Kristen Tarrin is a part-time judge and full-time advocate for children in Colorado. In this episode, she shares her passion for helping families navigate restructuring after separation and discusses the challenges of handling cases involving coercive control and domestic violence.
As a Child and Family Investigator (CFI), Kristen serves as a court-appointed neutral tasked with gathering information from parents, children, teachers, therapists, and other key individuals. In Colorado, CFIs complete 60 hours of initial training, including domestic violence and child abuse education, and continue their training throughout their careers.
Kristen explains that a CFI’s primary role is not to make decisions but to provide the court with a clear, fact-based report and recommendations. She also offers insight from the bench, revealing what she pays closest attention to when reviewing CFI reports: the voices of the children and the perspectives of neutral third parties.
—
Listen to the podcast here
Doing The Heavy Lifting For Kids In Court With Kristen Tarrin, Esq, CFI, CLR
Welcome to the show. This is the series of the Consilium Institute where we talk to amazing professionals who work in the divorce and family sphere. I am retired Judge Julie Field. I am here with my partner, Heidi Webb, who is the co-founder with me of the Consilium Institute. We are very honored today to have as our guest, Magistrate Kristen McLaughlin Tarrin. We will do a little bit more detailed introduction, but Kristen, if you do not mind if I call you by your first name, Magistrate?
Yes, of course.
Thank you so much for being here.
Thank you for having me.
Let me tell the world about you because I think your background is really interesting, and the things that you do in your spare time. We are going to want to dig into that a little bit as well. Kristen has been practicing family law in Colorado since 2007. She has been a child and family investigator since 2019. We will ask you to explain to our audience a little bit more about what that is. A child’s legal representative and a guardian ad litem, those are different roles, and we will probably get a little bit of definition on those as well from 2022.
Has been a part-time magistrate since 2023 in different counties in western Colorado, and her entire docket consists of domestic relations cases. Kristen is an international referee for powerlifting, and I want to know more about that for sure. When Kristen is not working with kids or powerlifting, she enjoys spending time with her dog, Brad the Pit. Love the name. Kristen, thank you for spending some time with us.
Thank you. I am looking forward to it.
Defining The Role Of A Child And Family Investigator
Just to start definitionally, what is a child and family investigator? What is the CFI report? What is a parental responsibility evaluation? Those are unique to Colorado, maybe, but at least that is what they are called here in Colorado. Other states have similar things, but can you tell our audience what that is and what you do?
A Child and Family Investigator, I believe, is similar to what GALs do in other states in some instances. Essentially, a child and family investigator or a CFI can be an attorney, a mental health professional, or a teacher. There is really no licensing requirement. The only requirement to be a CFI is to take a 40-hour class in addition to twenty hours of domestic violence and child abuse training.
Really, 60 hours to get on the list. The process is a court-appointed neutral. We do not work for parties. We do, but we do not. CFI will then talk to each parent, psychological parent, or grandparent, or whoever is part of the process. We will talk to the collaterals, usually teachers, if they will speak. Unfortunately, a lot of teachers will not talk to CFIs. They do not want to get involved. If they do, they are a great source of information.
I bet.
We will talk to therapists, counselors, friends, neighbors, things like that. We will talk to the kids. This past weekend, three families. I did speak to all these kids. All these kids were fantastic. All of them were great. In one home, the kids were teenagers. We had real substantive conversations because they are mature enough to be able to do that. One was a one-year-old and a three-year-old. There were no conversations there. It was me just watching them with their parents.
One was a six-year-old. It was sort of in between. I asked her some questions. I am not so sure how mature she was to answer them. Here, you can still even get an idea of how the kids are doing, even if they are not mature enough to make an informed decision, which is one of the elements of the law in Colorado anyway, that the court has to consider the children’s wishes if they are mature enough to give a reasonably thought-out opinion. That is part of what the CFI does.
