1997 Dr. Richard Maxfieid Ph.D -Custody Evaluator Dom Brow Ski v Richardson Case No. 96D217 Topeka, KS

8/8/2019 1997 Dr. Richard Maxfieid Ph.D -Custody Evaluator Dom Brow Ski v Richardson Case No. 96D217 Topeka, KS

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/1997-dr-richard-maxfieid-phd-custody-evaluator-dom-brow-ski-v-richardson 1/6

~ #J

'I

i

III

I

~ l l W L t rud Richard B. Maxfield, Ph.D. APR - 5 1997LICENSED PSYCHOLOGIST

wrfu hot Cbp1ed EVALUATION

Name: Hal Richardson and C 1 a U d i n ~ : : O W ~ k O These parents were court ordered to involve themselves in a custody evaluation with me.

This evaluation concerns their eighteen month old daughter who currently resides \vith

the mother, \vith weekend visitation available to the father. rmet with Mr. Richardson

on June 19 and 26, July 18, and September 13 for individual hour long diagnostic

sessions. In addition I met with him for one hour with his daughter on October 4, 1996.

r met with Ms. Dombrowski for a two hour consultation session on July 10, 1996, a

second two hour consultation session on September 11, 1996 and a one hour consultation

with her daughter on October 4, ,1996. In addition I administered the MMPI-JI to both

parents. Further, I have spoken with or received reports from Joel Nance, M.D., Bernard

Nobo, MSW, Mrs. Barger, whois

Claudine's current counselor, Ms. Fisher who is thechild's current day care provider. In addition I have received and reviewed mUltiple faxes

from Ms. Dombrowski, numerous police reports concerning the history of violence in

this relationship and I have listened to and reviewed a taped telephone conversation

provided to me by Mr. Richardson. That conversation was one betvveen him and Ms.

Dombrowski. It is on the basis of the above contacts and infonnation that I come to my

findings and conclusions.

This was an extraordinarily difficult evaluation to conduct. In part that difficulty arises

from the extreme violence which has been part of this relationship from nearly the

beginning of their relationship. Further. that difficulty arises, and perhaps primarily,

from my opinion that neither member of this couple was forthright in their approach tome and to the evaluation. Though it is to be expected that any parent undergoing such an

evaluation will "put their best toot tOf\vard," my assessment of each member of this

couple is that they are prone to fabrication and to blaming the other for all, or nearly all,

of the problems in their relationship. On multiple occasions they provided infonnation

which was frankly and boldly contradictory to the intormation that the other had

provided. Sorting out where the truth lay in those situations was not possible.

Each member of this couple describes their relationshi p as beginning im pulsively. Each

of them describe it as "love at first sight," though they do not both use that verbalization.

At the time that they met Mr. Richardson was married to his first wife. Almost

immediately upon meeting Ms, Dombrowski he became intimately involved with her.He very quickly, from his point of view, began to provide for her financially and

emotionally. She describes herself as being "struck offher feet" by his "chann."

9 13- :WG·ii.=,()()

FAX; 913·1Iji)·(i,')·:Pi

2:201 SIV 20f t l ST, TOP!:l',\ Ki\i"Si\S 'ilif) I I



Hal Richardson & Clal".,;e Dombrowski.-

Richard B. Maxfield. Ph.D.LICENSED PSYCHOLOGIST

As their relationship deepened there began a serious of violent interchanges. At least half

dozen of those interchanges came to the attention of the police and on at least one

occasion there \vere charges filed against both of them.Mr.

Richardson describes Ms.Dombrowski as extraordinarily moody. He tells me that she began the violence by

"tearing up" a number of his possessions. He tells me that he became violent in return as

a matter of self defense. Ms. DombrO\vski, on the other hand, describes herself as the

victim of the violence which, in her mind, was essentially unprovoked. She tells me that

she needed to defend herself against him and that whatever damage she might have done

to him or to his property was a result of her efforts of self defense. In reviewing the

police reports of these various episodes it is impossible to sort out who did what to whom

and in vV'hat order. Clearly, however, both members of the couple actively engaged in

violent behavior toward one another.

