eNews

One of the most disliked aspects of family law litigation is cross-examination. People have a universal aversion to it, from litigators to parents to experts. In family law cases, there are many types of individuals a lawyer will need to cross-examine. Often, the lawyer will cross-examine at least one of the parents, an evaluator or Guardian ad Litem, mental health professionals for either parent or the minor child, or other various experts, professionals, or friends and family. Effective cross-examination is a critical tool for litigators to help paint a picture for the factfinder (Judge) of what is in the best interest of the children, just as understanding effective cross-examination is also a critical tool for any professional in a family law case so they are prepared to answer questions in a way that is useful to the factfinder in making decisions for families. The author reflects on the purpose of cross-examination and offers some key guidelines for lawyers cross-examining witnesses and for those who face cross-examination during testimony.

Family Law Forensic Mental Health (FLFMH) is facing a critical juncture. With many professionals retiring or leaving the field—often due to its inherently litigious nature and the demands it places on practitioners—there is a growing shortage of qualified experts. This exodus is creating a significant gap in access to essential services for families and the courts. The few remaining specialists are stretched thin, managing overwhelming caseloads and extended waitlists. Meanwhile, most academic and clinical training programs offer limited, if any, opportunities for education in FLFMH, making it difficult for new professionals to enter the field.

Stephanie Tabashneck, PsyD, JD offers practical guidance for family court professionals handling cases involving psychedelic use by parents. She emphasizes assessing the impact on parenting rather than relying on stigma, distinguishing between medical, spiritual, and recreational use, and staying informed about evolving legal and clinical contexts. Key recommendations include using evidence-based evaluations, avoiding overreliance on drug testing, creating individualized parenting plans, and maintaining cultural competence and professional humility throughout the process.

Judges, attorneys, and clinical evaluators are confronted with endless sources of information in their daily practice. Often the information conflicts, and the parties in a family law matter are particularly motivated to have us believe their version of the truth. How do we evaluate how much stock to put in each of these sources? What do we believe? 

Expert testimony plays a crucial role in legal proceedings, providing courts with the knowledge needed to interpret complex issues. In cases such as child custody disputes, the insights offered by psychologists can significantly influence judicial outcomes. However, for such testimony to be admissible and reliable, it must be based on sound principles, scientific methods, and established professional knowledge. This article explores the legal framework surrounding expert testimony and the importance of scientific rigor in psychological evaluations.