Description
Prior to beginning work on this discussion, read Chapter 12 in the textbook and the required articles for this week. For this discussion you will take on the role of a psychologist assigned a case in which the client has a legal concern. For your initial post, select one of the three forensic case scenarios below and follow the instructions.
Forensic Scenario One: Mr. W (Attempting to Obtain Legal Guardianship Over an Elderly Parent): Attorney Mr. X referred Mr. W for an evaluation of his decision-making capacity. Mr. W’s children do not agree with the findings from a prior evaluation and have requested a second opinion. Review the PSY640 Week Six Clinical Neuropsychological Report for Mr. W, and begin your post with a one-paragraph summary of the test data you deem most significant. Utilize assigned readings and any additional scholarly and/or peer-reviewed sources needed to develop a list of additional assessment instruments and evaluation procedures to administer to the client. Justify your assessment choices by providing an evaluation of the ethical and professional practice standards and an analysis of the reliability and validity of the instruments.
Forensic Scenario Two, Mr. M (Not Guilty Plea): Your client, Mr. M., was referred by the court for an evaluation of his mental condition after his attorney entered a plea of not guilty on his behalf. Review the Case Description: Mr. M—Forensic, Pre-trial Criminal Score Report, and begin your post with a one-paragraph summary of the test data you deem most significant. Utilize assigned readings and any additional scholarly and/or peer-reviewed sources needed to develop a list of additional assessment instruments and evaluation procedures to administer to the client. Justify your assessment choices by providing an evaluation of the ethical and professional practice standards and an analysis of the reliability and validity of the instruments.
Forensic Scenario Three, Ms. X (Personal Injury Lawsuit): Ms. X was referred for a forensic neuropsychological evaluation in connection with a personal injury lawsuit she had filed. Review the Case Description: Ms. X—Forensic, Neuropsychological Score Report, and begin your post with a one-paragraph summary of the test data you deem most significant. Utilize assigned readings and any additional scholarly and/or peer-reviewed sources needed to develop a list of additional assessment instruments and evaluation procedures to administer to the client. Justify your assessment choices by providing an evaluation of the ethical and professional practice standards and an analysis of the reliability and validity of the instruments.
Guided Response: Review several of your colleagues’ posts, and respond to at least two of your peers by 11:59 p.m. on Day 7 of the week. You are encouraged to post your required replies earlier in the week to promote more meaningful interactive discourse in this discussion.
Indicate the extent to which you agree or disagree with your colleague’s choice of information to include in the summary of test results. Suggest any additional significant test results that you would have included in the summary. Identify additional assessment measures you would recommend for the client. Assess the personality instrument(s) suggested by your colleague. Would these measures provide reliable, valid, and culturally appropriate results for the given scenario? Use scholarly and peer-reviewed sources published within the last fifteen years to support your assertions. Continue to monitor the discussion forum until 5:00 p.m. Mountain Standard Time (MST) on Day 7 of the week, and respond to anyone who replies to your initial post.
Carefully review the Discussion Forum Grading Rubric for the criteria that will be used to evaluate
Explanation & Answer
Hi. I have completed your work and attached it below. Feel free to contact me for any clarification or corrections
Running head: Pre-trial Mental Evaluation
1
Pre-trial Mental Evaluation
Name:
Course:
Due Date:
Name of Instructor:
Pre-trial Mental Evaluation
2
After careful evaluation of the psychological test results, Mr. M’s protocol validity
shows signs of both over reporting and exaggeration of incidences. This is a contradiction
and further tests need be performed to conclusively determine his protocol validity. Mr. M’s
COG as per the test data is at 80. This is an indication of cognitive dysfunction which results
in low tolerance of frustration.
DASS (Depression Anxiety Stress Scales) test can be employed to det...