[No CEs] It has been a decade since the term clinical judgment and its use in conceptualizing a case and arriving at valid opinions entered the forensic rehabilitation literature and lexicon through the writings of Field, Choppa, Barros-Bailey, Neulicht, and Johnson. In the intervening period, the term has become hijacked to imply the lack of a methodological process through the sole experience of the practitioner instead of a determined process of decision-making.   

By approaching clinical judgment from a comprehensive analysis of all forensics literature inclusive of all disciplines beyond rehabilitation, the definition of clinical judgment is not only clarified, but also the forensic practitioner receives a tool chest of resources to demonstrate an evidence-based approach and to educate those within the forensic context of how the practitioner applied a clinical judgment method in decision-making.

Objectives

1. List operational definitons of clinical judgment as applied to forensic practice regardless of disipline
2. Interpret what is and is not clinical judgment
3. Examine models identified in the literature related to data integration and decision making (clinical judgment) in forensics
4. Demonstrate the use of models as applied to forensic rehabilitation

Speakers
Mary Barros-Bailey, PhD, CRC, CLCP, ABVE/D
Scott Beveridge, PhD, LCPC, CRC, CDMS

Here's what attendees said...
"Extremely interesting, engaging and helpful in the world of real practice."
"Gave us much to think about. I will not look at the term "clinical judgement" in the same way as I used to."