant persons they may be ethically bound not to render an opinion and certainly their views won't carry the same weight with a judge as the full evaluator.  This is not to imply, however, that your children's interests are even your own interests are served by attacking an evaluator's report just because you don't like portions of it.

I will write more on this topic but want to leave you with this thought:  Contested custody cases will damage your children, guaranteed.  I urge you to consider mediating your custody differences instead, either by using a qualified mediator or a mental health professional.




Continue reading "What does it mean that a judge has ordered a 730 EVALUATION in my custody case?" »

Permalink  | Comments(0)
 

Palm Springs Family Law Attorney
Contact Thurman W. Arnold III
Site Map

Professional Web Design The information on this Palm Springs Family Law Attorney / Law Firm website is for general information purposes only. Nothing on this or associated pages, documents, comments, answers, emails, or other communications should be taken as legal advice for any individual case or situation. This information on this website is not intended to create, and receipt or viewing of this information does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship.


© 2010 by Thurman Arnold III Law Offices. All rights reserved.


Address: 225 South Civic Drive   Suite 1-3   Palm Springs, CA 92262   Phone: (760) 320-7915   Fax: (760) 320-0725

Administration