VOLUNTARY DECLARATIONS OF PARENTAGE FOR LGBT COMMUNITY USING ASSISTED REPRODUCTIVE TECHNOLOGY

In 2020 California enacted a new law amending Family Code 7574 https://codes.findlaw.com/ca/family-code/fam-sect-7574.html that allows couples who use assisted reproduction to have a child to complete a Voluntary Declaration of Parentage form at the hospital or at any time after the child’s birth in front of a notary. This has the effect of a Judgment of parentage. It means that two people who sign it are to be recognized as the child’s parents in all states. Previously only an unmarried mother and the biological father could sign a Voluntary Declaration of Paternity. Under federal law the Declaration is the equivalent of a court order and secures important protections for the right to social security benefits, military benefits, inheritance rights, health insurance and survivor benefits from both parents. It is therefore advisable for same sex couples to sign a Declaration (even if they are legally married in California) because many states do not recognize parentage by marriage and only recognize biological parents as legal parents. California couples who have used donor sperm or eggs are could be at risk if they move to one of those states. https://www.courts.ca.gov/selfhelp-parentage.htm?rdeLocaleAttr=en

Air Talk Discussion on NPR: Platonic Co-Parenting: A Helping Hand With Your Biological Clock

According to the Wall Street Journal, co-parenting sites, such as Modamily and PollenTree, offer matching services where users can find potential parental partners to raise a child with. Users are encouraged to vet and become extensively acquainted with one another to find a partner (or more than one) who is equally committed to raising a child without necessarily the expectation of romantic love or sex. The co-parenting trend and the nascent industry around it is largely made up of professionals who thought they might be ready for children by their early 30’s, but kept pushing that plan back, says Modamily founder Ivan Fatovic. LGBTQ and straight adults approaching 40 years old who still want to be parents, but need a hand with child rearing and don’t want to risk putting a child through divorce, are turning to this idea to start families, Fatovic says.NPR Link

Fresh Air 'Boys & Sex' Reveals That Young Men Feel 'Cut Off From Their Hearts'

Author Peggy Orenstein knows that talking to your son about sex isn't easy: "I know for a lot of parents, you would rather poke yourself in the eye with a fork than speak directly to your son about sex — and probably he would rather poke himself in the eye with a fork as well," she says.

But we don't have "the luxury" to continue avoiding this conversation, she says. "If we don't talk to our kids, the media is going to educate them for us, and we are not going to love the result."

Orenstein spent 25 years chronicling the lives of adolescent and teen girls and never really expected to focus on boys. But then came the #MeToo movement, and Orenstein, whose previous books include Girls & Sex and Cinderella Ate My Daughter, decided it was time to engage young men in conversations about gender and intimacy.

Her new book, Boys & Sex, is based on extensive interviews with more than 100 college and college-bound boys and young men of diverse backgrounds between the ages of 16 and 22.

https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2016/03/29/472211301/girls-sex-and-the-importance-of-talking-to-young-women-about-pleasure

How to Help Your Toddler With Custody Transitions

The instability and uncertainty of a divorce can hamper a toddler’s need for routine.  When parents separate, new rituals and routines need to be created to foster a child’s sense of security and family.

Anyone who has had children will remember the terrible twos: the domineering behavior, inflexibility, stubbornness, extreme emotions, indecision, and the need for things to be done just in a certain way.  Characteristic behavior of toddlers is well described by the authors of the classic child development study Child Behavior: The Classic Child Care Manual from the Gessel Institute of Human Development.  A child at two and a half years old gives orders and wants exactly what they want when they want it.  If a toddler decides "Mommy do it" they will not accept Daddy as a substitute. If they decide "me do it" then no-one is allowed to help them no matter how difficult the task.  In Child Behavior the authors describe this phase as one of "disequilibrium" where toddlers find it very difficult to adapt to change, and crave structured domestic routines. These rituals make toddlers feel safe and secure. The rigid sequences of events and rituals can be as elaborate and impenetrable as a Japanese tea ceremony.  


It is important in the context of divorce that a very young child’s inclination toward ritual and routine should not automatically be misinterpreted as a preference for one parent over another.  In fact, divorce is an opportunity for both parents to help the toddler to create new rituals and routines to ease transitions and give the toddler a sense of comfort and stability.

