3.5 Hours / 3.5 CEs

On Demand | Self-Paced Professional Training

This on-demand professional training program on Conducting Work Product Reviews in Child Custody Litigation is presented by David Martindale, PhD, ABPP.

The use by family court judges of mental health professionals appointed to conduct parenting plan evaluations has increased. Litigants who are displeased with the findings, opinions, and recommendations offered by evaluators may challenge the evaluators’ advisory input to the courts appointing them. The attorneys representing these litigants may retain forensic mental health professionals to review the evaluators’ work and, where appropriate, to assist the attorneys. Ordinarily, where the review process yields negative reviews, the reviewing practitioners will offer either to provide litigation support services (such as providing assistance in the development of cross-examination questions) or to testify. 

Dr. Martindale, who has been conducting work product reviews for 34 years, describes the review process from pre-retention contacts with attorneys through trial. Emphasis is placed on procedures intended to minimize the objectivity-impairing influence of retention bias; the relevant ethical issues; the various types of litigation support services; and means by which testifying experts can maximize their helpfulness to the court.

Discussion of the ways in which the work of evaluators is reviewed is beneficial to forensic mental health professionals who offer to perform parenting plan evaluations.

This program is intended for forensic mental health professionals involved in (or considering becoming involved in) custody/access litigation. Though only experienced evaluators should consider reviewing the work of others, novice evaluators may benefit by learning what reviewers look for when they assess the work of evaluators. Work environments might include solo practice, group practice, or court employment.

Learning Objectives

Upon completion of this training, participants will be able to:

  • 1 Describe 5 procedures that are likely to reduce the effects of retention bias substantially
  • 2 Describe 4 cognitive biases that, if not addressed, are likely to impair reviewer objectivity
  • 3 Describe 5 reviewer-identified evaluator errors that led to the rejection by a NY court of its appointed evaluator’s recommendations
  • 4 Describe 5 cognitive dynamics that, if not addressed, may contribute to a subjective presentation of the evidence by a retained reviewer offering testimony

  • Intended Audience

    This training is designed for forensic mental health professionals involved in custody and access litigation, including those who conduct forensic evaluations, provide expert testimony, or review the work of other evaluators. It addresses the skills and knowledge needed to perform evaluations, support family court proceedings, and understand the standards used in reviewing forensic reports.


    Examples of Relevant Professionals:
    • Mental Health Professionals
    • Forensic Psychologists
    • Forensic Psychiatrists
    • Social Workers specializing in forensic or family court matters
    • Custody Evaluators
    • Expert Witnesses in family law cases
    • Clinical Psychologists involved in forensic assessment
    • Licensed Professional Counselors conducting forensic evaluations

  • Experience Level

    This training is designed for licensed and pre-licensed mental health professionals with varying levels of experience in forensic parenting plan evaluations and work product reviews.

    • Beginner: Participants new to forensic parenting plan evaluations or work product review will gain foundational knowledge of the review process, common evaluator errors, and relevant ethical considerations.

    • Intermediate: Participants with some experience in forensic evaluations or litigation support will deepen their understanding of retention bias, cognitive biases affecting objectivity, and the stages of work product review.

    • Advanced: Participants with substantial experience conducting evaluations and reviews will refine their skills in providing litigation support, testifying as expert witnesses, and implementing advanced procedures to maximize objectivity and court helpfulness.

  • Practice Setting

    Practice occurs in family-court–facing environments where practitioners conduct parenting plan evaluations, review other evaluators’ work, and provide litigation support or expert testimony. These settings prioritize objectivity, ethics, and close coordination with courts and attorneys, whether operating independently or within court-affiliated services.


    Examples of Practice Settings:
    • Solo private practice (court-appointed or retained by counsel)
    • Group forensic practice or multidisciplinary clinic
    • Court-employed or court-affiliated family evaluation services
    • Court-appointed evaluator panels/rosters
    • Consultation arrangements with attorneys or law firms for litigation support
    • Family court settings for expert testimony

Presented By

David Martindale, PhD, ABPP Consultant

David Martindale, Ph.D., ABPP (forensic) limits his practice to consulting with psychologists, attorneys, and state regulatory boards. He lectures regularly on issues pertaining to evaluations of comparative custodial suitability, served on the AFCC Child Custody Consulting Task Force, and was the Reporter for the AFCC Model Standards of Practice for Child Custody Evaluation.

View More Programs from this Presenter
David Martindale, PhD, ABPP

Training Outline

Key topics covered in this training include:

  • Pre-retention procedures intended to reduce retention bias

  • Discussion of cognitive biases likely to impair reviewer objectivity

  • The stages of the work product review process

  • Communication of the reviewers’ input to the retaining attorney

  • The provision by retained work product reviewers of litigation support services

  • Testimony by retained work product reviewers

CE Sponsorship Information

Palo Alto University, Continuing & Professional Studies (CONCEPT) is approved by, recognized by, or maintains sponsorship provider status with the following boards and agencies. We maintain responsibility for all content in our CE/CPD programs. For more information, visit here. 

  1. American Psychological Association (APA): Approved sponsor of continuing education for psychologists.

  2. Association of Social Work Boards (ASWB): Approved continuing education provider (ACE program, Provider #1480), 11/22/2023–11/22/2026.

  3. Canadian Psychological Association (CPA): Approved to sponsor continuing education for psychologists.

  4. National Board for Certified Counselors (NBCC): Approved Continuing Education Provider (ACEP No. 7190).



Palo Alto University, Continuing and Professional Studies (CONCEPT) is approved by the American Psychological Association to sponsor continuing education for psychologists. Palo Alto University, Continuing and Professional Studies (CONCEPT) maintains responsibility for this program and its content. Palo Alto University, Continuing and Professional Studies (CONCEPT), is approved by the Canadian Psychological Association to offer continuing education for psychologists. Palo Alto University, Continuing and Professional Studies (CONCEPT), SW CPE is recognized by the New York State Education Department’s State Board for Social Work as an approved provider of continuing education for licensed social workers #SW-0356 and the New York State Education Department’s State Board for Mental Health Practitioners as an approved provider of continuing education for licensed mental health counselors. #MHC-0073. Palo Alto University, Continuing and Professional Studies (CONCEPT) has been approved by NBCC as an Approved Continuing Education Provider, ACEP No. 6811. Programs that do not qualify for NBCC credit are clearly identified. CONCEPT Professional Training, #1480, is approved to offer social work continuing education by the Association of Social Work Boards (ASWB) Approved Continuing Education (ACE) program. Organizations, not individual courses, are approved as ACE providers. State and provincial regulatory boards have the final authority to determine whether an individual course may be accepted for continuing education credit. CONCEPT Professional Training maintains responsibility for this course. ACE provider approval period: 11/22/23-11/22/26. Social workers completing this course receive (clinical or social work ethics) continuing education credits.