Warwickshire pause in ADHD referrals 'putting lives at risk'
Mr Morrison said his diagnosis had been a "game changer" for himADHD is a neurodevelopmental condition characterised by difficulties with concentration, energy levels, impulsiveness, or by a person's ability to manage their time.Figures published earlier this year by NHS England estimated there were nearly 2.5 million people in England with ADHD, with more than 550,000 currently waiting for an assessment.Mr Morrison said he thought being forgetful, impulsive and struggling to concentrate were just some of his personality traits until his partner suggested he might have ADHD.''I used to bury anxiety and to try to fit in," the 35-year old said.Because of that, he said he became "pretty close" to developing an abuse problem but his recent diagnosis changed that.''It's the same as someone who's visually impaired putting on glasses. That's the best way to describe it'' Mr Morrison said.
While he recognised action needed to be taken to get the waiting list for children's referrals down, he said adults should not feel ignored.''It's a lot more common for ADHD'ers to use substances to counteract burnout and it's a lot less common once they are on medication," he said."So the fact that won't be available now will make them more vulnerable''.ADHD UK, a charity that helps people with the condition, said one in four women with it and one in 10 men with ADHD would at some point try to take their own lives.''We absolutely think this decision [to suspend referrals] represents a risk to life," a spokesperson for the charity said.Mr Morrison agreed: ''I've had a few friends trying to take their own lives diagnosed or otherwise, so the fact the over-25s are being completely disregarded is just horrible''.He said he felt the decision could put lives at risk claiming ''it's not deliberate, but it is a consequence of the action''.
NHS pledge
More than 7,500 children and young people were currently waiting for an ADHD assessment in the region, the Coventry and Warwickshire Integrated Care Board, of which the partnership NHS trust is a member, said.A spokesperson added that was ''unacceptable'' and showed the need for a different approach with more than 10-year waiting times for some children.Under the temporary policy, only new referrals for assessments for people under 25 would be commissioned but, they added, this would not affect anybody who had already been referred and those on the current waiting list would remain.Autism assessments are also not affected."This policy will remain in place until we have implemented a new, comprehensive and sustainable all-age pathway for ADHD'' chief medical officer Dr Imogen Staveley said.''We are committed to introducing this new pathway as soon as possible."If you are affected by any of the issues raised in this story, support and advice is available via the BBC Action Line.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
38 minutes ago
- The Independent
NHS set for winter chaos as nurses and GPs threaten strike action
The Royal College of Nursing will ballot members for industrial action after 91 per cent rejected a 3.6 per cent pay offer, citing feeling 'deeply undervalued' and demanding improved pay and career progression. General Practitioners, represented by the British Medical Association, are also threatening strikes, with a September meeting planned to consider action over their role in the NHS 's 10-year plan and demands for contract investment. These new threats follow a five-day walkout by resident doctors, who were seeking a 29 per cent pay rise, which resulted in the cancellation of some vital cancer operations. The Department of Health and Social Care acknowledges the value of nurses but states they have received two above-inflation pay rises, while the Health Secretary has warned the British Medical Association against a prolonged dispute. The Royal College of Nursing emphasises that widespread vacancies, stunted career progression, and pay erosion are critical issues impacting patient safety, urging ministers to agree on a comprehensive investment plan.