Can I ask you a question about the training element of this, because we have some similar roles, like the GAL role, in this training as well? In terms of child development and your observations of kids who are six, who are two, or who are fourteen, what does the training consist of that you are receiving?
Not a lot, which I will circle back to. That brings me to what a parental responsibility evaluator, those are done by mental health professionals, and they do testing. They are the ones that I think really get more in-depth on mental health issues and developmental issues. CFIs really are not meant to dig that deeply. Although I think more attorneys expect us to, that is really not the role. The role is to really be information gatherers.
Provide that to the court in a succinct 15 to 20-page report, maybe more depending, and then give recommendations. I do not know that my recommendations are that critical. I will say as the magistrate, when I read reports, I look at the recommendations, and I do not always implement them as a rule. When I am looking at a CFI report, the thing that I am most interested in is what the kids say. Especially if they are old enough. Of course, what neutral collaterals will say.
To go back to your question, Heidi, we do not have a whole lot of training there. I do think it is important that we do. We have to do fifteen hours every five years of ongoing domestic violence training, but it does not specifically say child development. I have done hundreds of hours of domestic violence and child abuse training. There is some child development in there, but there is no specific requirement for that type of training.
Qualifications And Selection Process For Investigators
Just theoretically, somebody who has no background other than an interest in family law or this sphere could take those courses and be, as you said, gathering facts, information, observing, almost like a reporter, and coming back and saying, “This is what I observed,” and hoping that that is a neutral observation.
That is true. However, CFIs still have to apply. I do not know the percentage of people who apply who actually get to take the class. That might be an interesting question to ask the SCAO, but I do believe you have to have references. They do ask some of those questions.
I think that is right. I taught in the CFI 40-hour basic training as well as in the 20-hour training for domestic violence. I do not know the answer to that question. How many people apply who are told, “No, thank you”?
It might be interesting to find that out. The training is only every two years. It is not like anybody can. I guess anybody could theoretically do it, but it is mostly attorneys and mental health professionals who do it.
It sounds like it is self-selecting, but it is a lot to do if you are not interested in being helpful and doing that. I just wondered. A layperson who had strong opinions about the process, perhaps, could become involved in something like that.
I have seen some paralegals who do it, and they actually do a great job. I have seen some, like there is a preschool teacher who does most of the CFI work down in Southwest Colorado. The preschool teacher, of course, would have the child development, the paralegal, maybe not as much, but you do not see many people, mortgage brokers coming to ask to be CFIs.
Part of it is, to follow up with Heidi’s question, it is reporting on “This is what the kids told me. This is what I observed. This is what I heard from the neutral collateral.” You also make recommendations on the parenting time schedule and what the parenting time schedule should look like. As a CFI, I know you talked about it from the magistrate’s perspective, but as a CFI, do you have a sense of how often courts are straight-up adopting what the child and family investigator is recommending?
Yes and no. I try to go back and look at mine to see what the courts do. I will say my goal as a CFI is to have the parties settle. Unfortunately, my goal is not met more often than not. When the parties settle, and they settle based on my recommendations of maybe some tweaks here and there, that is a win in my book. Those are actually very rewarding, and I love to see that. When I do see, I think like Judge Michael Lord-Blegen, she was a CFI, she was a magistrate. She has a mind of her own.
When the parties are able to settle—especially when that settlement reflects my recommendations with a few adjustments—that’s a win in my book. Share on XShe is not going to follow my recommendations in lockstep. She is going to do her own thinking about it, which is good. Whereas maybe somebody who is just appointed, who was a public defender, who does not have a whole lot of experience in DR work, which is domestic relations, might be a little bit more apt to take my recommendations. I wonder about it sometimes, and I think I am either hired or not hired because I am a part-time magistrate.
I wonder if people think, “The judge is just going to take her recommendations because she is a judicial officer.” That is either why they will or will not hire me. I know that some people have not hired me because I am a judicial officer, and that is fine. I hope that is not the case when it comes to the actual case. I hope the judge does their thinking for themselves. I would also hope that my being a magistrate lends a little bit of credibility to what I am doing.
