Richard B. !\1axfield, Ph.D.

LICENSED PSYCliOLOGIST
t (I e-et+ lill~ r eLLL~ APR - 5 1997
\AXiS hot Co~ied
EV.-\LVATION
II
Name: Hal Richardson and CI3"~in~o:::wsk~)

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, with weekend visitation available to the father. I met with Mr. Richardson
on June 19 and 16. 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.
I 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 M1'vlPI-II to both
parents. Further, I have spoken with or received reports from Joel Nance, M.D., Bernard
Nobo, MSW, Mrs. Barger, who is Claudine's current counselor, Ms. Fisher who is the
chIld's current day care provider. In addition I have received and revicv,:ed multiple faxes
from Ms. Dombrowski, numerous police reports concerning the history of violence in
this relationship and I have listened to and reviev,:ed a taped telephone conversation
provided to me by Mr. Richardson. That conversation was one between him and Ms.
Dombrowski. It is on the basis of the above contacts and information 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 to
me and to the evaluation. Though it is to be expected that any parent undergoing such an
evaluation will "put theIr best foot forward," my assessment of each member of this
couple is that they 3re prone to fabric3tion and to blaming the other for all, or nearly all,
of the problems in their relationship. On multiple occasions they provided information
which was frankly and boldly contradictory to the information that the other had
provided. Sorting out where the truth lay in those situations was not possible.

Each member of this couple describes their relationship as beginning impulsi\ely Each
ofthcm describe it as "love at first sight." though they do not both use that verbalization.
At the time that they met Mr. Richardson \Vas married to his first wife. Almost
immediately upon meeting Ms Dombrowski he bec3me intimately involved with her.
He very quickly, from his point of view, began to provide for her financially and
emotionall:-- .. She describes herselfas being "struck otT her feet" by his "chJrm."

q I ,)-.2(-)1-) ():;{)()
r,\,\; ') 1::--":'/1':, !)~ .~Il
:2 ~ () I ~ \V ~:!1 ) I ....;,r i I \ f' ~-;\ \ h. ,\ ......•...
,\ <...;. I ~, "-J I 1
 Hal Richardson & C1aL .le Dombrowski

Richard B. MaxfIeld. Ph.D.

LICENSED PSYCHOLOGIST

As their relationship deepened there began a serious of violent interchangcs. At least half
dozen ofthosc intcrchan!.!cs 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\',ski, on the other hand, describes herself as the
victim of the violence which, in her mind, \vas essentially unprovoked. She tells me that
she needed to defend hersel f against him ~l!ld 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 \vhat 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 animosity
between 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 backt,'Tound. 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 to
occur in the presence of a third party. When I initially began the evaluation those
exchanges were taking place in a hospital in Salina \vith a social \vorker participating.
TO\V~Hd the end of the evaluation process the exchanges were transferred to the Salina
police depanment. Following one such interchange there was some sort of disturbance
bet\vcen 1\1r. Richardson and i\ls Dombro\'\'s1-;i. 1\ls. DombrO\vski communicates that
1vIr. Richardson followed her around Salma. that she went back to the police station to
report him for harassing her and that the police "escorted him out of town." ;'vir.
Richardson communicates that he was simply getting gas for his truck that \iIs.
DombrO\'is1-;l drove by and that she made a false repon to the police that he was harassing
her and he 15 deeply offended that the police esconed him out of town. r\gain it IS
impossible for me to underst3nd what may have transpired and \vho may be at fault in the
above interchange.

\\:hat IS abundantly clear is that It IS Jmposslbk for these parents to co-parent Nclther of
them can sa\ a civil \\ord about the other. Each nflhem has extraordinar\ . JrlJI110Sltv.
toward the other. IvIs Dombro\\s1-;J CommU!lIC::ltes that she is deeply fearful of IvIr
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 boyfriend's. She says, convincingly,
that she is fearful for her life. How much that is conscious exaggeration is unknO\'vTI 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 O\\oTIends. 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 any1hing 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 with the use of substances and/or 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 \\ith their
impulse control. Each of them involved themselves quite impulsively in this
relationship. Further, each of them admit to interactions with 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 vv'hat 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 that
which she provides me in the consultation which completely, in her mind, exonerates her
from responsibility. Mr. 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 was always 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 littk doubt that both members of this couple suffer from a sih'11Jflcant psychiatric
difficulties. It seems quite likely to me that each of them suffers from Borderline
Personality Disorder. In regard to that characterization Ms. DombrO\vski has
demonstrated a pattern of unstable and intense interpersonal relationships. sih'11itlcant
impulsivity. affective instJbility with cleJr proneness to depression on the one side and
Iffitabil ity or anxiety on the other She additionally has demonstr3ted Intense and
in:.lpprOpf13te :.Inger. She cle3rly has engaged in dTons to :.Ivoid re31 or Imagined
abandonment. In fact. her gre:.ltest fear in reg:.Hd to this custody evaluation is the
Hal Richardson & Cl: ine Dombro\vski

complete loss of her daughter, perhaps, she says, from Mr. Richardson's kidnapping of
the daughter. For his part ~\'fr. 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 othef\vise 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, with the
presence of Borderline Personality Disorder.

