Anyone watching Panorama at the moment?

[endofthelinefinally]

It is about ADHD rapid online diagnosis and very expensive drugs for all.

I wonder if anyone will join the dots and hear the bells and klaxons...

I would hate to think that issues in the private sector will shut that option - I may have to go down that route I can’t cope…

I don't think it will shut the private option but highlight that it needs to be better managed and perhaps better regulated. The aim is to shut down the abuse not the private sector. Tavistock GIDS showed that the NHS can also be vulnerable to mismanagement and poor practice. It wouldn't be possible to shut down the private sector and there would be no point.

Nily I hope you can find some RL support for yourself and your boy, it sounds like it has been a very rough ride lately.

I was going to comment about the thread, but I won't. I need to actually watch the programme properly, but I will say that everyone deserves safe, effective and clinically sound care whether this is through the NHS (or equivalent) or private healthcare.

I agree. This should not lead to private practices shutting down but a hell lot more oversight seems in order.

Are those with adhd being misdiagnosed because of social media, or aren't they?

The point of this 'documentary' was that people are being overdiagnosed because of a social media trend that supposedly caused the uptake of diagnosis seeking and therefore heading to private diagnosis.

You can't change your mind just because you've been shown evidence that contradicts your view.

So are you agreeing it's a tictok trend or not?

Funny how this analysis contradicts this woeful excuse of journalism
'However, contrary to concerns of over-medication, ADHD is more likely to be under-identified, under-diagnosed and under-treated in the UK'

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8017218/

*Background: Despite evidence-based national guidelines for ADHD in the United Kingdom (UK), ADHD is under-identified, under-diagnosed, and under-treated. Many seeking help for ADHD face prejudice, long waiting lists, and patchy or unavailable services, and are turning to service-user support groups and/or private healthcare for help.

Methods: A group of UK experts representing clinical and healthcare providers from public and private healthcare, academia, ADHD patient groups, educational, and occupational specialists, met to discuss shortfalls in ADHD service provision in the UK. Discussions explored causes of under-diagnosis, examined biases operating across referral, diagnosis and treatment, together with recommendations for resolving these matters.

Results: Cultural and structural barriers operate at all levels of the healthcare system, resulting in a de-prioritization of ADHD. Services for ADHD are insufficient in many regions, and problems with service provision have intensified as a result of the response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Research has established a range of adverse outcomes of untreated ADHD, and associated long-term personal, social, health and economic costs are high. The consensus group called for training of professionals who come into contact with people with ADHD, increased funding, commissioning and monitoring to improve service provision, and streamlined communication between health services to support better outcomes for people with ADHD.*
Front Psychiatry. 2021; 12: 649399. Published online 2021 Mar 19. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2021.649399

Are the 22 professionals who wrote this paper less qualified than the journalist?

Are the following not qualified either?

arc-swp.nihr.ac.uk/news/adhd-services-map-reveals-major-gaps-in-care-failing-the-vulnerable/

attentionuk.org/frequently-asked-questions/#:~:text=Q%3A%20Is%20ADHD%20overdiagnosed%20in,mental%20health%20difficulty%20%5B31%5D.

www.forbes.com/sites/drnancydoyle/2022/01/14/adhd-crisis-in-the-uk-under-diagnosed-lacking-support-and-stigmatized/?sh=e0bb45b96f4e

www.nottingham.ac.uk/helm/dev/adhd/understanding_adhd/section03.html

The woeful low diagnostic rate has even been discussed in parliament:
hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2023-02-01/debates/AF2D45AA-23C1-4EF3-90F9-F10C1E77A5F3/AttentionDeficitHyperactivityDisorderDiagnosis

I apologise that these links probably won't work as I have no idea how to make them do so on here. But you get the idea. In contrast to panorama, we are vastly under-diagnosed as a nation.

I can't put anymore into this thread. I'm stepping away now.

Hopefully some of you will do some reading and have a change of mind.

egowise
It's possible for more than one thing to be true.

It's entirely possible to acknowledge ADHD might be under-diagnosed, whilst also acknowledging that there are charlatans out there handing out a diagnosis and medication based on vague questions and a quick online chat.

It doesn't have to be one or the other.

Why wouldn't we want to expose any business or industry that is working in an unethical way and priortising money over patient safety? Surely it's important people have access to good quality, specialist professional diagnostic clinics so they can have the right diagnosis and the right medication for them, not just a 45 minute zoom call and some vague questions.

What lola said.

It is perfectly possible that social media has created awareness inducing the people who have to date been diagnosed to come forward. It is also possible most people who came forward were diagnosed correctly but we can't trust the data because some unscrupulous professionals decided money was more important.

The two behaviours can exist simultaneously.
And the unscrupulous professionals should hang their heads in shame!