Telegraph
38 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Gender clinic can give children cross sex hormones, judge rules
A clinic run by former Tavistock medics can continue prescribing cross-sex hormones to children, the High Court has ruled. Susie Evans, a former nurse and a mother known as XX, took legal action against the Care Quality Commission (CQC), the safety regulator, over its decision to register the Gender Plus Hormone Clinic (GPHC) in Birmingham in January 2024. The regulator, which was deemed 'unfit for purpose' by Wes Streeting, the Health Secretary, upon entering office, went on to rate the clinic as 'outstanding'. The pair also challenged the CQC's decision last December to allow it to prescribe cross-sex hormone treatment to 16 and 17-year-olds without any conditions. The 'gender-affirming hormones' involve giving hormones, such as testosterone, to help someone change their physical appearance. The clinic does not prescribe puberty blockers. Lawyers for the women told a hearing in June that the CQC had acted 'irrationally' and made decisions that were 'simply not open to it', given the NHS's stance on hormone treatment for children aged 16 and 17 in light of the Cass Review. The review by paediatrician Baroness Cass, which recommended a ban on puberty blockers and medical treatment for under 16s, also urged 'extreme caution' in prescribing the drugs to any 16 and 17-year-olds. She said gender medicine had 'been built on shaky foundations' and that there should be 'clear clinical rationale for providing hormones at this stage rather than waiting until an individual reaches 18'. The CQC and GPHC opposed the challenge, with barristers telling the hearing in London that it was 'fatally flawed' and the clinic was found to be 'committed to the safety and best interests of its patients'. In a ruling on Thursday, Mrs Justice Eady dismissed the claim, saying there was 'no irrationality in the decisions reached' and they were within the 'rational range' of options available to the watchdog. Gender-questioning children Hormone treatment was previously provided on the NHS at the Tavistock's Gender Identity Development Service, where Ms Evans worked. It was shut down because of its medical-first, affirmative approach to treating gender-questioning children. The NHS has opened three specialist children's gender clinics and has plans for a further five covering the seven NHS regions in England by the end of 2026, but has said that all recommendations for hormone interventions must be endorsed by a national multi-disciplinary team. It is understood that there have not yet been any recommendations for hormone treatment for 16 and 17-year-olds since the Cass Review. GPHC was set up by Dr Aidan Kelly and is led by nurse consultant Paul Carruthers, who both worked at the Tavistock. 'Unjustifiable' Dr Kelly previously told the Guardian he 'disputed many of Cass's findings' and said after the Cass Review that the NHS was 'going backwards instead of forwards' and that this level of caution was 'unjustifiable'. The Gender Plus director worked at the Tavistock from 2016-21 before moving to the Nottingham Centre for Transgender Health in 2021 and moving into private practice two years later. In 2022, he claimed that for those clinicians leaving the Tavistock, 'it was often because of the toxic media and political environment surrounding the service rather than because they disagreed with practice there'. He has also previously said some staff had doubts about whether the children they were treating were transgender, or should instead have been receiving help for other conditions, including autism. Dr Kelly is a member of the World Professional Association for Transgender Health, a controversial international body which says that adolescents should be able to access sex change surgery, even if this is not supported by their parents, and calls for 'eunuch' to be classed as a gender identity. 'Putting responsibility back on the family' The court also heard how in 2018, Dr Kelly had told a conference, when speaking of assessing, which children should go forward with transitioning, that 'often we are putting responsibility back on the family because we don't have the evidence base to say it's these kids and not these kids, or how we can pick out which kids should go forward and which kids shouldn't'. James Gardner, partner at Conrathe Gardner LLP, acting for the claimants, said: 'Any activism in medicine should give a regulator pause for thought, but the activism that permeates much of gender medicine is a red flag. It exposes vulnerable children to the irreversible and lifelong consequences of a treatment which has remarkably weak evidence for its safety and effectiveness.' He added: 'The CQC–declared 'unfit for purpose' by Wes Streeting after the Dash Report – chose to disregard the ideological activism of key members of the GenderPlus team, and it is shocking that the High Court was unwilling to intervene. 'Wes Streeting must now take decisive action and ban cross sex hormone treatment outside the protective measures in place in the NHS.' 'Not factored in' Tom Cross KC, for Ms Evans and XX, said in written submissions that there were 'a number of key differences' between GPHC and NHS safeguards, including that referrals to the former came from Dr Kelly's company, Kelly Psychology, which is unregulated. He said in court that the CQC had 'not factored in' parts of the treatment process on the NHS, which 'serve as important safeguards' and were 'obviously material'. He said consideration of these points would have led to the treatment of under-18s being halted. Jamie Burton KC, for the CQC, said that there was 'ample evidence' that Kelly Psychology 'did not pose an unacceptable risk' to patients, and that a 'significant number' of those assessed by the company were not referred for treatment at GPHC. The court was told that the CQC found no evidence of 'improper decision making or anything that might flag a concern', and that the CQC 'had regard' to NHS processes. 'Entirely consistent' Peter Mant KC, for Gender Plus Healthcare Limited, said that there was no legal requirement for a private provider to mirror NHS care and that the clinic's model was 'entirely consistent' with the Cass Review and NHS policy. In a 64-page ruling, Mrs Justice Eady said: 'Accepting that (GPHC) could neither access the NHS national MDT nor precisely replicate it, but keeping in mind the purpose of the NHS model, I cannot say that the CQC's finding of sufficient alignment was outside the reasonable range of conclusions open to it.' She continued: 'The range was set by reference to the substance that underpinned the NHS structures, not merely the choices made as to the form that those structures should take. 'Applying that approach, as I am satisfied the CQC did, the decisions reached fall within the rational range, and the CQC was entitled to conclude that no further conditions were required.' Dr Kelly said he was 'absolutely delighted' at the judgment, with Mr Carruthers stating that the ruling 'further demonstrates the diligence and integrity of our work'.