Yes, I am sure it does. You talked a little bit about the domestic violence training that you do first as part of the initial process of becoming a CFI, and then also the ongoing training that you have. If you could talk just a little bit more about that. Do you think, I guess it is a two-part question, tell us about the training around domestic violence coercive control. Do you think that CFIs get enough training around those issues?
Training Requirements For Domestic Violence And Coercive Control
Yes and no. First of all, when the first iteration of it was introduced, we did not call it Kayden’s law, but it is basically that is where it all started. The first iteration of that was in 2020. Necessity is the mother of invention. The Colorado legislature passed this law, take this class and everybody, or take these hours of training, and everybody said, “Great, where is the class?” The legislature and the SCAO said, “We do not know, you figure it out.” To many people’s credit, 3 or 4 different groups did courses, and Julie, I think you did one as well.
I took all of them because even though we were only required to take one, I still took all of them because I am a little bit crazy. I also feel like fundamentals, you cannot get enough of them. It was very interesting to me to also be able to compare what these three different courses had in common and maybe where the differences of opinion were. They were all very good, and I appreciated all of them. They are all online, so it was easy to do them.
Again, if we are just basic information gatherers, then they are perfectly adequate. Where we get into some concern or problems is again, because the CFI has a cap on payment. Our payment cap is $3,250. Many CFIs will ask for additional fees if they feel they need them. I do not, for the most part, for many reasons, which I can go into later if you want to know. For $3,250, you can only do so much. Whereas these PREs, the parental responsibility evaluators, can run into the $20,000, $30,000, $40,000 range or more.
I have seen cases of half a million.
Yes, it is nuts.
Wait, I have a question. The PRE, you said they are mental health people who are trained, but that is also a broad range. What does that mean? How qualified are the people, and what is the training there?
That is also up for debate. I personally, if I am going to get a PRE for my personal whatever, I am getting a PhD. Because if I am going to charge that much, I want someone with that, but it is not required. There really isn’t any requirement. They can even farm out the mental health assessments. They do need to do a minimum of assessments, like an MMPI or some of those tests, but some of the PREs do not even do that themselves. Some of them are glorified CFIs. They do exactly the same thing, except they can charge more.
Now they can also spend a little bit more time talking to collateral. I know a PRE who is retired now. He would go to both homes and have dinner with them. He would make them make him dinner. I do not know if you like that or not, but he would spend time with the families. LCSWs can do it. Just regular psychologists can do it. Anybody with a mental health background, MFTs. That’s where you really want to be. If you are a practitioner wanting to spend that money, I am spending it on a psychiatrist, a PhD.
Are there some PhDs you’ve worked with who like that’s their full-time gig, that this is their job, that’s what they do, or are they people who specialize and do this infrequently, or what’s your experience?
The one I loved, who is now retired, was Dr. McNamara. She still did private practice. The work is hard, and it is very labor-intensive. I do not know if they are, but I am sure there are probably some that are all they do, but I think most of them also maintain a private practice.
Do you think that people get enough training as child and family investigators, and the parental responsibility evaluators are also supposed to do the same training, the 20 hours plus that maintain the five hours a year?
Yes and no. Especially with coercive control, where there isn’t a bruise or a scratch or a mark or whatever, it takes being in it and seeing it a lot. It is not necessarily experiencing it yourself, but seeing what that looks like. The training comes with the experience of seeing it, which I guess could be a double-edged sword, because if you do not have the training, you might not see it or notice it. What I do not want to be is a hammer looking for a nail. Sometimes, with the little amount of training we have, that can end up happening because it is looking for these high-level things like, “Is the wife on an allowance?
