The case presented to us of Jack seems to show a capable young man with some concerning behavioral issues. A situation like his, in which various factors are at play (some more than others) and some are unknown, is a testament to the usefulness of the BPS model. His risk factors are his aggressive and impulsive behavior, at noted by Grandma, to a certain extent the genetic uncertainty from the father, and that his mother is from a low socioeconomic background raising four other children while substance abusing. His protective factors are that his toxicology screening at birth was clean, his success in school and thus far academic competence, and that Grandma is in fact present to help take care of him. Using the biopsychosocial framework, we can assess his positive and negative qualities and their roots. In terms of his aggression biologically, this is something that we do not know and thus are unsure of potential predispositions. If at all possible, it would be advantageous to get basic medical information from the father. If you analyze his home life, his attempts to lash out seem like they could come from a lack of attention. That being said, SES risk factors usually indicate a poor trajectory educationally, and he has thus far defied this odd. Nevertheless, it can create a tense environment, especially as he becomes older and more conscious of the stress associated with poverty. These factors are certainly intertwining to emphasize and de-emphasize certain characteristics. From what we have learned, an effective technique in treating aggressive and disruptive behavior management issues is through Parent Management Training (PMT). Just like the Super Nanny, you simply ignore negative behavior and reinforce good or even non-negative behavior with praise. I feel MST wouldn’t be necessary at this juncture just based on Jack’s age and that despite his behavior he hasn’t been violent.