Originally Posted by
FallenAngelina 
A quick check on LegalZoom.com says otherwise. Of course, much depends on the particular judge, but I imagine that this awareness varies greatly. Apparently, judges do take addiction into account. I'm not an expert at all, but the question does seem to be embedded in the general legal process of custody arbitration.
"If you are concerned about your ex's substance abuse, you must argue it is not in your child's best interests to be left alone with him and advocate for a custody plan that requires supervised visitation or provides for no visitation at all. In many cases, judges will require parents to attend treatment before they can seek visitation. When one parent alleges the other parent is an addict, judges have the power to compel the alleged addict to undergo a substance abuse evaluation. A court-appointed evaluator will assess whether the person is, in fact, an addict and evaluate how the addiction could affect the children."
I personally had a very good outcome on paper after successfully arguing that my ex's drinking made him a danger to our son. He was ordered to complete a substance abuse evaluation and follow all recommended treatment before his visitation could begin.
The problem is that the onus is on the alcoholic parent to actually live in sobriety rather than simply "checking the boxes." A court order, even a good one, only takes you so far with someone who is absolutely determined to keep drinking.
Not that it wasn't worth it in the end. I am allowed to cancel any visit at any time, so I can now effectively protect DS.