If you don’t have the training, you may not see or recognize it. What I don’t want to be is a hammer looking for a nail. Share on XHe only gives her $50 a month, so there must be coercive control. They do not look into this. He only gives her $50 a month because she asked for that, or because that was their family plan, or because she has filed bankruptcy four times, and he is trying to protect the family.” I do not know. There could be many reasons. That is my other concern, not necessarily about whether they have enough training to recognize it, but whether they do not have enough training to recognize when it does not exist or when there are some nuances there that could maybe be tweaked a little bit.
What do you think parenting can look like after divorce or separation when there is domestic violence involved?
Parenting Through Domestic Violence And Conflict
That really is specific to the families. Just because there was domestic violence in the relationship does not necessarily mean there will be child abuse to follow, which I think a lot of people make that assumption, which they are not always wrong, but I think we need to be careful there. While domestic violence is domestic violence, whether it happened one time or twenty times, I do think we also need to look at the context of it, and that, “Both of these parties are really stressed out. One of them is calling the F and B word every three minutes.
The other one is looking at their phone, calling them a thousand times.” Things that are not healthy behaviors, but that are really compartmentalized into their situation at the time, whereas once they are separated and out of this high stress, they probably will not happen. We have to look at that as well. Now, physical violence, I am a little bit more careful to say that. I really want to know why that happened and when, and it does not necessarily mean the aggressor cannot have parenting time.
There are plenty of programs and places that treat anger management and domestic violence. Safe and Together is a program that really does holistic training and keeps the whole family involved, not just the victim, but also tries to work with the perpetrator. Programs like that, I think, can allow for parenting time because, for instance, one of the families I visited this weekend, two teenage girls, where their dad has definitely committed some domestic violence against their mom.
They have their own phones, and they can self-protect. They want to spend time with their dad. They are not scared of their dad. They like their dad. In that case, I am going to recommend that they be able to have parenting time because of those reasons. Now, if they were two and four, maybe not, maybe it would be more of a supervised thing until he took some anger management courses or something like that.
It sounds like what you are saying is that it depends on the situation. It also speaks to the recommendations that you can make as a CFI, or presumably a PRE can also make, to put protective pieces in place and to recognize what needs to happen, whether that is domestic violence treatment of the perpetrator or safe supervised parenting time. All of these different things. It is not like an automatic checkbox one-and-done, where everybody gets the same cookie-cutter.
That is correct. The statute is clear, though, that if there is domestic violence, the court will be responsible for decision-making, which is different, but the court can put in protective measures to make sure that everybody is safe.
If I am not mistaken, earlier in the conversation, you said one of your goals when you do these reports is that people would settle, that it would not be yet. We are talking about it as if it is a foregone conclusion that there will be court involvement. I guess my question is, is there ever a consideration given to not just the report for the court, but the modeling and a template for the parents to effectively implement some of these things and be self-governing after the divorce?
Yes, definitely. I do try to put in admonishments for lack of a better word. Sometimes they work, sometimes they do not. For example, this is a domestic violence case, but the parents called this little girl two totally separate nicknames. She is like two years old. I do not know enough to know if that is good or bad, or if she is going to be civil or what. What I put in the report was, “You guys might want to talk to a mental health professional and figure out the nickname you both want to use.” Little things like that, or the fact that you feed her Cheetos at eight, and mom says, “No sugar,” and “Why don’t you guys like to talk about these things?” I do try to give some guidance there now again, whether they listen or not, I do not know.
All these things take practice as well as encouragement, or advice, or whatever you want to call it. I think about how you model and create a mechanism for people to practice when their intention is not to stay together. It is like, you have these competing, I guess, goals in a sense, one is to separate, and the other is to co-parent and try to get that rhythm right, and a system that works is, of course, really challenging.
It is very challenging, especially when you have one or both parties that just really cannot see the benefit of the other parent in the kids’ lives. There are some bad parents, absolutely, but as a rule, kids love and want both of their parents. The other parent needs to figure out how they can respect the other parent as a parent, and they do not have to love them anymore or whatever. Yes, that is always difficult.