Crankiness, irritability, defiance, signs of regression, clinginess toward one parent, and physical resistance to the other parent are common patterns displayed by toddlers when parents separate.  In their book, In The Name of The Child, Janet Johnston and Vivienne Roseby describe how parents can develop collaborative strategies to ease transitions between parent's households using rituals and routines.  (read more) 

 

For more information on child custody please call Law Offices of Warren R. Shiell - Certified Family Law Specialist at (310)247-9913 or visit our website LA Family Law or visit our FAQs on Child Custody

The Changing Role of Fathers in the Modern American Family

Pew Research Center reports: The role of fathers in the modern American family is changing in important and countervailing ways. Fathers who live with their children have become more intensely involved in their lives, spending more time with them and taking part in a greater variety of activities. However, the share of fathers who are residing with their children has fallen significantly in the past half century.

In 1960, only 11% of children in the U.S. lived apart from their fathers. By 2010, that share had risen to 27%. The share of minor children living apart from their mothers increased only modestly, from 4% in 1960 to 8% in 2010.

According to a new Pew Research Center analysis of the National Survey of Family Growth (NSFG), more than one-in-four fathers with children ages 18 or younger now live apart from their children -- with 11% living apart from some of their children and 16% living apart from all of their children.  Read the rest of the article here.

 

Los Angeles Divorce Attorney

Los Angeles Family Law Attorney

Divorce Lawyers|Attorneys Los Angeles, Beverly Hills

California Prenuptial, Prenups

 

 

The Economist's Guide to Parenting

"An entire roundtable of economists to talk about a great many elements of child-rearing, with one essential question in mind: how much do parents really matter, and in what dimensions? So you’ll hear about parents’ effect on everything from education and culture cramming to smoking and drinking."  Listen here.

Los Angeles Divorce Attorney

Los Angeles Family Law Attorney

Divorce Lawyers|Attorneys Los Angeles, Beverly Hills

California Prenuptial, Prenups

The Role of Therapists in Family Law Litigation: PART 6

Non-Testifying Consultants

 

Generally accepted non-testifying consultant tasks include reviewing a work product and writing direct and cross examination questions, presenting research to the retaining attorney or client for educational purposes, identifying the psychological elements involved in legal strategy, and assisting in case preparation and presentation.[1]

 

Sometimes, the FMHP can become involved in child custody cases as therapists for one of the parties or the children.[2]  Some have written about the need to differentiate between the therapeutic role and expert role of the FMHP.[3]  A child custody’s evaluator role is researching a family’s functioning while a treating therapist’s role is intervention.[4]

 

If a testifying FMHP later comes to Court in assistance of one of the attorneys, this can compromise the FMHP’s credibility with the judge.[5]  If they have presented themselves as educators to the Court and then are seen providing litigation support, the judge will probably conclude that their previous testimony was biased.[6]  A non-testifying FMHP communicating with a client in front of a judge can also alter perceptions and should be avoided.[7]  Also, there are serious ethical considerations to be taken into account when an FMHP in attempting to explain the evaluation process crosses a line into coaching a client to give false evaluation responses and perpetrating fraud on the Court.[8] 

 

In advising and preparing witnesses, the American Society of Trial Consultants (ASTC) guidelines makes distinctions “between providing information, feedback and guidance, versus unethical approaches such as scripting, shaping, and instructing witnesses.”[9]  According to those guidelines, a consultant crosses a line when he or she becomes too directive or instructive about what content should be in the client’s testimony.[10]  Clear breaches of ethics include assisting a parent to fill out a custody evaluation or previewing to clients parts of psychological tests such as the MMPI-2 or the Rorschach.[11]  When meetings occur prior to trial, the consulting expert can conform to ethical standards by advocating that the parent tell the truth, avoiding the manipulation of the parent’s participation in any custody evaluation or trial proceeding, operating within the bounds of the consultant’s expertise, and understanding the limits of confidentiality.[12] 

 

Hon. Gould-Saltman artfully describes the proper role of a non-testifying FMHP:

 

“Mental health professionals who prepare attorneys by helping them understand psycho-legal issues – and help craft questions that will make testimony clearer for the judge- also do a service for the court (as well as for the attorneys and parent-litigants).  Those who “polish” the parent-litigant by reducing the parent-litigant’s anxiety about the process and help the parent-litigant present his or her best self, may also be assisting the process.  Those who “sandpaper” the parent-litigant by trying to reshape the parent-litigant into something he or she is not often do more harm than good to that parent-litigant.  After all, when you use sandpaper to reshape something, inevitably you end up exposing what is underneath, for good or bad.”[13]

 

© 2011 Warren R. Shiell.  Warren R Shiell is a Los Angeles Divorce and Family Law attorney. All rights reserved. The information contained in this website is an "Advertisement." It is for informational purposes only and shall not constitute legal advice. Nothing in this Website shall be deemed to create an Attorney-Client relationship. An Attorney-Client relationship shall only be created when this office agrees to represent a Client and a Client signs a written retainer agreement.

 

For more information visit www.la-familylaw.com

---

[1] Id.

[2] Id.

[3] Gould, Jonathan , Martindale, David , Tippins, Timothy and Wittmann, Jeff ‘Testifying Experts and Non-Testifying Trial Consultants: Appreciating the Differences’, Journal of Child Custody, 8:1, 32 - 46.

[4] Id.

[5] Gould-Saltman, Dianna ‘A View from the Cross-Road: Considerations for Mental Health Professionals Consulting with Attorneys (by a Judge, and Former Lawyer…with a Degree in Psychology)’, Journal of Child Custody, 8:1, 135 – 141.

[6] Id.

[7] Id.

[8] Id.

[9] Kaufman, Robert L. ‘Forensic Mental Health Consulting in Family Law: Where Have We Come From?  Where are We Going?’, Journal of Child Custody, 8:1. 5 – 31.

[10] Id.

[11] Id.

[12] Id. 

[13] Gould-Saltman, Dianna ‘A View from the Cross-Road: Considerations for Mental Health Professionals Consulting with Attorneys (by a Judge, and Former Lawyer…with a Degree in Psychology)’, Journal of Child Custody, 8:1, 135 – 141.

 

The Role of Therapists in Family Law Litigation: PART 4

(3) One-Sided Evaluator

 

A testifying evaluator is rarely hired by one side to conduct an evaluation.[1]  This is due to the fact that a one-sided evaluator does not have the same standing as the court-appointed expert.[2]  A one-sided evaluator’s testimony is not given much weight because such evaluations are conducted simultaneously with or after the court-appointed evaluation.[3]  In contrast to the court-appointed evaluator, the one-sided evaluator starts with an incomplete set of data – it is based solely on how much information the single participant is willing to disclose.[4]  The one-sided evaluator does not have access to all of the original data.[5]  Access to only one of the parents is unlikely to render enough information to form opinions about any parenting arrangements.[6]  Furthermore, the one-sided evaluator is hired by one side, and until declared as a testifying expert witness, their role is cloaked by the attorney-client privilege and work product doctrine.[7]  In particular cases, a one-sided evaluator can be useful if hired to focus on limited issues that would not need a full set of information.[8]

 

Los Angeles Divorce Attorney

Los Angeles Family Law Attorney

Divorce Lawyers|Attorneys Los Angeles, Beverly Hills

California Prenuptial, Prenups

---

[1] Gould-Saltman, Dianna ‘A View from the Cross-Road: Considerations for Mental Health Professionals Consulting with Attorneys (by a Judge, and Former Lawyer…with a Degree in Psychology)’, Journal of Child Custody, 8:1, 135 – 141.

[2]Kirkpatrick, H.D., Austin, William G. and Flens, James R. ‘Psychological and Legal Considerations in Reviewing the Work Product of a Colleague in Child Custody Evaluations’, Journal of Child Custody, 8:1. 103 - 123.

[3] Gould-Saltman, Dianna ‘A View from the Cross-Road: Considerations for Mental Health Professionals Consulting with Attorneys (by a Judge, and Former Lawyer…with a Degree in Psychology)’, Journal of Child Custody, 8:1, 135 – 141.

[4] Id.

[5] Kirkpatrick, H.D., Austin, William G. and Flens, James R. ‘Psychological and Legal Considerations in Reviewing the Work Product of a Colleague in Child Custody Evaluations’, Journal of Child Custody, 8:1. 103 - 123.

[6] Gould-Saltman, Dianna ‘A View from the Cross-Road: Considerations for Mental Health Professionals Consulting with Attorneys (by a Judge, and Former Lawyer…with a Degree in Psychology)’, Journal of Child Custody, 8:1, 135 – 141.

[7] Kirkpatrick, H.D., Austin, William G. and Flens, James R. ‘Psychological and Legal Considerations in Reviewing the Work Product of a Colleague in Child Custody Evaluations’, Journal of Child Custody, 8:1. 103 - 123.

