I’ve added the BBC link, the article is being updated constantly.
I’ve added the BBC link, the article is being updated constantly.
A couple of papers here that might indicate what is happening here,
As good people in this thread are pointing out there is possible bias in the media reporting of this...
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10202797/ https://www.researchgate.net/publication/383825228_Negative_news_headlines_are_more_attractive_negativity_bias_in_online_news_reading_and_sharing
It's clear this has an effect on people who read it. - personally I and others have read commented here find it distressing and potentially damaging. There is a term I have come across newly: "rage bait". I'm adding this to "dog whistling" when considering information I encounter...
I have no definitive answer to why this is taking place. One might speculate: a government edict to spin things one way or another, personal bias on the reporters part without sufficient editorial control, some sort of crazy "got to get lots of people to read this" metric and a rush to the gutter with news reporting and perhaps wider society - I don't know and I doubt I ever will for sure in this particular case.
On the premise of wanting to be helpful tho' I think that there may be a lesson from this about misleading framing of "headlines", badly calibrated views about what is taking place and the sort of emotional distress that information exchange of all sorts can generate here that I'm appreciating. I conclude that how I and others react to that is a key part of whether it is perpetuated.
Theres a couole of articles in todays Guardian on this report
To be honest I think the debate over diagnosis is neither here nor there.
However, I do hope that this report does cause change within youth services and schools such as improved, practical support for anxiety, sensory issues and learning difficulties.
Adult social services can be really effective whereas youth services seem to struggle in building independence and support.
Indeed it does, but within context, not out of context. The context is about supplying support and the report makes the comment that relative numbers are not increasing. The report also mentions underdiagnosis, along with misdiagnosis and overdiagnosis as contributing problems to supporting people.
Look, I understand if you want to see the report in negative terms. I see it as a positive thing for ND people, so further dialogue is probably pointless.
I don't think they'd be able to refuse support for people already diagnosed so if they increase support it would have to include them. But I do think there's a real danger that if they relook at the criteria they could actually tighten it up to make it so those they see as having lesser need are not diagnosed. As I said earlier, I may just be being cynical.
I've just read had a look through the whole report and it mentions increasing risk of misdiagnosis and over diagnosis multiple times.
I'm talking about the BBC article that is linked as the topic of this thread. It is the first sentence of the summary and then again in the first section.
I agree the whole diagnostic criteria needs to be looked at again and not just outdated nonsense like the ability to make eye contact. The need for a witness, some one who's known you since childhood is ridiculous for adults and what about young people in care who many not have anyone either?
I think there's still a lot of old fashioned ideas arounf it not effecting women are still around too, those need addressing as women often mask heavier and present differently.
I honestly dont' think they'd be able to get away with offering more support to fewer people, the need is so huge and the current resourses so miniscule. They may be able to do it with children, but I doubt it and that still leaves all the adults in need of support and the school leavers. They need to rememeber adults and school leaver vote.
I'm not sure which article you mean. If it's the BBC article, it's not an accurate summary of the report. The first sentence of the report is "Our country is experiencing a profound change in the need for support for people with mental health problems and neurodevelopmental conditions."
Yet the first sentence of that article is "An official review in England has found young people are at risk over being over-diagnosed with ADHD and autism."
Well I see your point on the lack of support. My point was more if they reduce who can be diagnosed and then offer support to the smaller numbers they can make it look like they've done more than they have but will leave many unable to be diagnosed.
I was diagnosed through right to choose (only way it could be done in my area) and the psychiatrist that diagnosed me was very knowledgeable so I am confident in my diagnosis. But yes it should certainly be more regulated. A lot of NHS services don't diagnose people based on outdated nonsense like able to make eye contact. So it's not just the private sector that would need looking at.
The report doesn't state that autism and ADHD is at risk of being overdiagnosed in England. It states "Similarly to ADHD, there is little evidence of a substantial change in underlying population prevalence, although uncertainty remains because there has been no recent England-wide prevalence study. The best available estimate remains around 1.2% among young people, based on the 2017 MHCYP survey. Again, there is no equivalent adult population survey data."
Seeing as so few of us get any meaningful support, I'm not quite sure how we get less support? I've never had any support since I was diagnosed, I've had the phone put down on me for mentioning autism when seeking help and I dont see how it could get worse it could get than that?