As a child and family investigator, you spend a lot of time talking with kids. If a child and family investigator is not involved or a PRE is not involved, how does the court get the voice of the child? You have seen it from both sides. As a magistrate and as someone who is making recommendations after talking to kids, how can the court get the voice of the child in a way that is helpful?
Incorporating The Voice Of The Child In Court
It is tough. There is an option of the child’s legal representative, a CLR, where the CLR then advocates for the best interest of the child, so the child is not the client. The best interest of the child is the client, which makes things murky at best. When you have attorneys who do not like the CLR’s position, they are going to make hearsay objections when you try to tell the court what the kids want.
They are also the possibility of an attorney for the child, or is it always in the best interest?
It is always in the best interest. I guess you could potentially have a GAL if the child is disabled, but I have never seen it. It is always a CLR. What I would like to see happen, and I am starting to do this more and I am starting to, is that this may actually, I am not sure if this is in the legislature now. I have told the attorneys, “I am going to ask the judge for hearsay under 807. Here is what the kids are going to say. Here is what I am going to ask for.”
That is Colorado Rule of Evidence 807.
Yes, thank you. That is one way. But some judges will require the CLR at the beginning of a hearing or something, say, “I want to know what the kids want.” If the attorneys object to hearsay or whatever, I really hope they do, and I really hope they appeal because we need some clarity on this. We need the legislature to pass a law that says child hearsay is acceptable when it is given by a neutral.
Something like that. This is a little bit for the audience, maybe a little bit more of a technical question, but are these reports coming in at a time of temporary orders, or are these only coming in at a trial? That is an issue.
You mean the CFI, the CFI report?
Yes.
Usually, they are going to be towards the end of the case because they take 90 to 120 days. I have had some judges ask me to opine on temporary orders, and I do not like that because I have not done a full investigation. Typically, what the law is is that if there is no due date, it has to be completed 35 days prior to the permanent orders hearing. There are some where they are like, “I have to do a hearing in July. Can you do a report?” I am like, “It is not going to be 35 days.” As long as the parties agree to have it in a shorter period of time, that is okay. To answer your question, typically, these are going to be later in the process.
What about judges interviewing kids?
I love it. I will interview kids all day long. I have the training, though. I will say that I was at a conference last year, which was for judges, CFIs, and attorneys. It was the conglomeration of a bunch of us. A judge said, “I do not want to talk to kids. I have my own kids. I do not want to talk to my kids. I do not want to mess them up. I do not want to do something.” I piped in, I am like, “You are not going to hurt these kids with a 30-minute conversation.”
Unless there is sex abuse or there are some really serious allegations of abuse, at which time you say we are done. Even as a CFI, I am not trained to handle that. I call CPS as a mandated reporter. We are done. As a rule, the judge is not going to hear that stuff, I do not think. They are going to hear, “My mom is great, even my dad says she is a jerk,” or whatever. In a 30-minute conversation, they are probably not going to get a whole lot of information, but they are going to be able to at least get to know the kid a little bit.
More importantly, that child is going to feel like they have had a say in the process. That is really important. We get down to dockets. My docket is good enough that I can do it. Dockets in Adams County, Arapahoe County, and the metro dockets do not have time. I wish they did, because it actually is really fun to talk to them. You get to know the whole family holistically, not just what they want you to hear.
More importantly, the child will feel they had a voice in the process. That sense of being heard is what matters most. Share on XDo you have an age when you think it’s appropriate? Are you talking about you talking to a three-year-old, or you talking to a thirteen-year-old?
As a judge or magistrate, I have only interviewed people probably 12 and older. That is not because I have a rule. That is just the kids who have come in and have talked to me. I would probably talk to anyone of any age, but if you really want to get some substantive information. I have some ten-year-olds who are super articulate and some ten-year-olds who are not. Same with maybe thirteen-year-olds. It really depends. Teenagers for sure. I have no problem with teenagers.
