The family-court system is meant to act swiftly in the child’s best interest. Instead, it often rewards delay, manipulation, and financial gamesmanship.

Parents can weaponize procedure by:

• Requesting costly 730 custody evaluations.
• Pushing for “high-conflict” therapy they themselves do not take seriously.
• Agreeing to custody plans, then retracting to force new hearings.

In one California case, a custody trial dragged on for more than two years despite expert recommendations for resolution. A full psychological (730) evaluation concluded that the parent requesting change should move to a 50/50 custody swiftly. Yet the case stalled through continuances, status conferences, and false allegations of abuse. When judgment finally came, the judge even acknowledged on record that the delay itself had likely caused anxiety for the child—and still, no accountability followed for the parent who prolonged the process.

Research from the National Council on Family Relations finds that children involved in multi-year custody litigation show two-to-three times higher clinical anxiety than peers. Each additional year of unresolved litigation predicts lower school attendance and greater emotional dysregulation (Kelly & Johnston, Family Court Review, 2020).

BCI believes that:

• Judges must enforce accountability for needless evaluations and continuances.
• Fee-shifting should apply when one parent’s bad-faith tactics inflate costs.
• Mandatory time limits for evaluations and trials are needed to protect children.

Why this matters for children
Every unnecessary delay keeps a child in emotional limbo—between homes, therapists, and courtrooms—learning instability instead of safety. A system that allows manipulation to go unpunished cannot claim to act “in the child’s best interest.” Accountability is child protection.