Children should be sheltered from careless and un-protective parents. If a divorcee feels that their kids are not safe with a mentally unstable partner, then one can request for psychological testing child custody. To prove a case, judges require both prosecutors and prosecuted undergo a series of mental tests to ascertain the credibility of allegations. Intuitively, cognitively unstable parents may have cases of previously injuring a kid, dependability on certain drugs as well as un-called off parenting behaviors. However, this approach is limited by various reasons such as a number of tests worth carrying out to prove mental stability, inconsistent psychologists, bias including others. Below is a detailed discussion of such limitations.

The identification of which parent to take charge of kids involves various activities. First is the assessment of mental health through a series of interviews. Here, specialists ask individuals a number of questions. However, procedures, questions as well as the design of the interview are not scientifically universal. Therefore, each specialist has their own set of queries and guidelines covering an interview session.

As a result, different specialists administer interviews in their own manner. For this reason, one cannot gauge the quality of an examination. Questions asked cannot be considered comprehensive or not which means they do not reflect the skill level of assessors. As a result, legal advisers may make wrong conclusions in the litigation process.

The next stage of evaluation is medical screening. Individuals are tested of different health conditions such as Rorschach inkblot just to mention a few. Like interviews, there are no scientifically defined tools to carry out these procedures. Therefore, each specialist may decide to use machines of their choice.

For instance, one psychologist can decide to carry out a different procedure while another may adopt a different technique. While there are few tests considered a must in various countries, erroneous information gathered by specialists may promote unsound judgment.

After screening and interviewing, experts explain results as well as recommendations. Since techniques of gathering information vary depending on specialists, results are also inconsistent. Markedly, conclusions made from results of tests performed during a certain time may be wrong. This is because behaviors change with time. A certain mental state could be contributed by specific factors existing at the time. Therefore assuming an individual will behave alike at all times is unfair.

Another process involves the evaluation of check-up outcomes. This may be done by non-specialists representing a certain individual. For this reason, translation is done leaning on one side. Similarly, bias starts from information gathering where assessors gather facts of interest only. It is possible to collaborate with specialists to give false information favoring a client.

The court ruling is expected to be as fair as possible. However, due to biases illustrated in the above points, this is usually not possible.