A Judge's Pre-Flight Checklist Before Adopting a GAL Report

Judicial Accountability · By Gale McArthur · 2026-03-31 · 8 min read

Pilots have pre-flight checklists because lives are at stake. So do judges in custody cases — they just don't use them. Here's the one we made for you.

Pilots don't take off without a checklist. Surgeons don't operate without a checklist. But judges? They adopt 47-page GAL reports that determine a child's entire future with… vibes? 🛫

Lives are at stake. Maybe treat it like they are.

✈️ The Pre-Flight Checklist

Before adopting ANY GAL report as the basis for your ruling, complete this checklist:

Section 1: GAL Credentials ✅

[ ] Registry status verified — Is the GAL on the active county registry as of today?
[ ] Training current — AOC-approved Title 26 training completed for the current cycle?
[ ] DV training verified — Specific training in coercive control and domestic violence?
[ ] No license claims without credentials — If making clinical assessments, are they actually licensed?

Fun fact: In our audit, 23% of GALs on county lists had lapsed or unverifiable training credentials. Would you fly with a pilot whose license expired last year? ✈️❌

Section 2: Methodology Review ✅

[ ] Equal access — Did the GAL spend comparable time with both parents?
[ ] Home visits — Were home visits conducted for both households?
[ ] Collateral contacts — Were they balanced, or did the GAL only talk to one side's references?
[ ] Document review — Did the GAL review medical records, school records, and police reports?
[ ] Children interviewed — Were children interviewed in a developmentally appropriate manner?

If the GAL spent 8 hours with Parent A and 45 minutes with Parent B, that's not an investigation. That's a character reference with extra steps. 🕵️

Section 3: Report Quality ✅

[ ] Facts vs. opinions clearly distinguished — Can you tell which is which?
[ ] Sources cited — Are factual claims attributed to verifiable sources?
[ ] Statutory factors addressed — Does the report address all 11 factors under RCW 26.09.187?
[ ] Bias indicators absent — Does the language favor one parent? Are there unsubstantiated characterizations?
[ ] Recommendations logically connected — Do the conclusions follow from the evidence?

A 47-page report that reads like a novel is not "thorough." It's a 47-page opinion piece. 📖

Section 4: Independence Check ✅

[ ] Your analysis differs in at least one finding — If you agree with everything, you probably aren't analyzing
[ ] You can articulate WHY you agree — "The GAL was thorough" is not a reason
[ ] You've considered the opposing evidence — What did the GAL dismiss, and should you?
[ ] Your findings of fact are YOUR findings — Not the GAL's report with your signature

📊 The Adoption Rate Problem

| County | GAL Report Adoption Rate | Independent Analysis Rate | |---|---|---| | King County | 89% | 11% | | Pierce County | 84% | 16% | | Snohomish County | 91% | 9% | | Statewide Average | 87% | 13% |

When 87% of GAL reports become court orders, you don't have a judicial system. You have a ratification system.

🎯 The Challenge

We challenge every family court judge in Washington to:

1. Use this checklist for your next 10 cases 2. Track your own adoption rate — how often do you deviate from the GAL? 3. Issue findings that demonstrate independent analysis 4. Ask yourself: Am I the decision-maker, or the stamp?

Download GAL verification data at www.galeregistry.com.