And i forgot to say, it is highly likely that adhd is still under-diagnosed but we really can't say because they've botched the count. it is honestly infuriating to fight so hard for this and have greed undo all the work.

Once again, I am not referring to you, or to your condition.

Please refrain from your aggressive and abusive outburst, or else i will have to report them - which is something I am loathe to do.

Furthermore, you have no idea about my own experienece with mental health issues, and given your aggressive and abusive beahviour I'm not likley to share them with you either.

This is not a thread for people with ADHD to hound and abuse other people who wish to contribute or to exchange posts with each other. Nobody owns this thread, and certainly not people who didn't start it - and who have mis-read and continue misrepresent the OP's intention.

Yes, your post has been twisted and manipulated in order to endorse some very aggressive outburst sand behaviour. Quite frankly, I've not encountered such overt and continued naked aggression before on mumsnet - except from those trolling for maximum impact and screenshots.

There is certainly a a growing problem with people self diagnosing conditions, or in being led by on -line 'gurus' into doing the same, and the parallels with the girls and young women developing ROGD after spening time on the inter-net are clear.

I read that during lock-down there was a trend for girls to develop Tourette's Syndrome - and this was certainly the case at my daughter's school ( she is a teacher, and after lock-down a couple of girls came back to school with symptoms of Tourette's)

I think that the issue is that several things are simultaneously true.

1. ADHD may well be under diagnosed, particularly in adult women.
2. The overwhelming focus on medication may not be helpful for various reasons.
3. The NHS seems set up to avoid even offering assessment in many cases and institutional factors will skew assessment results towards ‘no’ (this happens in many conditions)
4. there is enormous variation in provision available and GP attitudes to referring in to it
5. Where the NHS decides it’s ‘just’ another MH condition, people are often left with little to no support
6. Private companies have come in to fill the void left by an under resourced and often obstructive NHS
7. Some of those private companies are less scrupulous than others and have seen an opportunity to make money - particularly from ongoing private prescriptions and monitoring.
8. existing regulation is not fit for purpose in preventing this
9. most people are not in any way equipped to know the difference between good and bad private providers.
10. The public is already happy to dismiss ADHD as a made up thing, which is unfair to people whose life is fundamentally affected by the condition
11. tik tok is full of irritating videos trivialising ADHD and presenting it as a set of cute traits
12. some of this does probably help some people to start properly looking into why they have struggled with some things all their life
13. but all of this just fuels the social narrative that adhd is made up by attention seeking fools/an excuse for laziness etc

The problem is that this documentary has chosen to focus only on one, narrow part of that picture. And has done so in a fundamentally problematic way that hides the NHS problems and has fed the dismissive societal attitude to ADHD such that even having a diagnosis is no longer enough.

The private ‘fake’ 🙄 diagnosis problem would go away pretty much if the nhs actually assessed people with life long symptoms of ADHD. But it doesn’t. Most women will be palmed off by a GP with antidepressants and CBT.

It’s also worth noting that, even where people with ADHD diagnosis start on medication, it doesn’t mean they continue with it long term or take it every single day.

that’s not because they don’t have ADHD; it’s because the downsides of the medication may not be worth it. And they find better ways for them to manage their condition.

And also that the problem is often environmental. Their symptoms can be exacerbated by a world designed for NT people. Making various changes can mitigate that and make the ADHD easier to just live with.

which is to say that the OP may have a point about the pathologising of neurodevelopmental difference and the push to medicalise it.

Something I noticed on Reddit:

https://www.reddit.com/r/ADHDUK/comments/13j1ach/refused_shared_care_due_to_bbc_panorama_episode/

From the psychiatrist who appeared in the programme who now appears to be trying to exercise some damage limitation https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/may/17/nhs-psychiatrist-adhd-underdiagnosis

I’m not sure that it’s the psychiatrist trying to backtrack, rather trying to correct the journalistic bias employed by the bbc when putting the program together.

There is reporting on some reputable ADHD Twitter accounts that people are now having their shared care agreements cancelled by their GP on the basis of the Panorama report… you really couldn’t make this up!

Almost like the NHS is desperately keen not to have to deal with (and certainly not treat) adults with adhd. 🤦🏻‍♀️

Or the NHS now has to reassess everyone because some wanker thought he could make a quick buck.

Either way I hope for those who have had their SCP/A cancelled or suspended that it’s been handled properly. depending on the medication you can need a staggered withdrawal. (guanfacine etc I think are the ones that need this.) Withdrawal on top of any mental health condition is a receipe for disaster.

Someone asked the company:

https://www.reddit.com/r/ADHDUK/comments/13kuf23/adhd360_assessment_data/

Apparently with the ADHD360 company, 75% of people were either refused or declined to proceed when screened negatively.

A very high percentage of the actual assessments resulted in an ADHD diagnosis.

