What Is In Camera Review
An in camera review is a private meeting between a judge and a child, conducted in the judge's chambers away from the courtroom and without the parents or their attorneys present. The judge speaks directly with the child to assess their wishes, observations, and emotional state regarding custody and living arrangements.
This practice exists because judges recognize that children often cannot or will not speak freely about their preferences in open court. An in camera review creates space for a child to express themselves without feeling watched by parents, attorneys, or court staff.
When Judges Order In Camera Reviews
Judges typically order in camera reviews in custody disputes when a child is old enough to form and express meaningful preferences. While no fixed age exists across all states, courts generally consider children ages 10 and up as potentially capable of articulating preferences. Some states have statutory guidelines. For example, Florida law allows judges to consider a child's preference if the child is old enough to express one reasonably, which courts often interpret as age 12 or older, though younger children may still be interviewed at judicial discretion.
An in camera review becomes particularly important when custody evaluations reveal conflicting information, when one parent alleges the other has influenced the child's preferences, or when a child's stated wishes differ sharply from what the Best Interests of the Child standard would otherwise suggest.
What Happens During the Review
The judge meets alone with the child for 15 to 45 minutes, depending on the child's age and the complexity of family circumstances. The judge typically asks open-ended questions about the child's relationship with each parent, daily routines, school, activities, and living preferences. The judge does not force the child to choose between parents.
A court reporter is usually present to create a transcript, though the transcript remains sealed and confidential. Some jurisdictions allow judges discretion on whether transcripts are made.
Confidentiality and Limits
The in camera review transcript is not automatically shared with parents or attorneys. Judges have discretion to keep the child's statements confidential to protect the child from retaliation or pressure. However, judges may disclose what they learned to explain their custody decision in the final order.
Courts recognize that information shared in an in camera review carries weight precisely because it is private. The judge is assessing the child's authentic voice without courtroom pressure. At the same time, courts understand that children can be manipulated or coached. If one parent has significantly influenced the child's expressed preferences, that fact may undermine the child's credibility in the judge's mind.
How This Differs From Custody Evaluation
An in camera review is not the same as a Custody Evaluation. A custody evaluator is a mental health professional who interviews both parents, the child, extended family, teachers, and others over weeks or months. A custody evaluator produces a detailed written report with recommendations. An in camera review is a direct conversation between judge and child, lasting under an hour, with no formal report to either parent.
Common Questions
- Can my child refuse to meet with the judge in camera? In most states, no. If the judge orders an in camera review, your child is required to participate. However, the judge will not force a very young child (typically under age 6) to speak if the child is distressed.
- Will my attorney know what my child told the judge? Not necessarily. The judge may keep the child's statements confidential. You will learn what the judge decided, but the reasoning may not include details of what the child said privately. Some states have rules allowing judges to share the gist of the conversation with attorneys in limited circumstances.
- Can my ex coach our child before the in camera review? Yes, and judges know this happens. If the judge detects that a child's preferences seem rehearsed, coached, or inconsistent with the child's behavior in other settings, the judge will discount what the child said. This is one reason judges also consider evidence from custodial evaluators, teachers, therapists, and others.