The question of whether ADHD is being overdiagnosed is one of the loudest and most fraught in UK mental-health discourse right now. Headlines talk about “rising diagnoses,” politicians call for reviews into possible “over-pathologising,” and people ask whether they are seeking help for a real condition or a culturally trendy label. The truth is more complicated than a yes/no headline: evidence from services, clinicians and researchers points to both real increases in demand and persistent under-recognition and wait-list problems. Here’s a balanced take on the debate and what the data and experts are actually saying.
What people point to when they say “overdiagnosis”
Those who argue ADHD may be overdiagnosed typically raise several linked concerns: a genuine rise in labels for everyday stress and restlessness, pressure on clinicians to diagnose quicker, expanded public awareness that might lower the diagnostic threshold, and the role of private clinics or online assessments that could fast-track a diagnosis without comprehensive assessment. Politicians and commentators have framed the issue as one of potential medicalisation of normal behaviour and fiscal pressure on benefits and services, prompting government-level reviews.
These are not trivial questions – overdiagnosis has negative consequences (inappropriate medication, stigma, resource diversion). The political urgency around reviews reflects pressure on services and public anxiety. But headlines about “too many diagnoses” often don’t engage with the parallel realities of limited NHS capacity and long waits.
The data that complicates the “overdiagnosis” picture
Prevalence data suggests 2.8% of adults would meet criteria for ADHD, whilst only 0.32% of adults in the UK have a diagnosis (O’Nions et al, 2025). If overdiagnosis were the main problem, we might expect falling unmet need and short waiting lists, but the latest NHS figures suggest the opposite. NHS management information from 2025 estimates millions in England have ADHD (including undiagnosed people), and in March 2025 up to 549,000 people may have been waiting for an ADHD assessment (NHS England, 2025a). Large proportions of people referred are waiting many months or longer for assessment and treatment. That suggests substantial under-recognition and serious access problems rather than rampant overdiagnosis.
Independent taskforce and NHS reporting have also emphasised variation across regions and inequality in access, some areas still offer almost no adult ADHD services (NHS England, 2025b). Multiple professional bodies and charities say the service gap means many people who truly need assessment and support aren’t getting it. That’s a key reason many clinicians argue the rise in recorded diagnoses reflects improved recognition and referral, not unnecessary medicalisation.
What clinicians and researchers are saying
Major clinical voices push back on the overdiagnosis narrative. Researchers and clinicians note that population prevalence estimates imply many more people with ADHD than have a formal diagnosis in the UK, which is inconsistent with an “overdiagnosis” claim. For example, recent academic reviews and clinical summaries stress persistent uncertainties about adult ADHD but also underline that under-recognition remains a pressing issue and that diagnostic rigor is crucial.
Professional bodies, including the Royal College of Psychiatrists (2025), have welcomed taskforce recommendations aimed at improving assessment pathways and early intervention — a signal that the profession sees structural gaps rather than a wave of false positives.
Why the debate has political heat
The topic intersects with politics because rates of mental-health diagnoses affect service demand, benefit claims and public spending. Recent announcements of independent reviews into mental-health and neurodevelopmental diagnoses reflect concerns about both rising demand and the need to safeguard diagnostic standards. But beware framing: policy reviews can be driven by fiscal concerns rather than clinical realities, and that can skew public conversation toward “overdiagnosis” even where clinical evidence points elsewhere.
Where the data is thin — and where it matters
There are real gaps in high-quality, long-term surveillance data for ADHD in the UK. We have improving datasets on referrals and prescribing, but fewer comprehensive studies that track diagnostic accuracy across settings (primary care, CAMHS, adult services, private clinics). That evidence gap fuels disagreement: critics interpret rising diagnoses as overreach; advocates see it as catching up with unmet need. Both sides would be better served by robust, transparent national monitoring that records who is referred, assessed, diagnosed, and what happens afterward.
Practical implications for patients and clinicians
For clinicians: the debate should encourage careful assessment, use of diagnostic guidelines, and thorough consideration of differential diagnoses (anxiety, mood disorders, sleep problems). For patients: be skeptical of any rapid, checklist-only diagnosis, but also be cautious of messages that delegitimise lived experience or discourage help-seeking. Given long NHS waits, quality assurance across both public and private providers matters.
A way forward — nuance, capacity, and measurement
The sensible middle path rejects simple slogans. Three priorities can defuse polarisation:
- Expand capacity and shorten waits. Long waiting lists create two bad outcomes: delayed treatment for those who need it, and a market for quick private assessments that may lack rigour. The NHS taskforce recommendations and increased funding aim to address this.
- Improve monitoring and research. National surveillance that links referrals, diagnostic pathways and outcomes would clarify whether diagnostic thresholds are changing or simply recognition is improving. High-quality research should examine age, gender and socio-economic patterns.
- Safeguard standards across settings. Clear guidance and audits for both NHS and private services would protect patients and reduce legitimate concerns about variable practice. Professional bodies are already calling for integrated care and standards.
Final thought
Is ADHD being overdiagnosed in the UK? The short answer: there’s no clear evidence of mass overdiagnosis, and much of the increase in recorded cases likely reflects improved awareness and unmet need finally reaching services. At the same time, political anxiety and variable practice make it essential to tighten diagnostic standards, invest in services, and collect better data. A constructive debate should focus less on headlines and more on capacity, quality and the lived reality of people trying to access care. That’s how we protect both patients and public resources — and how we make sure a diagnosis does real good rather than harm.
References
NHS England (2025a). ADHD Management Information – May 2025. https://digital.nhs.uk/data-and-information/publications/statistical/mi-adhd/may-2025#
NHS England (2025b). Report of the independent ADHD Taskforce: Part 1. https://www.england.nhs.uk/long-read/report-of-the-independent-adhd-taskforce-part-1/
O’Nions, E., El Baou, C., John, A., Lewer, D., Mandy, W., McKechnie, D., Petersen, I., & Scott, J. (2025). Life expectancy and years of life lost for adults with ADHD in the UK: matched cohort study. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 226(5), pp. 261-268.
Royal College of Psychiatrists (2025). Royal College of Psychiatrists applauds ADHD Taskforce Report, calls for integrated care and early intervention. https://www.rcpsych.ac.uk/news-and-features/latest-news/detail/2025/06/20/royal-college-of-psychiatrists-applauds-adhd-taskforce-report–calls-for-integrated-care-and-early-intervention