ETHICAL, LEGAL, AND PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE ISSUES INVOLVED IN ACTING AS A PSYCHOLOGIST PARENT COORDINATOR IN CHILD CUSTODY CASES

• Date: 01 July 2004
• Author: Matthew J. Sullivan
• Published date: 01 July 2004
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/j.174-1617.2004.tb00670.x

ETHICAL, LEGAL, AND PROFESSIONAL

PRACTICE ISSUES INVOLVED IN

ACTING AS A PSYCHOLOGIST PARENT

COORDINATOR IN CHILD CUSTODY CASES

Matthew

J.

Sullivan

The use of Psychologist Parent Coordinators in child custody cases (called Special Masters in California) is becon-

ing increasingly prevalent across the country. This postdivorce parenting coordination role is

a

legal/psychological

hybrid, demanding knowledge and skill in legal domains (legal procedure, relevant case law, etc.), psychological

domains (child development, family systems, etc.), and dispute resolution (mediation and settlement processes). Sit-

uated in the intcrface

of

legal and psychological paradigms, Parent Coordination

may

be reviewed by multiple legal

and psychological regulatory bodies. Coming

from

varying perspectives, the practice guidelines and mandates of

these legal, ethical, and licensing agencies impose multiple standards

of

review of Parent Coordination.

A

brief over-

view

of

the legal and psychological review processes applicable to Special Master work in California, as they relate

to common issues that confront the Parenting Coordinator across the country, is the focus of this article. They

sug-

gest that the current lack of coordination of review processes creates a minefield of professional risk for the

psychologist who chooses to practice in this role.

Keywords:

parent

coordinution;

ethics; special

master;

high-corflict

divonre

THE PARENT COORDINATOR

ROLE IN THE FAMILY COURTS

The use of Parent Coordinators (also called Custody Commissioners

in

Hawaii and Spe-

cial Masters

in

California) in child custody cases began in California and has proliferated

across legal jurisdictions and developed increasingly formal procedures associated with the

legal appointment (Association of Family and Conciliation Courts Task Force on Parenting

Coordination [AFCC Task Force], 2003; Lee, 1995; Stahl, 1995; Sullivan, 1998). In Califor-

nia, Special Mastering is a legal concept originating in the Federal Court System where

judges delegate their decision-making powers to an expert in cases requiring specialized

knowledge and expertise (Lurvey, 1990). This role has been expanded in child custody cases

to utilize an expert, typically a psychologist, to determine the “best interest of the child” on

issues that the parents dispute (Kelly, I994,2001a, 2001b). Typically, referrals for this alter-

native dispute resolution process occur in only the most high-conflict cases, when other fam-

ily court processes have failed

to

resolve child custody issues and the parents return to court

over and over again

(J.

R. Johnston

&

Roseby, 1997).

The parents legally contract (stipulate) to use a Special Master, who has the authority to

make certain decisions in the form of recommendations or binding court orders related to

custody and visitation (Sullivan, 1998). Typically, the domains of authority involve day-to-

day parenting issues such as decisions about children’s education, activities, health care, and

interpreting and modifying specific provisions of a parenting plan. Custody cases that have

children with special needs

or

who have multiple professionals involved (therapists, health

care professionals, educational professionals, etc.), cases with very young children, or par-

FAMILY

COURT

REVIEW,

Vol.

42

No.

3.

July

2004

576.582

0

2004

Association

of

Family and Conciliation Couns

576