ADHD and Autism 'Overdiagnosis' Review Raises Questions Over Timing as More Women Are Diagnosed

A government‑commissioned review warning of a growing risk of ADHD and autism 'overdiagnosis' has been published at a time when diagnoses of these conditions have risen sharply and when women and girls, historically overlooked, are finally gaining wider recognition.

Published on 9 October, the findings have prompted debate online, with some questioning why concerns about excessive diagnoses are gaining attention just as awareness of how these conditions can present in women has improved.

However, the review does not conclude that widespread overdiagnosis is occurring. Instead, it highlights a more complicated picture involving rising demand, inconsistent assessments and people who remain undiagnosed.

What Did the ADHD and Autism 'Overdiagnosis' Review Actually Find?

The government‑commissioned Independent Review into Mental Health Conditions, ADHD and Autism, chaired by Professor Peter Fonagy, examined rising demand for mental health, ADHD and autism services in England.

It found that ADHD and autism diagnoses have risen sharply over the past 25 years, with some younger age groups recording diagnosed rates above earlier estimates of how common the conditions are.

Nevertheless, researchers stressed that they 'cannot conclude that overdiagnosis is occurring at scale.'

Instead, they warned of an increasing risk of misdiagnosis and overdiagnosis, while recognising that underdiagnosis remains a concern for certain groups.

The findings raise questions about how rising diagnosis rates should be interpreted, especially when greater awareness may be helping people identify conditions that previously went unrecognised.

Why Is the 'Overdiagnosis' Debate Intensifying Now?

Historically, ADHD and autism have often been recognised through patterns more commonly identified in boys, potentially contributing to missed or delayed diagnoses among girls and women.

Greater awareness of differences in how these conditions can present has encouraged more adults to seek assessments, including women who may have spent years without an explanation for their difficulties.

Against that background, some online commenters have questioned the renewed emphasis on overdiagnosis.

One X user wrote:

'hey does anyone else also thinks its eerily coincidental that the moment women with autism and adhd start to get recognised and diagnosed we suddenly see a wave of people pushing this "over-diagnosis" rhetoric'

Another suggested that rising diagnosis rates could reflect previously missed cases, rather than an emerging problem of excessive diagnosis.

The reactions reflect concerns that discussions about overdiagnosis could overshadow the experiences of people who struggled for years to obtain recognition.

However, these are questions raised by commenters, not conclusions established by the review. The report does not recommend restricting diagnoses for women or suggest that their growing recognition is evidence of overdiagnosis.

What Does the Review Say About Rising Diagnoses?

The review distinguishes between rising rates of recorded diagnoses and changes in the underlying prevalence of ADHD and autism.

While available evidence suggests that the underlying prevalence of these neurodevelopmental conditions has remained broadly stable, the number of people seeking assessments and support has increased dramatically.

Greater awareness and reduced stigma are among the contributing factors. The report also identifies a healthcare and support system in which a formal diagnosis has increasingly become necessary to access assistance.

By the end of 2025, more than 560,000 people in England had open referrals for ADHD assessments, over 17 times the figure recorded in 2019.

The review also raised concerns about the quality and consistency of assessments conducted by independent providers, which now account for more than half of NHS‑funded ADHD assessments and more than a third of autism assessments.

It called for stronger oversight alongside further research to establish how diagnosis rates compare with the conditions' actual prevalence.

Could Focus on Overdiagnosis Affect Those Still Waiting for Help?

Not everyone responding to the debate agrees that the review's findings are being accurately represented.

One X user challenged the interpretation of the report, writing: 'That is NOT what it says. Take this inaccurate, discriminatory headline down.'

The disagreement highlights an important distinction: identifying a risk of overdiagnosis is not the same as establishing that large numbers of existing diagnoses are incorrect.

For people who have spent years seeking an assessment, the debate also raises questions about whether increased scrutiny could make accessing recognition and support more difficult.

That remains a concern rather than a demonstrated consequence of the review.

In fact, one of its central recommendations is to move away from a system where diagnosis is the main gateway to assistance.

Fonagy has argued that support should be based on individual needs, rather than requiring people to wait for formal confirmation before receiving help.

The government has pledged to strengthen oversight of ADHD and autism assessments while developing a system that offers earlier support.

Ultimately, the review points to two challenges that need to be addressed together: ensuring diagnoses are accurate and making sure people who genuinely need help are not left waiting.

For those questioning the timing, the concern is whether efforts to prevent overdiagnosis can move forward without overlooking people whose conditions have historically gone unrecognised.