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.