From what I've read a lot of the private sector is pretty unregulated, how do you know that the person you're seeing for diagnosis is really qualified? I mean anyone could put up a certificate saying they're a psychologist, they might have a degree, but that dosen't make them qualified to do anymore than administer the AQ20 test and tell you what your score is and dump you back on the health service. A lot of the private sector do this for all sorts of things, they only do the easy stuff and as soon as anything gets complicated off to the NHS you go
Whilst that sounds positive. Stating that autism and ADHD is at risk of being over diagnosed does not sound to me like they intend to support people. It sounds like they will tighten up the diagnostic process so less people are diagnosed. Then with lowered numbers can say look we are providing better support. Maybe I'm just cynical but I don't trust what is going on surrounding autism and ADHD at the moment.
Better support is exactly what the report recommended. 
why nobodies looking into it
The late neuroendocrinologist Bruce McEwen coined a term: "allostatic load" meaning the cumulative biological "wear and tear" that chronic environmental, psychological, and physical stressors inflict on the human body TheCatWoman .
People do continue to look into this - there is evidence out there - you're not the only one who has these concerns.
I would posit the question: why is the problem not being resolved?
My answer is that we're all damned by a fallacy that the only way forward for humanity is by infinite growth - the primary mandate for which being that we must all achieve more. The current system survives not because people love it, but because the alternatives feel incredibly risky to build. I use the term "incredibly" deliberately there - people don't feel that alternatives are credible.
Eventually people have to look a the numbers tho' - that's the way we prove things these days. Yes The Thatcherite "toughen up and do more" belief does continue to have traction and yep it's evident in many layers of society past and present - from slave drivers to the old schools system that held out "spare the rod and spoil the child" in all manner of ways... If I hadn't been drawn to conclude that I was mentally unwell I personally wouldn't have gone looking for an answer why - and part of that was answered by being identified as autistic in what I consider to be an unsanitory world for many autistic people including my self...
From the broader reason as to why the UK government has had to investigate the problem, So many people being mentally unwell eventually can't be ignored - can it???
Eventually there has to reach a statistical tipping point.
At the moment there is a battle taking place because the rules between public systems are shifting because that tipping point has clearly been reached. Real people sustain real hurt in battles. I'm really pi$$ed off about that.
the antidote???
How have people resolved this sort of thing in the past without a battle?
Just maybe.... the moment people gather and realise, "Oh, it’s not just me; the environment we are in is toxic," the internal battle changes shape. Maybe there's a result of the shame and self-doubt vanish. We stop fighting our own minds and start looking at the external structure together.
When a dominant system is broken, trying to attack it head-on just drains energy and keeps someone locked in their battle - and believe me I am still caught up in all that craziness and it is debilitating me further. It appears to me that the most successful historical movements stopped trying to fix the corrupt machine and instead built parallel spaces that operated on entirely different rules.
Yes, first of all- anyone with any sort of condition or illness can apply for benefits, it does not depend on diagnosis, but severity of symptoms. Someone with depression and anxiety may also apply. The difference here is that these conditions are curable, autism and adhd are permanent, but there are ways to treat at least some symptoms to improve the quality of life.
The higher diagnosis is not only due to higher awareness- yes this is the main reason. But the second reason is that suddenly people from various generations seek the assessments. Tgere are not only children aged 4-8 like previously. There are young adults, older adults, seniors, people from marginalised groups, plus women (previously autism was believed to affect only boys). So there are people from various groups, who missed diagnosis as children, and now all at once seek the assessment. That creates an impression of huge overdiagnosis. If they were diagnosed as children, as they should be- the numbers now would be same, the difference would be that it would be considered normal.
I myself know an example of someone (from my family) to play the system by pretending depression. It's tge easiest and fastest diagnosis to get and although it should be curable within 2 years, many people get involuntarily diagnosed and treated for decades, there are also some, who take advantage of this systemic negligence.
Do they really think that the people who wait years or pay large sums of money for an assessment for themselves or their children are playing the benefits system? Claiming to have a 'bad back' is much faster and even less prone to definitive clinical invalidation.
Before the mid-1990s anyone without intellectual disability was extremely unlikely to get an autism diagnosis, the increase in diagnosis since then is almost entirely due to the realisation by the clinical community that autism affects people without co-occurring intellectual disability.
I've wanted for so long for there to be more recognition of autism and ADHD. And now I want nothing more than for it to stop. I'm sick of our existence being questioned in the way that it is. How about they start trying to support people rather than try and find ways to make less of us "exist".
I think my garden centre was strange as it seemed to be year round. I recall having freezing hands in december just before christmas!
That is a good approach to take. Funny enough today I did fill in a form and did mention the autism as it asked about disability. I don't normally do that but took your advice on board!
It is illegal here too, but they make up reasons and it is hard to prove.
It is depressing to hear that employment is tricky to find in the US as it is here. Can I ask where you had luck getting your clients employment?