It is interesting in Colorado, and the bifurcation that we have was dependency and neglect cases, the child abuse cases where the state is involved, versus domestic relations cases. In our child abuse and neglect cases, the children are presumed to be able to attend court hearings and to talk to the judge. The judge is required to talk to those kids, really, no matter how young they are. The kids have more of a say over a lot of things as they get older in both realms, in terms of, like, they can choose a mental health provider, they can keep that information confidential when they are in their mid to late teens, even from their parents. That piece is common.
In the family law realm, judges are like, “No, I do not want to talk to kids. That is too scary.” One of the things that I did when I was on the bench was I had both those dockets. I got very comfortable talking with kids and talked with lots of kids of all different ages, from two years old on up, and got great information. Again, that I think goes to, I was trained, I came with the domestic relations and child abuse and neglect background. How can we encourage the voices of children? This goes back to my question from before. How can we encourage the voices of the children to be heard in ways that courts can hear them?
As a personal mantra, I guess any judge who asks me, I will tell them to do it. Do not be scared of it. CLRs, as I said, think that we could get, because the child’s legal representative does not write a report. The child’s legal representative is just the lawyer in court. If I had my way, every single case would have a CFI and a CLR, because the CFI can have the hearsay. Most people do not have the money or resources, and that is a lot of people involved. The CLR is involved throughout the whole trial or the hearing and can ask questions, can cross-examine, can give evidence, can do all of that.
There are some ways the CLR can put in, get information from the children. The judge, of course, can talk to the kids if somebody asks and the judge says, “Okay.” Neutrals, if they are willing to testify, I personally do not like children’s counselors testifying because then that violates their safe space. Teachers can give some good information as well. Even then, you have the hearsay problem. I really think the best way to get the kid’s voice heard is through a custody evaluation, either through CFI, PRE, or the judge.
Impact Of Consilium Training And Professional Mindset
Kristen, you are a tapestry member. You have had the Consilium mastery course and the training, and you did that, I know, shortly after I first met you in the CFI training. How do you think your Consilium training has impacted your work as a CFI, as a CLR, as every other acronym, including Magistrate?
From a networking standpoint, if people ask, if I cannot take a case, I send it to Tommy or Amanda, depending on what it is. There is definitely some of that networking there because I know they have had the same basic training, and I trust their instincts, if you will. I feel confident recommending other tapestry members. That is a good bonus. Because I do not represent adults anymore, I do not have an opportunity to use it in my day-to-day practice much.
I will say, even as a child, legal representative, and I see these attorneys who just cannot see the forest through the trees, I will try to at least say, “Let us have a conversation here. Let us all chat. Let us see if we can come to some resolutions.” Sometimes it works, sometimes it does not. Even sometimes, as a CFI, I have not actually had I do not interview the parents together. I threaten to sometimes. I have had conversations with them. “Why am I here?” You guys are so close on everything except this one issue.
We are making this harder than it needs to be, or just recently, a case where the one parent was very contrite. He had an affair. He was very contrite, and he was like, “I messed up my marriage. I want her back. I really want to reconcile.” When I talked to my wife, I was like, “Is there any chance you guys can reconcile?” She is like, “Nope, I am done.” I am like, “I am not going to push it because I am not your lawyer or whatever, but I am not going to just say I am a CFI, and I have to do my investigation. I have to write my report.”
If these parties decide in the middle, like, “We do not need you anymore,” I am fine with that. I will go play golf, power lift, or do something. In my mind, you are so much better off coming to an agreement on your own than having me or the judge or somebody tell you what to do. I think Consilium has helped with that, because just because someone’s getting divorced or going through a breakup does not mean they have to hate each other. Even if there was an affair, even if there were bad things, let us try to put the kids’ needs first.
Obviously, it is really hard when someone’s feeling really salty, betrayed, angry, all those things. It is hard to make that psychological shift. One of the things I hope people get from a Consilium practice and training is this idea of restructuring a family as opposed to divorcing and really saying, “If we are in this for 5, 7, 12 years together for our children, how do we create platforms, templates, systems so that we can effectively work together in this new construct?” That is, I hope to inform this process a bit.
