In August 2010, the court approved Rule 1915.18 for what was called a “form of order directing expert examination and report.” The rule is a general order and, while the rule requires certain things, it really is lax in what, respectfully, this article suggests.
First, while it directs that the order might be either a psychological evaluation or custody evaluation, it does not specifically set out the scope of the evaluation. A custody evaluation is a very general term and, frankly, in most cases, such evaluation is not necessary. It is only when there is something specific in the case that would affect parenting, such as alcoholism or a possible mental disorder, that such an evaluation is necessary. What the evaluator essentially does, besides administering psychometric tests, is to gather factual information that could and should be presented in the courtroom. This may be a shortcut for the court to reduce the amount of time that a custody case takes, but it should not be on the shoulders of the custody evaluator to do such factual gathering. There should be a specific reason why a custody evaluation is necessary and not just to save the court time on gathering facts. That is why the scope of the evaluation is so important and should be set out in the order appointing the evaluator.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]