+- Family Law Express Forum (https://forum.familylawexpress.com.au)
+-- Forum: Family Reports (https://forum.familylawexpress.com.au/Forum-Family-Reports)
+--- Forum: Disputing Family Reports (https://forum.familylawexpress.com.au/Forum-Disputing-Family-Reports-%09)
+--- Thread: Apprehended bias (/Thread-Apprehended-bias)
Apprehended bias - Meridian - 30-May-2016
Can apprehended bias (or something else) be used in order to change family reporter in circumstances where the family reporters first report was grossly and patently wrong, fooled by the acting of one parent and child deliberately attempting to deceive the court, missing the nasty psychological dynamics altogether (although clear and obvious evidence of the dynamics was not available at the time of the report, but is available now)?
A fully ethical reporter would admit they were totally wrong, but in circumstances where the reporters reputation is that they don't change their mind under cross-examination (ever?), it would be a risk to use the same reporter again.
At a minimum they may be tempted to water down their assessment, as to make a full and proper assessment would be pointing out just how dangerously wrong (perhaps incompetent) they were in the first instance.
Could this count for apprehended bias, or is there something else that can be used here to effect change of a family reporter?
RE: Apprehended bias - Dr Travis Gee - 21-Sep-2016
Meridian
Can apprehended bias (or something else) be used in order to change family reporter in circumstances where the family reporters first report was grossly and patently wrong, fooled by the acting of one parent and child deliberately attempting to deceive the court, missing the nasty psychological dynamics altogether (although clear and obvious evidence of the dynamics was not available at the time of the report, but is available now)?
A fully ethical reporter would admit they were totally wrong, but in circumstances where the reporters reputation is that they don't change their mind under cross-examination (ever?), it would be a risk to use the same reporter again.
At a minimum they may be tempted to water down their assessment, as to make a full and proper assessment would be pointing out just how dangerously wrong (perhaps incompetent) they were in the first instance.
Could this count for apprehended bias, or is there something else that can be used here to effect change of a family reporter?
Dr Gee:
Hi, first apologies for the long delay, there have been some systems problems with migration to new servers, apparently and I've only just gotten restored.
To your question, I've done independent reports where this exact thing has happened. Yes, an ethical reporter would note caveats about the report in the first instance, and acknowledge new evidence when it comes in. However, it's also possible, and you need to check carefully, whether the reporter was provided with sufficient evidence by the ICL if one was involved. An ICL does not have to provide a balanced set of affidavits, and can cherry pick evidence to be provided to the report writer to suit the case they want to make. I've seen it done. You can consider asking the court to direct the consultant to revise based on previously-unseen evidence. If this reporter is very unwilling to back off in the face of new facts, an embarassing cross-examination can be constructed. If you are self-represented, asking a professional in the reporter's field to compare the report and give you a withering set of questions could be money well-spent.
Also, the reporter will have a professional association whose code of conduct governs their reports, and if you obtain their code and it's clearly been breached, then the outcome of a complaint to that association is a common approach to discrediting the report if there is no change of reporter. An independent professional who is a senior (or executive!) member of the association may be willing to review the facts, and you would have to discuss whether a fee would be involved for assistance in deciding if to pursue that avenue. While a review of evidence will attract a fee, sometimes assistance formulating a complaint will not, as reporting other professionals whose work is sub-standard may be part of the ethical structure of their association's guidelines.
Independent reports may not always be allowed, but a second opinion report that gets in may reveal a good deal that helps the court reconsider the original report. There is an appeal underway now, actually, that may provide a good precedent in this area early next year,where a 2nd opinion report was commissioned to expose how badly the original report writer had missed the point about alienating behaviours by the mother, and how the views parroted to him by the kids did not reflect their real feelings so much as they did fear of upsetting the mother,who wished to have the father removed from their lives as completely as possible. As I understand it, it relies in part on some HUDOC cases where arbitrary disallowance of that kind of evidence got up in Brussels as a human rights violation.
Hope this helps. All the best.