DMR Eligibility Decision by H.O. Hudgins 4 22 04

Date:

04/22/04

Author:

Hudgins

Appeal denied by Commissioner on May 5, 2004

Keyword: intellectual function, subset score discrepancy, Asperger's Disorder, MCAS

Hearing Officer: Marcia A. Hudgins

Counsel present for Appellant: No

Counsel present for DMR: Kim LaDue

Appellant present: No

Hearing Officer Decision on April 22, 2004

Year	Test	Age	Score			Diagnosis in report
Year	Test	Age	Verb.	Perf.	Full	Diagnosis in report
1999	WISC-III	14	106	84	95	The report stated that the appellant was functioning at the 14-year-old level intellectually. It also stated that the he might qualify for mild Asperger's disorder or PDD.
2000	SB-IV	15	-	-	-	The appellant's intelligence was found to be in the average to high average range. The examiner stated that the appellant's developmental and social history and cognitive profile are clearly consistent with Asperger's disorder and that the appellant also exhibited signs of ADHD and depression.
2003	WAIS-III	18	114	87	-	The clinician stated that the appellant's performances on measures of intellectual ability were not predictive of his overall ability at an adaptive functional level. The clinician recommended DMR services.

The DMR expert made a recommendation of ineligibility. He testified that the full scale scores should have not been given because of the large discrepancy between the verbal and the performance scores. He also testified that the diagnoses of Asperger's disorder and ADHD accounted for the appellant's lower performance IQ score along with social interaction problems. He pointed out that the appellant passed the MCAS and noted that a person with mental retardation would not be expected to pass such a test.

The hearing officer concluded that the appellant was not mentally retarded and did not have significantly sub-average intellectual functioning in that all of his IQ scores were out of the qualifying range of 70 to 75 or below.

Attachment	Size
Hudgins decision 4-22-04 WO JR_0.pdf (3.54 MB)	3.54 MB