Debate contribution: ADHD Services
Debate contribution by Mrs Diane Dodds on .
- MLA
- Mrs Diane Dodds
- Party at the time
- Democratic Unionist Party
- Date
- 9 February 2026
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Private Members' Business
- Heading
- ADHD Services
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5369697
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I thank the proposers of the motion and of the amendment for this important debate. We will support both. This is an important issue and one on which many of us across the House get a lot of attention from constituents. When I think of ADHD, I think of the impact on people. I think of young people I have met who have dropped out of university, young people who have had a private diagnosis and have tried a number of GPs but cannot get into a shared care arrangement and, therefore, still have no medication for their condition. I think of the people who contacted me over the weekend just to talk about the impact of ADHD and the fact that they could not find in the Portadown Health Centre a GP willing to work with the private consultant to make sure that medication was available. One of my young constituents dropped out of university. Those are sad reflections of the state or lack of the service. It is important to remember that ADHD has a social and economic consequence for Northern Ireland. ADHD charities that gave evidence to the House of Commons estimated that 40% to 80% of young people who were not in employment, education or training will have ADHD. They were also confident that 40% of those in youth offender institutions will have it. Therefore, ADHD has a real, knock-on consequence for our whole society. That is important. The charities also estimated that the cost to the economy over 10 years might be as much as £11·2 billion in lost productivity and reduced household earnings. Not having a service has important consequences for the individual and serious consequences for our economy. A 2024 study in the British Journal of Psychiatry found that the risk of suicide or self-harm is much greater for those diagnosed with ADHD. The same goes for drug or alcohol addiction, so we have a really serious issue. From recent correspondence from the Department of Health — Minister, it is really important that you clear this up — it seems that our health trusts in Northern Ireland have a sporadic approach to ADHD. Nuala McAllister referred to that in some detail. Some have services; some do not. When I asked about referrals in the Southern Health and Social Care Trust, I was directed to the mental health service, not to a specific ADHD service. My constituent, who is a young adult, was annoyed, because, as they said, "I do not have a mental health problem; I have ADHD". That sporadic postcode lottery is also important to clear up. The Department of Health adopted the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines on ADHD but has gone no further in providing a pathway for diagnosis and treatment. It needs to address that. I would like more information, Minister, on the needs assessment that, you say, was completed on 30 November 2025 and on the report that will be published in early 2026. We are now six weeks into 2026, and I would like to think that that report, which will give us more information on the needs assessment of adults with ADHD, will be forthcoming. The other issue that my constituents stressed to me in advance of the debate was shared care. One constituent had paid a substantial sum for a diagnosis, could not find a GP who would participate in a shared care arrangement and therefore is still unmedicated. On asking whether they could transfer to another GP service, they were told that there were no transfers and no opportunity for any. That is a sad reflection of the situation —
— for adults with ADHD. For children, there are long waiting lists —
— that will have an impact on their whole life. That needs to be addressed.
638 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Assessment
Jev’s structured answers met the documented threshold for “not flagged”.
- Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.02 (flagging needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not flagged).
- None of the five culture-war criteria was met (each was below 0.60).
- Assessed as legitimate policy scrutiny (0.96).
- No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
- Subject area: Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits.
- The overall probability was at or below the not-flagging threshold.
This is an AI-generated assessment of the text, made against published criteria. It is not a finding of fact about the MLA or their intentions. The Assembly record itself is the fact.
Jev’s structured answers
| Question | Probability | Met? |
|---|---|---|
| Identity framing | 0.03 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.02 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.02 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.96 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.02 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 1.00 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.00 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits | 1.00 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.00 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
| Irish language, Ulster-Scots and language policy | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 14:33 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.
Disagree with this assessment?
Classifications can be challenged. A person reads every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.