Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Ethical, Legal and Risk Management Considerations in the Neuropsychological Assessment of Veterans

  • Published:
Psychological Injury and Law Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This article examines the ethical and regulatory issues facing neuropsychologists practicing within the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) system, either as Veteran Health Administration neuropsychologists or as consultants. The focus is proactive, with an emphasis on preparation consistent with a positive approach to ethical practice and risk management. Given the sheer magnitude of applicable Federal regulations and guidelines, the scope is limited to an overview of select ethical complexities involved in the professional practice of neuropsychology with veterans within VA settings. The article uses a top-down structure, with each section (a) identifying the relevant core biomedical ethical principles, followed by (b) an elaboration of the relevant ethical requirements as defined by the American Psychological Association’s Code of Ethics, and (c) applicable Federal regulations. Suggestions for translating core ethical principles and relevant ethical requirements into pragmatic action consistent with Federal regulation follow. Topics include (a) establishing professional competence, (b) understanding the type of assessment, (c) understanding consent requirements, and (d) understanding the ethical and regulatory issues in assessing veteran symptom presentation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • 5 CFR § 2635.101

  • 5 CFR § 2635.704

  • 38 CFR 3.159

  • 38 CFR § 1.201

  • 38 CFR § 1.576

  • 38 CFR § 3.326

  • 38 CFR § 3.901

  • 18 USC § 371 (2006)

  • 18 USC § 1001 (2006)

  • 18 USC § 1035 (2006)

  • 38 U.S.C. § 3.655 (2006)

  • 38 U.S.C. § 5103A (2006)

  • 38 U.S.C. § 7402 (2006)

  • 44 U.S.C. § 3301 (2006)

  • American Academy of Clinical Neuropsychology (2003). Official position of the American Academy of Clinical Neuropsychology on ethical complaints made against clinical neuropsychologists during adversarial proceedings. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 17(4), 443–445.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • American Academy of Clinical Neuropsychology (AACN). (2007). Practice guidelines for neuropsychological assessment and consultation. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 21(2), 209–231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • American Psychological Association. (2002). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. American Psychologist, 57, 1060–1073.

    Google Scholar 

  • American Psychological Association. (2010). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. Washington, D.C.: Author. http://www.apa.org/ethics/code/principles.pdf. Accessed 2 Oct 2012.

  • Beauchamp, T. & Childress, J. (2001). Principles of biomedical ethics (5th ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bennet, B., Bryant, B., VandenBos, G. & Greenwood, A. (1990). Professional liability and risk management. Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bush, S. & NAN Policy & Planning Committee (2005). Independent and court-ordered forensic neuropsychological examinations: Official statement of the National Academy of Neuropsychology. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 20, 997–1007.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bush, S. S., Ruff, R. M., Tröster, A. I., Barth, J. T., Koffler, S. P., Pliskin, N. H., et al (2005). Symptom validity assessment: Practice issues and medical necessity. Official position of the National Academy of Neuropsychology. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 20(4), 419–426.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bush, S., Russo, A. & Cuesta, G. (2012). Ethical considerations in the neuropsychological evaluation and treatment of veterans. In S. Bush (Ed.), Neuropsychological practice with veterans (pp. 333–356). New York: Springer Publishing Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carone, D., Iverson, G. & Bush, S. (2010). A model for approaching and providing feedback to patients regarding invalid test performance in clinical neuropsychological evaluations. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 24, 759–778.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Chafetz, M. (2011). The psychological consultative examination for social security disability. Psychological Injury and Law, 4, 235–244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Congressional Budget Office. (2012). The Veterans Health Administration’s treatment of PTSD and traumatic brain injury among recent combat veterans. Washington, DC: Author.

  • Cooper, D., Nelson, L., Armistead-Jehle, P. & Bowles, A. (2011). Utility of the Mild Brain Injury Symptoms Scale as a screening measure for symptom over-reporting in Operation Enduring Freedom/Operation Iraqi Freedom service members with post-concussive complaints. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 26, 718–827.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Department of Veterans Affairs. (2002) How do I appeal a decision? VA Pamphlet 01-02-02A. Washington, DC: Author.

