ABS 300 Capella University psycholOgical Evaluation Discussion

Description Prior to beginning work on this assignment, read the required textbook chapters and articles for this week and view the video on Functional Behavioral Assessment (Links to an external site.) by Dr. Tim Lewis. For this discussion, you will take on the role of the private psychologist being asked to conduct a full psychological evaluation of a client. Carefully review the ABS 300 WEK ONE ASSESSMENT SCENARIO (attached) In your initial post, first, clearly state whether or not you agree to conduct a new full psychological evaluation of the client. Write a rationale for either agreeing or disagreeing with the request to conduct a new psychological evaluation of the client based on the information available. Explain which theoretical assumptions about psychological testing and assessment as discussed in the textbook support your decision. Apply the American Psychological Ethical Standards from the assigned reading to discuss the ethical responsibilities a psychologist must consider if choosing to re-test the client. Provide a pro/con analysis of both potential decisions regarding whether or not to re–test the client. In your pro/con analysis, present the potential ethical issues which might arise from each decision–the decision to re-test and the decision to not re-test–the client in the given scenario. Assume you have the opportunity to conduct a behavioral assessment interview before making your decision about whether or not to conduct a full psychological assessment. Give examples of the types of information from the behavioral assessment would aid you in making an ethical decision about whether or not to conduct a full psychological assessment. Peer 1 response Clearly state whether or not you agree to conduct a new full psychological evaluation of the client. I would not agree to conduct a new full psychological evaluation in fear that it may disrupt any progress the client has made. In addition, all of the clients behaviors clearly indicate signs of Asperger’s which would line up with the doctors conclusions. I would not impede on any progress simply because a parent cannot accept that their child is challenged, especially when the evaluation has already been completed to the best of ones abilities. Write a rationale for either agreeing or disagreeing with the request to conduct a new psychological evaluation of the client based on the information available. Based on the given information, the client struggles with certain every day things such as understanding complex ideas while also being able to memorize hundreds of plant and flower species. This has already been recognized and studied by another physician who came to the conclusion of Asperger’s, the only thing that rules over that conclusion is a parent who is unaccepting of the diagnosis which does not give me as a professional any reason to think that there should be another diagnosis seeing as though the description if the psychological issues of the client are fairly accurate. Apply the American Psychological Ethical Standards from the assigned reading to discuss the ethical responsibilities a psychologist must consider if choosing to re-test the client. One of the main goals when conducting an evaluation is to enable the client to feel as comfortable as they can be in the space they are located. If this gets destroyed in any way, behaviors could become more prevalent and have the potential to end in the decline in progress Provide a pro/con analysis of both potential decisions regarding whether or not to re–test the client. In your pro/con analysis, present the potential ethical issues which might arise from each decision–the decision to re-test and the decision to not re-test–the client in the given scenario. Pro- Not re-testing would save time and money Con- We would not be able to test to see if there are any other possible diagnosis Peer 2 Donna should have a new evaluation as she was tested using the Gilliam Asperger’s Disorder Scale (GADS) (Harper, 2015). Per the review of testing offered, the GADS has been updated from the original form developed in 2013. The current test used for assessing if someone is on the autism spectrum would be the Gilliam Autism Rating Scale | Third Edition (GARS-3). The GARS-3 was updated to work off the diagnostic criteria for autism spectrum disorder from 2013 (Pearson, 2021). Because the testing methods that were utilized to base Donna’s diagnosis on are no longer considered current, it would be unethical per the psychologist code of ethics and conduct in section 9.08 subsection (a) for the psychologist to use an outdated test to base their assessment of an individual on (American Psychological Association, 2010). Since the diagnostic tests have advanced and the clinical definition of Donna’s diagnosis has changed due to a change in criteria, retesting her with the most current tools is not unethical. The other issue is that Donna continues to function a grade lower than her actual class even with supports in place. Because there remains a lag in Donna’s grade and the level where she can complete work, a new educational, psychological assessment may reveal new information. The ability for further supports may be needed, though she has shown progress in social and academic areas (Harper, 2015). Because of the information displayed on the QEEG, the initial diagnosis may no longer be accurate given the improvements in the social aspects of Donna’s life. The previous assessment was also completed just following an event that was traumatic for Donna, enough so that she was removed from school and faced charges of terrorism. Given those factors, the opportunity for a re-evaluation should be considered. The ability to complete a behavioral assessment before doing the psychological assessment would likely shed light on the genuine need for a re-evaluation. Still, given other factors, it is not unethical to provide a new assessment. During a behavioral assessment, the ability of Donna to interact in socially acceptable ways while demonstrating accurate nonverbal communication would be clues that the diagnosis is no longer applicable, though masking may be being used by Donna. Seeing restrictive or repetitive behaviors demonstrated would give an indication of Donna’s needs and the autism diagnosis is still applicable. Given the nature of an educational assessment, the reassessment of Donna, should it yield different findings, may result in a loss of supports and measures that are currently helping her as she is nearing graduation. Because of how Individualized Educational Plans (IEPs) are written and the disconnect that can be seen between medical diagnoses and educational diagnoses, the supports that Donna needs to be successful may have to be removed based on the outcome of the findings. Ms. Kraut needs to understand the possible ramifications of the change in her daughter’s diagnosis before proceeding. That would be part of the informed consent aspect of participating in testing and assessment.