BILL ANALYSIS
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 612|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 612
Author: Ruskin (D)
Amended: 7/17/07 in Senate
Vote: 21
SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE : 3-2, 7/10/07
AYES: Corbett, Kuehl, Steinberg
NOES: Harman, Ackerman
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 55-16, 5/3/07 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT : Child custody evaluations
SOURCE : Author
DIGEST : This bill (1) provides that, in the context of
child custody evaluations, nonscientific labels and
diagnoses that are not consistent with standards generally
accepted by the medical, psychiatric, and psychological
communities shall be specifically excluded as allowable
diagnoses for court use, and (2) provides that nothing in
the section precludes a child custody evaluator from freely
interviewing parents and children, observing a parent-child
interaction, speaking to collateral sources, consulting
over psychological data, or using his/her professional
expertise to integrate data, assess and evaluate
psychological issues, or communicate the results of those
analyses to the court consistent with ethical and
professional standards.
CONTINUED
AB 612
Page
2
ANALYSIS : Existing law states that health, safety, and
welfare of children is the court's primary concern when
determining the best interests of children in child custody
and visitation orders. [Section 3020 of the Family Code
(FAM)]
Existing law permits the court, in a contested custody or
visitation proceeding where the court determines it is in
the best interests of the child, to appoint a child custody
evaluator to conduct a child custody evaluation. [FAM
Section 3111)
Existing law provides that where the court determines there
is a serious allegation of child sexual abuse, as defined,
the child custody evaluation shall be conducted under
specified rules. [FAM Section 3118]
Existing law requires court-connected and private child
custody evaluators to complete a described domestic
violence and child abuse training program and to comply
with other requirements. [FAM Section 1816 and 3110.5]
Existing law requires the Judicial Council to adopt
standards for child custody evaluations. The court rules
specify qualifications for evaluators and specify the scope
of the evaluation. For the purposes of these provisions,
court rules provide that a "child custody evaluator" is a
"court-appointed investigator." [FAM Section 3117, Rules
of Court 5.220 and 5.225]
This bill codifies those court rules to provide that a
"child custody evaluator" is a "court-appointed
investigator."
This bill provides that nonscientific labels and diagnoses
that are not consistent with standards generally accepted
by the medical, psychiatric, and psychological communities
shall be specifically excluded as allowable diagnoses for
court use.
This bill provides that nothing in the section precludes a
child custody evaluator from freely interviewing parents
and children, observing a parent-child interaction,
speaking to collateral sources, consulting over
AB 612
Page
3
psychological data, or using his/her professional expertise
to integrate data, assess and evaluate psychological
issues, or communicate the results of those analyses to the
court consistent with ethical and professional standards.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: No
Local: No
SUPPORT : (Verified 7/17/07)
Advocators & Mentors for Children
American Federation of State, County and Municipal
Employees, AFL-CIO
California Commission on the Status of Women
California Protective Parents Association
Calmetrics Company
Children's Civil Rights Union
Coalition for Family Equity
Courageous Kids Network
Hearts Home Foundation
Incest Survivors' Speakers Bureau of Yolo County
Kid Helps Intercession
Mothers of Lost Children
National Alliance for Family Court Justice
National Organization of Women, California Chapter
Partnership to End Domestic Violence
Statewide Advocacy Association
William Kelly Foundation
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : The author states:
"Often, psychological tests are used to examine a
parent's mental state during a custody battle. While
these tests have never been validated for use in family
court nor have they ever been proven to have the ability
to determine one's capacity to parent, the tests have
been used incorrectly in some custody cases.
"There have been several documented cases where a child
accuses a parent of abuse that results in the child being
placed in the sole custody of the alleged perpetrator.
In those cases, it is determined by evaluators that the
child is suffering from 'Parental Alienation Syndrome'
AB 612
Page
4
(or some other similar label), a pseudoscientific theory
that professes that a child may be estranged and/or
alienated from a parent by false suggestions of abuse
from the other parent. Often, this results from
psychological tests and evaluations being used as
evidence to come to this conclusion.
"This bill limits psychological testing, and ensures that
unrecognized syndromes are not used as factors in a
custody dispute."
ASSEMBLY FLOOR :
AYES: Adams, Aghazarian, Bass, Beall, Berg, Berryhill,
Brownley, Caballero, Carter, Coto, Davis, De La Torre, De
Leon, DeSaulnier, DeVore, Duvall, Dymally, Eng, Evans,
Feuer, Fuller, Gaines, Galgiani, Garrick, Hancock,
Hayashi, Hernandez, Horton, Houston, Huffman, Jones,
Karnette, Keene, Krekorian, Laird, Leno, Levine, Lieber,
Lieu, Ma, Mendoza, Mullin, Nava, Parra, Portantino,
Price, Richardson, Salas, Saldana, Solorio, Swanson,
Torrico, Walters, Wolk, Nunez
NOES: Anderson, Blakeslee, Garcia, Huff, Jeffries, La
Malfa, Maze, Nakanishi, Niello, Plescia, Silva, Smyth,
Spitzer, Strickland, Tran, Villines
NO VOTE RECORDED: Arambula, Benoit, Charles Calderon,
Cook, Emmerson, Sharon Runner, Ruskin, Soto, Vacancy
RJG:mw 7/17/07 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****