- Report: #138104
Complaint Review: Jerry Nims Ph.D - Reno Nevada
-
Author Confirmed
Why?
Jerry Nims Ph.D
3066 Market Ridge Drive Reno, 89509 Nevada, U.S.A.
Phone:
775-329-3030
Web:
N/A
Categories:
Business Rating:
(0)
Tell us has your experience with this business or person been good?
Jerry Nims Ph.D ripoff dishonest biased unethical Reno Nevada
I do not know if it is a biased against men, the military, red heads or what but Jerry Nims, a psychologist and attorney completely disregarded almost everything that occurred during a custody evaluation in favor for the result of 1 of 3 psychometric tests to determine his custody recommendation.
Back ground information on the case was I was being accused, first of being violent, I was sent to a MSW/LCSW and was observed and was given the DVI test. The evaluation said that there was a very small probability for me to be controlling and violent. After this the accusations became that I was mentally disturbed so the Judge ordered a mental health/Custody evaluation. The evaluator was chosen from a list provided by the mother/accuser's attorney; I am not able to afford an attorney so I was pro per.
During the custody evaluation I was administered the Rorschach, MMPI-II and the MCMI-II, first administered was the MMPI-II. My results were that I was open and candid and that I was somewhat suspicious of others. I have found that this is a normal response by people that are being falsely accused of something, but no other elevations are noted.
On another visit, a few weeks later, I was administered the Rorschach and the MCMI-II. The Rorschach, a test which takes time to score and is considered by today's standards archaic was not score by Jerry Nims.
The results from the MCMI-II, a test which has be proven to overpathologize and even cautioned against using on non clinical patients came back with severe personality problems. Now most professionals agree that when using the MCMI-II (which was updated years ago) for custody evaluations The computerized narrative must never be lifted verbatim into the report since it may find serious psychopathology and personality disorders in just about everyone. Jerry Nims failed to heed this wisdom and copy and paste' the computer generated result directly onto his report.
Jerry Nims consulted (9) people in his report, including myself and the mother, (5) which have documented reasons for wanting to portray me in an unfavorable light, and of the other 4 he asked loaded questions trying to exact certain answers to back up his report, which he failed to do, but rather stated They do not use the same words, nor complain of exactly the same behavior, but all recognize that FATHER has serious problems with his temper. Jerry Nims described MOTHER as generally maintains good control of her anger, but may experience occasional outbursts. Which when asked, is the definition of losing your temper of (5) of those people.
I find it odd that Jerry Nims says things one way for on person and another less slanderous way for another.
Jerry Nims also wrote off the (2) people (out of 4 not having reasons to say bad things about me, and minus me, 2 out of 3) that said positive things about me as being under FATHER's control.
The Mother's MMPI-II results say that she was guarded, and intended to convey a positive impression. This is probably indicative of an elevated Lie scale.' The Mother's MCMI-II results were not lifted verbatim onto the report but were summarized as MOTHER was self-protective in taking the test. She avoided disclosing much about herself. This is also indicative of lying.
Jerry Nims has a published custody observation tool' but did not observe me with the child. Jerry Nims did not conduct a proper evaluation and everyone should be warned about his ways.
Jeffrey
Reno, Nevada
U.S.A.
Back ground information on the case was I was being accused, first of being violent, I was sent to a MSW/LCSW and was observed and was given the DVI test. The evaluation said that there was a very small probability for me to be controlling and violent. After this the accusations became that I was mentally disturbed so the Judge ordered a mental health/Custody evaluation. The evaluator was chosen from a list provided by the mother/accuser's attorney; I am not able to afford an attorney so I was pro per.
During the custody evaluation I was administered the Rorschach, MMPI-II and the MCMI-II, first administered was the MMPI-II. My results were that I was open and candid and that I was somewhat suspicious of others. I have found that this is a normal response by people that are being falsely accused of something, but no other elevations are noted.
On another visit, a few weeks later, I was administered the Rorschach and the MCMI-II. The Rorschach, a test which takes time to score and is considered by today's standards archaic was not score by Jerry Nims.
The results from the MCMI-II, a test which has be proven to overpathologize and even cautioned against using on non clinical patients came back with severe personality problems. Now most professionals agree that when using the MCMI-II (which was updated years ago) for custody evaluations The computerized narrative must never be lifted verbatim into the report since it may find serious psychopathology and personality disorders in just about everyone. Jerry Nims failed to heed this wisdom and copy and paste' the computer generated result directly onto his report.
Jerry Nims consulted (9) people in his report, including myself and the mother, (5) which have documented reasons for wanting to portray me in an unfavorable light, and of the other 4 he asked loaded questions trying to exact certain answers to back up his report, which he failed to do, but rather stated They do not use the same words, nor complain of exactly the same behavior, but all recognize that FATHER has serious problems with his temper. Jerry Nims described MOTHER as generally maintains good control of her anger, but may experience occasional outbursts. Which when asked, is the definition of losing your temper of (5) of those people.
I find it odd that Jerry Nims says things one way for on person and another less slanderous way for another.
Jerry Nims also wrote off the (2) people (out of 4 not having reasons to say bad things about me, and minus me, 2 out of 3) that said positive things about me as being under FATHER's control.
The Mother's MMPI-II results say that she was guarded, and intended to convey a positive impression. This is probably indicative of an elevated Lie scale.' The Mother's MCMI-II results were not lifted verbatim onto the report but were summarized as MOTHER was self-protective in taking the test. She avoided disclosing much about herself. This is also indicative of lying.
Jerry Nims has a published custody observation tool' but did not observe me with the child. Jerry Nims did not conduct a proper evaluation and everyone should be warned about his ways.
Jeffrey
Reno, Nevada
U.S.A.
