ADHD

start timer

ℹ️ This is the case information for the doctor.

Name

Ricky White

Age

5 years old

Address

17 Oakridge Crescent

Social history

None

Past history

  • No history of allergies.
  • Immunisations up to date; last seen for preschool immunisations 6 months ago.
  • No previous significant illnesses.

‍

Investigation results

  • None to date.

Medication

  • None.

Booking note

Dad requests appointment about Ricky's behaviour.

ℹ️ This is the information for the person role playing the patient.

Case overview

Name

Ricky White

Age

5 years old

Address

17 Oakridge Crescent

Social history

None

Past history

  • No history of allergies.
  • Immunisations up to date; last seen for preschool immunisations 6 months ago.
  • No previous significant illnesses.

‍

Medication

  • None.

Opening statement

"I've come on to talk about my son Ricky – he’s not right, doc. He’s just always so hyper and doesn't listen. I really think something’s going on."

Information freely divulged

  • Ricky is "always on the go", can't sit still for more than a few seconds – at home, he jumps around on the sofa and climbs furniture constantly.
  • The behaviour has always been this way, but seemed more manageable before school started; now feels more pronounced.
  • Ricky only pays attention to TV; otherwise doesn’t seem to listen to instructions.

‍

Information given on questioning

Background

  • No problems with speech – Ricky is articulate and talks a lot, sometimes excessively.
  • One incident of fighting at school, but nothing further reported by teachers; no teacher concerns voiced regarding attention or listening.
  • No history of abdominal pain, urinary symptoms, or other medical concerns.
  • Feels “different” to other 5-year-olds when comparing Ricky to his peers or what Ben thinks is “normal”.
  • Admits some family stress but denies ongoing conflict with Ricky’s mother.

‍

Psychosocial background information:

  • Ricky lives mainly with his mother, and Ben (father) has weekend custody.
  • Parents have been separated for 4 years. No ongoing conflict but minimal communication.
  • Ricky has a baby (younger half-sister) at his mother’s home—Ben is not involved with her care.
  • No extended family support nearby. Ben lives alone; Ricky stays with him one/two nights each weekend.
  • Ricky is in Reception class at primary school since September. No feedback from teachers about concentration problems.
  • Ben is in full-time employment as a delivery driver, works weekdays.
  • No concerns raised about child safeguarding at present.

‍

Ideas (patient’s ideas about the cause):

  • Ben suspects Ricky might have “ADHD” and has read/watched information about it online. Sees the behaviour fitting this diagnosis.

‍

Concerns (patient’s worries):

  • Worried there may be something “medically wrong” with Ricky.
  • Concerns Ricky’s not getting the support he needs, might get labelled or struggle as he gets older.
  • Worried the separation and split home life might be affecting Ricky, but thinks both parents are loving and supportive
  • Ricky wet the bed once recently ("last weekend"), not sure if this has happened with his mum.

‍

Expectations (patient’s expectations for consultation):

  • Hoping for medication or a referral to a specialist to confirm ADHD and support behaviour.
  • Open to school involvement if suggested.
  • Wants practical support and advice to manage at home, and doesn’t want to be “fobbed off”.

‍

Family history:

  • No known family history of ADHD or neurodevelopmental disorders.
  • Mum has mentioned that her new partner’s son is “quite lively” but no formal diagnosis.

‍

Behaviour

  • Initially comes across as worried and a little frustrated at not knowing how to help Ricky but not angry – genuinely seeking help.
  • A bit anxious; feels let down by not having a clear answer until now.
  • Will be open and responsive if the doctor listens, acknowledges concerns, and offers a clear plan (even if referral takes time).
  • If the GP seems dismissive, minimises concerns or refuses to discuss referral/medication, Ben becomes more insistent, upset, and “pushes” for clear action (“I really think you need to do something, I’m not coping anymore”).
  • Reassured if doctor gives structure, explains the process of referral, and suggests practical support (e.g. school involvement, possible follow-up).
  • If told symptoms might be related to family change rather than a neurodevelopmental issue, becomes slightly defensive but not hostile (“I suppose so, but I really think it’s more than that”).

ℹ️ To mark data gathering & diagnosis select from the descriptors below.

Positive descriptors

Negative descriptors

Data gathering was systematic and targeted ensuring patient safety.

  • Uses open questions to explore the father’s main concerns, onset, and progression of Ricky’s behaviours.
  • Follows up with targeted closed questions about related symptoms (e.g., sleep, aggression, school performance, wetting episodes) and responds to cues from the father.

