'Insuring' a correct differential diagnosis--a 'forensic' collaborative experience.
Mr. J was referred to a speech and language therapist (SLT) by a consultant psychiatrist. He had sustained an industrial accident which he claimed was responsible for a range of problems which included a speech and language problem. Some three years after his accident, he brought an action for damages arising out of the accident. His solicitor, on the recommendation of the consultant psychiatrist, contacted the SLT requesting his views as to whether Mr. J's speech difficulties were due to the injuries sustained and requesting recommendations for further treatment. The SLT saw Mr. J and concluded that he had problems at all communication levels, the greatest being an articulatory impairment. Some reports suggested a psychological basis for his problems and others, including the psychiatrists', suggested an organic basis.
Abudarham
S
S
School of Speech and Language Therapy, Faculty of Health and Community Care, University of Central England, Franchise Street, Birmingham B42 2SU. sam.abudarham@uce.ac.uk
White
A
A
D000062:Accidents, Occupational / Q000523:psychology; D001037:Aphasia / Q000209:etiology; D001925:Brain Damage, Chronic / Q000175:diagnosis*; D003937:Diagnosis, Differential; D005104:Expert Testimony; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008306:Malingering / Q000175:diagnosis; D009483:Neuropsychological Tests; D013066:Speech-Language Pathology / Q000379:methods*