It may be a high percentage with NHS assessments also.

Quoting:

https://www.thenational.scot/comment/23530060.bbc-apologise-sensationalist-adhd-documentary/

The documentary first saw him have a three-hour sit down with an NHS psychiatrist before he moved on to three private clinics that diagnosed him in a much quicker fashion to anyone who has actually gone through this process, alarm bells were immediately ringing.

My (NHS) psychiatrist diagnosed me in under half an hour once I eventually got an appointment and I don’t know a single neurodivergent person that has had a three-hour sit down with an NHS psychiatrist.

With waiting lists as disastrous as they are, this is just not an accurate representation of how NHS diagnosis plays out.

And if he did in fact get a three-hour sit down so easily, why can a privileged neurotypical journalist get access to this when those who are actually in need can’t?

The simple fact that he was intentionally trying to get them to diagnose him
is a problem. Was he more honest with the NHS psychiatrist that he managed to get 3 hours with, despite waiting lists of 5+ years?

What was the effect of him not thinking he had ADHD but choosing to answer questions in ways that he knew (from
research) would lead to a diagnosis?

If I wanted to get myself a diagnosis of all sorts of things for which no objective tests can confirm, I’m sure I could. Because I’d be putting on a performance for that purpose. Indeed, people manage to do that for conditions with objective tests too - the whole Münchausen’s syndrome thing.

This wasn’t some fair expose. It was a man looking to prove his own point by manipulating his data.

PLOT TWIST:

It seems like this man, behaved unethically in order to get the story he wanted. Not to reveal the deeply complex issues that ADHD diagnosis is throwing up.

There isn't a particular revelation in the idea that there is possible over diagnosis privately. Its not touching on any new idea. But the programme really didn't ask the right questions. Instead it sought to prove a predetermined agenda rather than look at WHY this is happening and to WHO.

Generally speaking I think there is a loose understanding amongst people who understand the system that there is:

1. There is over diagnosis in the private sector
2. There is deliberate under diagnosis in the NHS to keep to budgets (particularly in schools)
3. That because the diagnosis criteria are skewed towards male presentation, and that its girls/women who are being under diagnosed as a result
4. That because its women who are being under diagnosed its them who are turning to the NHS out of desparation
5. These women have often been on a cocktail of other (unnecessary and potentially harmful) drugs due to misdiagnosis and delayed diagnosis causing its own problems.
6. Women are facing particular stigmas due to lazy stereotypes and ignorance about ADHD.
7. People with unmanaged ADHD have a tendancy to self medicate - with all that brings in social problems.
8. If people are forking out a grand on a diagnosis, things are pretty fucking terrible and they are desparate - there's a problem with access to NHS care however you cut it.

With this in mind, anyone making a responsible programme about ADHD would cover this and be mindful of these sensitivities.

What they WOULDN'T do, especially if they are a man, is go onto a female only safe space for ADHD women and say they are seeking to make a programme about their experiences with the NHS or say they were making a programme about women with ADHD - knowing that many of these women had been forced to go private due to the huge bias in the system and because they'd gone years through the system of misdiagnosis and never managing their condition - and going private had proved to be something of a lifeline to them.

Keeping in mind at this point that the programme itself seems to say that 90% of the private diagnosis ARE safe and appropriate.

So here we are:
https://twitter.com/Emily_Mckenzie/status/1658638785062502401
Let's expose the unethical journalistic practices that went into making #Panorama - ADHD Clinics Exposed. It appears that@RCars0n1
went undercover in a private group for ADHD women and then messaged people pretending he was doing a piece on #ADHD diagnoses "within the NHS".

That group is a safe space for thousands of women with ADHD. We share deeply personal thoughts and experiences with each other - it's one of the few places online where we can be truly vulnerable and not have to worry about being mocked or even manipulated by bad actors.

Maybe the real exposé here is the BBC enabling a male reporter to pose as a woman and tell multiple lies in order to gain access to a space intended for women, many of whom are legally classed as vulnerable. #Panorama #ADHDPanorama #ADHD

Please read the thread and the replies below (the first post). They are awful. There are several women saying they were approached by the journalist through this adhd forum under false pretences. Or they feel really upset / violated by this guy doing this where they thought they had privacy. There is another thread on MN itself where a poster has said they were approached by this guy and how they were upset about it.
See last couple of pages of the thread:
https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/telly_addicts/4806906-panorama-private-adhd-clinics-exposed?page=14&reply=126262285

As the poster SquidwardBound put on the other MN thread:
This is completely different to ‘being undercover’ to expose something. Those women have done nothing wrong (to justify any weird tactics as ‘in the public interest’) and should have been asked for properly informed consent - which means he needed to be honest about what his documentary was about.

