ABSTRACT
Tippins and Wittmann provide much food for thought about why we have come to the present situation and what we can do about it. In the first instance, they make a very persuasive case for the exclusion of forensic psychological assessments on the ultimate questions presented in disputed child custody cases. Their conclusions appear to be based on two general theories: first, there is simply no reliable scientific basis for making such determinations, and second, the best interest standard currently used by the courts is not a psychological construct but rather a legal and socio-moral one. As to the first point, they make a compelling case for the lack of empirical research sufficient to make these judgments and we are not prepared to dispute those findings. Rather, as lawyers and law professors, it is the second basis for their conclusion that raises more interesting questions.
