Hm. I think it might be worthwhile considering whether NVLD or the existing DCD diagnosis fit better as possible alternative formulations. Many of those kids are characterized as ADHD early, but look less so as the years go by. Note: I'm not saying he doesn't have ADHD, but I'm not sure reaching for an additional diagnosis is totally justified by the data. The relevant points:
1. VS much lower than VC or FR (both WISC and VMI), both motor and, to a lesser extent, motor-free. Though he did do nicely on the perception portion of the VMI, this does not involve spatial manipulations, even mentally, while both the WISC tasks do (one motor, and one motor-free).
2. Visual memory much lower than verbal/auditory working memory. Can't tell if the WRAML visual memory was mostly owing to motor demands, since the recognition tasks weren't administered (minimal motor), but I'm suspecting it was, since he did fine with the VMI perception subtest.
3. Preexisting Dx of DCD.
As to the data they used to Dx ADHD, all of those could also be used to support NVLD &/or DCD Dx, including the EF deficits on the Tower test.
His strengths: all of his motor-free language skills tested high. He even did well on spelling, probably because he only had to do one word at a time, and it's untimed. I'd be interested to see how his oral expressive language looked, in contrast to motor-involved written language. Similarly, his oral math skills, versus written. If you look at his achievement scores, you can almost line them up in reverse order of motor and motor speed demands.