Data gathering was incomplete, lacking structure and focus.

  • Misses clarifying the exact nature, duration, or progression of the behavioural concerns.
  • Does not structure the questioning or neglects to confirm safety issues such as safeguarding, or enquire about the child’s daily routine and school engagement.

Information gathered placed the problem in its psychosocial context.

  • Explores parental separation, weekend custody, relationships with both parents, and the presence of siblings.
  • Assesses parental stressors, support network, and the child’s environment, including routine and screen time.

‍

The social and psychological impact of the problem was not adequately determined.

  • Fails to clarify the custody arrangements, relationships between the parents, and how separation affects Ricky.
  • Ignores the broader family dynamics, living setups, or psychosocial stressors impacting Ricky’s behaviour.

The presence or absence of relevant red flags was established.

  • Checks for safeguarding concerns including any signs of physical punishment, neglect, or emotional distress.
  • Asks about developmental regression, self-harm, or risk to Ricky or others.

Fails to assess key information necessary to determine risk.

  • Does not enquire about potential safeguarding issues or other signs of serious underlying problems.
  • Fails to clarify if there are concerns about harm to Ricky or others in the home or at school.

‍

A working diagnosis was reached using a structured, evidence-based approach.

  • Investigates symptoms systematically: sleep pattern, attention, activity level, behaviour in multiple settings, and any learning or speech difficulties.
  • Integrates the information to consider (but not assume) neurodevelopmental conditions, environmental effects, and normal developmental variability.

The evidence collected was inadequate to support the conclusions reached.

  • Jumps to diagnostic labels (such as ADHD) without systematically ruling out sleep deprivation, emotional reaction to life changes, or situational factors.
  • Does not synthesise or reflect on the collected information before forming conclusions.

Uses an understanding of probability based on prevalence, incidence, and natural history to aid decision-making.

  • Recognises that ADHD and behavioural problems are not uncommon in this age group but carefully weighs contextual, family, and environmental factors.
  • Notes that sleep deprivation and family factors are common in young children and may present similarly.

‍

Choice of diagnosis and/or investigations does not reflect disease likelihood.

  • Overemphasises rare conditions or pathologises behaviour without considering normal developmental variation for a 5-year-old.
  • Recommends medication or a specialist referral prematurely, without appropriate evidence or reasoning.

Revises hypotheses as necessary in light of additional information.

  • Adjusts initial impressions upon hearing cues about sleep problems, bedwetting, fighting at school, or family setup, integrating these into the working diagnosis dynamically.
  • Demonstrates flexibility in questioning style and clinical reasoning as new data emerges.

‍

Rigid consulting with new information not adequately considered and integrated into the working diagnosis.

  • Sticks to an early hypothesis (e.g., hyperactivity disorder) without integrating emerging data about family breakdown, sleep disruption, or variability in behaviour.
  • Does not modify the clinical approach when presented with additional or conflicting information.

‍

ℹ️ To mark clinical management & medical complexity select from the descriptors below.

Positive descriptors

Negative descriptors

Practises holistically, promoting health, and safeguarding:

  • Recognises the potential impact of parental separation and step-sibling relationships on Ricky’s behaviour and explores the wider family context.
  • Checks sensitively for any safeguarding concerns and offers holistic support, including signposting to family or parenting support groups.

Fails to safeguard patient welfare:

  • Ignores the context of family breakdown or potential domestic issues that could influence behaviour.
  • Fails to enquire or act upon possible safeguarding or emotional wellbeing issues within the family setting.

‍

Manages uncertainty, including that experienced by the patient:

  • Acknowledges that at this stage there is diagnostic uncertainty and explains to dad why formal assessment is not yet indicated, while outlining clear next steps.
  • Provides clear safety netting around what would prompt expedited review or action.

Struggles with uncertainty, leading to inconsistent decisions:

  • Appears uncomfortable with diagnostic uncertainty, resulting in inappropriate referral or vague reassurances.
  • Fails to explain the limitations of assessment at this stage or how uncertainty will be managed going forward.

‍

Tailors management options responsively according to circumstances, priorities and preferences:

  • Takes into account that Ricky’s issues are only observed at home and discusses the implications with dad, suggesting contacting mum and school before making further decisions.
  • Sensitively explains why input from both parents and the school is vital, and seeks agreement on how to share information appropriately.

