A parenting coordinator (PC) is a court-appointed professional psychologist or lawyer who manages ongoing issues in high-conflict child custody and visitation cases.
[1] As of May 2011, ten U.S. states had passed legislation regarding parenting coordinators: Colorado (since 2005), Idaho (2002), Louisiana (2007), New Hampshire (2009), North Carolina (2005), Oklahoma (2001), Oregon (2002), Texas (2005), and Florida (2009).
[2] The Parenting Coordinators are usually of two types: licensed professionals in a mental health or pastoral field of counseling, or attorneys who are in good standing with their state's Bar Association.
[16] AFCC explains:"the Model Standards have been renamed Guidelines, highlighting that AFCC does not intend them to define mandatory practice or to be used to create rules or standards of liability....The term Child Custody Evaluations has been replaced with Parenting Plan Evaluations.
This reflects an important shift away from the term 'child custody,' which connotes possession and control of children rather than responsibility for their care.
"[19] Court of Appeals of Oregon "conclude[d] that the trial court plainly erred in denying husband parenting time without making appropriate findings" and reversed the order that erroneously granted PC the "authority to deny husband parenting time".
[22][23] There is a possibility of a conflict of interest when the same psychologist provides Custody Evaluation and appoints himself to Parental Coordinator role, so laws in many states and AFCC guidelines explicitly prohibit this practice.
[24] PCs, however, have the right to resign when a complaint is filed against them with psychologists licensing board, or when lawsuit is filled with State or Federal Court.
I believe that parenting coordinators should serve as volunteers and not be limited to an exclusive class of licensed professionals.
[25] According to some lawyers, guideline documents from the psychologist boards have a lot of inspirational statements, but not malfeasance oversight to protect parents and children from abuse of power by PC.
Unlike court proceedings where legal standards govern changes and judgments bring closure to issues, the PC process is open ended and continuous.
There also was an official debate in Oklahoma Legislature that parenting coordination can interfere with civil liberties and conflict with Fourth Amendment:[29][30] Common civil liberties include the rights of people, freedom of religion, and freedom of speech, and additionally, the right to due process, to a trial, to own property, and to privacy.
The debate stemmed around the fact that the coordinator can demand to know details about parties conversations, check on conditions of their house, ask questions about their personal life, disregard rules of evidence laws, get copies of documents without a warrant request, make decisions which exceeds their authority, since the PC has the power to control and regulate many aspects of parent time with their child up to recommending court to limit parent contact with child.