  • Department of Veterans Affairs. (2006). Staffing: VA Handbook 5005. Washington, DC: Author.

  • Department of Veterans Affairs. (2012). Department of Veterans Affairs strategic plan refresh: FY2011 – 2015. Washington, DC: Author.

  • Department of Veterans Affairs, Office of the Inspector General (2010). Evaluation of physician credentialing and privileging in Veterans Health Administration facilities: VA Inspector General report No. 10-02381-185. Washington, DC: Department of Veterans Affairs.

    Google Scholar 

  • Department of Veterans Affairs, Office of the Inspector General (2012). Audit of VA’s internal controls over the use of disability benefits questionnaires: VA Inspector General Report No. 11-00733-95. Washington, DC: Department of Veterans Affairs.

    Google Scholar 

  • Department of Veterans Affairs/Department of Defense. (2009). VA/DoD clinical practice guideline for management of concussion/mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI). Washington, DC: Author.

  • Department of Veterans Affairs/Department of Defense. (2010). VA/DoD clinical practice guideline for management of post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Washington, DC: Author.

  • Durant, W. (1926). The story of philosophy: The lives and opinions of the world's greatest philosophers. New York: Simon & Schuster.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frueh, B., Grubaugh, A., Elhai, J. & Buckley, T. (2007). US Department of Veterans Affairs disability policies for posttraumatic stress disorder: administrative trends and implications for treatment, rehabilitation, and research. American Journal of Public Health, 97(12), 2143–2145.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Heilbronner, R., Sweet, J., Morgan, J., Larrabee, G., Millis, S. & Participants, C. (2009). American Academy of Clinical Neuropsychology Consensus Conference statement on the neuropsychological assessment of effort, response bias, and malingering. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 23(7), 1093–1129.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • House Committee on Veterans Affairs. (2012). Reclaiming the process: Examining the VBA claims transformation plan as a means to effectively serve our veteran: Hearings before the House Committee on Veterans Affairs. 112th Congress (June 19, 2012) (testimony of Linda A. Halliday).

  • Iverson, G. (2006). Ethical issues associated with the assessment of exaggeration, poor effort, and malingering. Applied Neuropsychology, 13(2), 77–90.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, J., Sinnott, P., Marx, B., Murdoch, M., Sayer, N., Alverez, J., et al (2011). Variation in practices and attitudes of clinicians assessing PTSD-related disability among veterans. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 24(5), 609–613.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson-Greene, D. & NAN Policy & Planning Committee (2005). Informed consent in clinical neuropsychology practice: Official statement of the National Academy of Neuropsychology. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 20, 335–340.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kilpatrick, D., Best, C., Smith, D., Kudler, H. & Cornelison-Grant, V. (2011). Serving those who have served: Educational needs of health care providers working with military members, veterans, and their families. Charleston: Medical University of South Carolina Department of Psychiatry, National Crime Victims Research & Treatment Center.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knapp, S., & VandeCreek, L. (2006). Practical ethics for psychologists: A positive approach. Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association

  • Koocher, G. & Keith-Speigel, P. (1998). Ethics in psychology and the mental health professions. New York: Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marx, B. & Holowka, D. (2011). PTSD disability assessment. PTSD Research Quarterly, 22, 1–6.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGrath, J. (2002). Fraudulent claims of combat status in the VA? Psychiatric Times, 53(3), 345.

