On Friday, it didn't take long (after this blog was first to highlight the issue because I had been following the «Posner
case» in
detail over the years)
before the appeals court ruling affirming Judge Posner's claim construction
of the» 647 patent was
discussed everywhere, and that was good.
This article
discusses the minimum disclosures every child custody evaluator (also known as «parenting evaluator» or «best interests» guardian ad litem or GAL)[1], or parenting coordinator (herein called a «mental health professional» or «MHP»)[2a] should be required to make, responding satisfactorily and in full,
before being appointed in any family law
case to do a child custody evaluation — in fact
before doing anything beyond answering a list
of limited,
detailed, specific, and narrowly - crafted questions the answers to which are directly within the MHP's field
of proved expertise.