BILL ANALYSIS �
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 1843|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
CONSENT
Bill No: AB 1843
Author: Jones (R) and Gordon (D)
Amended: 7/1/14 in Senate
Vote: 21
SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE : 7-0, 6/24/14
AYES: Jackson, Anderson, Corbett, Lara, Leno, Monning, Vidak
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : Senate Rule 28.8
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 75-0, 5/5/14 (Consent) - See last page for vote
SUBJECT : Child custody evaluations: confidentiality
SOURCE : California Board of Behavioral Sciences
DIGEST : This bill authorizes the disclosure of a confidential
child custody evaluation to the licensing entity of an evaluator
for the purposes of investigating allegations of unprofessional
conduct by the child custody evaluator, or in a criminal, civil,
or administrative proceeding involving the child custody
evaluator. This bill also requires the Board of Behavioral
Sciences (BBS), upon receipt of a child custody evaluation, to
notify the non-complaining party in the underlying child custody
dispute who is a subject of that report, of the pending
investigation.
ANALYSIS :
Existing law:
CONTINUED
AB 1843
Page
2
1.Provides that the health, safety, and welfare of children are
the court's primary concerns when determining the best
interests of a child for custody and visitation orders.
2.Provides that the confidential child custody report may not be
disclosed except to the following:
A. A party to the proceeding and his/her attorney;
B. A federal or state law enforcement officer, judicial
officer, court employee, or family court facilitator of the
superior court of the county in which the action was filed,
or an employee or agent of that facilitator, acting within
the scope of his/her duties;
C. Minor's counsel appointed for the child; or
D. Any other person upon order of the court for good cause.
1.Establishes qualifications for child custody evaluators and
requires initial and continuing domestic violence training for
child custody mediators, investigators, and evaluators.
2.Requires that local rules include a complaint procedure for
mediators and evaluators.
3.Authorizes the court, in a contested child custody or
visitation proceeding to appoint an evaluator to conduct a
child custody evaluation, from whom the court may require a
written, confidential report on the evaluation that is filed
with the clerk and served on the parties or their counsel and
any minor's counsel.
4.Requires that the confidential child custody report only be
made available to the parties or their counsel, any minor's
counsel, a court, child protective services, a probation
officer, or a guardianship investigator.
This bill:
1.Authorizes the disclosure of a child custody report to the
licensing entity of a child custody evaluator for the purposes
of investigating allegations of unprofessional conduct by the
CONTINUED
AB 1843
Page
3
child custody evaluator, or in a criminal, civil, or
administrative proceeding involving the child custody
evaluator.
2.Requires that all confidential information including the
identity of any minors shall retain their confidential nature
in any proceeding resulting from the investigation of
unprofessional conduct, shall be sealed at the conclusion of
the proceeding, and shall not subsequently be released. If
the confidential information does not result proceeding, it
shall be sealed after the licensing entity decides that no
further action will be taken in the matter of suspected
licensing violations.
3.Requires the licensing entity, upon receipt of a child custody
evaluation report, to notify the non-complaining party in the
underlying custody dispute of the pending investigation of the
child custody evaluator.
Background
In a contested child custody or visitation proceeding, the court
may appoint a child custody evaluator to conduct a child custody
evaluation if the court determines it is in the best interests
of the child. Evaluations contain highly personal, sensitive,
and confidential information. In most cases, an evaluation will
consist of several interviews and may include psychological
testing. Interviews are conducted with all adults involved with
the child, including parents, stepparents, and sometimes other
relatives who have a significant role in the child's life.
Psychological testing provides an additional source of
information that cannot be obtained through interviews alone.
The testing may further demonstrate the family dynamics and
expose any potential mental health or parenting problems. The
evaluation must comply with standards adopted by the Judicial
Council which specify the qualifications of the evaluator, as
well as the scope of the evaluation.
