Psychological Assesment Psychological Assessment Psychological

Psychological Assesment Psychological assessment Psychological assessment: Overview and ethical implications Psychological assessment: Overview and ethical implications Psychological assessments are often used to give a quick, thumbnail sketch of an individual's psyche in a variety of settings. In a therapeutic or clinical setting they are often used to create a DSM diagnosis for insurance purposes.

Also, given the compressed nature of much of psychiatric therapy today, assessment allows the therapist to gain a general idea of the patient's issues, their severity, and also to distinguish certain illnesses from one another, such as the manic phase of bipolar disorder from schizophrenia. In a medical setting, when general practitioners evaluate individuals with psychological illnesses, the medical professional must be qualified to perform the assessment. Often, triage rather than a formal diagnosis (screening a patient who may have had a stroke vs.

A patient with dementia, or determining if a patient's psychosis is temporary and drug-induced or the result of a psychological condition) is most appropriate. In a legal setting, the tester must often distinguish between a patient who is legally insane or incompetent and a patient who is legally sane and/or competent to stand trial. Legal insanity implies an inability to distinguish between right and wrong. Someone who is legally sane might still benefit from psychological treatment.

Someone can be legally competent to stand trial and capable of assisting in his or her defense yet not mentally stable. Other legal issues regarding assessment may arise when involuntarily committing an individual. A therapist doing an assessment may be in a difficult position if the therapist fears the patient may pose a threat to another person as a 'stalker' or if the patient may become violent because he or she is not taking his or her medication.

On one hand, the therapist has a professional, ethical obligation of confidentiality, on the other hand he or she has a legal obligation in almost every state of the nation to report someone who may be a danger to him or herself or others (Richmond 2009). The legal issue of consent may arise in situations such as a general medical setting, educational context, or psychiatric clinic if the individual refuses to be assessed.

A client may insist he or she is sane, even if his or her attorney is pressing for an evaluation; a person may seem to pose a risk to him or herself or others but attempt to leave the Emergency Room. Additionally, within a school setting, parental consent must be obtained if a child is assessed.

The results of testing a minor for learning disability can impact the child's education for many years and carries an additional weighty responsibility for the assessor: the child's parents must be made fully aware of what types of treatment are available for the child and the pros and cons of assessment. In all settings, the tests must be validated, reliable, and accepted by the psychological community as appropriate for that setting.

An obvious example of appropriateness is the need to use the correct version of the MMPI Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI-A) when testing adolescents, and using tests 'normed' on a representative population. Some tests are normed on individuals who are already identified as pathological, while others upon the general population. Cultural sensitivity is also an issue: on a very basic level, when testing a student's IQ whose primary language is not English, the assessment must be performed in the student's first language, or not be a verbally-focused test.

Even then, a student who is not accustomed to taking tests may fare poorly, based on.