9773562720

186

MAŁGORZATA TOEPLITZ-WINIEWSKA

BIBLIOGRAFIA

Bartold, C.R., Bartold, A.M. (2004). Intro-duction to Forensic Psychology. Thousand Oak, London, New Delhi: Sagę Publica-

Czerederecka, A. (2010). Rozwód a rywalizacja o opiekę nad dziećmi. Warszawa: Lexis-

Greene, E., Heilbrun, K. (2011). Wrightsmans Psychology and Legał System. Wadsworth: Cengage Learning.

Paluchowski, W.J., Stemplewska-Żakowicz, K. (2013). Wiaiygodność technik projekcyjnych jako narzędzi diagnozy psychologicznej. Część 1: Czemu niektóre techniki niesłusznie nazywa się projekcyjnymi? Problems of Forensic Sciences, 94,421—520.

Poznaniak, W. (2005). Psychologia sądowa -wybrane zagadnienia. W: H. Sęk (red.), Psychologia kliniczna (s. 287—312). Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.

CHILD CUSTODY - STANDARDS FOR PSYCHOLOGICAL EVALUATIONS IN DIYORCE CASES

Abslract: The article aims to show the spe-cific character of and difficulties in the evaluation of the family in divorce crisis and the relationships between the parents (guardians) and children. Such an evalua-tion is performed when ordered by the family court, which determines the goal of the proceedings by asking questions; the psy-chologist turns the ąuestions into hypothe-ses, operationalizes the variables and choos-es evaluation methods. The article discusses two fundamental issues: how to understand the “child s welfare” and what the indicators of parenting competence are. It also raises methodological issues, especially the choice of the method - the status and limitations of projective techniques. It mentions ethical dilemmas in judicial evaluations and points out the competency of the expert witness and his/her responsibility for the conse-quences of the evaluation.

Key words: divorce, evaluation methods, child s welfare, psychologist s competence

I