The qualifications, set out in Rule of Court 5.225, include
general education and training requirements as well as specific
domestic violence training requirements. In addition, an
evaluator must have participated in at least four partial or
full court-appointed child custody evaluations within the past
three years, except as specified. Each court must adopt local
CONTINUED
AB 1843
Page
4
rules to accept and respond to complaints about an evaluator's
performance. The procedural rules, set out in Rule of Court
5.220, also require that all evaluations include a written
explanation of the purpose of the evaluation, the procedures
used, and the scope of the report. Data collection and analysis
must allow the evaluator to observe each party in comparable
ways and "to substantiate interpretations and conclusions
regarding each child's developmental needs; the quality of
attachment to each parent and that parent's social environment;
and the reactions to the separation, divorce, or parental
conflict." The evaluator must consider the health, safety,
welfare, and best interest of the child and strive to minimize
the potential for psychological trauma to children during the
evaluation process.
A child custody evaluator who is licensed by the Medical Board
of California, the Board of Psychology, or the BBS is subject to
disciplinary action by that board for unprofessional conduct.
The BBS claims that it receives approximately 200 complaints of
unprofessional conduct per year related to its licensees serving
as child custody evaluators which it must investigate. The
confidential child custody evaluation, however, may only be
provided to a party, a court or judicial officer, law
enforcement, or minor's counsel. Any other person who wishes to
see the evaluation must petition the court and show good cause
as to why he/she needs the report.
Prior Legislation
AB 958 (Jones, 2013) would have authorized a confidential child
custody evaluation to be disclosed by the court to the licensing
board governing evaluator upon receiving a written request from
the board, or by allowing a person who is permitted to possess
the written confidential report to provide a copy to the
licensing board to investigate allegations of unprofessional
conduct. This bill died in the Assembly Judiciary Committee.
AB 1877 (Adams, Chapter 215, Statutes of 2008) provided that the
unwarranted disclosure of a child custody evaluation report may
result in the imposition of sanctions by the court, as
specified.
SB 1284 (Morrow, Chapter 102, Statutes of 2004) clarified
procedures for ensuring that confidential reports containing
CONTINUED
AB 1843
Page
5
psychological evaluations of a child, recommendations regarding
custody of and visitation with a child, and written statements
of issues and are placed in the confidential portion of the
court's files.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: No
SUPPORT : (Verified 7/30/14)
California Board of Behavioral Sciences (source)
Board of Psychology
Executive Committee of the Family Law Section of the State Bar
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : According to the author:
The Board of Behavioral Sciences [(Board)] is seeking statutory
authority to access a child custody evaluation report for the
purpose of investigating allegations that one of its licensees,
while serving as a child custody evaluator, engaged in
unprofessional conduct in the creation of the report.
Currently, the law does not give the Board direct access to the
child custody evaluation report. This leaves the Board unable
to investigate allegations of unprofessional conduct of its
licensees while they are serving as a custody evaluator, even
though the Board is mandated to do so by law.
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 75-0, 5/5/14
AYES: Achadjian, Alejo, Allen, Ammiano, Atkins, Bigelow, Bloom,
Bocanegra, Bonilla, Bonta, Bradford, Brown, Buchanan, Ian
Calderon, Campos, Chau, Ch�vez, Chesbro, Conway, Cooley,
Dababneh, Dahle, Daly, Dickinson, Donnelly, Eggman, Fong, Fox,
Frazier, Beth Gaines, Garcia, Gatto, Gomez, Gonzalez, Gordon,
Gorell, Gray, Grove, Hagman, Harkey, Roger Hern�ndez, Holden,
Jones, Jones-Sawyer, Levine, Linder, Lowenthal, Maienschein,
Medina, Mullin, Muratsuchi, Nazarian, Nestande, Olsen, Pan,
Patterson, Perea, V. Manuel P�rez, Quirk, Quirk-Silva, Rendon,
Ridley-Thomas, Rodriguez, Salas, Skinner, Stone, Ting, Wagner,
Waldron, Weber, Wieckowski, Wilk, Williams, Yamada, John A.
P�rez
NO VOTE RECORDED: Hall, Logue, Mansoor, Melendez, Vacancy
AL:e 8/4/14 Senate Floor Analyses
CONTINUED
AB 1843
Page
6
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****
CONTINUED