The “process” of assessment refers to the systematic
gathering of information, through a methodical plan of
action. Using a medical analogy, imagine a surgeon who cuts before
anesthetizing you. Process is everything! In the context of
an assessment, a questionable process may undermine the
credibility of the assessment, the clinical findings and the
recommendations. This can be avoided with attention to the process as discussed herein.
Parents involved in custody and access disputes should not phone
assessors directly during the referral process. If they do,
they risk the other parent will be concerned that the
assessor will be biased by a one-sided version of events.
Rather, it is better if the lawyer for either parent calls assessors
first to determine the appropriateness of referral,
timelines, costs, etc. Furthermore, the lawyer can request a
copy of the CV and ask any other pertinent questions as may
be necessary or of concern to their client.
Satisfied that a given assessor is appropriate to the task at hand,
the next stage is to seek agreement with the lawyer of the
other parent for the referral to take place. Upon reaching
agreement or alternately, upon the appointment of an
assessor by the Courts, a lawyer should again contact the
assessor and discuss data collection and payment.
Receiving monies in advance and holding in trust either by the
assessor or by the lawyer is suggested. Having monies
upfront reduces concern that the assessor will bias the
report with a view to payment. If the cost of the assessment
is greater than the amount held in trust, the assessor
should take action to ensure that additional monies are
secured prior to the disclosure meeting or the submission of the assessment report.
On the matter of data collection, lawyers should deliver the
legal file and supporting documents, assessments reports,
etc, prior to the assessor setting direct interviews. Having
the materials in advance of meeting the parents, allows the
assessor to better prepare for the content of the meetings
by determining and focusing on salient issues.
With the referral accepted by the assessor, monies in place and
documents secured, then the assessor may call the parents
and begin the formal interview process. While some parents
and lawyers perceive an advantage to the sequencing of
interviews, generally no advantage is actually accrued.
Multiple appointments will be made and any issues arising
should find opportunity for discussion over the course of several interviews.
Custody and access assessments, in accordance with professional
guidelines must include interviews with both parents. To do
otherwise is considered a “one-sided’ assessment and
hence subject to bias, the results of which will be suspect.
To do otherwise can only be done on the basis of a
substantial issue, supporting such action. There is also a
high expectation that parents will be seen with their
children and that children will be seen on their own. There
is however greater latitude here with concern to the
interests, risks and well-being of the children. Interviews
with other informants and obtaining of other documents may
take place during the process of direct interviews.
Following data collection and interviews, a report is written. While
some assessors may choose to release the report with
simultaneous delivery, other assessors will require a
four-way disclosure meeting, to present the assessment,
recommendations and written report. The advantage of a
four-way meeting is that again it precludes bias that may be
perceived as a result of sequencing and it allows questions,
but more importantly, answers to be heard by all parties at
the same time, in the same manner. Subsequent to the
completion of the assessment process as determined by the
delivery of a report, the assessor should exercise caution
with regard to any exparté discussions to limit concern or
advantage by one party over the other.
Few disputes reach the level of intensity as contested custody
and access disputes and few professional activities garner
more complaints to professional bodies as these assessments.
It is in everyone’s’ best interest to adhere to
assessment processes that mitigate the perception of bias
and thus maintain the integrity of the entire assessment.
Copyright 2004. Gary Direnfeld, MSW, RSW www.yoursocialworker.com
Gary Direnfeld is a child-behaviour expert, a social worker, and the author
of Raising Kids Without Raising Cane. Courts in Ontario, Canada consider Gary an expert on matters pertaining to child
development, custody and access, family/marital therapy and social work.
The following articles can give you more insight on the issues that you will face as you approach a divorce involving children.