    Google Scholar 

  • Poyner, G. (2010). Psychological evaluations of veterans claiming PTSD disability with the Department of Veterans Affairs: A clinician’s viewpoint. Psychological Injury and Law, 3, 130–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ridgeway, J. (2011). Mind reading and the art of drafting medical questions in veterans benefits claims. Psychological Injury and Law, 4(3–4), 171–186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roemer, L., Litz, B. & Orsillo, S. (1997). Consistency of traumatic memories. The American Journal of Psychiatry, 154, 1628.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ruff, R., Iverson, G., Barth, J., Bush, S. & Broshek, D. (2009). Recommendations for diagnosing a mild traumatic brain injury: A National Academy of Neuropsychology education paper. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 24, 3–10.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Russo, A. (2012). Symptom validity test performance and consistency of self-reported memory functioning of Operation Enduring Freedom/Operation Iraqi Freedom Veterans with positive Veteran Health Administration comprehensive traumatic brain injury evaluations. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 27(8), 840–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Russo, A., Bush, S. & Rasin-Waters, D. (2012). Ethical considerations in the neuropsychological assessment of older adults. In L. D. Ravdin & H. L. Katzen (Eds.), Clinical handbook on the neuropsychology of aging and dementia. New York: Springer Science.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schoenhard, W. (2010). Credentialing and privileging for compensation and pension memorandum. Washington, DC: Department of Veterans Affairs.

    Google Scholar 

  • Veterans Benefits Administration (2002). Adjudication procedures manual rewrite: M21-1MR. Washington, DC: Department of Veterans Affairs.

    Google Scholar 

  • Veterans Benefits Administration (2007). Clinicians guide: Compensation and pension. Washington, DC: Department of Veterans Affairs.

    Google Scholar 

  • Veterans Health Administration (2006a). Certification of clinicians performing compensation and pension examinations: VHA Directive 2008:005. Washington, DC: Department of Veterans Affairs.

    Google Scholar 

  • Veterans Health Administration (2006b). Health information management and health records handbook 1907–01. Washington, DC: Department of Veterans Affairs.

    Google Scholar 

  • Veterans Health Administration (2006c). Compliance and business integrity (CBI) program: VHA Directive 1030. Washington, DC: Department of Veterans Affairs.

    Google Scholar 

  • Veterans Health Administration (2008a). Consult policy: Directive 2008–056. Washington, DC: Department of Veterans Affairs.

    Google Scholar 

  • Veterans Health Administration (2008b). Credentialing and privileging handbook 1100.19. Washington, DC: Department of Veterans Affairs.

    Google Scholar 

  • Veterans Health Administration (2009). Informed consent for clinical treatments and procedures: VHA handbook 1004.01. Washington, DC: Department of Veterans Affairs.

    Google Scholar 

  • Veterans Health Administration (2010). Introduction of disability benefit questionnaires (DBQs) to support the compensation and pension (C&P) process: VHA Directive 2010–045. Washington, DC: Department of Veterans Affairs.

    Google Scholar 

  • Veterans Health Administration (2012). Analysis of VA health care utilization among Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF), Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF), and Operation New Dawn (OND) veterans. Washington, DC: Department of Veterans Affairs.

    Google Scholar 

  • Veterans Health Initiative. (2002). Post-traumatic stress disorder: Implications for primary care. Independent study course. Washington, DC: Author.

  • Veterans Health Initiative. (2010). Traumatic brain injury. Independent study course. Washington, DC: Author.

  • Watson, P., McFall, M., McBrine, C., Schurr, P., Friedman, M., Keane, T. & Hamblin, J. (2002). Best practice manual for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) compensation and pension examinations. Washington, DC: Department of Veterans Affairs.

    Google Scholar 

  • Worthen, M. & Moering, R. (2011). A practical guide to conducting VA compensation and pension exams for PTSD and other mental disorders. Psychological Injury and Law, 4, 187–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Psychology Department, VA New York Harbor Healthcare System Brooklyn Campus, 800 Poly Place, Brooklyn, New York, 11209, USA

    Arthur C. Russo

Authors
  1. Arthur C. Russo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Arthur C. Russo.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Russo, A.C. Ethical, Legal and Risk Management Considerations in the Neuropsychological Assessment of Veterans. Psychol. Inj. and Law 6, 21–30 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12207-013-9145-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12207-013-9145-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation