Forensic psychology is a failed experiment in service delivery to a vulnerable population.

Forensic psychologists are ignorant, incompetent, and unethical, they are the worst imaginable.

NY Blue Ribbon Commission

The New York Blue Ribbon Commission on Forensic Custody Evaluations found the practice of forensic custody evaluations to be “harmful to children” and lacking scientific or legal value. The NY Blue Ribbon Commission voted 11-to-9 to recommend the elimination of forensic custody evaluations in the family courts.

From NY Blue Ribbon Commission: “Ultimately, the Commission members agree that some New York judges order forensic evaluations too frequently and often place undue reliance upon them. Judges order forensic evaluations to provide relevant information regarding the “best interest of the child(ren),” and some go far beyond an assessment of whether either party has a mental health condition that has affected their parental behavior. In their analysis, evaluators may rely on principles and methodologies of dubious validity. In some custody cases, because of lack of evidence or the inability of parties to pay for expensive challenges of an evaluation, defective reports can thus escape meaningful scrutiny and are often accepted by the court, with potentially disastrous consequences for the parents and children… As it currently exists, the process is fraught with bias, inequity, and a statewide lack of standards, and allows for discrimination and violations of due process.”

From NY Blue Ribbon Commission: “By an 11-9 margin, a majority of Commission members favor elimination of forensic custody evaluations entirely, arguing that these reports are biased and harmful to children and lack scientific or legal value. At worst, evaluations can be dangerous, particularly in situations of domestic violence or child abuse – there have been several cases of children in New York who were murdered by a parent who received custody following an evaluation. These members reached the conclusion that the practice is beyond reform and that no amount of training for courts, forensic evaluators and/or other court personnel will successfully fix the bias, inequity and conflict of interest issues that exist within the system.”

Q: Did the forensic psychologist conduct a proper risk assessment for possible child psychological abuse?

Q: Did the forensic psychologist conduct a proper risk assessment for possible spousal emotional and psychological abuse of the targeted parent using the child as the weapon?

Q: Did the forensic psychologist conduct a proper assessment for a possible shared (induced) delusional thought disorder pathology?

  • Google negligence: failure to take proper care in doing something

Forensic child custody evaluators are in violation of multiple ethical Standards of the APA ethics code, including:

  • Standard 2.01 Boundaries of Competence
  • Standard 2.04 Bases for Scientific and Professional Judgments
  • Standard 9.01 Bases for Assessment
  • Failure in their duty to protect obligations

Blog: Ethical Violations in Forensic Psychology

This is an essay from my blog that describes the multiple ethical code violations and failures in the duty to protect in the practice of child custody evaluations in forensic psychology.

Blog: Standard 9.01

This essay describes the ethical violations in child custody evaluations surrounding inadequate assessment

Additional Blogs on Child Custody Evaluations

Example of “Standards of Practice” for Child Custody Evaluations

This is a redacted copy of a child custody evaluation I reviewed as a clinical psychology consultant.  I redacted red for original sentences and blue for direct quotes.

The forensic child custody evaluator simply recorded her interviews, had them transcribed, and then used the transcripts as the complete body of her report. She then offered a three paragraph conclusion that applied zero knowledge from professional psychology.

Note that she is a Diplomat of the American Board of Assessment Psychology. She is considered one of their best child custody evaluators.  This is considered acceptable standard of practice in forensic child custody evaluations.  In my professional opinion, it is fraud.

This is my de-identified Standard 1.04 letter of concern to this forensic psychologist.