This is your Member Reference Number (MRN). You’ll need to provide this when you make an appointment with an MAP counselor or contact your MAP by phone.

Anthem provides automatic translation into multiple languages, courtesy of Google Translate. This tool is provided for your convenience only. The English language version is considered the most accurate, and in the event of a discrepancy between the translations, the English version will prevail. This translation tool is not controlled by Anthem, and the Anthem Privacy Statement will not apply. Please read Google's privacy statement. If you want Google to translate the Anthem website, select a language.

Benefits with Southern California Laborers

Your MAP offers these great resources.

Credible Data in Custody and Access Disputes

Many people start with the premise that if you tell your story often enough, it must be true. Hence in bolstering child custody and access claims, some parties and lawyers run about gathering as many affidavits and one-sided opinions as possible. The trouble with this is that most are not worth the paper they are printed on. Even reports from expert sources may not be credible, if the data is derived from a single source.

Parties subject to child custody and access disputes are, by nature of the situation, vulnerable. It often happens that parties subject to child custody and access disputes engage others by sharing with them the nature of the dispute and their hypothesis underlying the behavior of the other party. They fear a loss of their relationship to the children as they had envisioned it. They are often feeling desperate in this concern, and hence are prone to present their situation in a way that favors themselves over the other party. It may be that they are innocently venting their upset or consternation, or it may be that they are trying to induct others to their version of events to curry support of their position. In any event, the listener—be it family, friend, or professional—is only privy to a one-sided account. Typically, the account provided is emotionally laden; hence, the listener is prone to accept the party's version on face value. In the case of counselors, it is generally their role to provide support, and they may not be prone to challenge a person's version of events.

In the face of an emotional account of wrongdoing, many persons, professional and otherwise, are moved to action to help correct a perceived injustice. However, in the absence of verifying data (or at least contrasting it with input from the other side), the injustice at risk is justice itself.

Experienced assessors are well aware of the above dynamics and that is why, by standards of practice, they are prohibited from forming a final opinion on the basis of a one-sided account or data derived or traceable to a single source. Data derived from or traceable to a single source occurs when one party sees a number of counselors, doctors or the like, tells his or her story, and then receives letters of support from those professional sources, but based solely upon the one-sided account. No matter how reliable the professional, the data remains one-sided and may not accurately reflect the situation.

Credible data is that which the assessor has tested. Strategies for testing include obtaining data from multiple sources, discussing and contrasting the data with the parties, and at times confronting the parties on their version of events in view of conflicting data.

The value of credible data is that it can help the parties and courts achieve a more appropriate resolution to the child custody and access dispute. Credible data may confirm the presence or absence of abuse claims, as well as any other positions or hypothesis put forward by the respective parties.

The risk of gathering one-sided data is that it (and the process) may contribute to an escalation in the dispute as now each side feels compelled to "outdo" the other in the race to amass support. Further, the process almost requires each side to escalate their positions and claims so as to restore balance to the perceived injustice each brings about to the other.

Credible data as obtained by an experienced assessor through an appropriate process has the advantage of clarifying issues and facilitating a reasonable resolution. Discreditable data collection runs the risk of escalating conflict, undermining an appropriate resolution, and undermining the well-being of children subject to the custody and access dispute.

Before you run around gathering affidavits and reports, at least remember this: A reasonable assessor can tell the difference between credible and discreditable data and will have concern about a party whose allegations are unfounded or exaggerated.

Direnfeld, G. (n.d.). Credible data in custody and access disputes. Retrieved November 5, 2019, from http://www.yoursocialworker.com

More about this Topics

  • A Race to Settle May Leave You Short

  • Separated Parents in Dispute

  • Right of First Refusal

  • What Is Child Custody?

  • Child and Spousal Support

Other Topics

    • Request to Begin Special Education Process
    • Declaration of Legal Name Change
    • Temporary Guardianship Authorization for Care of a Minor
    • Authorization for Foreign Travel With a Minor
    • Naming a Guardian for Your Child: Problems and Solutions
    • Choosing Divorce Court Over Mediation or Collaborative Divorce
    • Establishing and Calculating Child Support FAQ
    • Common Law Marriage FAQ
    • Divorce and Children: Helping Kids Deal With the Effects
    • Choosing an Adoption Attorney
    • American Bar Association