Eight domains for a composite grocery bagger of sixteen, each with a finding, a risk or strength label and a follow-up, recorded once privacy limits were explained and his mother left. Searches like "nu 572 unit 2 assignment example", "nu572 unit 2 sample" and "nu572 unit 2 example" land here.
HEEADSSS Interview Write-Up: A 16-Year-Old Grocery Bagger With Two Addresses and One Meal a Day
[Student Name]
Purdue University Global
NU572: AGNP I - Primary Care of the Adolescent and Adult
Unit 2 HEADSS Interview Write-Up
[Instructor Name]
[Date]
The patient is a composite; times, scores and distances are bracketed, and sensitive answers are summarized rather than quoted.
Version Note
The original 1988 HEADSS acronym covered home, education, activities, drugs, sexuality and suicide (Goldenring & Cohen, 1988). The 2004 revision added eating and safety to make HEEADSSS (Goldenring & Rosen, 2004), and a 2014 update extended the questions to media use (Klein et al., 2014). All eight domains are used here, in the acronym's order, which moves broadly from comfortable topics toward sensitive ones. The sequence was deliberate.
Setting
[Tyler], 16, came with his mother for a sports physical. She stayed for the medical history, then left. Before she left, the limits of confidentiality were explained to both: what he says stays private unless there is a risk to his life or someone else's, or abuse. The confidential portion ran [14] minutes.
Home
Finding: lives alternate weeks with his mother and with his father and stepfather, [four] miles apart. Calls his stepfather "fine." Label: neutral. Follow-up: none.
Education and Employment
Finding: grades slipping from Bs to Cs this year; works [20] hours a week bagging groceries, some school nights until 10 p.m. Label: risk for school, strength for work, which he likes and where he is trusted. Follow-up: discuss hours and sleep.
Eating
Finding: one meal a day, usually dinner; skips breakfast and lunch; says he is "not hungry" and "no time." No purging, no restriction to lose weight, no body image concerns stated. BMI [20.5]. Label: risk. Follow-up: dietary review; breakfast plan.
Activities
Finding: gaming online until about [2 a.m.] on school nights; plays pickup basketball weekends. Visits his grandmother every Sunday. Label: risk for sleep; strength for the grandmother and basketball. Follow-up: sleep discussion.
Drugs
Finding: vapes cannabis on weekends with friends; no alcohol; no nicotine; no other drugs. Label: risk. Follow-up: brief counseling today.
Sexuality
Finding: answered only after confidentiality was restated. One partner; inconsistent condom use. Label: risk. Follow-up: STI screening today with his consent; condoms offered; contraception discussed.
Suicide and Depression
Finding: PHQ-A [9], mild; denies thoughts of self-harm or suicide. Feels tired and "kind of down" about school. Label: risk, mild. Follow-up: repeat PHQ-A in [four] weeks.
Safety
Finding: wears a seatbelt; has ridden with a friend who drove after drinking, once, last month. No weapons at either home. Label: risk. Follow-up: safe-ride plan.
Plan, by Domain
1. Education and activities: sleep sits at the center of three domains, school, gaming and mood, so the plan's first step is a sleep target he chose himself: devices off by midnight on school nights.
2. Eating: a breakfast he can carry, discussed; recheck weight at next visit.
3. Drugs: brief counseling on cannabis and school performance; he agreed to skip vaping before shifts.
4. Sexuality: gonorrhea and chlamydia testing sent, confidential billing arranged; condoms given.
5. Depression: repeat PHQ-A in four weeks; resources given.
6. Safety: he agreed to call his mother or a ride service rather than ride with a drinking driver; his mother will not ask why if he calls.
Sensitive answers are recorded in the chart's confidential section and summarized here rather than quoted. Nothing disclosed met a threshold requiring disclosure to a parent. At the end, his mother was told that the visit covered routine adolescent topics, that he is cleared for sports and that he returns in four weeks for a routine check.
References
Goldenring, J. M., & Cohen, E. (1988). Getting into adolescent heads. Contemporary Pediatrics, 5(7), 75-90.
Goldenring, J. M., & Rosen, D. S. (2004). Getting into adolescent heads: An essential update. Contemporary Pediatrics, 21(1), 64-90.
Klein, D. A., Goldenring, J. M., & Adelman, W. P. (2014). HEEADSSS 3.0: The psychosocial interview for adolescents updated for a new century fueled by media. Contemporary Pediatrics, 31(1), 16-28.
How this NU572 Unit 2 example is structured
Domains run in the order the acronym gives, which moves broadly from comfortable topics toward sensitive ones, and the write-up states that the sequence was deliberate. Each domain holds three parts: the finding in plain clinical language, a label of risk, strength or neutral, and a follow-up where one exists. Strengths carry the same weight as risks, so his steady job and a grandmother he visits every Sunday appear as protective findings. A version note near the top explains that the original 1988 HEADSS acronym lacked eating and safety, both added in the 2004 revision, and that all eight are used. Sensitive answers are summarized rather than quoted. The plan groups actions by domain, notes that nothing met a threshold requiring disclosure, and records what the mother heard at the end: that the visit covered routine adolescent topics.
Get an NU572 Unit 2 example written to your instructions
Adolescent interview samples are drafted from your section's prompt word for word, including which acronym and which screening instruments it names. The composite teenager can match any age or setting the case specifies. Your first sample is free, follows the rubric line by line and arrives in 24-48h. The paper above is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Purdue University Global document.
NU572 Unit 2 questions, answered
Is HEADSS or HEEADSSS the right framework?
Whichever the prompt names, with the version stated. HEADSS has six domains; the 2004 HEEADSSS revision adds eating and safety, and a 2014 update added questions about media and online life. Many instructors accept the expanded form under the older name, but saying which version was used removes any doubt about coverage.
Should the write-up include a depression screening score?
If one was administered, yes, with the instrument named. The PHQ-A is common for adolescents, and its score belongs under the depression and suicide domain alongside the answer to the self-harm item. HEEADSSS itself produces no score; it is a structured conversation, so any number in the write-up has to come from a separate validated tool.
How is a parent's access to the note handled?
Most write-ups include a line on it. Sensitive findings are commonly flagged for a confidential section, since a parent with portal proxy access might otherwise see them, and the rules differ by health system and by state. The write-up records what the parent was told at the end of the visit, which is often a general summary rather than any specific answer.