Both members of this couple accuse the other of currently perpetuating the animositybetween them. Mr. Richardson, for his part, communicates that Ms. Dombrowski

frequently calls him. He says that she has called him at two and four in the morning and

has ridiculed him over some piece of current or past behavior. He tells me that she

sounds drunk in the phone calls and he is able to hear the baby in the background. He is

fearful for the baby's safety at such times. For her part Ms. Dombrowski absolutely

denies placing any phone calls to Mr. Richardson. She tells me that it is he who calls

her. She says that she feels threatened and harassed by him and wishes to have

absolutely no contact with him. Again, it is impossible for me to sort out the veracity of

either one of these claims or counterclaims. .

The animosity between these parents is such that the exchanges of their baby need tooccur in the presence of a third party. When I initially began the evaluation those

exchanges were taking place in a hospital in Salina with a social worker participating.

Toward the end of the evaluation process the exchanges were transferred to the Salina

police department. Following one such interchange there was some sort of disturbance

between Mr. Richardson and Ms. Dombrowski. Ms. Dombrowski communicates that

Mr. Richardson follO\ved her around Salina, that she went back to the police station to

report him for harassing her and that the police "escorted him out of town. I Mr.

Richardson communicates that he was simply getting gas for his truck, that Ms.

Dombrowski drove by and that she madea false report to the police that he was harassing

her and he is deeply offended that the police escorted him out of town. Again it is

impossible for me to understand what may have transpired and who may be at fault in the

above interchange.

What is abundantly clear is that it is impossible for these parents to co-parent. Neither of

them can say a civil word about the other. Each of them has extraordinary animosity

to\'-'ard the other. Ms. Dombrowski comm unicates that she is deeply fearful of Mr.



Hal Richardson & CIa _ne Dombrowski

Richardson, noting, for instance, that two members of her Battered Women's Task Force

Group have been murdered by their ex-husband's or boytriend's. She says, convincingly,

that she is fearful for her life. How much that is conscious exaggeration is unknown to

me. Mr. Richardson communicates that Ms. Dombrowski, in his opinion, is

psychiatrically disturbed, unable to be trusted and extraordinarily manipulative. He

communicates that he cannot have a reasonable conversation with her as she is a "liar"

who will distort the truth to her own ends. Currently there is virtually no communication

between them in regard to their daughter. As noted above each of them says that the

other one is making inappropriate and accusatory or threatening phone calls to the other,

both, however, admit that they are unable to have anything approaching a civil discussion

about their daughter or her circumstance.

Each member of the couple accuses the other one of having a problem with either

alcohol or substances. Each of them denies the use of alcohol themselves. My

assumption and confirmed by reports of previous evaluators, is that each of them has had

difficulty \ \ ~ t h the use of substances andlor alcohol in the past. Whether that is a current

problem is unclear to me, though as noted they each deny those possible difficulties.

There is little doubt that each member of this couple has significant difficulties with their

impulse controL Each of them involved themselves quite impulsively in this

relationship. Further, each of them admit to interactions \ \ ~ t h the other during this period

of separation when there are, so far as I know, mutual restraining orders. Each of them

speaks without thinking in their appointments with me. They provide information that is

contradictory to what the other one has said and what they have previously

communicated without much, if any, awareness of having done that.

Both members of this couple deny having problems with violence that predated their

current relationship. However, there is a police report available on Ms. Dombrowski that

concerns a violent interchange with a former boyfriend. She has an explanation for thatwhich she provides me in the consultation which completely, in her mind, exonerates her

from responsibility. iv1r. Richardson, despite Ms. Dombrowski's accusations to the

contrary, communicates that violence was never a problem in his first marriage.

However, he freely admits that he has had trouble with the law in the past and that he has

been in multiple fights. He provides the reasoning that he \\'asalways coming to

someone's defense who was unable to defend him or herself or that he was simply

attacked in an unprovoked way.

