gone

Based on what you've presented sans existing issues, I find the neuropsych's suggestion ethically suspect.

I would say no, too. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. My spidey-sense tells me the biggest reason to do all this testing is so the neuropsych gets paid.

The idea that an involved parent can't get an idea of their child's abilities without advanced testing is ludicrous.

Well, I remember some concerning issues with the DD's daughter in the past, so it could be that the neuropsych is harking back to those and feeling like the current situation may be a temporary peace? It does seem odd, though.

I wonder if he is just very interested in her? Sometimes some children evoke strong interest from adults. Our DD was treated a bit like a wacky curiosity by her preschool teachers, who urged us to test her (at age 3) I think at least in part to satisfy their own curiosity. They had no financial motive at all to suggest it. (We did not do this. She now is not nearly so noticeable.) Similarly, staff are curious about my DS at his current school--I know he has been an object of conversation among the teachers generally and I honestly wouldn't be surprised if someone wanted to test him to a high ceiling just to see what he could do.

Oh, but wait--the pro bono suggestion has mysteriously not been brought up again? Hmm.

Go with your gut. You can always look back and come up with something you could have done different/better, don't beat yourself up it. I all to much understand how things can be rough at times. When it seems there is clear sailing ahead you hate to make waves.

JMO

This is kind-of interesting to me because when I first had my DS evaluated I was unhappy with the results and did not believe it was a true picture of DS abilities AND challenges (I was suspecting learning disorder), I immediately inquired about re-evaluated in a year/year and half and that particular place/doctor was completely against it. Of course, it ended u being more than okay because as I researched and learned, etc. I realized the place I had taken him to was simply not a good fit/place and not knowledgeable enough to be able to help with DS. But I just remember how they acted when I brought up the issue of re-evaluating etc. Anyway, weird. Biu perhaps it was my position that they were missing something and/or misdiagnosing that was behind that - they were perhaps simply reacting defensively...

Reading this, my gut reaction says he is interested in her as a sort of "lab rat". Even if he gives away his services (especially if he does!), I wouldn't go through with it...at least not with him.

I'd suspect he's pushing in order to compile a history on her for a research paper or such.

I would say to go with your gut feeling -maybe tell him that you are going to wait and consider doing those things later. Leave the door open, but don't do them now if you don't think it is necessary.

Unfortunately, I think that specialists sometimes start looking for *anything* else that might be wrong once they have addressed the original issue, not out of malice, but just because they want to be thorough.

Also, sometimes things are recommended because they want to rule them out, so that the patient, or patient's parents, don't come back later and say "you didn't tell me such and such…"

I didn't look at your post history, but I wouldn't put a kid through that much testing if I didn't need something for the child, i.e. if it were a normal part of a school's assessment to improve overall performance, or the child's needs were not being met at school.

I find it rather appalling that he didn't respect your wife's first reply and if you do go back in, I'd do it elsewhere--somewhere that they have more respect for your child as a person, and for your family.

That's what I think, too. We have run into that, and opted out-- because if for no other reason, DD isn't likely to be cooperative if SHE catches a whiff of it, and she's much more likely to clue in than any other person I know, being Deanna Troi herself.

She had a teacher once who was primarily interested in her as a "thesis subject." Yeah, I get that you're interested, and I get that she's a novelty, but-- no.

Ditto

My general response would to go with your gut feeling, because as your dd's parent, you have the best overall insight into the situation and your dd's needs. OTOH, I suspect that rather than this being a psych simply interested in your dd as a lab rat / test case for a research study, there may be more of a motivation on the part of the psych related to your dd's overall well-being, with a look toward her past struggles.



