Collaboration among attorneys and evaluators/monitors
A strong collaboration between the judge and the attorney requesting a drug/alcohol evaluation or monitoring plan likely will result in a better outcome. This collaboration must begin with a clear delineation of the report’s purpose:
- Is the court appointing the evaluator to help gauge a drug/alcohol-involved parent’s ongoing ability to care for a child?
- Is an attorney looking for advice on how to best present the matter to the court?
- Is the evaluator expected to present and maintain a position in a court proceeding against another evaluator in a “battle of the experts?”
- Is the evaluator to consider only drug use? Only illicit drug use?
- Is the subject banned from using the substance at all times or just when she (he) is caring for the child?
A clear understanding of the evaluator’s mission is important, in part because the subject must fully comprehend the plan to consent to having the results disseminated.
To foster an effective collaboration with legal personnel the evaluator should frame the final report, testimony, and monitoring plan using clinical rather than colloquial language. To best describe the subject’s situation, diagnosis, and likely prognosis, these clinical terms often will require explanation or clarification. For example, urine drug screens (UDS) should be described as “positive for the cocaine metabolite benzoylecgonine” rather than “dirty,” and the subject might be described as “meeting criteria for alcohol use disorder” rather than an “alcoholic” or “abuser.” Using DSM-5 terminology allows for a respectful, reasonably reproducible diagnostic assessment that promotes civil discussion about disagreements, rather than name-calling in the courtroom. Professional third-party evaluation and monitoring programs in custody dispute proceedings can de-escalate the tension between the parents around issues of substance use. The conversation becomes professional, dispassionate, and focused on the best interests of the child.
Use of appropriate language allows the evaluator to expand the parameters of the report or recommend an expansion of it. If a drug/alcohol evaluation finds a relevant mental illness—in addition to a SUD—or finds another caregiver who seems incompetent, the evaluator might be professionally obligated to bring up these points, even if they are outside the purview of the requested report and monitoring plan.
Planning a monitoring program
If the evaluation determines a monitoring plan is indicated and the court orders a testing program, the evaluator must design a program that accomplishes the specific goals established by the court order. The evaluator might help the court draft that plan, but the evaluator must accommodate the final court order. Table 2 lists vital aspects of a monitoring program in a child custody dispute.