Paid Members Hannibal Scorch Posted May 16, 2023 Paid Members Share Posted May 16, 2023 41 minutes ago, Arch Stanton said: This thread reads like a lot of people moaning about some TV that they didn't actually watch, just read about. Sounds about right for a wrestling forum. I watched it and thought it was both fascinating and alarming. It was absolutely not a 'Super-Size Me for ADHD' piece. I read his written piece. I decided as someone that has at least 2 people affected not to watch it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Arch Stanton Posted May 16, 2023 Paid Members Share Posted May 16, 2023 37 minutes ago, Hannibal Scorch said: I read his written piece. I decided as someone that has at least 2 people affected not to watch it. Well then I'd recommend a watch for fuller context, because it feels like you've misunderstood important parts and the purpose of the investigation. You've accused the reporter of 'cheating' and compared it to feigning heart attack symptoms to try to gain a false diagnosis. This is absolutely not what happened. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperBacon Posted May 16, 2023 Share Posted May 16, 2023 1 hour ago, Arch Stanton said: This thread reads like a lot of people moaning about some TV that they didn't actually watch, just read about. I didn't watch it, but I haven't moaned about it. Like I said, I was interested in watching it, but ultimately based on what I've read from people who it has hurt/affected etc, decided not to. That's not me being a martyr or anything, but I do obviously feel it's best to listen to those who it affects the most. But everyone is free to wear sunscreen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Houchen Posted May 16, 2023 Author Share Posted May 16, 2023 6 minutes ago, SuperBacon said: That's not me being a martyr or anything, but I do obviously feel it's best to listen to those who it affects the most. Absolutely, if you don’t want to watch something, don’t! As you say, you haven’t moaned about it or made any comment on something you haven’t watched. I hope I was able to give a run down of it to give you an overview. It wasn’t anything groundbreaking, half hour shows rarely are, but I feel like it’s important to say what it WASN’T about. It’s like the Brass Eye paedogeddon. So many complaints from people who didn’t even watch it and got offended by what they imagined it was! A woman in one of my girlfriends groups is on Masterchef tonight. She is doing a deconstructed dish to emphasise how textures and tastes can affect autistic people. All the ingredients don’t touch and she wants to get across how people should be free to enjoy food in the way best suited to them. Looking forward to it! I wonder if there’s any preference for Japanese cuisine for people with a sensory processing disorder, where all ingredients are served separately like in a bento box? My partner has issues with textures so often everything is separate on her plate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Hannibal Scorch Posted May 16, 2023 Paid Members Share Posted May 16, 2023 11 minutes ago, Arch Stanton said: Well then I'd recommend a watch for fuller context, because it feels like you've misunderstood important parts and the purpose of the investigation. You've accused the reporter of 'cheating' and compared it to feigning heart attack symptoms to try to gain a false diagnosis. This is absolutely not what happened. I have now watched this, after re-reading his article. because you've called my bluff I think its lovely the twat in the hat got an NHS appointment when there is a 5 year waiting list He says everyone that goes to a private clinic gets a diagnosis of ADHD If you look at any recommended ADHD assessors on their website and what you pay for going private, there is never a single session to get a diagnosis its always with multiple sessions often with family members as well He admits he knows after his first assessment what they are looking for so goes into those knowing what to say I had already decided that I wasn't sure if I was going to go down the drugs route, but I also knew if I went down with someone on the NHS's approved list I could discuss that with my doctor and not have to go private with that, which is what the 3 companies he went to were trying to do. And yes, the last one was one that worked for the NHS, so I understand it isn't fool proof. Basically what I have learned watching this is that there are some dodgy companies. As there are in all fields. But I still left this watching that regardless of the quality of firm, if you can give them the answers they want to hear you can get the answer you want. It also has given a load of ammunition to people who don't believe in ADHD or believe, like the Daily Mail, that it's being diagnosed too easily and just highlighting some dodgy companies just fuels that particular fire. To me the purpose may have been to highlight some dodgy businesses, but I feel thats not the only thing that will come out from this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Lion_of_the_Midlands Posted May 16, 2023 Paid Members Share Posted May 16, 2023 1 hour ago, Keith Houchen said: A woman that's in one of my girlfriends groups is on Masterchef tonight. She is doing a deconstructed dish to emphasise how textures and tastes can affect autistic people. All the ingredients don’t touch and she wants to get across how people should be free to enjoy food in the way best suited to them. Looking forward to it! I wonder if there’s any preference for Japanese cuisine for people with a sensory processing disorder, where all ingredients are served separately like in a bento box? My partner has issues with textures so often everything is separate on her plate. I haven't commented on this thread before because I'm not autistic and I don't have any family who are and I feel that is more what this thread is for. Also I'm not claiming any Mickey Numbers type expertise in the subject, I can just tell you of my working experiences in the field. I've seen a lot of notes on autistic people of all ages from 7 to 90 and you probably wouldn't be surprised how often this comes up Keith. It's not just texture though, taste, smell, and colour of food are common triggers for challenging behaviour. Over the years the colour of food is especially prominent. The amount of people who will only eat yellow or white food is astonishing. One kid would only eat plain yoghurt for a couple of years, offered anything else they would become very challenging. It has taken 10 years but they are now eating a variety of foods, they are still all white though. I will look forward to MasterChef, it is a part of autism that so many people don't know about. So few people realise that neurodivergent applies to all the neurons, and forgive me if I've intruded into something that is not my place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Houchen Posted May 16, 2023 Author Share Posted May 16, 2023 58 minutes ago, Hannibal Scorch said: I think its lovely the twat in the hat got an NHS appointment when there is a 5 year waiting list He didn’t. The consultant wanted to make clear what a thorough assessment should look like because he knew what these sham companies do and thought it important that it was highlighted on the platform of a national broadcaster. But god yeah, that sub Wes Anderson get up was ugh. Get a hat that fits! 58 minutes ago, Hannibal Scorch said: He says everyone that goes to a private clinic gets a diagnosis of ADHD Did he? Former staff at these sham artists said 99% or something like that got a diagnosis but I don’t recall the journo saying everyone did. When did he say that bit? 58 minutes ago, Hannibal Scorch said: He admits he knows after his first assessment what they are looking for so goes into those knowing what to say But it’s what he said in his first meeting. He didn’t change any answers or tailor his answers to suit. 58 minutes ago, Hannibal Scorch said: Basically what I have learned watching this is that there are some dodgy companies. As there are in all fields. But I still left this watching that regardless of the quality of firm, if you can give them the answers they want to hear you can get the answer you want And that’s the difference between NHS and private, or a firm. The formers incentive is healthcare, the latter is profit. Danger made the point about confirmation bias and those Daily Mail readers that you seem to always mention will cherry pick whatever they want. If they watched it and decided that ADHD isn’t real, then they ignored the experts interviewed who very much say it’s real and how people should seek help if they think they have it. And yes the issue is being diagnosed too quickly. And by that I don’t mean they haven’t been on a waiting list. They mean quickly as in not thoroughly. It’s not about the questions they asked in the short assessment but more the questions they don’t ask, how they don’t probe the answers further to see if the reasons for exhibiting traits are connected to something else, which in the case of the journo, it was. These wankers are basically charging worried and vulnerable people a lot of money to essentially do an buzzfeed type “You might have ADHD” quiz and then charge them for medication for life. It’s criminal in my eyes. To emphasise my Rogue Traders point, these clinics are cowboy builders and rightfully should be exposed. That doesn’t mean all builders are bad, not even close, just you should be careful as jackals will always look to exploit. If people saw this documentary as an attack on ADHD, then they are the ones with Daily Mail blinkers on in my opinion. They are seeing what they want to see. @Lion_of_the_Midlands Thanks for that post, that’s super informative and exactly what makes this thread a great resource for people like me, a neurotypical trying to navigate a neurodiverse world. Really appreciate it. I do the cooking due to her sensory disorder and at times it’s been challenging but we’re getting there. I know how to prepare dishes for her based on texture, colour, smell, keeping tastes separate. We prepare what we can together and due to this she is trying new foods and flavours because I can talk her through it. She does joke with my non verbal nephews mum about how they both love the rich variety and abundance of “The Beige Plate Menu”! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Tommy! Posted May 16, 2023 Paid Members Share Posted May 16, 2023 1 hour ago, Keith Houchen said: All the ingredients don’t touch Puts the baked beans in a ramekin? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Houchen Posted May 16, 2023 Author Share Posted May 16, 2023 Just now, Tommy! said: Puts the baked beans in a ramekin? Haha!! Good arrows!! Sometimes when I do her Quorn Roarsomes (the best new food item of the last five years) potato waffles and beans, I put the dinosaurs atop the waffles and say they are on rafts escaping the sea of bean lava. The waffles (and chips) are permitted to touch the beans, Branston obviously, but not be overlapping! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Hannibal Scorch Posted May 16, 2023 Paid Members Share Posted May 16, 2023 (edited) 3 hours ago, Keith Houchen said: Did he? Former staff at these sham artists said 99% or something like that got a diagnosis but I don’t recall the journo saying everyone did. When did he say that bit? 7:00 in and he said almost everyone to be fair. As to the rest of your points: 3 hours ago, Keith Houchen said: He didn’t. The consultant wanted to make clear what a thorough assessment should look like because he knew what these sham companies do and thought it important that it was highlighted on the platform of a national broadcaster. It was a couple of minutes. How did we see what a thorough assessment looks like when so little time was spent on it. But it’s what he said in his first meeting. He didn’t change any answers or tailor his answers to suit. How do you know? We didn't see that. Danger made the point about confirmation bias and those Daily Mail readers that you seem to always mention will cherry pick whatever they want. If they watched it and decided that ADHD isn’t real, then they ignored the experts interviewed who very much say it’s real and how people should seek help if they think they have it. Yeah, and that was given a natural platform. Pat on the back for you not taking it that way, but we're not the target audience for Panarama. And yes the issue is being diagnosed too quickly. And by that I don’t mean they haven’t been on a waiting list. They mean quickly as in not thoroughly. It’s not about the questions they asked in the short assessment but more the questions they don’t ask, how they don’t probe the answers further to see if the reasons for exhibiting traits are connected to something else, which in the case of the journo, it was. 40 minutes isn't enough. Although I am sure how you show your neurodiversity would mean some people may appear more obvious than others. These wankers are basically charging worried and vulnerable people a lot of money to essentially do an buzzfeed type “You might have ADHD” quiz and then charge them for medication for life. It’s criminal in my eyes. That's not true. You can argue the pre consultation forms might do that, but you can't say the appointment itself was. To emphasise my Rogue Traders point, these clinics are cowboy builders and rightfully should be exposed. That doesn’t mean all builders are bad, not even close, just you should be careful as jackals will always look to exploit. A good documentry would show some good examples. That didn't happen. If people saw this documentary as an attack on ADHD, then they are the ones with Daily Mail blinkers on in my opinion. They are seeing what they want to see. No shit sherlock. And thats the problem. ADHD has been portrayed as a fad and over diagnosed and now thats been shown to be the case on the BBC. The agenda of this report in my eyes did nothing but prove those idiots right, there was no upside to it. In his report he wrote the NHS appointment is 3 hours, the others varied between 40 minutes and 1 hour 40. Based on what? Because I know someone who got seen on the NHS for an Autism and ADHD diagnosis and it was just under 2 hours. This was 2019, maybe its changed. But this is presented as fact with no back up to it. My opinion is it was a poor documentry which has helped no one, except maybe someone who was going to book a private diagnosis without doing a fact check first. Edited May 16, 2023 by Hannibal Scorch Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Houchen Posted May 16, 2023 Author Share Posted May 16, 2023 29 minutes ago, Hannibal Scorch said: It was a couple of minutes. How did we see what a thorough assessment looks like when so little time was spent on it. It was a couple of hours at least! I think he said it was actually three! Or did you expect a thirty minute documentary to show a three hour appointment or something? 30 minutes ago, Hannibal Scorch said: How do you know? We didn't see that. Because he said he did, are you saying he lied about it? 32 minutes ago, Hannibal Scorch said: Yeah, and that was given a natural platform. Pat on the back for you not taking it that way, but we're not the target audience for Panarama. Who is the target audience for Panorama? Why am I not in that target audience? 34 minutes ago, Hannibal Scorch said: 40 minutes isn't enough Glad you agree with programmes point. Sure, people display differently but that’s what the thorough deep dive is for, as there are a lot of crossover traits and symptoms with things like trauma. That’s evidenced by the full assessment being able to explore these traits. You can’t do that in 40 minutes. 37 minutes ago, Hannibal Scorch said: That's not true. You can argue the pre consultation forms might do that, but you can't say the appointment itself was. Yes I can, because as you say yourself, 40 minutes isn’t enough. The NHS agree with this. All the dodgy clinic seem to do was go through his answers and not delve deep into them. Because it’s too short a time to do that. 39 minutes ago, Hannibal Scorch said: A good documentry would show some good examples. That didn't happen Apart from mentioning that many clinics partner with the NHS, obviously. 