What is a custody evaluation and when is one needed?

A custody evaluation is a comprehensive forensic psychological assessment ordered by the court to help determine the best custody and visitation arrangements for a child. It typically involves interviews, psychological testing, behavioral observations, and collateral contacts. Courts order evaluations when parents cannot agree on parenting plans, there are concerns about a parent's fitness, or complex family dynamics require professional assessment.

How long does a forensic custody evaluation take?

A thorough forensic custody evaluation typically takes 4 to 8 weeks to complete, depending on complexity. This includes multiple interview sessions with each parent, child observations, psychological testing, review of relevant documents, collateral interviews, and preparation of the written report. Dr. Rosiere prioritizes thoroughness while maintaining reasonable timelines for the court.

What areas of Florida does Dr. Rosiere serve?

Dr. Rosiere's primary office is in Lake Mary, Florida, and he serves clients throughout Central and South Florida, including Orlando, Tampa, Jacksonville, Daytona Beach, Fort Lauderdale, and surrounding areas. He is available for court-appointed and private evaluations across all Florida family law circuits.

What is a bonding and attachment assessment?

A bonding and attachment assessment evaluates the emotional connection between a child and their parent or caregiver. Using structured observations, validated assessment instruments, and clinical interviews, Dr. Rosiere measures the quality of the parent-child bond to provide the court with evidence-based findings that inform custody and placement decisions.

Can attorneys refer clients directly for forensic evaluations?

Yes, attorneys can refer clients directly for forensic evaluations. Dr. Rosiere regularly works with family law attorneys throughout Florida, accepting both court-appointed and privately retained cases. Attorneys can contact the office at (407) 927-3955 to discuss case specifics and scheduling.

What qualifies Dr. Rosiere to conduct forensic psychological evaluations?

Dr. Scott C. Rosiere holds a Psy.D. in Clinical Psychology and is a licensed psychologist in Florida. He has specialized training in forensic psychology, extensive experience conducting custody evaluations, parenting capacity assessments, and bonding evaluations for dependency and family law courts. He serves as an expert witness and follows all APA guidelines and Florida statutory requirements for forensic evaluations.

What types of forensic evaluations does Dr. Rosiere conduct?

Dr. Rosiere conducts custody evaluations, bonding and attachment assessments, parenting capacity evaluations, domestic violence and coercive control assessments, psychological evaluations of child sexual abuse allegations, sexually reactive behavior assessments, and permanency/placement analysis for termination of parental rights proceedings. He serves courts and attorneys throughout Central and South Florida.

Does Dr. Rosiere provide expert witness testimony?

Yes. Dr. Rosiere has been qualified as an expert witness in Florida courts and regularly provides testimony in dependency proceedings, contested custody disputes, and family court matters. He is available for both deposition and trial testimony.

How do I retain Dr. Rosiere as an expert on my case?

Attorneys can contact our office at (754) 465-4698 or through the contact form at custodyevaluationpsychologist.com to discuss case details and scheduling. Dr. Rosiere is available for court-appointed and privately retained evaluations and consultations.

The Role of Psychological Testing in Family Law Cases: An Attorney’s Guide

Mar 12

Written By Scott Rosiere

Psychological testing is a cornerstone of forensic evaluation in family law cases, yet many attorneys find the testing component to be the most opaque and technically challenging aspect of the evaluation to understand and utilize effectively. Knowing what the major instruments measure, how to interpret results, and when testing data supports or undermines an evaluator's conclusions can significantly strengthen your litigation strategy.

This guide provides an overview of the psychological instruments most commonly used in Florida custody and dependency evaluations and explains how attorneys can leverage testing data in their cases.

Why Psychological Testing Matters in Family Law

Psychological tests provide objective, standardized data that complements clinical interview findings and behavioral observations. Unlike interviews — where a skilled individual can present themselves in a favorable light — well-validated psychological instruments include built-in validity scales that detect attempts to minimize problems, exaggerate symptoms, or present an unrealistically positive self-image. This objectivity makes testing data particularly valuable in adversarial proceedings where both parties have strong incentives to present themselves favorably.

Courts in Florida have consistently recognized the admissibility and relevance of standardized psychological testing in custody and dependency proceedings. Testing results can provide evidence regarding personality functioning, psychopathology, parenting attitudes, cognitive abilities, and substance abuse risk that would be difficult or impossible to obtain through other means.

