LASA: Etiology and Treatment

In M3 Assignment 2 RA, you reviewed a  case study about Jessica, made primary and secondary diagnoses, and  identified differential diagnoses for each principal and secondary  diagnosis. The skills you developed and the feedback you received after  completing this required assignment, will significantly help you in  completing the following LASA. For example, both assignments (RA and  LASA), require you to complete similar tasks such as identifying the  principal and secondary diagnoses, providing rationale for the  diagnoses, and offering differential (alternative) diagnoses.

In this assignment, you will discuss the etiology and  treatment of your principal and secondary diagnoses for the following  case study using a minimum of five peer-reviewed sources on etiology and  a minimum of five peer-reviewed sources on treatment. Your paper should  have separate sections for the etiology of each principal and secondary  diagnosis, therapeutic modalities for each principal and secondary  diagnosis, justification of the selected therapeutic modalities for the  disorders, application of the treatment for the disorders, and a  reference page for your sources. Your citations and references should be  in APA style, and your paper should be 8–10 pages in length.

Click here to read the second case study (Psychological Evaluation for Homer Brine).

Once you read the case, complete the following tasks:

• Identify a principal and secondary diagnosis for the assigned case study with rationale for each diagnosis.
• Describe multiple elements of the etiology  for the principal and secondary diagnoses. Explain how the etiology  contributed to each (principal and secondary) diagnosis.
• Identify a specific therapeutic modality for each principal and secondary diagnosis.
• Apply therapeutic modality to treat each of the principal and secondary diagnoses in the case study.
• Identify at least one differential (alternate) diagnosis for the principal and secondary diagnoses.
• Discuss key cultural factors that may influence diagnosis and treatment.

Write in a clear, concise, and organized manner;  demonstrate ethical scholarship in accurate representation and  attribution of sources; and display accurate spelling, grammar, and  punctuation. Include citations in text and at the end of the document in  the correct APA format.

Submission Details:

• By the due date assigned, save your diagnoses as M5_A2_Lastname_Firstname.doc and submit the document to the Submissions Area.

LASA is worth 300 points and will be graded according to the following rubric.

Because this assignment is worth 30% of your overall  grade in the course, it is particularly important to view the rubric for  additional clarity on the requirements and point values for each  component of the assignment.

Assignment Component   Proficient   Maximum Points    Identify a principal and secondary diagnosis for the assigned case study with rationale for each diagnosis. Identifies  at least one principal and one secondary diagnosis that are rationally  linked to the case provided. Provides detailed information about how  diagnoses were reached and how the client’s symptoms fit the diagnostic  criteria. Evidence is presented in a logical manner that builds a solid  case which supports diagnostic impressions.  48    Describe  multiple elements of the etiology for the principal and secondary  diagnoses. Explain how the etiology contributed to each (principal &  secondary) diagnosis. Presents  a clear understanding of the possible origins of the principal and  secondary diagnoses. Demonstrates ability to integrate and conceptualize  all of the information presented. Clearly states how the diagnoses/  presenting issue began (ETIOLOGY) and what may be maintaining them.  48    Identify a specific therapeutic modality for each principal and secondary diagnoses. Chooses  a viable therapeutic modality that has applications to the principal  and secondary diagnoses and is appropriate for the client.  48    Apply therapeutic modality to treat each of the principal and secondary diagnoses in the case study. Demonstrates  a clear application of the selected therapeutic modality for treatment  of the principal and secondary diagnoses of the person in the vignette.  48    Identify at least one differential (alternate) diagnosis for the primary and secondary diagnosis. Clearly  discusses other diagnoses (differential diagnoses) that were ruled-out  as well as specific reasons for eliminating these diagnoses.  32    Discussed key cultural factors that may influence diagnosis and treatment. Describes  cultural factors that may influence the diagnoses and identifies  cultural issues that may require additional exploration. Outlines how  the cultural factors influence treatment options.  48    Academic Writing   Writing  is generally clear and in an organized manner. It demonstrates ethical  scholarship in accurate representation and attribution of sources; and  generally displays accurate spelling, grammar, punctuation. Errors are  few, isolated, and do not interfere with reader’s comprehension.
Citations in text and at the end of the document are in correct APA format. Writing  is generally clear and in an organized manner. It demonstrates ethical  scholarship in accurate representation and attribution of sources; and  generally displays accurate spelling, grammar, punctuation. Errors are  few, isolated, and do not interfere with reader’s comprehension.
Citations in text and at the end of the document are in correct APA format.  28    Total:    300       Due DateOct 8, 2018 11:59 PM Hide Rubrics

Rubric Name: FP6005_M5A2_Grading_Rubric

This  table lists criteria and criteria group name in the first column. The  first row lists level names and includes scores if the rubric uses a  numeric scoring method.CriteriaMaximum PointsGR1 Identify a principal and secondary diagnosis for the assigned case study with rationale for each diagnosis.48 points/ 48GR2  Describe multiple elements of the etiology for the principal and  secondary diagnoses. Explain how the etiology contributed to each  (principal & secondary) diagnosis.48 points/ 48GR3 Identify a specific therapeutic modality for each principal and secondary diagnoses.48 points/ 48GR4 Apply therapeutic modality to treat each of the principal and secondary diagnoses in the case study.48 points/ 48GR5  Clearly discusses other diagnoses (differential diagnoses) that were  ruled-out as well as specific reasons for eliminating these diagnoses.32 points/ 32GR6  Describes cultural factors that may influence the diagnoses and  identifies cultural issues that may require additional exploration.  Outlines how the cultural factors influence treatment options.48 points/ 48GR7  Wrote in a clear, concise, and organized manner; demonstrated ethical  scholarship in the accurate representation and attribution of sources;  and displayed accurate spelling, grammar, and punctuation.28 points/ 28Total— / 300

Rubric Name: FP6005_M5A2_LASA Rubric

This  table lists criteria and criteria group name in the first column. The  first row lists level names and includes scores if the rubric uses a  numeric scoring method.MAFP_PO1_Psychological Theory & PracticeLevel 1 UnsatisfactoryLevel 2 EmergingLevel 3 ProficientLevel 4 ExemplaryC1 Principal & Secondary Diagnosis (PO1).

