Sessions 6 & 18: Family Law in the Post-Truth Age (Trial Track)
In family law disputes, the parties and the court often have access to the same information yet interpret it in fundamentally different ways. Cognitive biases, false binaries, firmly held but arguably false beliefs, and emotional perspectives within a specific context can shape how each parent perceives communication, conflict, and co-parenting dynamics. For example, one parent may view vaccines or prescription medications as essential medical care, while the other sees them as harmful or unnecessary, each citing their own data to support opposing conclusions. This session explores how subjective interpretation influences legal narratives, the role of credibility in court proceedings, the application of the rules of evidence, and how professionals can assess competing claims. Presenters will examine the tension between fact and perception, offering strategies to navigate conflicting narratives in the pursuit of fair and informed decisions in family law cases.

Question Title

* 1. The content of the presentation was consistent with the abstract in the conference brochure

Question Title

* 2. Based on the content of this session, I am able to: (1=Strongly disagree, 5=Strongly agree)

  1 2 3 4 5
1. Identify ways in which underlying subjective interpretation guides legal narratives.
2. Describe how cognitive biases and heuristics impact perceptions in court.
3. Identify three strategies for navigating conflicting narratives.

Question Title

* 3. Please rate presenter: Lawrence Jay Braunstein, Esq. (1=Poor, 5=Excellent)

  1 2 3 4 5
Level of knowledge and expertise
Teaching ability
Maintained my interest
Was responsive to questions, comments and opinions

Question Title

* 4. Please rate presenter: Kathleen McNamara, PhD (1=Poor, 5=Excellent)

  1 2 3 4 5
Level of knowledge and expertise
Teaching ability
Maintained my interest
Was responsive to questions, comments and opinions

Question Title

* 5. Please rate presenter: Chris Mulchay, PhD, ABPP (1=Poor, 5=Excellent)

  1 2 3 4 5
Level of knowledge and expertise
Teaching ability
Maintained my interest
Was responsive to questions, comments and opinions

Question Title

* 6. Please rate this session presentation overall (1=Poor, 5=Excellent)

Question Title

* 7. How much did you learn as a result of this CE program? (1=Very little, 5=Great deal)

Question Title

* 8. Information presented in this session reflected the most current evidence on this topic (1=Disagree, 5=Agree)

Question Title

* 9. How useful was the content of this CE program for your practice or other professional development (1=Not useful, 5=Extremely useful)

Question Title

* 10. Additional Comments

T