Science‐Based Practice and the Dangers of Overreach: Essential Concepts and Future Directions in Evidence‐Informed Practice

• Published date: 01 October 2021
• Author: Lyn R. Greenberg,Kathleen McNamara,Sarah Wilkins
• Date: 01 October 2021
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/fcre.12602

SCIENCE-BASED PRACTICE AND THE DANGERS OF OVERREACH:

ESSENTIAL CONCEPTS AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS IN EVIDENCE-

INFORMED PRACTICE

Lyn R. Greenberg, Kathleen McNamara, and Sarah Wilkins

What scientific evidence should we consider in providing services to families? This has become a heated debate, potentially

impacting both social policy and intervention planning for families. Overreach has been common in this debate and can seri-

ously harm families. While recognizing the valuable information that randomly-controlled trials may provide, the authors

identify situations in which other scientific information may be more reliable, relevant and helpful for the complex families

we serve. They discuss the essential elements of evidence-informed services, the scope of evidence that may be relevant, and

the importance of exercising clinically and scientifically informed inference in planning services.

Key Points for the Family Law Community

Evidence informed practice requires broad knowledge and disciplined application of scientificfindings relevant to

separated families and children, adapted to the needs of individual families.

There is no single form of scientific inquiry that will tell us all we need to know about court involved families; a

broad range of scientific information is needed.

Oversimplified descriptions of social science are likely to be misleading and can cause serious harm to families and

children.

All court-involved mental health professionals should be able to explain the scientific and clinical bases for their

opinions, procedures, recommendations, and interventions.

As a profession, we need to clarify categories of scientific evidence and provide better tools to judicial officers for

using social science evidence.

Keywords: Court-Involved Families;Evidence-Informed Intervention; Science-Based Practice.

Billy and Olivia Smith are the children of Monique Perez and David Smith. Monique is of

Mexican descent and David is black. They are before the court on a motion to change or prohibit

parts of their court-ordered family therapy plan. Billy, age 6, has been exhibiting disruptive

behaviors at school and there are concerns that he suffers from ADHD. Olivia, age 13, has been

depressed and exhibits periodic episodes of anxiety as well. The parents are in conflict regarding

both issues. The children’s medical providers, including the providers of an evidence-based behav-

ioral parent training class, have found the parents to be exceedingly difficult to work with, which is

disrupting their ability to evaluate and treat the children. The family therapist has constructed a plan

in which both children will receive evaluations and appropriate treatment from their medical pro-

viders, and the family therapist will work with the parents to reduce conflict and the children to

strengthen coping skills. She will also serve as a resource to the medical providers when the

parents’child custody conflict impedes their work.

David is before the court requesting that the children’s assessment and treatment be delayed and

that services be provided only to the parents, as he has been told that randomly controlled studies

have shown that intervention with children is often unnecessary if the parents can reduce conflict,

Corresponding: lyn@lyngreenbergphd.com

The authors gratefully acknowledge the assistance of Michael Saini, Ph.D., and Thomas Sexton, Ph.D., ABPP, for their con-

sultation and support.

FAMILY COURT REVIEW, Vol. 59 No. 4, October 2021 683–696, doi: 10.1111/fcre.12602

© 2021 Association of Family and Conciliation Courts.