Laws requiring court-appointed custody assessors to have special training and experience with abused children met with opposition from the Maryland Judiciary last week, which said its rule regarding assessor qualifications adequately protects the best interests of all children.
“In many ways, the judiciary is consistent with the aims and purposes of the legislature,” retired Maryland Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Deborah S. Eyler told the House Judiciary Committee. “The welfare of the children is paramount, their reassurance that their best interests should be promoted.”
“The best way to do that is to apply the rule,” Eyler added. “It really doesn’t need a statute”
The judiciary said in written testimony that its rule for appointing evaluators takes into account their experience and qualifications, including the fact that they are licensed mental health care providers.
But attorney Paul Griffin, legal director of Child Justice Inc., said statutory requirements for assessors are necessary to ensure courts have the best information available when deciding which custody arrangements are in the best interests of an abused child.
The bill will ensure evaluators are “well trained” to identify and protect children in custody issues from continued abuse and domestic violence, said Griffin, whose Silver Spring-based group represents abused youth.
“This is especially important given the over-reliance that judges typically place on these experts when deciding custody,” Griffin said. “Put simply, we do not believe that the judiciary is well placed to make these determinations about what is in the child’s best interest, what factors should be considered in connection with domestic violence and child abuse.”
The committee’s consideration of House Bill 285 follows findings by a Family Law Legislative Working Group that judges adopt the expert’s recommendation in more than 90% of child custody cases.
By law, a reviewer would have to be a psychiatrist, a licensed psychologist, or a licensed social worker.
The assessor would also need to have treated or clinically observed matters related to family conflicts, normative child development, and the effects of chronic or traumatic stress, including domestic violence.
In addition, the assessor would need to complete a 20-hour training course covering specific topics including the impact of domestic violence on children.
Del. Vanessa E. Atterbeary, D-Howard and lead sponsor of the bill, said the proposed legal requirements for assessors would result in better custody decisions for the children than those currently being made.
“People who are custody assessors are not necessarily experts in the field, even though they are treated as such,” Atterbeary told the committee.
Del. Aaron M. Kaufman, D-Montgomery and committee member, said he would rather have legal standards for appraisers than leave that responsibility to the judiciary.
“I don’t think a lot of judges are experts on childhood trauma, so with all due respect I’m not sure you’re the best people to pick the training requirements,” Kaufman told Eyler.
The retired judge responded that the judiciary’s rule regarding the qualifications of evaluators was promulgated with input from experts in child psychology and psychiatry and only after consideration by the Standing Committee on Judiciary Practice and Procedure and acceptance by the Maryland Supreme Court.
“By the time a rule is drafted and goes to the Supreme Court, that kind of (expert) input has been solicited in a public manner for the public to appear, comment, comment in writing” on the appropriate qualifications for a custody assessor, Eyler said. “There is a lot of input”
House Bill 285 has been tabled in the Senate. Senator Mary Beth Carozza, R-Somerset, Worcester and Wicomico, is the lead sponsor of Senate Bill 13.
Comments are closed.