Each member of this couple has a history of significant disruption in family relationships.
rvfs. Dombrowski'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 which is positive for her observing parental abuse at
the hands of her stepfather to\vard her mother and some indications that she \vas 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 0\\11 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 extremely positive light. They
communicate good work histories, positive relationships ",,rith 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 \vithout 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 p!ac:r,g 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 de5criptJon of their daughter.
They clearly are involved and invested in her life. Both ofthe;,1 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 :in extremely 10:'-'31 ~.lnddevoted person. He
describes himselfas neH~r givlT1g up on others. fVl[ Rlchardson is par11cularly concerned
that his daughter grow up \vnh relJtionshlps WIth her half SIblings. his three children
Hal Richardson & Cb. .ne Dombrowski

from his first marri:1ge. He believes th:1t family ties :1re extraordinarily important and he
\vishes that his daughter would have that experience of family. He also communicates
grave anxieties about his daughter being exposed to Ms. Dombrowski's mother \vho he
has considerable negative opinion offor what she has "done to Claudine." He believes
that he could provide a Illore stable consistent Jnd loving home environment than could
Ms. DombrO\vski. 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 v,,'ere
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 lj fe. 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 \vith their daughter.
The initial hour of interaction was \\'ith ~1s. Dombro\vski. She brought the daughter to
the appointment. The daughter \vas 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 in
multiple and approprIate actIvities throughout the hour. There \vas a hint of anxiety in
the interaction, though that well could be accounted for by the fact that she was being
observed and the fact that she knew that Mr. Richardson would be coming for the second
hour. r saw nothing in their interactions that raised concerns in my mind about her ability
to be intune \vith 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 ditTiculty 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 te:.lrfulness and separation difliculties Mr. Richardson attempted to
distract her, attempted to reassure her :.lnd calmly held her. My impression is that he is a
loving and concerned father who is certainly c:.lpable of h'Teat tenderness with his
daughter. Again I saw nothing In IllS interaction \vith his daughter that concerned me
about his abilities \vlth her. As she napped during most of the hour I did not observe
their play, though it is clear that he is a loving :1l1d imolved parent.

It is difficult to know the parental abIlities of e:.lch 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 in1luence 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 reg:1fd to ma~ing a post divorce co-parenting re!atlomhip \vork in
this situation is the extr:lOrdlnJrv anJmOsltv, tt:.lr Jnd potential for violence If1I11is couple.
In :.lddltion thefl~ IS the \erv slgniticl11t possibility ufconscious mJnlpui:.ltlon JnJ
distortion on the ran orcJch member of the couple Thus rar they hJ\c been completcly
Hal Richardson & Cia ne Dombrov,'ski

unable to arrange for even the sharing of minimal inforn13tion bet\veen them about the
needs and development of their daughter. Being completely unable to put aside their
personal feelings for one ~lnother for the benefit 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 with 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 I have serious reservations that such treatment \vould
provide any benefit as [ 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 th3t there is substantial distance between the residence of
the mother and father. The child is required to travel many hours by car to have visits
v.,ith her father. Though the travel might not be terribly burdensome to a youngster her
age such travel as she grows and develops \vilI 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.

I have spoken \vith the day care provider and \vith Ms. DombrO\vski's counselor. Both of
them describe Ms. DombrO\vski 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 of Ms. Dombrowski's difficult upringing and the difficulties that upringing
may foreshadow in regard to future parenting abilities. I \vas impressed by that
counselor, her knowledge of the situation and her assessment that she has a positive
relationship with Ms. Dombrowski. I also spoke with the day care provider. She tells me
that the child initially had signi ficant 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 knO\vTI her. She describes Ms. Dombrowski as a concerned and reliable parent
who brings her daughter at the 3.ppointed time and picks her up at an appropriate time.
She tells me that Ms. Dombrowskl calls several times each day to check on the comfort
of her daughter. She describes haVing no concerns about Ms. Dombrowski's abil ity as a
parent, nor does the counselor who Ms. Dombrowski has consulted with

Recommendations

I) [ believe this youngster's best interest would be ser,,:ed by ongoing lD\olvement

with both of her parent's. As already noted e3ch of them is loving 3nd concerned.
she is attached to each of them and maintaining that attachment \\ould 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 other
parent.

2) I believe that the child should h3ve rmmary residential custody \\Ith the mother. I
believe that the mother's invohement in coumeilng lS a crUCIal benefit and should
not be underestImated In rcg3rd to helping her to rrovidc the ~Jnd ot' Crl\lrOnmcnt

6
Hal Richardson & Cia le Dombrowski

that this youngster will need. I have some
limiting or dropping out of the counseling
Therefore I would <;tron~lv encourage the
continue her counseling relationship with
duration at Ms. Barger's sole discretion.
concerns about Ms. Dombrowski
should she be awarded custody.
court to court order Ms. Dombrowski to
Ms. Barger at a frequency and for a

3) Given the lengthy travel to transport this child between parental homes I believe
that it would be in her best interest to have lengthy, but Jess frequent, visitation
with her father. I know that it is generally better for younger children to have
frequent and less lengthy visitation, ho\vever, the physical distance, I believe, out
weighs the benefits from more frequent visitation. I would suggest therefore, that
visitation with the father occur on an every other week basis \\itl1 a three day
weekend beginning Friday afternoon and ending either Sunday evening or
Monday morning.

4) As these parent's are completely unable to communicate I am not optimistic about

the stability of any custody and visitation schedule. However, I do not believe
that they are currently in a position to engage in any joint counseling or other
form of joint communication. Perhaps instituting some vvntten communication
that could be monitored through Court Services would be of some help in
beginning communications about the daughter.

5) Given the potential for violence and the fear of violence and "manipulation" I
would strongly encourage the Court to order that exchanges of the child occur in a
public place such as was arranged through the social worker at the Salina hospital
or the police department in Salina.

6) I suggest that are-evaluation of the circumstances occur in six to nine months to

see if the couple has been able to make any headway on their putting aside their
mutual animosity and distrust. Further, an assessment of their ability to begin
appropriate communications about their daughter at that point could be made.
Perhaps post-divorce parent counseling could be undertaken at that time.

Richard B. Maxfield. Ph.D.

Date signed