It essentially means that the programme is not only deeply flawed on its content, but it also looks like the way it was researched was highly dubious in its approach and potentially very much understood where to look for patients using private channels for ADHD diagnosis (women) and manipulated and mislead them to 'prove' that there is over diagnosis in the private sector. This methodology, however, only serves to undermine the argument because it just is bad, unethical journalism which is both easy to dismiss and has screwed women in particular over in the process, who now not only are being under diagnosed by the NHS but will see the NHS close off shared care plans and close the private route off - even though 90% of these diagnosis are regarded as safe.

The whole thing stink from every corner of misgynostic bullshit with women suffering the most from it.

Indeed it takes Adrian fucking Chiles to say this:
https://www.theguardian.com/society/commentisfree/2023/may/18/no-adhd-is-not-a-con-if-thats-the-message-you-got-from-panoramas-expose-you-werent-paying-attention?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
No, ADHD is not a con. If that’s the message you got from Panorama’s exposé, you weren’t paying attention

Imagine being in their position, like a young woman I know in the same business as me. She’s pretty sure it’s ADHD that is making her life so miserable and wants to address it. With no hope of an NHS appointment any time soon, she has scraped together more money than she can sensibly spare to go private. So now she’s stuck between the NHS, which can’t help, and an expensive private consultation she possibly can’t rely on. “I just feel I’m now in this awful dilemma. Going private should be an easy, albeit very expensive, solution, but now people might dispute the diagnosis anyway,” she says.

“No one wants ADHD, no one wants to hand over a substantial amount of money, no one wants to take medication every day. All we want is clarity, and for everyday life not to be so damn difficult.”

For me, I'm really personally screwed by this. My brother way back in the 80s was thought to probably have ADHD - but it wasn't pursued because my parents didn't want to medicate. DH's parents looked into it for his brother, but after getting nowhere with him, didn't do anything for DH. DH has always said he's probably ADHD but its never been a problem to him. Fast forward to now and DS is ungoing the process through school - we thought when he was a baby there was a strong chance of ADHD / Autism cropping up. It was us who raised it. They first put the idea of neurodiversity to us because he wasn't eating - but when I asked them directly if it was affecting his work I was told no, so I didn't think it was significant. This year however, after dreadful SAT results and masses of issues with behaviour and all sorts of other signs that yes, its a problem and likely ADHD. And we are also being warned that because he's smart they may not allow the diagnosis even though its massively leading to underperformance at school and issues at home. So are being quietly told that private might be our option (we haven't done this yet because of worries over shared care).

And at this point DH and I started to read up. And realised that I'm text book for ADHD. And I've had two breakdowns over burnout at work and am not in work. Its caused me massive issues and I struggle with every day normal shit.

We decided, with the influx of people seeking diagnosis, waiting on DS would probably help my case. And now I find myself seeing this and thinking I'm never ever going to be able to access what I need, so whats the point in trying.

Ironically in the narrative of 'everyone saying they now have ADHD', no one stops to think that theres a generation of mothers who have children being diagnosed thanks to greater awareness in schools for whom the penny is dropping. Its just 'they got it off tiktok'. No its fucking not. If its heretiary then of course you would see a massive uptick in demand from adults as rates in children is looked at. No one has thought 'hey what about all those women who are having kids legitimately diagnosed and slowly waking up to the possibility'. Its like its an idea thats got lost in time and space and never ever considered. Its just 'oh well it must be social media and all these idiots being easily led'. Cos its women.

I'm so fucking angry, because this one now looks like a sexist pig of a man and the thoughtless sexist fuckwits at the BBC haven't exposed anything. All they've successfully done is fuck over women who have already been screwed by a sexist system.

There isn't any consequences or tightening of oversight for the private clinics. Nor is there any thought to looking at the inconsistency of the post code lottery and sexism over diagnosis in the NHS/council provision through schools as a result of the problem. I know the system in the neighbouring council is totally different two miles down the road from me and seems to encourage private route as they don't refer through the schools cos my friend works in one of the schools there. So the whole programme is a fucking farce.

The unethical nature of it is way below what we should expect from the BBC - remember this is the same programme that had the Bashir/Diana farcial. The programme should be shit hot about ethical practice.

Instead this shit show.

I really hope there's a shed load of complaints about it, because its not going to stop the problem. Its just going to feed more desparation and make more (women) people vulnerable to exploitation by dodgy private clinics.

To see the upset and distress on social from women who have been unwittingly directly exploited by the journalist in question expressing their horror at being duped once the programme has been broadcast, really is the icing on the cake to the entire story. Its utterly disguisting. This in itself is direct harm to women with ADHD (and thus more vulnerable) isn't excusable in any way.

I can not express enough, how awful I think this is.

This also can not be just dismissed by saying 'oh well we know private clinics are...' cos thats missing the majority of the bigger picture about how we got to that point in the first place. Its unacceptable.