age eighteen so in essence the the the proper rule that would apply that is from a nation was not used and that led to an iranian determination by the administrative law judge to find that dumb melissa b did not satisfy her he's performed this test so a couple of things about that lady three tests that need to be observed or need to be recognized i should say first of all there is no when you take a look through that there is no would have to function as that performed in that and when you look at th undisputed that she was a special education and doctor the last testified the only thing that she could have been a special education for would have been her mental retardation and the reason why is when you provide this testing you take a look and determine whether her an overwhelming majority of evidence that demonstrates that that test is unreliable shouldn't have been used i'm just simply based on the date only be rejected are you suggesting that we can just write that evidence  as a matter all i'm suggesting that if you take a look at the at the at the decision you'll see that the decision specifically says this test is supposed to be given the most weight of all of these tests because of the time f i'm struggling because to me the concept of mental retardation onset above the age of eighteen seems like i've seen one in other words i mean i've been referred to as the sixty year old that acts like an after that those wouldn't be referred to as mental retardation it's the retardation of the gross joyousness of child's age and growing that is commonly referred to as i understand it mental retardation as opposed to some other ment the state's guy was incomplete there should have been more testing done to of i it will withstand this stuff so it was it was criticized and there was nobody to say that well everything that should every test it should have been done was twenty two years after the fall of the time period aren't sufficient to demonstrate that she manifested mental retardation during the developmental years many before the age of eighty eight they did not address in any significant way diagnosed her with my own borderline personality disorder and in fact a two thousand and four evaluation noted that she was actively to lose you know during the evaluation and yet they never read to us what effect this had on her abilities at that time in addition these evaluations when they do trust what sort of limitations that she had they don't they attribute the limitations to her mental health issues and her physical issues and not to cognitive issues for example that you know they mention that she has been a severely impaired ability to manage her activities of the living and say that this is due to her psychiatric and medical condition that she's currently not a candidate for show that they don't interact at all cognitive abilities or for adaptive behavior during that period of time and then in addition they did the evaluation that was prepared closest to that period of time which is twenty five years apple and you know the role of the agency to you to weigh the evidence and determine its credibility and that's not the function of the court on administrative review and the agency here has to you know based upon the evidence here the decision is supported by the evidence you have three psychological evaluation to which which were prepared you know eighteen to twenty two two years after the fact and never addressed her abilities during that period that in that relevant here valinor for these concerns so that and then he conducted it so what happens if somebody with psychiatric problems such as suicidal ideation elucidations and up in a group home with mentally retarded people correct i mean this is a program for developmentally disabled persons so they have to be developmentally disabled and they haven't asked to show that they're developmentally disabled meaning that if you're originated during her developmental year and the evidence here just doesn't show change that's absolutely correct i mean when you're dealing with questions of fact it is the department's responsibility to weigh the evidence and assess the credibility of the evidence it's not the function of the court on  want when you as far as the issue of whether or not she manifested mental retardation prior to the age of eighteen that the a question and again i just want to match i mean they're saying that they did not follow the rules there their rules under the unreliable as data and will put that specifically into their report a fact that is not mentioned therefore means it doesn't exist because it's always addressed if it's a problem in fact dr who less testified that she was with melissa for four hours and saw actually no