Management options fail to adequately consider patient preference and circumstance:

  • Follows a one-size-fits-all approach or pushes referral without tailoring plans to Ricky’s specific family, school, and custody context.
  • Does not discuss with dad the importance of involving mum or school in a non-judgemental, collaborative way.

Refers appropriately being mindful of resource:

  • Recognises ADHD referral is not appropriate until there is further information and criteria are met (problems evident in multiple settings, previous school and parental support tried).
  • Explores other local voluntary and school-based support first, such as the school nursing team or early intervention services.

Sends patients for specialist input unnecessarily:

  • Inappropriately refers to specialist paediatric services before basic assessment and support steps have been taken.
  • Omits consideration of community resources (school nurse, parenting support, family support services).

Offers management options that are safe and appropriate:

  • Explains clearly that behavioural concerns such as hyperactivity can be within normal limits for a 5-year-old and that a diagnosis like ADHD requires evidence of pervasive symptoms across multiple settings.
  • Suggests gathering more information from school and both parents before considering referral, and discusses non-pharmacological support options first (e.g., parenting support, school nurse, family support services).
  • Provides reassurance appropriately while maintaining vigilance for emerging concerns.

‍

Fails to provide appropriate and or safe management choices:

  • Recommends referral or suggests medication without sufficient evidence or assessment.
  • Does not reassure the parent that this behaviour may be normal at this age, or fails to explain the process needed for a diagnosis.
  • Does not mention the need for symptom persistence across different settings.

Empowers self-care and independence:

  • Provides practical advice to dad on behaviour management strategies at home and signposts to reputable parenting resources.
  • Encourages dad to keep a diary of behaviours and sleep patterns to support future discussions and self-reflection.

‍

Management fails to foster self-care and patient involvement:

  • Relies solely on referral or formal services, not giving any advice or tools for the father to use proactively.
  • Misses opportunities to encourage the parent’s role in managing and observing the situation.

‍

ℹ️ To mark relating to others select from the descriptors below.

Positive descriptors

Negative descriptors

Shows understanding of medical-legal principles and regulatory standards:

  • Clearly explains that information may need to be gathered from both parents and the school, and that mum will be contacted—with sensitivity about consent and family dynamics.
  • Ensures confidentiality and discusses the rationale for involving both parents in Ricky’s care.

‍

Fails to give appropriate regard to key legal aspects of consulting:

  • Does not explain the need for information-sharing between parents, school, and healthcare providers.
  • Refers or takes action involving the family without proper discussion of consent or sensitivities.

Explores the patient’s agenda, health beliefs and preferences:

  • Listens carefully and acknowledges the father’s hope for answers or a “diagnosis”, and his concerns for Ricky at school and at home.
  • Explores why the father is concerned now and what outcome he expects.

Fails to recognise the patient's agenda and impact of the problem:

  • Does not explore the father’s ideas, concerns, or expectations about Ricky’s behaviour.
  • Fails to elicit the family’s preferences around assessment or support.

‍

Recognises what matters to the patient and works collaboratively to enhance patient care:

  • Involves the father in discussion about steps forward, checking how he feels about contacting mum or school, and encourages him to share observations.
  • Works towards a plan that the father feels comfortable with, promoting partnership in ongoing care.

‍

Fails to work with the patient to plan care:

  • Imposes a solution without involving the father or considering his views on contacting the school or mum.
  • Does not adjust the plan to the family’s practicalities or preferences.

‍

Demonstrates flexibility of communication adapting to the patient and scenario:

  • Adjusts language to suit the father's understanding, explaining medical terms and normal childhood behaviour clearly.
  • Picks up on cues such as the father's question about bedwetting, explaining sensitively that this can be normal.

‍

Consults rigidly, providing generic explanations and management plans:

  • Uses technical or overly rigid language that does not take the father’s emotions or confusion into account.
  • Does not tailor explanations—for example, fails to reassure about bedwetting or adapt approach when father is concerned about possible diagnosis.

‍

Demonstrates an empathic approach, and a willingness to help and care for the patient:

  • Shows warmth and reassurance, acknowledges how worrying parenting concerns can be, and offers practical support options.
  • Normalises the experience for the father (“many parents feel like this at some stage”) and offers further contact.

‍

Lacks empathy and fails to recognise emotional cues:

  • Dismisses or minimizes the father’s distress or feelings of being overwhelmed.
  • Fails to offer reassurance that support or follow-up will be available.