Commonly Used Instruments in Custody Evaluations

The Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2-Restructured Form (MMPI-2-RF) is the most widely used and researched personality assessment instrument in forensic psychology. It measures a broad range of psychological constructs including emotional dysfunction, thought disturbance, behavioral problems, interpersonal functioning, and somatic complaints. Critically, the MMPI-2-RF includes multiple validity scales that assess the test-taker's approach to the evaluation, including scales that detect overreporting of symptoms, underreporting of problems, and inconsistent responding.

The Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI) provides a comprehensive assessment of personality and psychopathology with scales measuring clinical syndromes (anxiety, depression, mania, paranoia, schizophrenia), personality features (borderline, antisocial), treatment-related factors, and interpersonal style. Like the MMPI-2-RF, it includes validity indices that help the evaluator assess the credibility of the respondent's self-report.

The Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory-IV (MCMI-IV) is specifically designed to assess personality patterns and clinical syndromes in individuals with known or suspected psychological difficulties. It is particularly useful when personality disorder features are relevant to the case, as it provides detailed information about personality styles and their potential impact on interpersonal functioning and parenting.

Parenting-Specific Instruments

Beyond general personality and psychopathology measures, forensic evaluators often administer instruments specifically designed to assess parenting attitudes and risk factors. The Parenting Stress Index (PSI-4) measures the level of stress in the parent-child relationship, including both parent-domain and child-domain stressors. The Child Abuse Potential Inventory (CAPI) assesses characteristics associated with physical child abuse risk, including rigidity, unhappiness, distress, and problems with the child and with others.

These parenting-specific measures provide data that directly addresses the court's central concerns about parental functioning and child welfare, making them particularly relevant in both custody and dependency proceedings.

Interpreting Validity Scales: What Attorneys Should Know

Validity scales are among the most important components of psychological testing in the forensic context, yet they are frequently misunderstood. A common scenario in custody evaluations is the parent who approaches testing with an overly positive, defensive response style — minimizing any psychological difficulties, denying common human faults, and presenting an unrealistically favorable self-image.

When validity scales indicate this pattern, the evaluator must determine whether the substantive test results can be reliably interpreted. Moderately elevated defensiveness scales may be expected in the custody evaluation context and do not necessarily invalidate the testing. However, extreme defensiveness can render the test results uninterpretable, limiting the evaluator's ability to draw conclusions from the testing data.

Attorneys should pay close attention to how the evaluator handled validity scale findings. Did they adequately address response style in their interpretation? Did they account for contextual factors that might influence test-taking approach? Did they draw conclusions from test data that the validity scales suggest should be interpreted with caution?

Cognitive and Neuropsychological Testing

In some cases, cognitive functioning is directly relevant to parenting capacity. When there are concerns about intellectual disability, traumatic brain injury, dementia, or other neurological conditions that might affect a parent's ability to provide adequate care, neuropsychological or cognitive testing can provide essential data. These assessments evaluate domains including general intelligence, memory, attention, executive functioning, and processing speed.

Cognitive testing results must be interpreted in the context of the specific parenting demands at issue. A parent with below-average cognitive functioning may be perfectly capable of meeting the needs of a typically developing child but may struggle with the complex medical management required for a child with special healthcare needs.

How Attorneys Can Use Testing Data

Testing data is most useful when attorneys understand both its strengths and its limitations. Test scores alone do not determine custody outcomes — they provide one piece of a larger puzzle that includes clinical interviews, behavioral observations, collateral contacts, and records review. However, testing data can be particularly powerful in several ways.

When testing results contradict a party's self-presentation, they provide objective evidence that the individual's public image may not accurately reflect their psychological functioning. When testing results are consistent across multiple instruments, they provide converging evidence that strengthens the evaluator's conclusions. And when testing results conflict with the evaluator's recommendations, they may indicate a weakness in the evaluation's reasoning.

For attorneys who need assistance understanding or utilizing psychological testing data in their cases, Dr. Scott C. Rosiere provides case consultation services that include detailed explanation of test results, identification of testing-related issues for cross-examination, and expert opinion on the appropriateness of test selection and interpretation. With over 25 years of forensic psychology experience and expertise in custody evaluations and expert testimony, Dr. Rosiere helps attorneys make the most effective use of psychological data in their family law cases.

Scott Rosiere