[8] Id.

 

The Role of Therapists in Family Law Litigation: PART 1

Forensic mental health professionals serve a valuable role in child custody cases.  They conduct custody evaluations, assist attorneys in understanding psychological issues, and help a client present the best version of their true selves to the Court.  Judges look to such experts to provide insightful information that makes testimony clearer, as well as help the parties better understand the needs of the children.[1]  In some cases, a forensic mental health professional (FMHP) can play a more mediative role and help parents avoid costly litigation by enabling them to work together to make their own parenting plans.[2]  This article is intended to serve as a summary of the views expressed by therapists, attorneys and Judges in the January issue of the Journal of Child Custody.[3]

 

New Roles Lead To New Ethical Responsibilities

 

Today, FMHPs are frequently hired by attorneys on one side of a case to join the litigation team and perform consulting functions that are far from traditional roles as court appointed neutral evaluators and mediators.[4] FMHPs are now being utilized to keep abreast of the growing body of research on social and psychological factors of complex custody cases, to critique the data from custody evaluations, to manage distraught or difficult clients, and to collaboratively forge settlements.[5]  Professional behavior is not well defined in this new territory.  In fact, the Association of Families and Conciliation Courts recently convened a task force to explore the ethical problems that arise from FMHPs assuming various roles in the legal field.[6]  A key decision from the outset is who should retain the FMHP.  If the FMHP is retained by an attorney and is not a testifying expert, their work will have the protections of attorney-client privilege and work product doctrine.[7]  If the client retains the FMHP directly, these legal protections may not be available.[8]

 

When an FMHP is retained by an attorney, the ethical responsibilities become more complex.  There is a duality to the role of retained experts – they are retained for a particular purpose, but they also have an ethical role to be objective.[9]  The client paying both the attorney and FMHP’s bills, directly or indirectly, expects zealous representation.  FMHPs must be attuned to what is in the best interests of the children.[10]  Influence also comes from the attorney who can easily draw the FMHP into their advocacy perspective and responsibility to work diligently on behalf of their client.[11]  Although attorneys know that licensed mental health professionals have a professional code of ethics and licensing boards, they may not know the finer details of an FMHP’s ethical responsibilities.[12] 

 

Many argue that it is possible for a retained expert to not have to choose between integrity and advocacy.[13]  To this end, both the Specialty Guidelines for Forensic Psychology and the Professional Code of American Society of Trial Consultants maintain the importance of managing expectations between the retaining party and consultant through the establishment of a clear contract.  [14]  In addition, FMHPs should stay true to the data of the case and take special care to avoid any undue influence on their methods and work products that could result from financial or personal pressure by the retaining party.[15]  Although an FMHP consultant may feel pressure to side with the client, the scientific process, Daubert requirements, and Specialty Guidelines call on the consultant to weigh the merits of rival hypotheses, and discuss bases for opinions rendered.[16]  The Committee on Ethical Guidelines for Forensic Psychologists clearly states:  “[as] an expert conducting an evaluation, treatment, consultation, or scholarly/empirical investigation, the forensic psychologist maintains professional integrity by examining the issue at hand from all reasonable perspectives, actively seeking information that will differentially test plausible rival hypotheses.”[17]  The consultant’s independent ability to view the strengths and weaknesses of the case is an important part of one’s role and can help the attorney and client form realistic views of their case.[18]  Forensic experts in the field have addressed the concern over their dual roles by discussing their professional autonomy.  Even though attorneys may tend to retain experts whose positions are likely to support their own, that does not mean the FMHPs should tailor their findings to meet the needs of those retaining attorneys.[19]  It is also important to keep in mind that experts have a responsibility to alert the Court to any conflict between law and ethics.[20]

 

The Testifying and Non-Testifying FMHP

 

Hon. Dianna Gould-Saltman, a Judge in the Superior Court of California, asserts that the testifying FMHP typically embodies one of four roles: “(1) court appointed, neutral evaluator; (2) case-blind didactic expert, who only provides information about research without having reviewed any case related documents; (3) testifying, evaluating expert hired by one side to conduct an evaluation; and (4) work product reviewer, hired by one side, who, after having completed a review, testifies to his/her assessment of the work reviewed.” [21]

 

Los Angeles Divorce Attorney

Los Angeles Family Law Attorney

Divorce Lawyers|Attorneys Los Angeles, Beverly Hills

California Prenuptial, Prenups

---

[1] Juhas, Mark ‘Commentary on Forensic Mental Health Consulting: Is More Better?’ Journal of Child Custody, 8:1, 124-134.

