Parenting Recommendation Experts

doctor, therapist, physician

In parenting cases which are either higher-conflict, or involve deeper issues (an unfit parent, relocation, parental alienation, domestic violence, etc), the court may appoint an expert to assist. Typically the expert is appointed by agreement of the parents, or when one of them files a motion; rarely does the court sua sponte appoint an expert on its own initiative.

The term parenting recommendation expert does not appear in any statute - it is just a simple term for the title of this article to denote an expert whose rule is to investigate a parenting situation, and make recommendations to assist the judge in deciding a parenting situation.

Typically, when the parents agree on a professional, the fees are divided proportional to incomes. When one party files a motion seeking the appointment of one, the Court may allocate the fees to that party initially (subject to reallocation at the actual hearing), or divide the fees between the parties.

Conflict of Interest

In 2012, Colorado enacted SB 12-056, which amended each of the applicable appointment statutes to require that a CLR, CFI or PRE provide, within 7 days of appointment, the parties, counsel and court with a disclosure of the nature of any familial, social, or financial relationship with a party, counsel, or judge.

The court may then, on its own, terminate the appointment, or either party may file an objection to the appointment within 7 days (or the objection is waived), and the court then has 7 additional days to confirm or terminate the appointment.

It is pretty much impossible for an expert not to know one, or both, of the attorneys in a case. Not only would attorneys typically not agree for a complete stranger to be appointed, but El Paso County is a small enough community that we work with the same experts over and over.

Child's Legal Representative (CLR)

Formerly known as a Guardian Ad Litem, a Child’s Legal Representative (CLR) is an attorney appointed pursuant to C.R.S. 14-10-116 to represent the best interests of the child. Note that the lawyer does not represent the child, but the child's "best interests".

Whereas a Guardian Ad Litem was previously appointed to represent the children, the change in terminology accompanied a shift in role - the CLR’s client is not the child, but the more nebulous concept of "best interests". While the distinction may seem subtle, imagine a teenager who wants to live with one parent, to move with one parent, or to reduce his/her time with one parent. The CLR is not a mouthpiece to parrot the child’s wishes. But may well reject them, in effect saying that the teenager does not know what’s good for him.

The CLR actively participates in the case, but unlike a CFI or a PRE, is not a neutral expert who can testify. The CLR may write a report, but then, as with any other attorney, at a hearing the CLR examines witnesses, and argues for a certain outcome.

When the purpose is to have a vehicle for an older child to express his/her views, a CLR may be a more efficient option than other parenting experts.

Child & Family Investigator (CFI)

C.R.S. 14-10-116.5 authorizes the court to appoint a Child & Family Investigator (CFI). , either upon request of one (or both) of the parties, or on its own. CFI fees are capped at $2750.

The CFI is tasked with investigating, reporting, and making recommendations in the children's best interests on issues as specifically directed by the Court. As such, even if paid by one party, the CFI is the neutral investigative arm of the Court, responsible to the Court, not to either parent. After issuing a report, the CFI may be called as a witness to testify.

A CFI investigation is typically limited to specific or simpler issues, in contrast to a PRE (see below), which may evaluate everything under the sun pertaining to custody. The rules governing the Child & Family Investigator are set forth in Chief Justice Directive 04-08, Directive Concerning Court Appointments of Child & Family Investigators Pursuant to Section 14-10-116.5, C.R.S.

As the court’s investigator, the CFI may not simultaneously serve in any role which could compromise that neutrality, such as a mediator, therapist, arbitrator, or later serve as a Child's Legal Representative. Standard 4, CJD 04-08. However, the CFI may transition into a parent coordinator, decision-maker or arbitrator after conclusion of his/her role as CFI. Standard 5, CJD 04-08.

The CFI may not conduct psychological or drug/alcohol testing, but must instead report back to the Court and recommend such testing. Standard 13, CJD 04-08. Note that this is a new rule as of 2011 - prior to that it was typical for CFIs to perform such testing when deemed appropriate.

A CFI may be an attorney or a mental health professional, or anyone else with appropriate training acceptable to the Court. Mental health professionals are most common. In addition to the requirements of Chief Justice Directive 04-08, districts may have their own additional requirements, for example: Chief Judge Order 10-03, Order Concerning Child & Family Investigators - 4th Judicial District.

Each judicial district has a roster of approved CFIs - here is the 4th Judicial District CFI Roster, covering El Paso & Teller Counties. Being on the roster does not mean they are endorsed nor preferred by judges, it simply means they have the requisite qualifications to be appointed.