Neglects to identify a principal or secondary diagnosis and neglects to rationally link the diagnosis to the case study.

Neglects to identify a principal or secondary diagnosis or neglects to rationally link the diagnosis to the case study.

Identifies  at least one principal and one secondary diagnosis that are rationally  linked to the case provided. Provides detailed information about how  diagnoses were reached and how the client’s symptoms fit the diagnostic  criteria. Evidence is presented in a logical manner that builds a solid  case which supports diagnostic impressions.

Identifies  one or more principal and secondary diagnoses that are rationally  linked to the case provided and supported by references. Provides  detailed information about how diagnoses were reached and how the  client’s symptoms fit the diagnostic criteria. Evidence is presented in a  logical manner that builds a solid case which supports diagnostic  impressions.

C2 Etiology of Diagnoses (PO1).

Either lacks a description of elements of etiology of one or more diagnoses or description is inaccurate and incomplete.

Provides  a description of elements of etiology of one or more diagnoses but at  least one of the descriptions is inaccurate and incomplete.

Presents  a clear understanding of the possible origins of the principal and  secondary diagnoses. Demonstrates ability to integrate and conceptualize  all of the information presented. Clearly states how the diagnoses/  presenting issue began (ETIOLOGY) and what may be maintaining them.

Presents  a clear understanding of the possible origins of the principal and  secondary diagnoses based on empirical research. Demonstrates ability to  integrate and conceptualize all of the information presented. Clearly  states how the diagnoses/ presenting issue began (ETIOLOGY) and what may  be maintaining them.

C3 Therapeutic Modality (PO1).

Neglects to identify an appropriate therapeutic modality.

Identifies a specific therapeutic modality but neglects to articulate how it was appropriate for the diagnoses identified.

Chooses  a viable therapeutic modality that has applications to the principal  and secondary diagnoses and is appropriate for the client.

Chooses  a viable therapeutic modality that has applications to the principal  and secondary diagnoses and is appropriate for the client and supported  by research literature.

C4 Therapeutic Modality Txt Application (PO1).

Neglects to apply or erroneously applies a therapeutic modality to treat the diagnosis.

Identifies a specific therapeutic modality but neglects to articulate how it was appropriate for the diagnoses identified.

Chooses  a viable therapeutic modality that has applications to the principal  and secondary diagnoses and is appropriate for the client.

Chooses  a viable therapeutic modality that has applications to the principal  and secondary diagnoses and is appropriate for the client and supported  by research literature.

C5 Differential Diagnosis (PO1).

Neglects to identify any alternative diagnosis for either the primary or secondary diagnosis.

Identifies one alternative diagnosis, but neglects to articulate rationale for the diagnosis and why it was ruled out.

Clearly  discusses other diagnoses (differential diagnoses) that were ruled-out  as well as specific reasons for eliminating these diagnoses.

Clearly  discusses other diagnoses (differential diagnoses) that were ruled-out  as well as specific reasons for eliminating these diagnoses. Articulates  any assessments or additional information to rule out and alternative  diagnosis.

This  table lists criteria and criteria group name in the first column. The  first row lists level names and includes scores if the rubric uses a  numeric scoring method.MAFP_PO5_Multicultural CompetenceLevel 1 UnsatisfactoryLevel 2 EmergingLevel 3 ProficientLevel 4 ExemplaryC6 Cultural Factors (PO5).

There was no opinion provided on the defendant’s risk of dangerousness or insanity.

The opinion provided was vague and not well connected to the case vignette.

Describes  cultural factors that may influence the diagnoses and identifies  cultural issues that may require additional exploration. Outlines how  the cultural factors influence treatment options.

Describes  cultural factors that may influence the diagnoses and identifies  cultural issues that may require additional exploration. Outlines how  the cultural factors influence treatment options supported by  appropriate research literature.

Associated Learning ObjectivesMAFP_PO1_Psychological Theory & PracticeAssessment Method:  Score on Criteria – C1 Principal & Secondary Diagnosis (PO1).Required Performance:  Level 3 ProficientMAFP_PO1_Psychological Theory & PracticeAssessment Method:  Score on Criteria – C2 Etiology of Diagnoses (PO1).Required Performance:  Level 3 ProficientMAFP_PO1_Psychological Theory & PracticeAssessment Method:  Score on Criteria – C3 Therapeutic Modality (PO1).Required Performance:  Level 3 ProficientMAFP_PO1_Psychological Theory & PracticeAssessment Method:  Score on Criteria – C5 Differential Diagnosis (PO1).Required Performance:  Level 3 ProficientMAFP_PO1_Psychological Theory & PracticeAssessment Method:  Score on Criteria – C4 Therapeutic Modality Txt Application (PO1).Required Performance:  Level 3 ProficientMAFP_PO5_Multicultural CompetenceAs