I totally agree. It is funny because I hate the word co-parent because it is never used positively. It is always used negatively. Like, “Why can’t you co-parent? You are not a co-parent.” I wish that language would get reframed as well, because I said they are both parents. The co is fine, it is true, but it is used as this word.
It is funny that you say that because I had a client many years ago who was objecting to the word co-parent in the agreement. To me, at that point, I just thought they were co-parenting. Like, “Why is he so upset about this?” I said, “Would you have a better word?” He said “Cooperative parenting,” which I thought was funny because it was like, “That’s what the co is for.” It is like, “Can we say what we are doing?”
It is in his mind at least, co sounded 50/50, and his position or feeling was that he was doing more, he was responsible for more of the children’s residential time at that point. He was fine with their mother, but did not feel like it was cool, like that it was equal. It was like, “Yes, sure, I will cooperate, but we are not co-captains. Co-executors, parents.” That makes sense. It matters. To you, you are wise to listen as attorneys and as people who are helping families restructure. These labels really are much more than words alone. They create sentiment.
I will tell you in my reports too, I try to never use the word off. You will hear, “We are a week on, week off.” I know it is more words, but I do not care. I say, “You have a weekly rotating schedule.” It’s because you are never off as a period.
That is really good.
I do that. I know you both know, because I said this on our first day, that I also try to never use the opposing party or opposing counsel, because the words do matter. The more acrimony we can pull out and leave aside, the better. It often does not take so much more thinking. When you hear a word that you find offensive, assume other people will and think what other word would work better.
Really shifting that perspective. One of the things I have started doing when people are talking about co-parenting is to say, “At a minimum, you are coordinating your parenting.” That is a different way of thinking about co-parenting. You are coordinating your parenting. You have got to know what the kid’s schedule is. You have got to know what the calendar looks like. That is the baseline of co-parenting.
I have a question for you, a little bit off here, but you are an international powerlifting referee. If that informs your magistrate practice or vice versa?
It does in a way. It does. I will give you an example. This past week, I was in New Orleans at the Collegiate Nationals. It just so happened, I do not know why, I had 3 or 4 lifters from CU on my platform. Of course, in my brain, I am thinking, “Go buff, get the lift.” The referee in me has to be like, “Nope, I do not care where you went to school, you are a lifter, I am going to just judge the lift as is,” which I did. What ended up being really funny was that one girl made an unofficial world record, because you cannot do world records there, but she made an unofficial world record from Colorado, coaches from Colorado, plus there was another Colorado referee on the platform.
I thought, “This is not looking good, guys.” It actually does. Also, both of these play off of each other. When you are refereeing in a big national or international competition, it is 3 or 4 days of nonstop yelling, cheering, and yahooing. The athletes in their schools, and as the ref, you have to yell your commands, so you are losing your voice. By day four on your seventh session, you are tired, and it is so easy to just kind of half-ass it. Sorry for the language. I always remind myself, “This may be my seventh session, but it is their first.” That is what I always have to remind myself of as a CFI. Like, “You cannot half-ass this.”
This may be like an easy one, but it is still their lives. They deserve the same amount of effort as you are going to put into one that has got the sex abuse and the nasty stuff, whatever. The same with being on the bench. It is 4:00, and you have another protection order that is like, “They said boo to me, and I am scared.” You still have to listen to them. You still have to take their concerns as valid, and as if I would in the morning when I am super bright. I know they have had the studies about the harsher sentences with judges, I think, come after lunch or before lunch or something like that. “I am not going to be that judge. I am not.”
You have to be against it. You have to be conscious about it.
That is how those two things really help me with the other. Knowing that it is not about me, it is about them.
Kristen, this has been a delight. Thank you so much for taking some time to talk with us. If people want to find you, they can find you through your website, TarrinLaw.com. Your experience, expertise, and passion for making sure that children’s voices are heard, whether you are doing that from the perspective of an investigator, an evaluator, or from the bench, is really profound. Thank you for the service that you give to families in Colorado and the information that you have shared with our audiences.
