The Online Resource for Massachusetts Poverty Law Advocates

DMR Eligibility Decision by H.O Hudgins 8 13 07

Date: 
08/13/2007
Author: 
Hudgins

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

 

 

Year

Test

Age

Score

Diagnosis in report

Verb.

Perf.

Full

1996

WISC-R

8

81

91

85

Behavior during the exam was consistent with that which is typical for children with attention deficit disorder. Put in a great deal of effort and tried hard to participate. Difficulties with receptive auditory language.

2001

WISC III

13

72

87

73

May be a underestimate of his abilities due to his anger, defensiveness, and difficulty understanding expectations.

2005

WISC IV

16

 

 

63

Reluctant to engage in testing and was highly sensitive about his cognitive weaknesses. Easily frustrated and gave up on test measures when he encountered difficulty.

2006

ABAS II

17

 

 

78

Done by his mother.

 

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.

To save files, right click and choose 'Save Target As' or 'Save Link As'
File Attachment: 
AttachmentSize
PDF icon Hudgins decision 8-13-07 WO_0.pdf1.01 MB

Limit Offer