ADHD: Private clinics exposed by BBC undercover investigation

I caught the last ten minutes of the repeat the other night and found the reporter very unlikeable. He seemed like he was acting the part of a journalist rather than just being one, and (and I know we're all individuals so this is unfair) that wee rolled up hat he had balanced on his head and his multi-coloured shirt with five popped buttons was incredibly distracting, as was his intense unblinking stare. OK, no reason whay he should have to wear suit and tie these days to communicate serious journalist, but something about his whole vibe was deeply offputting to me. 

Harley Psychiatrists' response to the BBC Panorama Programme.

A very interesting read:

Any comments/opinions would be very welcome:

https://harleypsychiatrists.co.uk/bbc-panoramas-devastating-criticism-of-private-adhd-assessments/

Like you, every test I have ever taken has confirmed my autistic identity. Even tests that I thought that I would fall within the 'normal' range for, I fall outside. I thought that I didn't have any measurable degree of alexithymia, but two tests I took indicated that I was 'highly alexithymic'. 

This is actually true, if you self refer to (and pay money for) these services you are already giving the assessors the tacit message that you feel this is something you are struggling with enough to warrant a diagnosis and if they "take your word for it" rather than fob you off then that's just them being good doctors and listening to you.

The real headline here should be:

Man lies to doctors and doctors (who aren't lie detectors) believe him.

Thank you for letting us know this. I get so paranoid if people don't reply, not that I expect a reply but because I worry I offended said person or upset them.

To summarise today:

I think I am who I thought I am.

I scored 175 in the RAADS test + there were other tests too.

My family (especially my mother) show/ed traits of autism too, and considering its genetic component, that's another indicator besides a lifelong display of autistic traits in myself.

When I deal with professionals I expect them to be exactly that ie professional.

I think this is what really threw me yesterday.

Although I understand concerns about the making of the programme and have great reservations myself, I wasn't impressed by the assessment shown.

However, I believe there would have been paperwork completed beforehand which would have shown indications of ADHD.

My own ASD assessment was done by a different set of clinicians and was for a different condition and was more thorough.

I do feel for the people who have been diagnosed by these clinics though for ADHD as there will be quite a few people in a quandary this morning doubting themselves (and their meds).

That's shocking and actually quite upsetting to read. It's no wonder people struggle to trust people who are meant to be people of trust... 

Thanks for sharing this interesting but shocking article.

Bump

Per a request from Debbie:

'I am grateful for the replies but that I am not able to post on the forum at the moment, due to the spam filter.'

I've just done a reply to this thread responding to individuals, but I think because I quoted a few times, it's gone into the spam filter.

So, I will just for now, say a general 'thank you' for your contributions.

Martin said:

Personally, I think observation by a clinician is of very dubious worth, when applied to adults who may have perfected masking techniques over many years

That's a good, and reassuring, point.

Number said:

.Do you think that your time processing and assessing your diagnosis SINCE it was given to you is now more affirming than the original piece of paper?

A good question that I will need to think about.

I'm still processing at the moment.

Shardovan said:

Also, all the most appalling ‘no diagnosis’ stories I’ve heard on here have been courtesy of the nhs lottery assigning an outrageously old fashioned assessor to the person seeking help. ‘You can make eye contact and you have friends -not autistic. NEXT!’ Was the experience related. Why should ‘leading nhs psychiatrist’ be any more inherently trusted given these experiences? I’m dubious. 

Yes.  I agree. 

Iain said:

I had my ASD diagnosis from this company and it was a pretty rapid process, but the actual diagnosis came via the RAADS test and a long history of classic Aspie behaviours, so I'm sure it was correct.

Good to know.

Thanks everyone who has contributed to this thread.

Food for thought.

Interesting that this guy describes the mere three hour process as gruelling. Maybe because three hours of fraud is gruelling whereas those of us who go with sincere desperation to know are deeply appreciative of forensic levels of inquiry. For me my own 4+ hours over three sessions flew by. I’d have talked for hours more frankly. 

Question Debbie.....Do you think that your time processing and assessing your diagnosis SINCE it was given to you is now more affirming than the original piece of paper?

I don't know if that's a daft or inappropriate question....forgive me please if so.

I had my ASD diagnosis from this company and it was a pretty rapid process, but the actual diagnosis came via the RAADS test and a long history of classic Aspie behaviours, so I'm sure it was correct.

Where I question the responsibility of the journalism is in its lack of comparative testing against NHS services of the same nature.

I've heard plenty of shocking tales of incompetency, indifference and lack of ability from the NHS assessment services, even in the rare situation when you can even get an appointment.

It does seem to be a common theme throughout the industry of massive oversubscription to the resources available, so it seems inevitable that the lowest levels of service are what we end up with.

The BBC does have a reputation for bias and is always looking for a sensationalist angle these days it seems. Dissapointing.

The merits or demerits of this investigation aside, I think there's a worrying trend abroad in media and political circles: to downplay everything from mental ill-health to Autism and other conditions. All the better to get the likes of us into work and/or deny us any kind of help, no matter whether this destroys us or not.

It's perhaps telling, and not in a good way for reasons of credibility, that the reporter (in the article's photograph) chose to dress in that garish style. Bad faith, as you've written.

battybats said:

There's a good ongoing thread on Twitter about this, written by a neuroscientist who has some serious concerns about the situation: twitter.com/.../1658113052691124226

I just picked up this link in that thread (thanks) re a response from one of the clinics featured:

https://adhd-direct-ltd.mykajabi.com/social-media-policy-copy-1

Great thread that. I’m actually surprised at the bbc here. I wonder what would Chris Packham say about it all? 

I had a more than three hour assessment privately. I’d say closer to five by the time the follow up phone conversation  (still pre diagnosis, gathering more information) was completed. It felt robust enough to me, but what if this thread the bbc have pulled in discredit the good and bad alike. 
 
Also, all the most appalling ‘no diagnosis’ stories I’ve heard on here have been courtesy of the nhs lottery assigning an outrageously old fashioned assessor to the person seeking help. ‘You can make eye contact and you have friends -not autistic. NEXT!’ Was the experience related. Why should ‘leading nhs psychiatrist’ be any more inherently trusted given these experiences? I’m dubious. 

Aye tis true, me old digit