There is little doubt that both members of this couple suffer from a significant psychiatric

difficulties. It seems quite likely to me that each of them suffers from Borderline

Personality Disorder. In regard to that characterization Ms. Dombrowski has

demonstrated a pattern of unstable and intense interpersonal relationships, sihlTJificant

impulsivity, affective instability \v1th clear proneness to depression on the one side and

irritability or anxiety on the other. She additionally has demonstrated intense and

inappropriate anger. She cleariy has engaged in etfoI1S to avoid real or imagined

abandonment in fact her brreatest tear in regard to this custody evaluation is the



Hal Richardson & CI: .'ine Dombrowski

complete loss of her daughter, perhaps, she says, from Mr. Richardson's kidnapping of

the daughter. For his part Mr. Richardson has demonstrated a pattern of intense and

unstable interpersonal relationships, impUlsiveness, affective instability with periods of

significant depression though he denies inappropriate and intense anger his behavior

suggests othenvise and I suspect that he suffers from feelings of boredom or emptiness,

though I did not do a thorough inquiry in that area. The psychological testing

demonstrates that both of these people likely minimize their difficulties in reporting their

symptoms and behavior. In addition, however, the testing would be consistent, ,vith the

presence of Borderline Personality Disorder.

Each member of this couple has a history of significant disruption in family relationships.

Ms. Dombrmvski's history is marked by multiple abandonments by her mother,

placement in foster care throughout her life and difficulties in relationships with her

siblings. She describes an upringing \vhich is positive for her observing parental abuse at

the hands of her stepfather toward her mother and some indications that she was abused

physically by her stepfather.

Mr. Richardson describes that he parent's divorced rather early in his life, he is the third

oldest of seven children. He communicates that following the divorce his parent's

remarried, he describes his mother as being inconsistent, having significant problems of

her own and one gets the sense, though he does not quite say it, that his mother was less

available to him than he would have liked. .

. Each member of this couple described themselves in an eX1remely positive light. They

communicate good work hi.stories, positive relationships with others and a sense of

responsibility about their lives. However, there is evidence to the contrary, for instance,

each of them dropped out of high school, that despite their telling me that their

adolescence was a relatively calm one. Again I am thwarted in my evaluation of them by

their portrayal of themselves as essentially being without difficulties.

I have little doubt that each member of this parental pair loves and is concerned about

their daughter. However, there is also little doubt that the daughter is placed squarely in

the middle of their conflict.' Each of them accuse the other of piacing the daughter in

situations that were physically dangerous and threatening to the daughter. Ms.

Dombrowski communicates that Mr. Richardson once pointed a shot gun at her and her

daughter, Mr. Richardson accuses Ms. Dombrowski of being quite drunk and driving the

car with the daughter in the car. Again it is impossible to sort out the truthfulness of

either one of those accounts.

Each member of this couple gives an accurate and complete description of their daughter.They clearly are involved and invested in her life. 80th ofthern have substantial goals

for her in life. Each of them wishes to provide her the most stable environment possible.

Mr. Richardson is proud of his being an <;!xtreme!y loyal and devoted person. He

describes himseif as never givmg up on others. Mr. Richardson is particubriy concerned

that his daughter oTfOW up with relationshIps with her half siblings. his three children

4



.

Hal Richardson & C I ~ .he Dombrowski

from his first marriage. He believes that family ties are extraordinarily important and he

v,,;shes that his daughter would have that experience of family. He also communicates

grave anxieties about his daughter being exposed to Ms. Dombrowski's mother who he

has considerable negative opinion oftor what she has "done to Claudine." He bel ieves

that he could provide a more stable consistent and loving home environment than could

Ms. Dombrowski. On the other side Ms. Dombrowski describes herself as being quite

devoted to her daughter. She says that she wishes for her daughter to have in life

advantages that she didn't have. She particularly notes that her growing up years were

substantially disrupted by her various placements in foster care and she certainly wants to

avoid any such disruptions for her child. She communicates that providing for her

daughter is her number one goal in life. She says that she is currently doing a good job at

that and believes that she should continue with that.

I observed each member of this couple independently interacting with their daughter.

The initial hour of interaction was with Ms. Dombrowski. She brought the daughter to

the appointment. The daughter was alert, though obviously tired from the long car trip.

Mother and daughter interacted in a positive and comfortable manner. The mother

brought age appropriate toys for the daughter to play with and involved the daughter inmultiple and appropriate activities throughout the hour. There was a hint of anxiety in

the interaction, though that well could be accounted for by the fact that she \vas being

observed and the fact that she knew that Mr. Richardson would be coming for the second

hour. I saw nothing in their interactions that raised concerns in my mind about her ability

to be intune with her daughter. Their level of interaction suggests the positive bond and

obvious ongoing concern on Ms. Dombrowski's part.

