Managing Psychological And Psychiatric Fitness For Duty And Threat Assessments Teleconference

Dr. Fisher will assist employers, EAP professionals and others with the decision-making process used when requesting and evaluating Risk and Fitness for Duty evaluations. Included will be a discussion of common reasons to refer an employee for a FFDE, information initially needed by the evaluating doctor, and how to write appropriate questions for the psychologist or psychiatrist to answer. Evaluating doctors' credentials, experience, and forensic experience will be covered, as well as the important differences between evaluations completed for forensic (as opposed to treatment) purposes. A thorough examination protocol will be presented, which will include an extended clinical interview, objective psychological testing, and important collateral interviews. The limitations in psychologists' and psychiatrists' ability to predict employee dangerousness will be discussed, as well as issues regarding the confidentiality of FFDE results.


Agenda

I. Typical Scenarios for Threat Assessments/Fitness for Duty Evaluations.

Central concept: Conduct evaluations when administrative decisions are to be made partly on the basis of employee mental state.


A. Employer is unsure if a threat is idle or if there is a danger.
B. Employee in a safety sensitive position and is making mistakes.
C. Employer is unsure about how to address decline in job performance.
D. Employer is unsure about how to manage mood changes or other problem behaviors.
E. Information is needed about reasonable accommodations.


II. Why EAPs and employers should not select evaluating doctors or use doctors who will treat the employee.

A. If the doctor is associated with the referring EAP/employer, the employee could argue that the EAP/employer influenced the doctor's findings.
B. If the doctor has (or will) treat the employee, the doctor's primary allegiance might be with his/her patient. This practice is now often considered unethical.
C. Treating doctors frequently do not have the training to conduct these evaluations in a manner designed to withstand the scrutiny of court.
D. Lack of experience evaluating the credentials of potential doctors with medical/legal expertise.

III. Components of a good FFDE/risk evaluation that will stand up in court.

A. Thorough social and clinical history.
B. Objective psychological testing.
C. Telephone consultations with treatment providers.
D. Review of job description.
E. Collateral interview(s) with spouse, supervisor or co-worker.
F. Correct doctor chosen (MD vs. Ph.D. with forensic training).

This teleconference is designed for human resource directors, safety directors, insurance claims representatives, benefits professionals, occupational health nurses, business owners and managers.

This teleconference offers continuing education credits of HRCI for continuing education professionals.

Presenting this material will be David Fisher, Ph.D., LP. Dr. Fisher is a founder and president of PsyBar LLC. As a Diplomate in Clinical Psychology, Dr. Fisher oversees Fitness for Duty and Risk evaluations performed nationally by 1200 psychologists and psychiatrists. He publishes and lectures around the USA. He has consulted for many hundreds of employers, EAPs, insurers, hospitals and governmental agencies. Dr. Fisher’s current interests center on medical/legal Fitness for Duty and Risk evaluations.

If you would like to register for this teleconference, please click on the following link, http://www.lorman.com/info/36410. You can also register by calling 866-352-9539 and speaking with one of our customer service representatives, please use reference number 18189.