Please be clear that I am not knocking the psychologist or his/her work or clinical skill. (That would be unprofessional toward a colleague.) Just pointing out that there are additional pieces of (unknown) data that could affect the diagnostic picture. I certainly don't have all the information necessary to make a clear assessment one way or the other! I am guessing that the indicators of perfectionism fit more with the psych's clinical instincts. And he/she was on the spot, so naturally one defers to his/her observations. But in the absence of more fine-motor data, that doesn't actually rule out fine-motor speed/automaticity issues. Which can cause anxiety in themselves, especially in a child whose mind moves so much more quickly.
I will admit at first I read your replies as knocking or questioning our psychologist. But as the discussion progressed I realized your probing was causing me to think it over more carefully. Anything that helps me to better understand what I am seeing, and help me learn to speak the language of giftedness and testing is welcome. It only benefits my child in the long run, and that's what this is about. I am still confident in his diagnosis, but moreso now, and not due to sheer stubbornness! (DH will tell you I have a bit of a streak of that!)
I agree. That's what it's all about. The better you understand your child (and, ultimately, he understands himself), the more effective your efforts will be, creating an optimal match between him and his environment.
I just didn't want you to overlook any alternative interpretations. I've walked into meetings with my formulation all prepared, apparently supported by my data, presented my findings, and then had a key interpretation flatly contradicted by the student, rather convincingly. I listen very attentively when that happens; it's a good learning opportunity.
One of my guiding principles is that parents are the experts on their children. The corollary to that is that children become the experts on themselves, as they mature.