[2] Gould-Saltman, Dianna ‘A View from the Cross-Road: Considerations for Mental Health Professionals Consulting with Attorneys (by a Judge, and Former Lawyer…with a Degree in Psychology)’, Journal of Child Custody, 8:1, 135 – 141.

[3] Journal of Child Custody, Volume 8, Issue 1 and 2, January 2011.

[4] Kaufman, Robert L. ‘Forensic Mental Health Consulting in Family Law: Where Have We Come From?  Where are We Going?’, Journal of Child Custody, 8:1. 5 – 31.

[5] Id.

[6] Lee, S. Margaret and Nachlis, Lorie S. ‘Consulting with Attorneys: An Alternative Hybrid Model’, Journal of Child Custody, 8:1, 84 - 102.

[7] Kaufman, Robert L. ‘Forensic Mental Health Consulting in Family Law: Where Have We Come From?  Where are We Going?’, Journal of Child Custody, 8:1. 5 – 31. 

[8] Id.

[9] Kirkpatrick, H.D., Austin, William G. and Flens, James R. ‘Psychological and Legal Considerations in Reviewing the Work Product of a Colleague in Child Custody Evaluations’, Journal of Child Custody, 8:1. 103 - 123.

[10] Austin, William G. , Dale, Milfred D. , Kirkpatrick, H. D. and Flens, James R. ‘Forensic Expert Roles and Services in Child Custody Litigation: Work Product Review and Case Consultation’, Journal of Child Custody, 8:1 , 47- 83.

[11] Kaufman, Robert L. ‘Forensic Mental Health Consulting in Family Law: Where Have We Come From?  Where are We Going?’, Journal of Child Custody, 8:1. 5 – 31.

[12] Id. 

[13] Shuman, D.W. and Greenberg, S.A. (2003) The Expert Witness, the Adversary System, and the Voice of Reason: Reconciling impartiality and advocacy.  Professional Psychology: Research and Practice 34:3, pp.219-224.

[14] Kaufman, Robert L. ‘Forensic Mental Health Consulting in Family Law: Where Have We Come From?  Where are We Going?’, Journal of Child Custody, 8:1. 5 – 31.

[15] Kirkpatrick, H.D., Austin, William G. and Flens, James R. ‘Psychological and Legal Considerations in Reviewing the Work Product of a Colleague in Child Custody Evaluations’, Journal of Child Custody, 8:1. 103 - 123.

[16] Kaufman, Robert L. ‘Forensic Mental Health Consulting in Family Law: Where Have We Come From?  Where are We Going?’, Journal of Child Custody, 8:1. 5 – 31.

[17] Committee on Ethical Guidelines for Forensic Psychologists, 1991, p.341.

[18] Kaufman, Robert L. ‘Forensic Mental Health Consulting in Family Law: Where Have We Come From?  Where are We Going?’, Journal of Child Custody, 8:1. 5 – 31.

[19] Gould, Jonathan , Martindale, David , Tippins, Timothy and Wittmann, Jeff ‘Testifying Experts and Non-Testifying Trial Consultants: Appreciating the Differences’, Journal of Child Custody, 8:1, 32 - 46.

[20] Shuman, D.W. and Greenberg, S.A. (2003) The Expert Witness, the Adversary System, and the Voice of Reason: Reconciling impartiality and advocacy.  Professional Psychology: Research and Practice 34:3, pp.219-224.

[21] Gould-Saltman, Dianna ‘A View from the Cross-Road: Considerations for Mental Health Professionals Consulting with Attorneys (by a Judge, and Former Lawyer…with a Degree in Psychology)’, Journal of Child Custody, 8:1, 135 – 141.

 

Taming The Twin Trend From Fertility Treatments

NPR.com reports that "twins, once a rarity to marvel over, are now a common part of American culture, thanks in large part to increased use of reproductive technology. Twins are conceived naturally just 2 percent of the time; for those who get pregnant with fertility treatments the rate is more than 40 percent.  But as adorable as many of us consider twins, this dramatic rise poses serious health risks, and there are mounting efforts to curb it."  Read the article.

Divorce and Money

Los Angeles Family Law Attorney

Divorce Lawyers|Attorneys Los Angeles, Beverly Hills

California Prenuptial, Prenups