When Mr. Richardson came for his appointment the daughter had a period of significant

separation difficulty from her mother. She was tearful through the first fifteen or so

minutes of the session. Eventually she fell asleep on Mr. Richardson's shoulder. During

that period of initial tearfulness and separation difficulties Mr. Richardson attempted todistract her, attempted to reassure her and calmly held her. My impression is that he is a

loving and concerned father who is certainly capable of bTfeat tenderness with his

daughter. Again r saw nothing in his interaction \vith his daughter that concerned me

about his abilities \Vith her. As she napped during most of the hour rdid not observe

their play, though it is clear that he is a Joving and involved parent.

rt is difficult to know the parental abilities of each member of this couple over time. My

concern about each of them is that they are inconsistent in their psychological stability

and their relationships. How that inconsistency may intluence their daughter over time is

uncertain. My observation of them over one hour of interaction was positive, though that

certainly does not address the problem of their ongoing consistency.

The major problem in regard to making a post divorce co-parenting relationship \vork in

this situation is the extraordinary animosity, fear and potential for violence in this couple.

In addition there is the very significant possibility of conscious manipulation and

. distonion on the part of each member of the couple. Thus far they have been completely

5



r, Hal Richardson & Cia 'ne Dombrowski

unable to arrange for even the sharing ofminimal information between them about the

needs and development of their daughter. Being completely unable to put aside their

personal feelings tor one another tor the benetit of their daughter is clearly problematic

in the long term future of this youngster. Further, neither one of them can support the

daughter's relationship \\rith the other parent. Their level of distrust and animosity simply

eliminates that potential. At this point I do not believe that either one of them are

amenable to couple's therapy and rhave serious reservations that such treatment \vould

provide any benefit as I doubt that either one of them could be forthright enough with a

therapist to address the significant issues in their relationship.

I believe this youngster's relationship with each of her parent's is important and worthy of

maintenance. It is unfortunate that there is substantia! distance between the residence of

the mother and father. The child is required to travel many hours by car to have visits_ _ J _with her father. Though the travel might not be terriblv burdensome to a voungster her

age such travel as she grows and develops will become more burdensome and disruptive

of her usual life activities. Were it possible to establish residences less distant physically

that might be in this youngster's best interest.

have spoken with the day care provider and with Ms. Dombrowski's counselor. Both of

them describe Ms. Dombrowski as a loving and concerned parent. The counselor tells

me that parenting issues are the main focus of their work together. The counselor is

clearly aware ofMs. Dombrowski's difficult upringing and the difficulties that upringing

may foreshadow in regard to future parenting abilities. I was impressed by that

counselor. her knowledge of the situation and her assessment that she has a positive

relationship ,:vith Ms. Dombrowski. I aJso spoke with the day care provider. She tells me

that the child initially had significant separation anxieties when being dropped off at the

day care. She tells me that those anxieties have diminished substantially in the time that

she has known her. She describes Ms. Dombrowski as a concerned and reliable parent

who brings her daughter at the appointed time and picks her up at an appropriate time.She tells me that Ms. Dombrov.·ski calls several times each day to check on the comfort

of her daughter. She describes having no concerns about Ms. Dombro\vski's ability as a

parent, nor does the counselor \vho Ms. Dombrowski has consulted with.

Recommendations

I) r believe this youngster's best interest would be served by ongoing involvement

with both of her parent's. As already noted each of them is loving and concerned,

she is attached to each of them and maintaining that attachment \vould be

important for her future development. Each parent has a mixture of assets and

liabilities which are perhaps somewhat modified by the presence of the otherparent.

2) r believe that the child should have primary residential custody with the mother.

believe that the mother's involvement in counseling is a crucial benefit and should

not be underestimated in regard to hdping her to provide the kind ot'environment

6

Documents

1997 Dr. Richard Maxfieid Ph.D -Custody Evaluator Dom Brow Ski v Richardson Case No. 96D217 Topeka, KS