Case Consultation: Presenting and Validating Diagnosis

 

Video Report of Your Case Consultation: Presenting and Validating Diagnosis
In this Discussion, you first present to your peers the case collaboration begun in Week 4. Note: You make this presentation individually—you do not present with your partner. Your colleagues then review your diagnosis for validity, recommending an evidence-based tool to use in your case.

Such tools help confirm the details and validity of a diagnosis. Measures also help clinicians notice other patterns in a disorder that might otherwise be missed. By confirming an accurate diagnosis through a measurement instrument, a social worker ensures that the appropriate evidence-based treatment is used.

By Day 2
Post the following two pieces:

Use the Kaltura Media uploader to upload a 3- to 5-minute video in which you: (YOU CAN TYPE INSTEAD OF MAKING A VIDEO)
Briefly summarize your case, highlighting the diagnostic symptoms seen in the case.
Describe your decision-making process for identifying the key problems in the case and the differential eliminations for your case.
Identify the diagnosis of the client in the case. Explain the diagnosis by providing the supporting DSM-5 criteria with specific examples of how your client met those criteria.
Include a transcript and/or edit closed captioning on your video to ensure your presentation is accessible to colleagues of differing abilities.

Sample Solution

by proving there is a common underlying causal process for each distinct effect. Second, Jackson uses evolution to prove his dualism. Polar bears have evolved to have a thick coat. This thickness makes the coat heavy. Thus, the polar bears experience what it is like to carry a heavy coat. This is clearly not conducive to survival. Therefore, from Darwin’s Theory we know that any evolved characteristics are either conducive to survival or a by-product of an evolutionary action that is conducive to survival. Jackson uses this support his argument against physicalism: “qualia are a by-product of certain brain processes that are conducive to survival” (Jackson). Third, Jackson emphasizes the relationships between how we know our minds through behavior. We only know about others’ minds through observing their behavior. So, we must ask: how can a person’s behavior accurately reflect that he has qualia unless they conclude that behavior is an outcome of qualia? This gives rise to the main weakness of Jackson’s view – there is no proper evidence for the refutation of epiphenomenal qualia. Another weakness of Jackson’s view is the lack of clarity of source. Where do these qualia come from? If not physical, then where? This brings into questions spirits and “upper powers,” such as God, the existence of which are heavily debated in the scientific community. Despite this, the validity of dualism (and the lack of proving dualism to be incorrect), is a strong argument and will continue to allow Jackson’s argument to be considered valid.

Because Jackson clearly refutes any existence of physicalism in his explanation of phenomenal qualia, and his argument is overall less problematic than the arguments of his opponents, I align more with Jackson’s knowledge argument than that of Lewis. Until the existence of the actual physical matter behind “what it is like” information is found, Jackson’s argument proves to be more valid than that of Lewis. Although I would like to think that everything involving humans can be linked back to the brain, I do believe that some things may never be explained.

This question has been answered.

Get Answer
WeCreativez WhatsApp Support
Our customer support team is here to answer your questions. Ask us anything!
👋 Hi, Welcome to Compliant Papers.