- Joined
- Aug 23, 2008
- Messages
- 830
- Reaction score
- 6
I saw an unfortunate claimant awhile back for a med legal assessment.
This young gentleman was hit by a vehicle ( as a pedestrian), and incurred a serious head injury requiring a craniotomy in addition to multiple orthopedic injuries.
Fast forward 2 years later : the claimant has essentially healed from his orthopedic injuries ( i.e. pain once weekly), but is left with a significant neurocognitive deficit. This is demonstrated very clearly in the occupational therapist's notes. In particular, he attempted to return to school, and found that he could not from a cognitive perspective.
However, he has not received a neuropsych IME / assessment.
As a result, I stated that it was my opinion he was not significantly physically impaired, but he seemed quite cognitively impaired. However, this issue was outside my area of expertise, and thus I could not make any definitive statements in this regard. As such, I strongly recommended he receive a neuropsych assessment.
Apparently the lawyer has a problem with this. I say tough beans. I stick by my report ( and not to mention ethics). Pony up the dough and get a psych assessment. I would get torn apart on the stand if I ventured into cognitive territory. The lawyer now wants to meet with me in my office. Needless to say, I ain't changing the report.
Thoughts or comments ? Similiar experiences ?
This young gentleman was hit by a vehicle ( as a pedestrian), and incurred a serious head injury requiring a craniotomy in addition to multiple orthopedic injuries.
Fast forward 2 years later : the claimant has essentially healed from his orthopedic injuries ( i.e. pain once weekly), but is left with a significant neurocognitive deficit. This is demonstrated very clearly in the occupational therapist's notes. In particular, he attempted to return to school, and found that he could not from a cognitive perspective.
However, he has not received a neuropsych IME / assessment.
As a result, I stated that it was my opinion he was not significantly physically impaired, but he seemed quite cognitively impaired. However, this issue was outside my area of expertise, and thus I could not make any definitive statements in this regard. As such, I strongly recommended he receive a neuropsych assessment.
Apparently the lawyer has a problem with this. I say tough beans. I stick by my report ( and not to mention ethics). Pony up the dough and get a psych assessment. I would get torn apart on the stand if I ventured into cognitive territory. The lawyer now wants to meet with me in my office. Needless to say, I ain't changing the report.
Thoughts or comments ? Similiar experiences ?
Last edited: