Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I work in the schools. The private psych evals I see are not more extensive than school. I think school evals are way more comprehensive. Private evals also don’t include input from the school team, who has invaluable info to add about how the student is actually doing at school. School psych evals can do the testing and the parent rating scales.
I also see private evals frequently making recommendations for what should happen in the school setting, and the providers clearly have no idea or understanding of school model, Doe/LRE requirements, or laws. Of course the private providers think they are better and think they know best.

Private providers not accepting insurance is unethical and those providers have a conflict of interest (financial) with every single case. Remember you are their Customer And profit.

Having dealt with submitting claims to my insurance company and knowing friends who are physicians that do accept insurance, I absolutely understand why many providers do not take insurance.

Our entire healthcare system is profit driven, including providers that take insurance.

FWIW our private provider that doesn't take insurance did parent and teacher rating scales and a school observation.

So you are saying you know best, and the private providers think they know best. Do you see a pattern here?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I work in the schools. The private psych evals I see are not more extensive than school. I think school evals are way more comprehensive. Private evals also don’t include input from the school team, who has invaluable info to add about how the student is actually doing at school. School psych evals can do the testing and the parent rating scales.
I also see private evals frequently making recommendations for what should happen in the school setting, and the providers clearly have no idea or understanding of school model, Doe/LRE requirements, or laws. Of course the private providers think they are better and think they know best.

Private providers not accepting insurance is unethical and those providers have a conflict of interest (financial) with every single case. Remember you are their Customer And profit.

I worked in public schools for over 10 years as a school psych before opening up a private practice and find your post factually incorrect and offensive. My private practice reports are considerably more thorough compared to my previous school reports, because I have more time, flexibility, and access to more tests. Also, I do not have an unreasonable caseload that severely limits the amount of time I can spend on a child evaluation. I also consult with classroom teachers and distribute rating scales to teachers and special educators. Lastly, I do pro bono work for clients with financial constraints so their child can have a comprehensive evaluation that the school failed to do.

+1

Your comments are laughable. show me ONE private psych report that "consulted with teachers." Nonsense. Not one. By "consulting with parents," you mean that you had them complete rating scales... which is hardly "consulting" and which a school psych (or even a pediatrician!) can do. You consult with parents, who offer great perspective...but offer only one perspective and have different knowledge than professionals. While school staff do have unreasonable caseloads, they have a legal DUTY and ethical obligation to complete a thorough assessment which is much more involved...because it services to make eligibility determinations and for educational planning. Private psych reports do not have that duty.

And yes it is 100% true that any private practice professional who does not accept insurance is unethical. It is 100% true that you have a conflict of interest with all of your clients who are your "customers" versus your "patients." it is despicable to me. The fact that you come on here and post to defend yourself about this proves my point. Wow gold star for you for doing "pro bono work" for families with financial constraints. No family should be expected to pay thousands of dollars for an assessment that should be covered by insurance or cost a more reasonable fee.

Stop talking down about school professionals and your colleagues.

Uh, yes?? My private eval absolutely consulted the teachers. wtf are you talking about???

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I work in the schools. The private psych evals I see are not more extensive than school. I think school evals are way more comprehensive. Private evals also don’t include input from the school team, who has invaluable info to add about how the student is actually doing at school. School psych evals can do the testing and the parent rating scales.
I also see private evals frequently making recommendations for what should happen in the school setting, and the providers clearly have no idea or understanding of school model, Doe/LRE requirements, or laws. Of course the private providers think they are better and think they know best.

Private providers not accepting insurance is unethical and those providers have a conflict of interest (financial) with every single case. Remember you are their Customer And profit.

I worked in public schools for over 10 years as a school psych before opening up a private practice and find your post factually incorrect and offensive. My private practice reports are considerably more thorough compared to my previous school reports, because I have more time, flexibility, and access to more tests. Also, I do not have an unreasonable caseload that severely limits the amount of time I can spend on a child evaluation. I also consult with classroom teachers and distribute rating scales to teachers and special educators. Lastly, I do pro bono work for clients with financial constraints so their child can have a comprehensive evaluation that the school failed to do.

+1

Your comments are laughable. show me ONE private psych report that "consulted with teachers." Nonsense. Not one. By "consulting with parents," you mean that you had them complete rating scales... which is hardly "consulting" and which a school psych (or even a pediatrician!) can do. You consult with parents, who offer great perspective...but offer only one perspective and have different knowledge than professionals. While school staff do have unreasonable caseloads, they have a legal DUTY and ethical obligation to complete a thorough assessment which is much more involved...because it services to make eligibility determinations and for educational planning. Private psych reports do not have that duty.

And yes it is 100% true that any private practice professional who does not accept insurance is unethical. It is 100% true that you have a conflict of interest with all of your clients who are your "customers" versus your "patients." it is despicable to me. The fact that you come on here and post to defend yourself about this proves my point. Wow gold star for you for doing "pro bono work" for families with financial constraints. No family should be expected to pay thousands of dollars for an assessment that should be covered by insurance or cost a more reasonable fee.

Stop talking down about school professionals and your colleagues.

Uh, yes?? My private eval absolutely consulted the teachers. wtf are you talking about???

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I work in the schools. The private psych evals I see are not more extensive than school. I think school evals are way more comprehensive. Private evals also don’t include input from the school team, who has invaluable info to add about how the student is actually doing at school. School psych evals can do the testing and the parent rating scales.
I also see private evals frequently making recommendations for what should happen in the school setting, and the providers clearly have no idea or understanding of school model, Doe/LRE requirements, or laws. Of course the private providers think they are better and think they know best.

Private providers not accepting insurance is unethical and those providers have a conflict of interest (financial) with every single case. Remember you are their Customer And profit.

I worked in public schools for over 10 years as a school psych before opening up a private practice and find your post factually incorrect and offensive. My private practice reports are considerably more thorough compared to my previous school reports, because I have more time, flexibility, and access to more tests. Also, I do not have an unreasonable caseload that severely limits the amount of time I can spend on a child evaluation. I also consult with classroom teachers and distribute rating scales to teachers and special educators. Lastly, I do pro bono work for clients with financial constraints so their child can have a comprehensive evaluation that the school failed to do.

Your comments are laughable. show me ONE private psych report that "consulted with teachers." Nonsense. Not one. By "consulting with parents," you mean that you had them complete rating scales... which is hardly "consulting" and which a school psych (or even a pediatrician!) can do. You consult with parents, who offer great perspective...but offer only one perspective and have different knowledge than professionals. While school staff do have unreasonable caseloads, they have a legal DUTY and ethical obligation to complete a thorough assessment which is much more involved...because it services to make eligibility determinations and for educational planning. Private psych reports do not have that duty.

And yes it is 100% true that any private practice professional who does not accept insurance is unethical. It is 100% true that you have a conflict of interest with all of your clients who are your "customers" versus your "patients." it is despicable to me. The fact that you come on here and post to defend yourself about this proves my point. Wow gold star for you for doing "pro bono work" for families with financial constraints. No family should be expected to pay thousands of dollars for an assessment that should be covered by insurance or cost a more reasonable fee.

Stop talking down about school professionals and your colleagues.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I work in the schools. The private psych evals I see are not more extensive than school. I think school evals are way more comprehensive. Private evals also don’t include input from the school team, who has invaluable info to add about how the student is actually doing at school. School psych evals can do the testing and the parent rating scales.
I also see private evals frequently making recommendations for what should happen in the school setting, and the providers clearly have no idea or understanding of school model, Doe/LRE requirements, or laws. Of course the private providers think they are better and think they know best.

Private providers not accepting insurance is unethical and those providers have a conflict of interest (financial) with every single case. Remember you are their Customer And profit.

I worked in public schools for over 10 years as a school psych before opening up a private practice and find your post factually incorrect and offensive. My private practice reports are considerably more thorough compared to my previous school reports, because I have more time, flexibility, and access to more tests. Also, I do not have an unreasonable caseload that severely limits the amount of time I can spend on a child evaluation. I also consult with classroom teachers and distribute rating scales to teachers and special educators. Lastly, I do pro bono work for clients with financial constraints so their child can have a comprehensive evaluation that the school failed to do.

Your comments are laughable. show me ONE private psych report that "consulted with teachers." Nonsense. Not one. By "consulting with parents," you mean that you had them complete rating scales... which is hardly "consulting" and which a school psych (or even a pediatrician!) can do. You consult with parents, who offer great perspective...but offer only one perspective and have different knowledge than professionals. While school staff do have unreasonable caseloads, they have a legal DUTY and ethical obligation to complete a thorough assessment which is much more involved...because it services to make eligibility determinations and for educational planning. Private psych reports do not have that duty.

And yes it is 100% true that any private practice professional who does not accept insurance is unethical. It is 100% true that you have a conflict of interest with all of your clients who are your "customers" versus your "patients." it is despicable to me. The fact that you come on here and post to defend yourself about this proves my point. Wow gold star for you for doing "pro bono work" for families with financial constraints. No family should be expected to pay thousands of dollars for an assessment that should be covered by insurance or cost a more reasonable fee.

Stop talking down about school professionals and your colleagues.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What school does is not comparable, it's more limited in scope, and school based specialists don't have same credentials as a pediatric neuropsych practitioners, usually. Also school based staff have inherent conflict of interest - based on their conclusions school has to ration scarse public resources, so if something is subtle, it may not be included.

Our school eval was basically identical to the Children’s eval. I don’t think they did ADOS though. And disabilities are not “subtle” anyway.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I work in the schools. The private psych evals I see are not more extensive than school. I think school evals are way more comprehensive. Private evals also don’t include input from the school team, who has invaluable info to add about how the student is actually doing at school. School psych evals can do the testing and the parent rating scales.
I also see private evals frequently making recommendations for what should happen in the school setting, and the providers clearly have no idea or understanding of school model, Doe/LRE requirements, or laws. Of course the private providers think they are better and think they know best.

Private providers not accepting insurance is unethical and those providers have a conflict of interest (financial) with every single case. Remember you are their Customer And profit.

I worked in public schools for over 10 years as a school psych before opening up a private practice and find your post factually incorrect and offensive. My private practice reports are considerably more thorough compared to my previous school reports, because I have more time, flexibility, and access to more tests. Also, I do not have an unreasonable caseload that severely limits the amount of time I can spend on a child evaluation. I also consult with classroom teachers and distribute rating scales to teachers and special educators. Lastly, I do pro bono work for clients with financial constraints so their child can have a comprehensive evaluation that the school failed to do.

Your comments are laughable. show me ONE private psych report that "consulted with teachers." Nonsense. Not one. By "consulting with parents," you mean that you had them complete rating scales... which is hardly "consulting" and which a school psych (or even a pediatrician!) can do. You consult with parents, who offer great perspective...but offer only one perspective and have different knowledge than professionals. While school staff do have unreasonable caseloads, they have a legal DUTY and ethical obligation to complete a thorough assessment which is much more involved...because it services to make eligibility determinations and for educational planning. Private psych reports do not have that duty.

And yes it is 100% true that any private practice professional who does not accept insurance is unethical. It is 100% true that you have a conflict of interest with all of your clients who are your "customers" versus your "patients." it is despicable to me. The fact that you come on here and post to defend yourself about this proves my point. Wow gold star for you for doing "pro bono work" for families with financial constraints. No family should be expected to pay thousands of dollars for an assessment that should be covered by insurance or cost a more reasonable fee.

