{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.013550135501355014, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.713636363636364, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Parental Gatekeeping and Child Custody Evaluation: Part III: Protective Gatekeeping and the Overnights “Conundrum”

ABSTRACT The concept of parental gatekeeping and the forensic evaluation model for child custody disputes is described and applied to the context of considering overnight care by fathers for infants and toddlers. The forensic model is briefly described: facilitative, restrictive, and protective gatekeeping. The gatekeeping continuum is described, ranging from extreme restrictive to very facilitative and inclusive. Gatekeeping is isomorphic with a common best interest statutory factor on support for the other parent–child relationships. The limited research on overnights and child outcomes is briefly reviewed and discussed in the context of attachment theory. The concept of social capital is introduced as an explanatory concept for research that shows the benefit of joint parental involvement and shared parenting, including overnight care by fathers. Attachment and social capital are presented as complementary, explanatory concepts for understanding the gatekeeping and overnights issues. The conservative school of thought on overnight care by fathers is discussed in terms of a justification analysis as part of the gatekeeping model. Mothers opposing overnights need to show with behavioral specificity how overnights would be harmful to the child and then how the father can still be afforded substantial involvement in the present and future.