Certainly, no custody case has aroused more interest in the past several years than the Elian Gonzalez case. Passions flow strongly from both sides of this case as with most custody disputes. However, this particular case has political overtones that overshadow the legal issues. Unfortunately, it has caused some mental health experts to lose sight of their professional roles and engage in hyperbole or broad generalizations.

Custody evaluation is a controversial set of practices in the professional literature. One of the major issues is whether a mental health professional should ever answer the ultimate question concerning custody. There is no definitive test or battery of tests that has proven to be reliable for determining the decision of custody.

What is unanimously agreed upon among professionals is the need to conduct a thorough examination of each party as well as the interaction of each party in the dispute as well as the interaction of each party with the child or children. In the Gonzalez case, experts representing both sides repeatedly violated this basic procedure. A second unacceptable practice by mental health experts on both sides was to issue definitive opinions without any basis in fact. As an example, an expert in Miami stated that Elian would be irreparably harmed if he left Miami. On what basis was this opinion formed? An expert for the government said Elian would be badly affected by a visit by his Miami relatives. Did this expert interview the family and their plan for him? Certainly, the experts did not interview their adversaries.

Finally, a third unacceptable practice was to go well beyond the data available by the experts to offer opinions. As an example, the psychiatrist for the government concluded that father and son had a warm and loving relationship. This was based upon a brief observation of their interaction. What this expert saw was merely rapport with one another. In summary, when using an expert in a child custody lawsuit, do not insist on the expert declaring which parent should be given custody. Rather, insist on a thorough examination which entails both strengths and weaknesses of each parent. Insist that the expert point to facts to support his or her list of factors. Finally, insist that the expert does not go beyond his/her data in making conclusions.