Ashish Joshi is the owner and managing partner of Joshi: Attorneys + Counselors. He serves as the lead counsel in high-stakes, complex family law and divorce cases, focusing on issues related to intimate partner violence, parental alienation, child psychological maltreatment, and international child abduction.
Live Video-Broadcast: December 11, 2025
Sign-up for a law firm subscription plan and each attorney in the firm receives free access to all CLE Programs
To best serve families in an unbiased and fair manner, family courts must appreciate and acknowledge diversity in its many forms, such as gender, ethnic, race, cultural, sexual orientation, and neurodivergence. Despite there being a stigma against neurodiversity, increasing attention has been paid by the family courts to the unique considerations of children with special needs in families undergoing divorce and separation. While the default option in most jurisdictions is joint physical custody and family law judges primarily rely on developmentally-based time-share arrangements, these otherwise laudable goals may not serve the neurodiverse (ND) child well. For many ND children, the need for sameness, routine, and structure may supersede the need for “equal” or “equivalent” time with both parents.
A tension could arise here. On the one hand, the parent who is best attuned to the shifts in the ND child’s moods, who can best supervise the ND child (who may engage in self-harm or suicidal behaviors) should have the lion’s share or primary parenting opportunities and responsibility. On the other hand, such decisions could also lead to a ND child being weaponized or maladaptive restrictive gatekeeping behaviors (“only I can parent this ND child”).
The issue of neurodivergence in family law is not limited to ND child(ren); ND parents add a layer of complexity to these cases. They face the risk in family court of being caricatured for their psychiatric condition, instead of their strengths. In litigation, diagnostic information is often misapplied or misunderstood and the fact of neurodiversity is seen as a “risk” or shortcoming without an analysis of whether the ND parent, despite his or her psychiatric condition, has the ability to parent a child effectively.
Key topics to be discussed:
This course is co-sponsored with myLawCLE.
Date / Time: December 11, 2025
Closed-captioning available
Ashish Joshi | Joshi Attorneys + Counselors
Ashish Joshi is the owner and managing partner of Joshi: Attorneys + Counselors. He serves as the lead counsel in high-stakes, complex family law and divorce cases, focusing on issues related to intimate partner violence, parental alienation, child psychological maltreatment, and international child abduction. He has counseled and/or represented clients in state and federal courts across the United States and internationally, including in India, United Kingdom, Canada, Luxembourg, Hong Kong, British Virgin Islands, and China.
Mr. Joshi has been admitted to the Bar of the Supreme Court of the United States, state bars of New York, Michigan, the District of Columbia, and Gujarat, India. Mr. Joshi serves as a senior editor of Litigation, the flagship journal of the ABA’s Section of Litigation. He is a contributing author to Parental Alienation: Science and Law (Charles C. Thomas, 2020) and author of Litigating Parental Alienation: Evaluating and Presenting an Effective Case in Court (ABA, 2021).
In 2024, the Michigan Supreme Court appointed Mr. Joshi to serve on the Michigan Judicial Council.
I. Neurodiversity in Family Courts | 12:00pm – 12:20pm
II. Best Interests of the Neurodivergent Child | 12:20pm – 12:40pm
III. Balancing Parental Rights and the Child’s Needs | 12:40pm – 1:00pm
Break | 1:00pm – 1:10pm
IV. Assessing Parental Fitness and Bias in the Courtroom | 1:10pm – 1:30pm
V. Judicial and Practitioner Education on Neurodiversity | 1:30pm – 1:50pm
VI. Integrating Mental Health and Legal Frameworks | 1:50pm – 2:10pm
Approved for CLE Credits
2 General
Pending CLE Approval
2 General
Approved for CLE Credits
2 General
Approved for CLE Credits
2 General
Approved for CLE Credits
2 General
Pending CLE Approval
2 General
Approved for CLE Credits
2 General
No MCLE Required
2 CLE Hour(s)
Pending CLE Approval
2 General
Approved via Attorney Submission
2.5 General Hours
Pending CLE Approval
2 General
Approved for CLE Credits
2.4 General
Pending CLE Approval
2 General
Pending CLE Approval
2 General
Pending CLE Approval
2 General
Pending CLE Approval
2 General
Pending CLE Approval
2 Substantive
Pending CLE Approval
2 General
Pending CLE Approval
2 General
No MCLE Required
2 CLE Hour(s)
No MCLE Required
2 CLE Hour(s)
Pending CLE Approval
2 General
No MCLE Required
2 CLE Hour(s)
Pending CLE Approval
2 General
Approved for CLE Credits
2.4 General
Pending CLE Approval
2 General
Pending CLE Approval
2 General
Pending CLE Approval
2 General
Approved for CLE Credits
2 General
Pending CLE Approval
2 General
Approved for CLE Credits
120 General minutes
Approved for CLE Credits
2.4 General
Approved for CLE Credits
2 General
Pending CLE Approval
2 General
Approved for CLE Credits
2.4 General
Pending CLE Approval
2 General
Pending CLE Approval
2.5 General
Pending CLE Approval
2 General
Approved for CLE Credits
2 General
Pending CLE Approval
2.5 General
Pending CLE Approval
2 General
No MCLE Required
2 CLE Hour(s)
Pending CLE Approval
2 General
Approved for CLE Credits
2 General
Pending CLE Approval
2 General
Not Eligible
2 General Hours
Approved for CLE Credits
2 General
Approved via Attorney Submission
2 Law & Legal Hours
Pending CLE Approval
2 General
Pending CLE Approval
2.4 General
Pending CLE Approval
2 General