Guardians ad Litem: How States Approach Child-Centered Custody Investigations

When custody cases become high conflict, especially when allegations of abuse, mental health concerns, or safety risks arise, courts often turn to a Guardian ad Litem (GAL) to help determine what arrangement is truly in the child’s best interests. Georgia frequently uses GALs in family law cases, and many provide crucial support in difficult situations. However, across the country, states are reconsidering how GALs should be trained, supervised, and used, particularly in cases involving domestic violence.

Recently, Washington State has begun debating significant reforms that take a markedly different approach from Georgia’s current system. Understanding the differences gives Georgia families insight into how GALs work today and how future policy discussions might evolve.

How GALs Work in Georgia

In Georgia, GALs are usually attorneys appointed by the judge, though not all GALs are attorneys. Their job is to investigate the child’s circumstances, interview the parents, visit the homes, review records, and ultimately make recommendations directly to the parties and the judge about custody and parenting time.

Georgia law outlines the topics GALs should understand, including child development, interviewing techniques, and recognizing abuse, but the system is decentralized. Currently, there is:

• No statewide registry of approved GALs

• No mandatory, standardized training program

• No independent oversight board

If a parent believes a GAL has overstepped or made errors, the only practical avenue for raising concerns is the judge handling the case. Even when the GAL is an attorney, the State Bar generally does not discipline conduct performed in a GAL capacity. This leaves Georgia with a system in which GAL effectiveness can vary significantly from GAL to GAL, county to county, and even from judge to judge.

Still, and we really want to emphasize, most GALs do excellent work, and Georgia courts rely heavily on their neutrality and firsthand assessments—especially when cases raise emotional or factual disputes that judges cannot easily assess on their own from just what can be seen in a courtroom.

Washington’s Push Toward a Different Model

Washington also uses GALs, but is now at the forefront of national discussions about reform. Lawmakers, judges, and family violence experts in the state are examining a model code created by the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges. Its core message is simple:

In cases involving domestic violence, child abuse, trauma, or complex mental health questions, GALs should not be the ones making clinical or psychological judgments.

Instead, the model code recommends that:

• Licensed mental health professionals should conduct evaluations and make recommendations in abuse-related custody cases.

• GALs who are not clinically trained should still gather information and interview parties but should not offer diagnostic opinions or determine the parenting plan in cases where abuse or mental illness is at issue.

Washington hasn’t adopted the full model yet, but it has already rewritten significant portions of its parenting-plan laws and updated its GAL certification rules. Many counties require GALs to go through formal training, including domestic violence instruction, and maintain local registries that track qualifications. Legislative leaders have signaled that GAL reform is next on the agenda once related statutes are updated.

A Tale of Two Approaches

Comparing the two states highlights the tension many family courts face:

• Georgia values flexibility and judicial discretion, granting GALs wide latitude and broad investigatory powers, but it lacks a statewide training or oversight structure.

• Washington is moving toward a more specialized system in which GALs still play a significant role in the courtroom, while clinical experts handle the most sensitive evaluations.

Georgia’s system allows judges to appoint trusted professionals and tailor GAL involvement to the case. These judge-appointed GALs are expected to operate with a higher level of neutrality, relying on their legal background to analyze how their recommendations will impact both parties. Washington’s model prioritizes child-welfare expertise, especially in domestic violence cases where misinterpretation of trauma or mental health symptoms can have devastating consequences.

Neither system is inherently better, but they demonstrate different approaches to issues every state encounters.

What This Means for Georgia Parents

If you’re involved in a custody case in Georgia, understanding how the GAL process works can help you prepare:

• A GAL’s recommendation often carries significant weight.

• Their training and background may vary, so complex safety or mental-health issues may require additional expert testimony.

  • However, as attorneys, GALs should be able to recognize when expert testimony is needed.

• If you have concerns about a GAL’s conduct or conclusions, those concerns should generally be addressed through your judge (preferably through your attorney first), not a statewide agency like the Georgia Bar Association.

As states like Washington and organizations like the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges continue to refine the national conversation around GAL accountability, training, and specialization, Georgia may eventually revisit its own system. For now, parents should understand the process as it exists and work closely with experienced counsel to navigate GAL appointments effectively.

At Resurgens Legal Counsel, LLC, we help parents navigate GAL investigations, assert their rights during custody disputes, ensure GAL recommendations are properly reviewed, and advocate for fair, balanced outcomes. If you are in a custody case involving a GAL, and would like to learn more, our firm is here to guide you through every step.