| A dilemma known in child custody research involves the difference between the decision-making processes of family court judges and child custody evaluators when reaching custody decisions. This study compared the decision-making processes of family court judges and child custody evaluators in the county of San Diego, in the state of California. Using vignettes and ranking criteria based on the Michigan Child Custody Act (Michigan Legislative Council, 1970), this study explored the orientation, philosophy and decision-making processes of judges and child custody evaluators to understand whether, in spite of differing academic backgrounds and professional training and experience, they utilize similar criteria when considering the data available to them in child custody cases.;In our modem society, considerations of the best interest of the child has become the mainstay of custody evaluators, judges, attorneys and families. In the past, the courts made decisions based on the quality of the relationship or as a function of time spent as the caregiver, while the custody evaluator made decisions based on information gathered from interviews with parents and family. In both circumstances, the "best interest" of the child was frequently ignored or not considered when making the final custody decision in favor of the quality or necessity of the parent-child relationship.;This study's results were in agreement with previous studies: judges and custody evaluators tend to use the same criteria and look for similar factors when rendering a decision or recommendation on child custody cases. The results showed that several types of abuse (substance, physical and neglect) were major factors as were legal issues pertaining to the individuals involved in the case. Stability of the environment for the child and parenting/co-parenting skills were also featured factors involved in making effective custody decisions. The overall factors seen in the data were parental performance connection with the children, inflexibility, and lack of participation of the father, all of which are factors commonly seen by both professions in the course of their routine involvement in custody cases. |
