ADHD Diagnosis in Australia: Access Has Improved. Clarity Still Matters.

Across Australia, governments are expanding the role of general practitioners in diagnosing and managing ADHD. In several states, trained GPs will be able to diagnose ADHD and initiate treatment, with reforms promoted as a solution to long wait times, high costs, and limited access to specialist care.

Improving access matters. Many people have waited far too long for help.

But as these reforms gain momentum, it is worth being clear about something that is getting lost in public discussion.

Improving access does not automatically improve assessment quality.

And ADHD assessment is not a one-step process.

What Is Changing Across Australia

In New South Wales, from March 2026, GPs will be able to undertake accredited training that allows them to diagnose ADHD and initiate treatment. This expands earlier arrangements where GPs have been able to continue prescribing medication once a specialist diagnosis was already established.

In Queensland, appropriately trained GPs will be able to initiate, adjust, and continue ADHD medication for adults. In some circumstances, GPs have already been able to diagnose and manage ADHD in children for several years.

Victoria has committed funding to train GPs to diagnose and treat ADHD in both children and adults, with the stated aim of reducing wait times and out-of-pocket costs.

Across states, the intent is consistent. Increase capacity. Reduce bottlenecks. Bring ADHD care closer to primary care.

These are reasonable goals.

The difficulty lies in what these changes can unintentionally imply.

ADHD Is Not a Simple Diagnostic Problem

ADHD is a neurodevelopmental condition with symptoms that overlap with anxiety, trauma responses, mood disorders, sleep problems, learning difficulties, and autism spectrum presentations. In adults especially, attention difficulties often sit alongside years of coping strategies, masking, burnout, and secondary mental health concerns.

In clinical practice, attention problems are rarely just attention problems.

This is why evidence-based ADHD assessment has traditionally involved more than a brief clinical encounter. A comprehensive assessment typically includes a detailed clinical interview, careful exploration of developmental history, information from multiple informants where appropriate, and the use of structured and standardised assessment tools. Just as importantly, it involves ruling out alternative explanations and understanding how symptoms fit within a broader psychological picture.

This process is not about being thorough for its own sake. It is about diagnostic confidence and long-term treatment decisions.

The Problem With Oversimplified Pathways

When reforms are communicated in ways that suggest ADHD diagnosis is now quick, straightforward, and largely medication-focused, there is a real risk of oversimplification.

The issue is not that GPs lack skill or care. The issue is that systems designed for efficiency naturally compress complexity.

For some people, a streamlined diagnostic pathway will be entirely appropriate. For others, especially those with overlapping anxiety, trauma histories, learning difficulties, or neurodivergent profiles, a brief diagnostic process can produce partial answers.

This can lead to false reassurance. Relief at finally having a label, followed by confusion when treatment does not fully help, or when difficulties persist in ways that were never fully explored. In some cases, important co-occurring conditions are identified later, after time, energy, and trust have already been invested elsewhere.

These outcomes are not rare. They are predictable when complex assessments are reduced to single-pathway solutions.

Why Documentation Is Not a Side Issue

Another consequence of simplified diagnostic models is the assumption that diagnosis alone is sufficient.

Many people seek ADHD assessment not only for treatment, but for support in education, employment, disability services, or formal accommodations. These systems usually require more than a diagnostic statement. They require evidence, structure, and clear clinical reasoning.

Comprehensive psychological assessments are designed to meet these requirements. They integrate multiple data sources, quantify symptoms, and document how conclusions were reached. Primary care documentation, shaped by time and system constraints, often cannot serve the same function.

Both approaches have value. They simply serve different purposes.

Access and Assessment Should Not Be Framed as Alternatives

The current policy focus is on access, and that focus is understandable. But access-focused reforms should not be interpreted as making comprehensive assessment unnecessary, outdated, or excessive.

The question is not whether GPs can diagnose ADHD.

The question is when a more detailed assessment is clinically indicated, and whether the system clearly supports that distinction.

A well-functioning ADHD care pathway allows people to enter care more easily, while still preserving space for thorough, evidence-based assessment when complexity, documentation needs, or diagnostic uncertainty are present.

When that distinction is blurred, people are left to discover the limits of simplified pathways only after they have already committed to them.

In Summary

Australia’s approach to ADHD care is evolving, and expanded access through primary care is an important step forward. At the same time, ADHD remains a complex condition that cannot always be meaningfully understood through a single clinical lens.

Comprehensive psychological assessment continues to play a critical role in diagnostic clarity, understanding complexity, and providing the level of evidence many individuals need to move forward with confidence.

Access opens the door.
Assessment determines what actually happens next.

If you’re unsure which assessment pathway is the best fit for your situation, you’re welcome to reach out and discuss this further with our team.