This one thing in your post also makes me wonder, just a bit, if it might not be worth a look - possibly not redoing all the testing, but another look at functional behavior - depending on what "phenomenally accommodating" means in real life. If it refers to differentiating academics and nothing more, then no, I wouldn't bother with a re-eval at this point in time. If it means the teacher is making accommodations for sensory, behavioral, or social challenges, then yes, I'd consider another look. While this year's teacher is phenomenal in her willingness to accommodate, next year's teacher might not be, and you might find yourself back in another situation requiring advocacy on your part - and the second-look data might be very useful both for advocating and for having an outside perspective on how well your dd is coping with school, and what accommodations she needs to be successful in school. I hope that doesn't sound harsh - it's definitely not meant to be! I think it's wonderful that she's doing well this year, and know that it's because you worked really hard to find her a good academic and classroom fit. I just wouldn't be overly quick to brush off the suggestion for a follow-up eval due to your dd's past experiences.



We have a possibly unjustified fear that sending a neuropsych in to interview her would be both an imposition, and a negative influence on her perception of DD's behavior.


Have you talked to your ped or anyone local re whether or not they would have a gut feeling that this neuropsych might just be pushy in trying to bring in some more business/$ for himself? Or is he difficult to get into and well-respected? Those things would also weigh into my decision. FWIW, when our 2e ds had his neuropsych in 2nd grade, the neuropsych recommended we return for an update eval in 3 years. That time frame worked out well, because it meant we had a follow-up snapshot just before middle school, which helped with advocacy, and just prior to puberty, and we did see quite a few changes in ds' functioning as he went through puberty and matured developmentally.

The other thing I'd add - I wouldn't worry too much about having my kids go through additional testing, simply because our experience with neurospych testing has been that our kids thought it was fun and didn't mind spending the day with the neuropsych. If we asked them to sit an extra day of state testing... that's a different story! Not quite as much fun

So yes, I'd be skeptical, but also see some potential usefulness in it. And I would most likely be straightforward, if you don't have insurance coverage for this, and just say (if you are interested), "Yes, we'd really like to do a follow-up now (including whichever testing you feel is relevant) but unfortunately we don't have the funds at this point in time."

Best wishes,

polarbear

If he really cares about your DD, he will be happy to help when the time comes that you feel she needs it.

I also worry the testing could cause your DD unnecessary stress/anxiety & derail the good that you have right now.

Don't be pressured by his sales pitch!

Good luck...

I don't know it sounds a bit suspect to me. If your child is doing fine then there does not seem to be any reason to put her through the evaluation process. Honestly, we did an eval to decide whether a grade skip DD's teacher suggested was a good idea and I really wish we had not. I worry more about my DD education now then I ever did before and she is and was doing great and is happy, there is not a reason to. So, I don't necessarily feel like more knowledge is better if there are no problems. I think sometimes it just creates more worry!

I think Polarbear had some good points, I think a picture at at the end of a great year has some merit, and I like information myself, and my kids generally love iq tests... Which would make me inclined to do SOME level of testing. But not with someone I wasn't 100% comfortable with. I'm certainly not on board with the approach you describe of "Lets throw everything at her, because it might help and CAN'T hurt" it absolutely can cause harm...

Well, here's what we've learned re: testing-- medical or otherwise.

"We might find out something useful."

Yes....


OR...


You might "find out" something that you have to spend the next six to eighteen months altering your life around, while you wait to find out if it even means anything other than a weird day that is a fluke in some respect.

I'm pretty big on "what would this change" before I sign on for evaluation/investigative testing now.

We've lived through too much of it that gave us a LOT more questions and agonizing choices than clear answers and actionable information.

But that is us.

I agree with most other posters. I would not do this "full" evaluation at this time with your child. If all is working at the moment, then right now isn't the time to interrupt her life. Experience has taught me to say no to testing (medical or physiological) that we didn't need.

On the other hand do you think you might want to think about if you want to continue to have a relationship with this doctor. Will you perhaps be wanting his help in a few years? Maybe there might be a compromise, some level of "basic" baseline testing that doesn't seem so intrusive to you.

I didn't read this before I posted. Sounds like there is no reason to want to keep a relationship with this doctor. If his interventions made things worse, then I would just say no. And if you have future problems find someone else to help you.

To paraphrase the immortal words of Homer (Simpson):-

Dear Doc,

Welcome to Dumpsville, population YOU!