Disorder in the court! “There is no outcome research comparing the consequences of child-custody placement decisions based on expert testimony to those without expert guidance,” write Thomas Gionis and Anthony Zito Jr. of Chicago’s John Marshall Law School, in the Southern Illinois University Law Journal (Fall 2002). “Further, lawyers who regularly work with mental-health professional experts in child-custody cases commonly are not impressed with their expertise, and often do not regard their input as helpful in reaching appropriate child-custody determination.” Nevertheless, “judges and litigators have become dependent upon the expert opinions of mental-health professionals such as psychologists and psychiatrists.” Moreover, Illinois courts use at least four different standards for deciding when to admit expert testimony, which the authors say “leads to confusing, unpredictable, and often bizarre results.”
Best of Chicago voting is live now. Vote for your favorites »
Isolated wetlands–denied Clean Water Act protection in a 2001 Supreme Court decision–“perform many vital functions,” according to a report from the Illinois Natural History Survey (“Status and Functions of Isolated Wetlands in Illinois,” July 2002). “They act as reservoirs, trapping runoff and thereby reducing flooding. By reducing the velocity and volume of floodwaters, they also reduce erosion.” And they act as sediment traps and direct some runoff into the groundwater. According to the survey’s rough inventory, they make up about 12 percent of Illinois’ wetland acreage.
