ABSTRACT
Every family law practitioner who has been involved in a child custody case understands that the ultimate issue for the court to resolve is, “What custodial arrangement is in the best interests of the child?” The standard is inherently subjective, which means that the presiding judge will inevitably be guided by his or her own values, beliefs, and understanding of child development in reaching the answer to this critical question. The effect that certain influences have on a child is often self-evident. For example, if a parent has a significant, untreated substance abuse problem that affects her ability to perform day-to-day tasks, it is reasonable to conclude that this condition will adversely impact her ability to supervise and care for a toddler. However, in many cases, the probable consequences of a judge's decision to grant custody to one party or another are not so readily apparent. For some judges, it is particularly difficult to predict how a physical custody arrangement that changes the relationship between a very young child and a familiar caregiver will affect the child in both the short and long term. A common misconception is that it is easier for infants to recover from drastic changes in custody than older children. Thus, it may seem counterintuitive that pre-verbal children who are removed from their caregivers experience trauma to the same extent, or possibly an even greater extent, than children who are able to communicate their distress. Family lawyers must be prepared to provide the court with reliable information about attachment relationships and the likely ramifications of changing these relationships.
