DMR Eligibility Decision by H.O. Hudgins 1 13 06

Keyword:, intellectual function, medication side effect, score interference

Hearing Officer: Marcia A. Hudgins

Counsel present for Appellant: No

Counsel present for DMR: John O. Mitchell

Appellant present: Yes

Hearing Officer Decision on January 13, 2006

Four evaluation results were entered into evidence.

The appellant's mother testified that the appellant was diagnosed with ADD at the age of three.  She also testified that the appellant was found to have hyper-hypoparathyroidism which produced some deformities, for example, wide thumbs and toes, an unusually shaped head, and some frontal bossing.  She also stated that although the appellant's doctor found no neurological abnormalities, he stated that there was no medical explanation for the developmental delays.

The mother also testified that when the appellant was 18, he had had dystonic neck posturing from medication and the frequency of the tics had been increasing.  When the appellant was 19, the diagnosis given was Tourette's disorder, obsessive compulsive disorder, dysthymia on Axis I and mild mental retardation. She also pointed out that other reports stated that the appellant was functioning at a mentally retarded level and that he was at risk for a lifetime of institutional care.

According to the DMR expert, testing did not support a finding of mental retardation.  The expert also found that the appellant had academic skills, particularly his reading ability, at a level much higher than mentally retarded people.  He concluded that the appellant was ineligible upon meeting the appellant.  As to the 1993 test result, the expert stated that a side effect of medication might have interfered with the appellant's performance.  He also stated that nothing in the report indicated that the appellant was mentally retarded.

The DMR expert also stated that although the appellant's performance IQ scores had declined, she would not diagnose him with mental retardation given his good verbal scores.  The expert noted that the report indicated that the Tourette's, the OCD, and other behavioral issues that interfered with the appellant's performance on each testing.

The hearing officer found that the appellant did not meet the DMR's definition of mental retardation.  Even though the appellant had limitations in several adaptive skill areas, he found that the appellant did not have significantly sub-average intellectual functioning.  The appellant had no IQ scores of 70 to 75 or below before age 18.  He also found that the appellant's Tourette's disorder and tics affected his ability to perform on the performance portion of his tests, thereby lowering his scores.  The hearing officer also agreed that other reasons for the decline would be ADD, OCD, and medication side effects.