While the test may have some utility in diagnosing psychological disorders, nobody has ever been able to show that the test has anything to with identifying good parents. The test does not attempt to measure any parenting abilities or disabilities.
Family court evaluators like to use these psychological tests to give their evaluations a veneer of science. But the tests are just voodoo, and the so-called experts who rely on them are quacks.
The declaration by the psychologist below is as ridiculous as saying:
I am a nurse and I have drawn blood samples 1000 times. The mom had a medical checkup 5 years ago, but was not tested for diabetes. I have reviewed her medical history, and I found she eats too many sweets, so she could be at risk for diabetes. If she has diabetes, then the disease could possibly have a negative impact on her parenting abilities. I recommended that she give a blood sample so that she can be tested for diabetes, and that she be not allowed to see her son until she does.I suppose that there is some theoretical possibility that an undiagnosed case of diabetes could have some negative effect on the child, but how likely is that? And how does that compare to the obvious harm in the child not being able to see his mom?
The family court has to decide whether the risk in the mom visiting her son somehow outweighs the benefits. The psychologist declaration says nothing to address that issue at all. The court should disregard his declaration.