Kamika Dunlap’s article regarding reform of the Family Court is well-taken, but, in my opinion, for the wrong reasons.
The current system allows far too much discretion on the part of the judges, who frequently rely on findings by “custody evaluators,” many of whom have only very superficial awareness of the true situation in divorcing families.
The issue of alleged “child abuse” is frequently used by a vengeful or selfish parent in order to “stack the deck” against the other parent, since, once an accusation of abuse (especially against a male) is made, it is almost impossible to defend against (guilty until proven innocent).
Major reforms should include:
1. A presumption for joint and equal custody unless the parties agree to something else, or it is shown, by standard rules of evidence, that one parent is deficient.
2. A requirement that any recommendations by a “custody evaluator” be subject to challenge j in court, by the other party in the action.
3. Better, education of judges and other officers of-the court in the dynamics of family life and the psychology of divorce.
It must be remembered that when a court “awards” custody to one parent, the court is not “awarding” anything, but rather, it is depriving one parent of the ability to raise his/her child.