Good intentions but bad outcome: Critique of the Minnesota Neuropsychology Conference proposed guidelines.

Objective

The proposed Minnesota Neuropsychology Conference (MNC) guidelines may become enforceable standards for neuropsychology training. We describe the process and critique the content. Method: Review of the MNC process, proposed guidelines, and related documents.

Conclusions

Some assertions in the proposed guidelines about diversification of the neuropsychology workforce and assessment of culturally diverse patients are laudable. However, the encroachment of the proposed guidelines into sociopolitical values, a natural outcome of MNC planning and goals, was in our opinion unfortunate. The guidelines did not obtain consensus from the MNC delegates and were approved by only 58% of American Academy of Clinical Neuropsychology voting members. The National Academy of Neuropsychology declined endorsement and a leading journal (Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology) declined to publish them. The guidelines contain several problems including overemphasis on weakly validated determinants of cognitive function, inappropriate political rhetoric in a scientific discipline that may risk undermining the trust of patients, and an ill-defined call for training in advocacy. The guidelines may threaten standards of scientific and clinical objectivity in training. A recently published competency-based postdoctoral curriculum (Guidotti Breting et al., 2026) that avoids the MNC's controversial sociopolitical language is less divisive for training. We recommend prompt revision.