custody eval. report not very flattering

[Fatheroffour]

Top three reasons.

Bias.

Status qou.

Bias.

[Outis]

Top three reasons.

Bias.

Status qou.

Bias.

You forgot the possibility that bias led to the status quo.

[Fatheroffour]

That's why bias is first?

[pushed2far]

...

[mcc333]

OK, I think I can offer something here.

First of all, the bias is something that you'll see in most cases. Unfortunately for you, you have male genitals and you don't have a video tape of your ex beating children and puppies. If you and the ex are both fair to midland parents, this report does not surprise me in the least. GALs are the source of mommy bias at least as much as the courts if not more.

Second, I understood after my game had played out that a judge will not grant joint custody if the parents are bringing the full custody battle to him for his decision. It will go sole one way or the other. You can agree on joint without a trial but don't expect joint if it goes to trial.

Third, there is a clear misunderstadning on what you can and can't see as far as reports. I had two GAL's and saw both full reports. However, there was psych testing performed during the evals and this test result was something only the GALs were granted permision to see. The reason is that only the psychaitrists are trained to interpret the results and they don't want untrained people thinking they know better how to interpret. So in your case, do not expect to see test results. However, certainly the GAL's report is not only something you and your lawyer can view but something you must be able to view for any trial preparation. If your lawyer does not know this difference, fire their arss immediately.

[Fatheroffour]

For some reason I had the impression pushed2far was from a coastal state.

[Trevor]

On the clarification, that is the case in FL too; the psych can see the results from the psychometric testing, all the "customers get to see are the interpretations. You would have to set up a separate meeting afterward to discuss the results more in depth.

I agree that one of the most disgusting ideas in family court is the "if they can't get along, give ALL the cards to one of the people who doesn't get along and tough $#!+ for the other party." Complete idiocy and I cannot believe state legislators are so ignorant and inexperienced with divorce that they cannot see how untenable it is. Why not impose harsh sanctions on violations of joint custody terms instead? [Rhet.]

[pushed2far]

[....

[CCR]

Five seconds after I met my GAL, she told me she had been a GAL for 13 years, have never written a recommendation for a man to get custody and wasn't about to start now.

Yes, there is bias.

[kmich91262]

Five seconds after I met my GAL, she told me she had been a GAL for 13 years, have never written a recommendation for a man to get custody and wasn't about to start now.

Yes, there is bias.

And if they don't come right out and say it, then their actions show it. Mine for example after almost a year of status quo, decided to recommend switching from staying with the status quo (in the original report) to me getting every other weekend and NJ getting the other time (in her second report). WTF? There was nothing that changed during the period (i.e. me getting arrested, no skeletons in the closet, ect). So bias is very much alive and well whether we are talking about the subject in hand or sometimes other things. Long story short NJ settled on the court house steps to what we had which is week on/week off. I was prepared to fight the GAL on her moronic recommendation.