The Herald Scotland
an hour ago
- The Herald Scotland
Former nurse loses legal challenge over registration of private gender clinic
The two also challenged the regulator's decision last December to continue the clinic's registration and to allow it to prescribe cross-sex hormone treatment to 16 and 17-year-olds without conditions. The clinic, which was rated outstanding by the watchdog last year, treats people aged 16 and older, including through prescribing gender-affirming – masculinising or feminising – hormones, but, in line with the NHS, does not prescribe puberty blockers. Dr Aidan Kelly, clinical psychologist and director of the Gender Plus Hormone Clinic (Callum Parke/PA) Lawyers for the women told a hearing in June that the CQC had acted 'irrationally' and made decisions that were 'simply not open to it', given the NHS's stance on hormone treatment for children aged 16 and 17 in light of the Cass Review. The CQC and GPHC opposed the challenge, with barristers telling the hearing in London that the legal challenge was 'fatally flawed' and the clinic was found to be 'committed to the safety and best interests of its patients'. In a ruling on Thursday, Mrs Justice Eady dismissed the claim, saying there was 'no irrationality in the decisions reached' and they were within the 'rational range' of options available to the watchdog. Hormone treatment was previously provided on the NHS at the now-closed Gender Identity Development Service (Gids) run by Tavistock and Portman NHS Foundation Trust, where Ms Evans worked. But a review published by Baroness Cass in April last year said 'extreme caution' should be demonstrated when deciding to prescribe the treatment to 16 and 17-year-olds, and that there should be 'clear clinical rationale for providing hormones at this stage rather than waiting until an individual reaches 18'. The NHS has opened three specialist children's gender clinics and has plans for a further five covering the seven NHS regions in England by the end of 2026, but has said that all recommendations for hormone interventions must be endorsed by a national multi-disciplinary team (MDT). It is understood that the MDT has not yet received any recommendations for hormone treatment for 16 and 17-year-olds since the Cass Review. GPHC was set up by Dr Aidan Kelly and is led by nurse consultant Paul Carruthers, who both worked at Gids, and has previously said it primarily treats patients aged between 16 and 25, using its own MDT. Tom Cross KC, for Ms Evans and XX, said in written submissions that there were 'a number of key differences' between GPHC and NHS safeguards, including that referrals to the former came from Dr Kelly's company, Kelly Psychology, which is unregulated. He said in court that the CQC had 'not factored in' parts of the treatment process on the NHS, which 'serve as important safeguards' and were 'obviously material'. He said consideration of these points would have led to the treatment of under-18s being halted. Jamie Burton KC, for the CQC, said that there was 'ample evidence' that Kelly Psychology 'did not pose an unacceptable risk' to patients, and that a 'significant number' of those assessed by the company were not referred for treatment at GPHC. The court was told that the CQC found no evidence of 'improper decision making or anything that might flag a concern', and that the CQC 'had regard' to NHS processes. Peter Mant KC, for Gender Plus Healthcare Limited, said that there was no legal requirement for a private provider to mirror NHS care and that the clinic's model was 'entirely consistent' with the Cass Review and NHS policy. In a 64-page ruling, Mrs Justice Eady said: 'Accepting that (GPHC) could neither access the NHS national MDT nor precisely replicate it, but keeping in mind the purpose of the NHS model, I cannot say that the CQC's finding of sufficient alignment was outside the reasonable range of conclusions open to it.' She continued: 'The range was set by reference to the substance that underpinned the NHS structures, not merely the choices made as to the form that those structures should take. 'Applying that approach, as I am satisfied the CQC did, the decisions reached fall within the rational range, and the CQC was entitled to conclude that no further conditions were required.' A CQC spokesperson said: 'We are pleased that today's ruling recognises CQC's regulatory expertise. 'It also supports the systems and processes at CQC that put the needs of people using services at their heart and helps to ensure that people receive care and treatment in a safe way.' Dr Kelly said he was 'absolutely delighted' at the judgment, with Mr Carruthers stating that the ruling 'further demonstrates the diligence and integrity of our work'. Ms Evans said she was 'extremely disappointed' by the ruling and believed that the CQC's decision was 'irrational and highly risky', while XX said: 'To say I am disappointed is an understatement.'