42 minutes ago, Hannibal Scorch said: ADHD has been portrayed as a fad and over diagnosed and now thats been shown to be the case on the BBC. Apart from the NHS staff interviewed saying it’s under diagnosed and encouraging people to seek a diagnosis? 44 minutes ago, Hannibal Scorch said: report he wrote the NHS appointment is 3 hours, the others varied between 40 minutes and 1 hour 40. Based on what? Because I know someone who got seen on the NHS for an Autism and ADHD diagnosis and it was just under 2 hours Did they just turn up or did they go via a GP? Because you can add that time to it. If you have a good GP who refers you with a letter, include that time in the assessment too because getting diagnosed doesn’t start with a face to face / video call with the final assessor. But it does with these sham companies you seem to be defending for some reason. My partner got an autism diagnosis shortly after a two hour video call, but prior to that, a counsellor saw her for 14 hours and advised her to speak to our GP. The GP then booked a further hour long appointment so she could draft a cover letter to ensure she was triaged correctly. Before the video call they had a hour long conversation with her mum regarding her childhood. Then came the video call and after the doctors, consultant and speech therapist she spoke to had a meeting to discuss her case, they called back with a diagnosis. So her assessment was about two hours, but it was two hours of about 18 of the whole process. It was then followed up with 7 or 8 hours of after care video calls. This was all done by a private company who are one of the partners the NHS sub out to and who the documentary recommends if going private. Also, it was for autism and not ADHD and we are extremely lucky to have such a brilliant GP. You don’t get any of that from the bottom feeders. You just got the call and a diagnosis at the end of the call, no discussion, nothing, just a psychologist or a pharmacist diagnosing you based on a call that you yourself said isn’t long enough. 1 hour ago, Hannibal Scorch said: My opinion is it was a poor documentry which has helped no one, except maybe someone who was going to book a private diagnosis without doing a fact check first. Bravo!! That was the point!! Don’t give your money to snake oil salesmen who sell you costly and possibly unnecessary medication for the rest of your life!! Glad you got there in the end! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spud Posted May 17, 2023 Share Posted May 17, 2023 (edited) I read the article but not watched the documentary and I’m not really interested. But I’m seeing the fear in the FB group I’m in. People who have already been diagnosed worrying about the result, those who haven’t worrying about the potential outcome. One person had an assessment with ADHD360 tomorrow cancelled and, after waiting 5 months, is now worried about another lengthy wait. I won’t go into full detail but my NHS-referred diagnosis took an hour. My friend had to fill in a questionnaire but is (was) sceptical of the condition so it wasn’t particularly favourable. But I was diagnosed and my journey (hate that, sounds like Britain’s Got Talent or something) took just over a year. And I know I’m incredibly lucky. I just worry for those who are still wondering and waiting and what affect this documentary will have on the current unacceptable waiting times. Edited May 17, 2023 by Spud Wrong company name Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Houchen Posted May 17, 2023 Author Share Posted May 17, 2023 (edited) 7 hours ago, Spud said: I just worry for those who are still wondering and waiting and what affect this documentary will have on the current unacceptable waiting times. Sadly, I think it’ll be zero. The tories always have the approach of underfunding public services to the point they aren’t fit for service, then the only option according to them is privatisation. They did it with rail, they did it with utilities, they’re doing it with healthcare. Edited May 17, 2023 by Keith Houchen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spud Posted May 17, 2023 Share Posted May 17, 2023 Thing is, and perhaps slightly off-topic, despite the faults of the NHS (whether its own doing or the government) I’d still 100% rather have that than not. If the alternative is a US-based system then we’re all fucked. I saw a TikTok last night of a veteran, maybe mid-30, absolutely distraught because his mental health care is screwed up. He hasn’t had any support for two years and now his doctor has changed his therapist. Someone he has built up a relationship with and was making headway. Now he has to start all over again, go back over all the traumatic shit that screwed him up in the first place and he’s devastated. But there’s nothing he can do. Health care isn’t a luxury afforded by those with money. You shouldn’t have to choose between eating or having medication. But, at the same time, you shouldn’t have to wait years for treatment either. I don’t know what the solution is but I think I’d rather be on a waiting list than on the scrap heap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Arch Stanton Posted May 17, 2023 Paid Members Share Posted May 17, 2023 Here's a follow up piece to the Panorama documentary, by the NHS psychiatrist featured on the programme. Hopefully it will put to rest some of the tedious back and forth in the thread over the last few days. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/may/17/nhs-psychiatrist-adhd-underdiagnosis?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.