Stop talking down about school professionals and your colleagues.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What school does is not comparable, it's more limited in scope, and school based specialists don't have same credentials as a pediatric neuropsych practitioners, usually. Also school based staff have inherent conflict of interest - based on their conclusions school has to ration scarse public resources, so if something is subtle, it may not be included.

Our school eval was basically identical to the Children’s eval. I don’t think they did ADOS though. And disabilities are not “subtle” anyway.

Good for you. But my child had a documented gross motor and small motor delay (by a developmental pediatrician at childrens) and the school eval didn't mention either one. Lower elementary age.

did you get an OT evaluation from the school? we had an OT evaluation by an OT and the WISC etc by the school psychologist. We had gross motor done by an Early Stages PT earlier as well.

I have lots to complain about in terms of special ed, but testing isn’t one of them!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I work in the schools. The private psych evals I see are not more extensive than school. I think school evals are way more comprehensive. Private evals also don’t include input from the school team, who has invaluable info to add about how the student is actually doing at school. School psych evals can do the testing and the parent rating scales.
I also see private evals frequently making recommendations for what should happen in the school setting, and the providers clearly have no idea or understanding of school model, Doe/LRE requirements, or laws. Of course the private providers think they are better and think they know best.

Private providers not accepting insurance is unethical and those providers have a conflict of interest (financial) with every single case. Remember you are their Customer And profit.

I worked in public schools for over 10 years as a school psych before opening up a private practice and find your post factually incorrect and offensive. My private practice reports are considerably more thorough compared to my previous school reports, because I have more time, flexibility, and access to more tests. Also, I do not have an unreasonable caseload that severely limits the amount of time I can spend on a child evaluation. I also consult with classroom teachers and distribute rating scales to teachers and special educators. Lastly, I do pro bono work for clients with financial constraints so their child can have a comprehensive evaluation that the school failed to do.

Anonymous wrote:I work in the schools. The private psych evals I see are not more extensive than school. I think school evals are way more comprehensive. Private evals also don’t include input from the school team, who has invaluable info to add about how the student is actually doing at school. School psych evals can do the testing and the parent rating scales.
I also see private evals frequently making recommendations for what should happen in the school setting, and the providers clearly have no idea or understanding of school model, Doe/LRE requirements, or laws. Of course the private providers think they are better and think they know best.

Private providers not accepting insurance is unethical and those providers have a conflict of interest (financial) with every single case. Remember you are their Customer And profit.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What school does is not comparable, it's more limited in scope, and school based specialists don't have same credentials as a pediatric neuropsych practitioners, usually. Also school based staff have inherent conflict of interest - based on their conclusions school has to ration scarse public resources, so if something is subtle, it may not be included.

Our school eval was basically identical to the Children’s eval. I don’t think they did ADOS though. And disabilities are not “subtle” anyway.

I guess you missed it when they have told you repeatedly that many disabilities are in fact invisible. Do you go yelling at people who park in the handicapped spots because they don't have a wheelchair or cane?

so subtle it cannot be detected by a psychologist administering normed tests? lol.

The two models are looking for entirely different things. Privately, the provider is looking for any area of weakness. In a school, they are looking for disability to consider qualification. You're not comparing apples to apples.

Anonymous wrote:If you want school services you'll have to do the school exam. Reasons why parents do private evaluations rather than rely solely on school evaluations:

(1) The school refuses to evaluate, at all.
(2) The school evaluated, but said there's not a problem (kid doesn't qualify for services), and the parents want to bolster their case to challenge the school's conclusion.
(3) The school evaluated, and agreed to provide services, but the parents don't think the services are sufficient/adequately targeted, and want to bolster their case to challenge the services.
(4) The parents do not plan to rely (solely) on school district services, and want an independent opinion regarding what might benefit their child. School evaluations will not suggest services are needed unless they also agree to provide.

The "wait for insurance-covered" provider vs. pay out-of-pocket is probably largely a factor of (1) how long the wait will be, (2) how severe/untenable the problems are, (3) relative importance starting remediation/services ASAP.