Speech-Language Pathologist Case Study

In the scope of a speech-language pathologist’s practice, one may encounter a variety of people and populations, with a variety of abilities and disabilities, and with a variable amount of resources. For some clients and families, resources may be limited, therefore making it difficult to make ends meet when services are not covered by insurance. ASHA states that misrepresentation is, “Any statement by words or other conduct that, under the circumstances, amounts to an assertion that is false or erroneous (i.e., not in accordance with the facts); any statement made with conscious ignorance or a reckless disregard for the truth,” (Code of Ethics). As an SLP, there may be instances where misrepresentation may seem like a solution in order to benefit the client and/or the client’s family. Take this scenario for example. A child comes into an outpatient clinic for a diagnostic exam. The parents’ primary concern is that they have noticed their child is starting to stutter. The child is four years old, and is currently enrolled in preschool for

If the clinician had that information, she could compare and contrast her results with the school SLP in order to paint a better picture of the child’s abilities. If the school SLP had not seen the child yet, the clinician could encourage the parents to contact the school SLP to their opinion. The clinician could also refer the family to a clinic that provides services at a lower cost, such as a teaching or university clinic. The clinician could have also provided the family with the option to sit on it for a couple months, and not search for services. Their child may spontaneously recover and stop stuttering, on the flipside their child may still be on the lower end or dip to one standard deviation below normal limits for articulation and/or language. Thus, this may allow coverage for services to be