GP's Reaction to me asking for a referral...

Post Reply New Topic

With the exception of bi-polar disorder and schizophrenia. Everyone likes to believe someone is crazy...unless they kill someone, then they are crazy but not in an legally mentally insane type way.

The UK has a private health system too.



What leads you to believe that doctors are allowed to become GPs in the UK straight out of medical school? They have to do 6 years of medical school, then 2 years as a foundation doctor (supervised in several different hospitals and many departments), followed by 2 years GP training and a final year as a GP registrar.

But that's not what bjcirceleb said.

I said that GP's in the UK did require specialist training, in the US this is not the case, and so they often see GP's as incompetent, and in my opinion this is because they do not have that specailised GP training that we have in Australia and the UK. My former GP was from the UK and her GP training was accredited over here to allow her to practice in Australia. I have however been told by people that the US refers to doctors straight out of medical school as GP's. As my GP said to me, she would struggle to think of much she learnt in medical school that was really relevant to general practice, it is very much based on hospital medicine and that is important and needed, but what they see is very different. The reason that it is OK for our GP's to be gatekeepers is because they are specialists in their own right and have the expertise to be gatekeepers. Sure there will be good and bad in every field and to expect every single doctor to be an expert on everything is crazy, but a decent GP should be willing to refer if in any doubt.

Hiya, I'm in a similar position to you and Bizzie ( I'm in the UK too) but I received a firm NO! you don't have AS you have GAD and OCD (which was quite easy for them as I had already told them that) and from what I've read a second opinion is not a legal right here, but sod that, I'm asking for one anyway.

One thing that puzzles me is how come I have and have had so many of the AS traits all my life and score very highly and quite consistently on all of the AQ tests, EQ tests etc. It makes me wonder if the medical profession get a little bit worried about all the people they've missed and let slip through the net for so many years.

Tiffinity.

Not sure I'd go so far as to call it a 'legal right', as such - it's just a qualified opinion and not cast in stone, and you're quite free to ask someone else for theirs if you want to.
And besides, how would a doctor prevent you from getting a second opinion - nail you to the floor?
Go for it!

Maybe the tests your doctor ran weren't as thorough as the on-line ones, or he's not that hot at dealing with AS cases.
It's unfortunate that AS isn't as easily diagnosed as a bee sting - so there are likely to be variations in diagnoses.

Hiya, I got the information about a second opinion because I Googled it to see what my rights were after receiving a diagnosis I wasn't happy with and apparently this is what came back a few times, that although you don't have a legal right to one it's basically up to the GP to decide if you are entitled in their opinion. It didn't seem as though you could demand it, which I have to admit I always thought you could. Anyway, I'll soon know when I ask.

My GP doesn't believe at all that I have AS even though he referred me to a mental health centre where two somewhat confused psychiatrists sent me the tests in the post and on receiving the replies referred me to The Maudsley because I scored so highly. The Maudsley also said I don't have it, hence the second opinion. Therefore, I'm not very hopeful all round but I'm also not the type to give in without a bloody good fight.

Tiffinity.

Interesting, as I was wanting to be referred to the Maudsley but only got as far as the Lordship Lane Community Health team, who are completely useless.

If I had my Maudsley appointment again I would go completely prepared. Take written notes (it's stressful and you will forget important things when you're in there), dates etc, anything you can think of to prove that this has been a LIFELONG disorder, because that is what they are looking for. Take with you someone who knew you to back you up and try not to let them rush you. The doctor interviewing me was timing the sections of questions on a stopwatch on her mobile phone (very offputting) and kept saying, we must move on we have a lot to get through, and the doctor who interviewed my mum and two sisters wouldn't deviate at all from the 'criteria questions'. You really need someone with you who's prepared to butt in and elaborate a bit more than 'yes or no' to get the message across.

I stupidly didn't take notes with me because I didn't want it to appear that I had learned to be autistic and I also didn't go through things with my family and warn them what these doctors are like. (Years of experience, believe me.) When the consultant appeared after lunch he said I didn't 'look' autistic. Why bother with tests and questions then if he can tell by looking at you? The NHS could save a fortune this way by just having all suspected cases filing past him and him just nodding or shaking his head by way of consultation. What a tosser!

Rant over. Hope this helps a bit.

Tiffinity.

It wasn't Raj Persaud the ex-This Morning psychiatrist was it ?

Hmm, that's pretty poor and not what the BMA suggests should be done.
I posted a couple of links on this to your "How can this be? Please give your opinion" thread.

Oh God, tosser indeed. Seems that like the USA, we have a good selection of idiots in this field too.
I think if someone was restricting my responses to questions by timing and telling me we must move on I would have walked out, because they plainly weren't showing any interest.

So they were approved tests and you scored highly and you were sent to The Maudsley because of them - to be told you don't 'look' autistic. Crap, what a ridiculous mess.
This is worth documenting too, and pushing at your doctor as further evidence of AS and how badly it was evaluated. Just because some people at The Maudsley were too dense to actually talk to you and make proper use of the results doesn't mean that they are no longer valid support for your case.

Good!

Hmm, that's pretty poor and not what the BMA suggests should be done.
I posted a couple of links on this to your "How can this be? Please give your opinion" thread.

Thank you very much for those links I found them very interesting and I'm going to print them up and take them with me when I go to see my GP. Cheers

Tiffinity.

Nooo! lol, but I think he would have been more use

Tiffinity.

Ah, that's great! More ammunition!

I really think you have a much stronger case than your doctor is willing to accept, although for the life of me I can't think why he (and the other idiots you've got lumbered with) is making things so damn difficult.
Although mine wasn't much practical help with a diagnosis (NHS support for us 'lost generation' being practically nil), at least he was prepared to accept, discuss and agree with my discoveries.
I believe this is what's called "a good bedside manner" - as well as just showing a plain ol' professional interest in what the patient has to say.

How can a doctor say that you are not allowed to go and see another doctor. If you are not happy with the GP simply go up the road and see another one, really is as simple as that, well it is for me in Australia anyway. They have no right to medical records unless I release them to them.

As for a diagnosis, one has to ask what it will actually do for you. WHY do you so badly want it. If you believe you have it, then you do, if you need help and support, then one would think you should be able to get it on the basis of other things and not just that. What will the positive diagnosis actually provide for you?? It is not as though they can suddenly send up to some miracle cure or the like. You will always be who you are. Diagnosis simply says that people are at a severe end of the spectrum. The spectrum varies from profound autism at one end to NT at the other. You could lie one millimetere on the sind of the diagnosis and not be diagnosed. It is really about what it is going to do to you to be diagnosed. No one is going to pay you money because of it, you get disability benefits on the basis of being disabled by a condition, not by being labelled with it, and that is in the UK as well as elsewhere. What I see very often here is people somehow wanting a diagnosis to pay them money for having this condition. This condition no matter how severe it is can make life harder in some ways, but it does not stop you from living life. It may make interacting with people more difficult, and hence make certain types of work difficult, but it hardly stops you from doing any work at all. If you were profoundly disabled by it, then it would have been picked up earlier yes. No one owes you compensation because you were born finding social interaction and other things more diffiuclt than the average person.

So you did. Sorry, I must have been asleep when I wrote that.