DMR Eligibility Decision by H.O Hudgins 8 13 07

Outcome: Ineligible
Keyword: underestimate, reliability, ABAS-II

Hearing Officer: Marcia Hudgins 
Counsel present for Appellant: n/a
Counsel present for DMR: John C. Geenty Jr.
Hearing Officer Decision: 8/13/07
Appeal confirmed by Commissioner: 9/6/07

Dr. Cusher, who performed the first intelligence examination at age 8, concluded that the appellant's scores were consistent with his intellectual capabilities but lower than average for his age. He believed that the appellant was a child with low average intelligence who presented striking impairments related to attention and behavior regulation which may have compromised his scores. He noted that he also has a genetic abnormality (XYY) which may have caused him to be prone to learning and developmental difficulties.  He didn't offer diagnosis of MR, nor did 2 subsequent evaluators.

When testifying, his mother stated he had been receiving services from DMH since 1992 and would continue to do so until he was 22 years old. Appellant was diagnosed with Asperger's, XXY disorder, was hospitalized five times during 2002-2003, threatened suicide, and has been thrown out of school on numerous occasions.

Dr. Weir, the DMR psychologist, noted and evaluated all of the testing done on the appellant and concluded that she believed he was ineligible for DMR services. She suggested processing difficulties rather than cognitive difficulties. She noted that in the past, IQ scores were thought an underestimation due to behavior. She noted ABAS of 78. No area in which he was really weak.

Hearing Officer Hudgins also concluded that the appellant was ineligible because he did not meet the criteria as someone who is mentally retarded. Of three IQ tests presented, only one below 70 and that one had questionable reliability because it was modified to deal with frustration of subject. Other IQ tests may also have been underestimates. Even if HO accepted the one low IQ score of 63, the ABAS II of 78 wasn't 2 standard deviations below the mean and in no domains of adaptive functioning was he 1.5 standard deviations below the mean.