Skip to main content
MMedVellum
MCQsExamsAtlas
DashboardPricing
MMedVellum

The exam atlas that feels like a flagship product — evidence-graded topics and exam tools for MBBS and fellowship preparation. Built to scale to fifty specialties. Educational content only — not medical advice.

llms.txt·psychiatry LLM catalog · sitemap

Atlas

  • Specialty atlas
  • MBBS / Core medicine
  • Dermatology
  • ICU Fellowship (CICM)
  • Anaesthesia
  • Emergency Medicine
  • Psychiatry Fellowship

Study & account

  • MCQ practice
  • Practice alias
  • Exam tools
  • Dashboard
  • Pricing
  • Sign in

© 2026 MedVellum. For education only — not a substitute for clinical judgement.

Clinical Atlas Prestige · Evidence-first

Psych MEQs / SAQsGeneral adult psychiatry — reactive attachment and disinhibited social engagement

Psych MEQs / SAQs · General adult psychiatry — reactive attachment and disinhibited social engagement

Reactive attachment and DSED — nosology, residual adult risk and caregiving-first care (MEQ)

FRANZCP-style MEQ bridging childhood DSED/RAD nosology with transition-age residual risk, adult residual formulation after early deprivation, APSAC refusal of coercive therapies, and standard adult comorbidity care.

20 marks20 min
On this page & tools

Target exams

FRANZCPMRCPsychABPNMD-DNB

Target exams

FRANZCPMRCPsychABPNMD-DNB
Prompt
A 19-year-old is referred to adult community mental health after leaving out-of-home care. Early records document prolonged institutional care abroad until age 3, then serial foster placements. As a child he was described as 'too friendly with strangers' and once left a shopping centre with an unfamiliar adult. Current presentation: mild–moderate depression (PHQ-9 14), residual indiscriminate trust with two recent financial exploitation incidents, and no psychosis. Adoptive carers ask whether he 'still has RAD' and whether holding therapy would help. A legal aid letter asks if 'adult reactive attachment disorder' explains a recent impulsive theft. (i) Outline diagnostic formulation distinguishing childhood RAD/DSED criteria from residual adult presentation. (ii) Detail differentials with discriminators (ASD, ADHD, complex trauma/personality, ordinary insecurity). (iii) Outline risk priorities including exploitation and safeguarding. (iv) Give a stepped management plan rejecting coercive therapies and addressing comorbidity with a named antidepressant example if indicated. (v) Cite key evidence bases (AACAP, APSAC, BEIP, ERA young adult). (20 marks)

Model answer

Reveal model answer

(i) Formulation. Childhood history (institutional care, serial placements, indiscriminate stranger approach, leaving with an unfamiliar adult) is consistent with a past DSED phenotype after extremes of insufficient care, not primarily the emotionally withdrawn RAD pattern.[1][5][6] At 19 he does not neatly re-present as a freestanding DSM childhood attachment disorder; instead formulate residual social-boundary vulnerability after early severe deprivation plus current depressive episode and exploitation risk. Do not certify "adult RAD" as a primary forensic label; map residual features and current adult syndromes against developmental history.[3][1]

(ii) Differentials with discriminators. ASD: pervasive social-communication differences and RRBs without requiring insufficient care — screen carefully given institutional history but do not collapse DSED into ASD. ADHD: multi-domain impulsivity/inattention; DSED is specifically reduced stranger reticence after deprivation. Complex PTSD/personality: cross-context adult pattern and trauma clusters may coexist but are diagnosed on adult criteria. Insecure attachment style is not a clinical disorder. Substance use and learning difficulties should be screened as contributors to impulsive theft and exploitation vulnerability.[1][5]

(iii) Risk. Financial and possibly sexual exploitation from residual indiscriminate trust; impulsive offending; depressive self-harm risk (ideation, plan, means, protective factors); housing instability after leaving care; capacity for financial decisions if exploitation is active. Safety plan, means advice, multiagency leaving-care supports, education about stranger/financial boundaries, and local safeguarding pathways if third parties remain at risk or he is a carer of children.[1][3]

(iv) Management. Refuse holding/rebirthing/coercive attachment therapies (APSAC).[2] Psychoeducation for carers: residual disinhibited features can persist after good care and do not prove current carer failure.[1][6] Psychological care: behavioural activation and CBT for depression; social-boundary and problem-solving skills; trauma-informed support if indicated. Practical supports: financial mentoring, leaving-care worker, education/employment activation. If depression severity warrants medication after shared decision-making: example sertraline 25–50 mg orally each morning, early review 1–2 weeks for activation/suicidality (young adult), titrate as tolerated with measurement-based PHQ-9 and risk review — treat the depression, not "attachment."[1][3] No antipsychotic for attachment pattern.

(v) Evidence spine. AACAP parameter (caregiving-first, criteria, differentials); APSAC (reject coercive therapies); BEIP (environment/timing improves recovery); ERA childhood attachment disorder behaviour and Sonuga-Barke Lancet 2017 child-to-adult residual ND/MH trajectories after early deprivation; Gleason validity of inhibited vs disinhibited phenotypes.[1][2][3][4][5][6]

Common errors

  • Certifying "adult RAD" as a forensic primary diagnosis without developmental criteria.
  • Agreeing to coercive holding/rebirthing.
  • Prescribing antipsychotics "for attachment."
  • Blaming adoptive carers for residual DSED from early deprivation.
  • Missing depression, ASD/ADHD differential, and exploitation risk.
  • Ignoring ERA/BEIP evidence when asked for named studies. [1][2][3]

Examiner notes

High-scoring answers separate childhood DSED from residual adult formulation, refuse APSAC-contraindicated therapies, name caregiving-first principles for any youth siblings still in care, and treat adult comorbidity with standard regimens while citing ERA young-adult residual risk without nosological invention.[1][2][3]

References

  1. [1]Zeanah CH, Chesher T, Boris NW; AACAP Committee on Quality Issues Practice Parameter for the Assessment and Treatment of Children and Adolescents With Reactive Attachment Disorder and Disinhibited Social Engagement Disorder J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry, 2016.PMID 27806867
  2. [2]Chaffin M, Hanson R, Saunders BE, Nichols T, et al. Report of the APSAC task force on attachment therapy, reactive attachment disorder, and attachment problems Child Maltreat, 2006.PMID 16382093
  3. [3]Sonuga-Barke EJS, Kennedy M, Kumsta R, Knights N, et al. Child-to-adult neurodevelopmental and mental health trajectories after early life deprivation: the young adult follow-up of the longitudinal English and Romanian Adoptees study Lancet, 2017.PMID 28237264
  4. [4]Nelson CA 3rd, Zeanah CH, Fox NA, Marshall PJ, et al. Cognitive recovery in socially deprived young children: the Bucharest Early Intervention Project Science, 2007.PMID 18096809
  5. [5]Gleason MM, Fox NA, Drury S, Smyke A, et al. Validity of evidence-derived criteria for reactive attachment disorder: indiscriminately social/disinhibited and emotionally withdrawn/inhibited types J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry, 2011.PMID 21334562
  6. [6]O'Connor TG, Rutter M; English and Romanian Adoptees Study Team Attachment disorder behavior following early severe deprivation: extension and longitudinal follow-up J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry, 2000.PMID 10846304