For more information on the appointment of a CFI, rosters of approval, FAQ, and even how to file a complaint against a CFI, see the Child & Family Investigators page on the state judiciary web site.

Parental Responsibilities Evaluator (PRE)

Should the parties or Court desire a more in-depth evaluation of the parenting issues, an expert may be appointed to conduct a parental responsibilities evaluation (formerly known as a “custody evaluation”) pursuant to C.R.S. 14-10-127, and allocate costs between the parties, or to one party.

A PRE is typically used in higher-conflict custody cases, or where there are multiple issues which need investigating. Either party can request that one be appointed, or, less commonly, the Court may, on its own, direct that one be appointed.

Whereas appointment of a PRE upon request by a party was previously mandatory, the word “shall” has been replaced with “may”. C.R.S. 14-10-127(1)(a)(I) provides:

“In all proceedings concerning the allocation of parental responsibilities with respect to a child, the court may, upon motion of either party or upon its own motion, order any county or district department of human or social services or a licensed mental health professional qualified pursuant to subsection (4) of this section to perform an evaluation and file a written report concerning the disputed issues relating to the allocation of parental responsibilities for the child”

A PRE will not be appointed if the court finds the motion was for the purposes of delay - which also means you should request appointment by whatever deadlines may be specified in the court’s case management order. Moreover, C.R.S. 14-10-127(1)(a)(I.3) requires the court to consider any relevant factors in considering whether to appoint a PRE, including the following:

  1. Whether a CFI would be sufficient,
  2. Whether a PRE is really necessary, and
  3. Whether a PRE is in the child’s best interests.

A PRE is not cheap - unlike a CFI,. whose costs are capped at $2750, there is no limit on PRE fees. In El Paso County, you can typically expect to pay $5000 - $10,000, and in the Denver area, twice that amount.

Another contrast to a CFI is that a Parental Responsibilities Evaluator must be a licensed mental health professional. Furthermore, pursuant to C.R.S 14-10-127(4), the PRE must be qualified as competent by training an experience in such areas as the effects of divorce & remarriage on children, appropriate parenting techniques, child development, psychology, etc.

A typical parenting evaluation takes about 90 days to complete, and the actual process depends upon the policies of the specific PRE. By law, the PRE may consult anyone with information about the child, and refer the child to other professionals for diagnosis.

A PRE will typically meet with both parties individually at the outset, talk about the case, and give them questionnaires for the party and his/her collateral contacts (family members, teachers, day care providers, etc) to complete. The PRE will also meet with each party together with the child to observe parent-child interaction, and except with real young children, meet with the child individually.

Typically, PREs will do home visits, although to save time and money, some PREs will not visit the home of a parent in a different state unless there is a concern about that parent’s home or neighborhood.

In addition to the parents, most PREs will talk to at least a few of the more important collateral contacts personally, such as the child’s therapist, day care provider, teacher, or a close family member. Other times the PRE will review statements without talking to them. THe PRE may review communications between the parties, academic, medical or other records.

At times, a PRE may decide that one or both parents need psychological testing, and either administer the tests himself/herself, or solicit the assistance of a different professional qualified to administer them.

A written report of the evaluation is due to the Court and parties at least 20 days before the hearing, and should include a description of the procedure, the data collected, a conclusion explaining how the recommendations were reached, and the actual recommendations. The PRE may be called as a witness to testify at a hearing as to the evaluation.

A party who is dissatisfied with the initial evaluation may request that the Court appoint someone with the requisite qualifications to perform a supplemental evaluation, at that party's (initial) expense. The Court shall not order a supplemental evaluation, however, if any of the following applies:

  • The motion is for the purpose of delay;
  • A party objects, and that party or the child has a physical or mental condition which would make the supplemental evaluation harmful to that person;
  • The purpose of the motion is to harass the other party;
  • The moving party did not cooperate with the first evaluation;
  • The weight of the evidence other than the evaluation demonstrates that a second evaluation would not benefit the court;
  • There has already been both a CFI investigation and a PRE evaluation conducted.

Do You Need a Child Custody Lawyer in Colorado Springs?

The family law attorneys at Graham.Law have years of experience helping clients through the Colorado legal system. We know Colorado family laws, inside and out, from divorce to legal separation, including parenting and child custody issues. For more information about our El Paso County family law firm, click on:

Colorado family law is all we do. Period.