Reaction to Rational Life Care Planning

Kreuscher (2003) identified 11 points from our article (Woodrich & Patterson, 2003) that he believed could serve as a “road map” for defense attorneys. We agree, but a review of the points indicates that they are applicable equally to defense and plaintiff attorneys. As we noted in our article, “given the diversity of credentials of professionals working in forensic rehabilitation (e.g., physiatrists, rehabilitation counselors, nurses, psychologists), the field encompasses a variety of licenses, certifications, and memberships, each with its own code of ethics and standards of practice.” It is noteworthy that changes (e.g., a new section – F: Forensic and Indirect Services) in the recently revised Code of Professional Ethics for Rehabilitation Counselors (hereafter referred to as the Code, Commission on Rehabilitation Counselor Certification [CRCC], 2009) support Kreuscher’s statement “the defense lawyer must carefully question the planner’s qualifications, determine precisely the bases for the plan, and look at how it fits with the medical or treating physician’s evidence.” Standard F.2.b of the Code states