Thank you. I appreciate it. I am happy if anybody just wants an ear or even wants a CFI report read to see if they should do a work product review or something. I am happy to do that, and I do not charge for that.
What is a work product review? Let us just take a minute and fill that out.
Understanding Work Product Reviews In Family Law
I will, yes. Work product reviews are conducted if somebody does not like the CFI report. They can hire an independent CFI to review just the file. They do not talk to their parents. They do not talk to the kids. They do not talk to anybody. They just review the file. They will write a report. There is no limit on costs. These things could cost more than the report itself. I have been reviewed 4 or 5 times. One time, the review was legit, like I had some legitimate stuff to say about myself.
I actually called the CFI and thanked him, and we had a great conversation. Most of the time, they are not. I have been asked several times to do work product reviews. I have done one. I will do them if I really feel like the CFI did not just get it wrong, but really did not look at things I had to look at. For example, the one I did, which Julie knows about. She did not look at any, like this one was a case where there was blatant coercive control in my mind, like blatant, did not even address it. That was one where I felt, “No, this deserves a work product review.”
Most of them are, “I just do not like your recommendations,” or “you did not talk to the kids’ school, I am going to, whatever.” I am happy to read through reports and say, “This is not worth a work product review” or, “Their criticism here is the alcohol use. Why do not you just go like start doing some testing or do something that shows you are not drinking or whatever,” to give some ideas so they do not have to spend another $3,000, $4,000 on a work product review that is probably going to go nowhere.
That is super helpful. Is that something that someone has to ask the court permission for? Are the reports otherwise under lock and key in the court? What happens once those CRI reports are filed with the court?
The CFI and CLRs do not do reports. CFIs do. The CFI reports are controlled by the court. They are not necessarily confidential. I use the word controlled by the court. Again, language matters. They are not to be disseminated to people outside of the case. Happens all the time. Especially if they are remarried, they let their spouse read it. Technically, they are not supposed to do that. The court does have control.
Now, I put in my reports. If there are mental health professionals, please share the report with them, if they want it. Technically, they are not supposed to do that either. They are confidential to the parties. No one else is supposed to see them. They are under seal. Not like if I am just a schmo attorney and go look into a case, I cannot pull that up. It will not come up for me. They are somewhat private. Does that answer your question?
Yes. If somebody wants the work product review, they have read it and shared it with their spouse, like whatever. How do they go about doing that?
That is a really good question, Heidi. That technically might actually be a violation because the court does not have to give permission for that. The party will give the CFI report and the case file to the work product reviewer, and they have it. The court does not have to permit that. Maybe they do now. I am going to rethink that, but they do not typically give permission to do that.
You are coming in as an expert witness for the party that is asking for the work product review, but then do you testify?
Yes. I have never seen a judge have a problem with them coming, testifying to coming in. I do not know how much they use their reports as good evidence.
They can come in as evidence. Yes, that is interesting. Thank you so much. It was a conversation. I have so enjoyed it. This is great.
I am happy to. If anybody has any questions or thoughts, please reach out.
Kristen Tarrin at TarrinLaw.com. Kristen can also be found on the Consilium Institute website as a tapestry member and as a Consilium practitioner. ConsiliumInstitute.com. Thank you so much, Kristen, and go lift or whatever it is you do. I do not understand.
Yes, I will. Thank you so much.
Thanks.
Important Links
About Kristen Tarrin
Kristen has practiced family law since 2007, been a Child and Family Investigator since 2019, and a Child’s Legal Representative/Guardian ad litem since 2022.
Kristen became a part-time magistrate in 2023, and her entire docket consists of domestic relations cases.
Kristen is an International referee for powerlifting. When Kristen is not working with kids or powerlifting, she enjoys spending time with her dog, Brad the Pit.