The problem for me is that adults are going in to doctors believing they have whatever and they have researched it and they know all the signs and symptoms and could possibly be just answering to get a diagnosis they want that might justify some perceived failures.
What exactly goes on when an adult goes to see a doctor about this? How do they come to a diagnosis? It's not the same as a child who doesn't really know they're being tested.
Not based on anything, so totally disregard, but I'd guess it's good for health industry to have a nice supply of customers, sorry "patients". Sorry I'm just an aul cynic at this stage.
That's the same with all symptoms. Doctors rely on what patients are telling them.
Why would patients want to lie?
I thought that was a good interview with Suzanne O'Sullivan, though it never touched on the point raised above ^ - the elephant in the room. She has written a number of interesting books. Her previous one called "Sleeping Beauties" was about mass psychogenic illnesses (such as the so-called Havana syndrome).
Similar on the newspaper panel. Any time someone looked like they were about to make an interesting or potentially controversial point, they were cut off, or it moved on to something else. Not sure it's deliberate, more there is just not enough time to go into any depth. It's quite frustrating.
I was surprised that Brendan was surprised to learn that Northern Ireland was a lot more advanced economically than the republic in the 60s and 70s, and indeed later than that. I remember at the beginning of his political career, David Trimble touting a pamphlet called "An Economics lesson for Irish Nationalists and Republicans". That was written in 1996 apparently and was basically about how the Republic couldn't afford to take on NI (at the time).
The question was in the contexts of adults seeking diagnoses, the vast majority of whom will not be taking exams in educational institutions.
And the answer was in the context of adults seeking diagnoses (ADHD in this case)…and where some are not doing so in an entirely honest way i.e. lying.
To bring it back to the show, it's just an example of what Suzanne O' Sullivan was talking about on Saturday - these conditions are becoming so over-diagnosed and/or the parameters becoming so wide that it may lead to inaccurate diagnoses or some taking advantage of this.
some people using it as another version of 'whip lash'
Which brings me back to my question - why would adults be lying to get a false diagnosis? The vast majority of them aren't doing exams so what's in it for them?
I'll draw my own comments on this issue to an end after this because it's getting to be hard work.
It was just an example of why some adults might lie. Yes, the majority of adults are probably not doing university exams, although quite a few are (somewhere in the region of 3 million adults are enrolled in higher education in the UK)…but again, it was just one example of why some might lie.
Another one might be because some have been convinced/influenced to believe they have a condition when perhaps they don't (e.g. on social media). There may be other examples or reasons, but I don't know enough about those. I gave you an example of higher education because that's an area I'm very familiar with in the UK.
to be honest I could not be arsed reading through that. Different situation, but parents with autistic children can get tax breaks of about €4000 per year.
I know a young lady who is constantly looking for an psychological illness. I don't think she wants to work. Every few weeks, I've got this or I've got that.
If you knew how hard it is to get a diagnosis for a child with autism you wouldn't be bringing it up...
We're talking about adults here.
None of the conditions that we're talking about here are going to get someone off work.
it's a statement of fact, parents with autistic children can get tax breaks of €4000 per year
ya, and included was a link to the entitlements that autistic can avail of
You referred to parents of autistic children.
What specific benefits are you suggesting that autistic adults get with a diagnosis?
Not sure what extra benefits it might get an adult in ROI, but I'd say that in the North you'd more than likely qualify for extra benefits if you have some condition or other.
people aren’t necessarily looking for financial reward from a late (adult) diagnosis of autism. But as the song says “everybody’s looking for something”. Some people are naturally very introspective and self analytical. They may question why it is they behave or think in a certain way. Most people l would suggest don’t dwell on this very much, but introspective people like to have an answer.
Don't know much about the system across the border, but down here, getting a diagnosis and qualifying for something like disability benefit are two very different things.
like i said, there is a link there, read it if you are interested. I really don't care about all the newly diagnosed autistic adults
This discussion is ABOUT newly diagnosed autistic adults, and why they would allegedly be lying to get their diagnosis.
The benefits you were pointing out don't apply to this scenario, and aren't relevant to this discussion.
A medical diagnosis is good for the council waiting list.
A medical diagnosis gets you precisely nowhere on the council housing list.
If you want medical priority on your housing application, you need sign off from two medical professionals detailing how your medical condition impacts your housing need.
Which is a bit of a stretch for autism diagnosed as an adult or ADHD.
Is this all just barstool waffle about these conditions, or are there any actual benefits than anyone can point out that arise from diagnosis of these conditions as an adult?
Many will no doubt tell you repeatedly on social media about their diagnosis.
Is that a 'benefit'?
They could just be making it up, of course, like anything on social media.
Mod: Please move on from the general autism/benefits discussion, it's completely off topic and not suited to the Radio forum.
So it's sexist when Verona Murphy is shouted at.
Yet the CC was always shouted at, but it was OK before. Now it's a woman you have to stop shouting or you are a sexist.
What's striking for me is the lack of those calling it sexism/misogyny. A few weeks ago Alison O'Connor (who thought Jim O'Callaghan's criticism of Helen McEntee's performance as a minister was an example of misogyny) and sociologist Niamh Hourigan went out of their way to not go there…even though I strongly suspect they'd be screaming misogyny (never mind sexism) if Verona Murphy shared similar socio-political views as them.
Susanne Murphy from Social Justice Ireland was the same this morning…talk about dancing around it. She'd be throwing other women from the left (Mary Lou, Ivana, Holly et al.) under the bus if she made accusations of sexism/misogyny.
I'm no fan of Verona Murphy, but the hypocrisy is so blatant, and I think this whole circus with the Ceann Comhairle could reasonably be looked at from the perspective of sexism (not misogyny) with some of the carry on in the Dail…but Verona is not on their team, so feck her.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://www.boards.ie/applications/dashboard/design/images/banned.png)
