DMR Eligibility Decision by H.O. Silver 3 7 08

Date:

03/07/08

Author:

Silver

Outcome: Ineligible
Keyword: IQ, underestimation, mental illness

Hearing Officer: Elizabeth Silver
Counsel present for Appellant: Elaine W. Cockroft
Counsel present for DMR: Douglas White
Hearing Officer decision: March 7, 2008
Appeal confirmed by Commissioner: Mar. 14, 2008

The Issue presented in this case is whether the Appellant meets the definition of mental retardation, and is thereby eligible for DMR services.

Year	Test	Age	Score			Diagnosis in report
Year	Test	Age	Verb.	Perf.	Full	Diagnosis in report
1998	WISC-III	8	100	94	97	Took 2 sessions to complete because of Appellants various emotional and behavioral issues. Verbal and nonverbal abilities, as well as general cognitive abilities fell into the average range.
Same time as above	WIAT					Above average mathematical performance, high average reading performance, and low average spelling performance. Used BASC checklist, Connor's rating scale and Devereux rating scale; Appellant displayed aggression, anxiety, depressions, atypicality, social skills, and adaptability all in the "clinically significant" range, as well as at risk behaviors including hyperactivity, conduct problems, attention problems, learning problems, and study skills.
1999	WISC-III	9	82	82	81	Also took 2 sessions to administer. In the 35th percentile for his age cognitively, could have been underestimated however because of concentration and attention issues, (ADHD). Scored in the low average range of intellectual functioning with potential to be in the average range. At the time Appellant was taking medication for Bipolar disorder as well as ADHD
2003	WISC-III	13	91	82	86	Took 3 sessions to administer. Appellant's general cognitive ability was in the low average range of intellectual functioning.
Same time	Woodcock-Johnson	13				Low-average on reading, math, and math calculation skills. Academic skills, ability to apply those skills, and fluency with academic skills all within the low-average range compared to others his age. Rorschach testing suggested appellant was emotionally disturbed, specifically anxious, impulsive and with unmet dependency needs.
2006	WISC-IV	17			78	Took 2 sessions to administer. This test is supposed to be administered to 6-16 year olds, and Appellant had turned 17 about a month before the test. Can't give it as much weight as the others.
2006	Woodcock-Johnson	17				Academic skills within the average range and the ability to apply academic skills in the low average range.
2007	WAIS-III	18	78	83	78	On cognitive testing his performance fell within the borderline range, and he was in the low end of the average range for non-verbal reasoning tasks. Demonstrated anxiety and impulsivity during the test.
Same as above	GARS-2 And BASC-2	18				Exhibited some characteristics of autism, but his strengths in social interactions and social skills reduced the likelihood of this diagnosis. There were concerning levels of behavior in depression, anxiety, and somatization. On the Behavioral Symptom Index he had elevated behaviors in depression, atypicality, hyperactivity, attention problems, and withdrawal. Behaviors associated with aggression were within normal limits

Appellant's parents were appointed his permanent guardians in July 2007, when the appellant was 18 years old. The court did not check off mental retardation as the purpose of the guardianship, rather the decision was made based on inability to take care of himself as a result of mental illness. The Appellant's psychiatrist documented for the court that the appellant was diagnosed with Bipolar Disorder and ADHD and was taking several medications for these conditions.

Appellant was first screened and placed on an IEP when he was 3½ years old. Appellant was hospitalized in a day treatment program as a result of out-of control behavior. Then 3 years later in 1997 Appellant was hospitalized on an inpatient basis for 2 weeks resulting again, from out of control behavior as well as suicidal ideation. 3 months after his release he was hospitalized for another 16 days for suicidal ideation.

Appellate became eligible for DMH services as a youth. Appellant has been in a residential placement since he was 10. He will need to be placed into a home once he leaves his current placement, his mother claims ‘he will fall apart physically and mentally' without structure.

The DMR psychologist found that Appellant did not qualify as mentally retarded. She looked at his IQ tests and determined that not only was his IQ too high to qualify, but the scores might be underestimated, due to obvious signs of agitation when the tests were being administered which could certainly effect the timed portion of the test. There was also the issue of his dysgraphia which could have affected his writing portions negatively, and the fact that he was on anti-depressants and anti-psychotics while he was taking these tests. Dr. Shook also brought up the fact that there was no mention of mental retardation in the IEP's, but rather that they just mentioned Appellant's emotional issues.

The hearing officer found that the Appellant did not meet the definition of mental retardation, because his IQ scores were all well above the requisite of 70 or below. Also, the fact that his emotional and behavioral issues could have interfered with his learning and social skills, shows that it is likely his cognitive levels were underestimated by these tests.

Attachment	Size
Silver decision 3-7-08 WO_0.pdf (3.44 MB)	3.44 MB