Disputes in family arise time and again. In the worst case, parents decide to divorce when all trials to salvage a marriage fail. For this reason, questions such as who takes care of children fully, when can the other party visit kids as well as for how long are they allowed to do so come up. When litigating children care, of paramount importance is parents mental state. Of course, children cannot be left with a parent who has a conceptual condition that predisposes them to abuse. The decision on whether psychological testing child custody in a case is important or not relies on numerous factors. One, claims that a parent has been involved in juvenile abuse before. Secondly, if a parent is addicted to drugs as well as the existence of mental instability cases in family antiquity. However, for many years, tests carried out to ascertain mental state have failed for reasons discussed below.
The custody assessment process involves a series of actions. Firstly, psychologist interview persons in question to collect various facts regarding the relationship with kids. Notably, there are no universal guidelines directing how interviews are carried out. Similarly, questions vary from one specialist to another.
As a result, different specialists administer interviews in their own manner. For this reason, one cannot gauge the quality of an examination. Questions asked cannot be considered comprehensive or not which means they do not reflect the skill level of assessors. As a result, legal advisers may make wrong conclusions in the litigation process.
The next stage of evaluation is medical screening. Individuals are tested of different health conditions such as Rorschach inkblot just to mention a few. Like interviews, there are no scientifically defined tools to carry out these procedures. Therefore, each specialist may decide to use machines of their choice.
Consequently, experts define their own tests that may vary. Similarly, selected tools used to carry out screening differ with specialists. For this reason, it is impossible to ascertain correct results.
At the end of every test, specialists give a list of observations. Notably, behaviors vary with time hence a current examination result does not reflect how individuals will act tomorrow. For example, an alcoholic can decide to stop drinking some time in the future. Relying on such information to identify which parent is worth custody is therefore incorrect. As discussed earlier, tools used in the examination are different depending on a specialist. Likewise, formats vary with experts as well as questions asked. For this reason, observations are biased besides being erroneous. Use of such results thus might hinder sound ruling.
Another limitation appears in the evaluation of results. This is done by a person who could not have a psychosomatic background. Interpretation of similar care data will greatly differ between experts significantly. Similarly, when collecting data from particular families, professionals can decide to lean on one side.
The process is erroneous starting from point one. What it means is that judgment given using such evidence is also corrupt. To curb such an eventuality, juries should consider the above limitations before giving a ruling. They should not entirely depend on such evidence hence consider other sources of facts. This way, children rights will be upheld in the right way.
The custody assessment process involves a series of actions. Firstly, psychologist interview persons in question to collect various facts regarding the relationship with kids. Notably, there are no universal guidelines directing how interviews are carried out. Similarly, questions vary from one specialist to another.
As a result, different specialists administer interviews in their own manner. For this reason, one cannot gauge the quality of an examination. Questions asked cannot be considered comprehensive or not which means they do not reflect the skill level of assessors. As a result, legal advisers may make wrong conclusions in the litigation process.
The next stage of evaluation is medical screening. Individuals are tested of different health conditions such as Rorschach inkblot just to mention a few. Like interviews, there are no scientifically defined tools to carry out these procedures. Therefore, each specialist may decide to use machines of their choice.
Consequently, experts define their own tests that may vary. Similarly, selected tools used to carry out screening differ with specialists. For this reason, it is impossible to ascertain correct results.
At the end of every test, specialists give a list of observations. Notably, behaviors vary with time hence a current examination result does not reflect how individuals will act tomorrow. For example, an alcoholic can decide to stop drinking some time in the future. Relying on such information to identify which parent is worth custody is therefore incorrect. As discussed earlier, tools used in the examination are different depending on a specialist. Likewise, formats vary with experts as well as questions asked. For this reason, observations are biased besides being erroneous. Use of such results thus might hinder sound ruling.
Another limitation appears in the evaluation of results. This is done by a person who could not have a psychosomatic background. Interpretation of similar care data will greatly differ between experts significantly. Similarly, when collecting data from particular families, professionals can decide to lean on one side.
The process is erroneous starting from point one. What it means is that judgment given using such evidence is also corrupt. To curb such an eventuality, juries should consider the above limitations before giving a ruling. They should not entirely depend on such evidence hence consider other sources of facts. This way, children rights will be upheld in the right way.
About the Author:
Get a summary of the things to keep in mind when picking a psychologist and more information about a professional who offers psychological testing child custody purposes at http://www.drjamesrflens.com today.
No comments:
Post a Comment