‍

Respectfully challenges unhelpful health beliefs or behaviours:

  • Gently addresses assumptions about medicalising behaviour and explains the process for understanding and supporting children’s development.
  • Offers reassurance that challenges like bedwetting and high energy are not uncommon.

‍

Fails to maintain a productive therapeutic relationship:

  • Responds dismissively to the father’s concerns or makes the parent feel at fault for Ricky’s behaviour.
  • Corrects the parent in a way that feels abrupt or patronising, risking loss of trust.

‍

ℹ️ Insights from the examiner

📝 Section 1: Case Overview and Consultation Priorities

Case at a glance

Ricky is a 5-year-old child whose father is concerned about hyperactivity and possible ADHD. The concern appears to be mainly at home, with no similar concern reported from school or Ricky’s mother in the information provided.

The behaviour may have started or become more prominent after Ricky’s parents separated. The consultation should explore whether this is a neurodevelopmental concern, a situational response to family change, sleep-related behaviour, normal developmental variation, or another issue.

 

GP trainee performance focus

A strong GP trainee should demonstrate the ability to:

  • Start with open questions and understand the father’s agenda.
  • Avoid prematurely labelling Ricky with ADHD.
  • Explore behaviour across home, school and both parental households.
  • Identify contextual factors such as parental separation, sleep, routines and parenting consistency.
  • Explain ADHD in simple language.
  • Clarify that ADHD diagnosis requires impairment in more than one setting.
  • Involve Ricky’s mother and school where appropriate.
  • Offer first-line support such as parenting support and behaviour monitoring.
  • Arrange follow-up rather than simply referring or dismissing the concern.

 

What this case is testing

  • Structured data gathering.
  • Synthesising information before management.
  • Differentiating normal behaviour, situational distress and possible ADHD.
  • Exploring family context without judgement.
  • Communication with an anxious parent seeking diagnosis or treatment.
  • Explaining NICE ADHD diagnostic principles.
  • Shared decision-making and follow-up planning.

 

Patient and parent priorities and concerns

Ricky’s father may be concerned about:

  • Hyperactivity.
  • Poor concentration.
  • Impulsive behaviour.
  • Whether Ricky has ADHD.
  • Whether Ricky needs referral or medication.
  • Difficulty managing behaviour at home.
  • The impact of parental separation.
  • Whether others, such as school or Ricky’s mother, are seeing the same behaviour.

 

Central challenge

The central challenge is to avoid “solving the wrong problem”.

If Ricky’s behaviour is only occurring in one setting, especially after family separation, the immediate task is not to diagnose ADHD but to gather information, understand context and support the family.

 

Must-not-miss issue or diagnosis

The must-not-miss issue is assuming ADHD from behaviour in a single setting.

Under NICE NG87 principles, ADHD diagnosis should not be based on symptoms in one setting only. Symptoms need to:

  • Be present for at least 6 months.
  • Be evident before age 12.
  • Cause at least moderate impairment in more than one setting.
  • Be considered after excluding other causes such as sleep problems, anxiety, adjustment, family stress or normal developmental stage.

 

Red flags or high-risk features

Look for:

  • Behaviour worsening significantly.
  • New concerning features.
  • Significant family stress.
  • Safeguarding concerns if they emerge.
  • Major impairment in school, friendships or family life.
  • Possible sleep deprivation.
  • Symptoms suggesting other medical or neurological causes, such as hearing or vision problems or epilepsy.

 

Common GP trainee pitfalls

  • Referring immediately for ADHD assessment without wider information.
  • Assuming hyperactivity equals ADHD.
  • Ignoring the fact that behaviour is only reported at home.
  • Not exploring parental separation and routines between homes.
  • Not seeking school or mother’s perspective.
  • Medicalising normal 5-year-old behaviour too quickly.
  • Not summarising and synthesising before management.
  • Failing to offer parenting support or follow-up.
  • Not checking the father’s understanding and expectations.

 

What good looks like

A strong consultation is curious, structured and non-judgemental. The trainee listens to the father’s concern, explores Ricky’s behaviour across settings, explains why more information is needed, and agrees a practical support plan.

“One of our goals should be to understand whether Ricky’s behaviour is happening in more than one setting, because that helps us decide if this could be ADHD or something different.”

Learner checkpoint

Have I worked out whether the concern is ADHD, family-stress-related behaviour, sleep-related behaviour or normal developmental variation before planning next steps?

‍

📝 Section 2: Patient-Centred Consultation and Data Gathering

Start with an open question

Begin with an open, purposeful question.

“Could you walk me through what concerns you most about Ricky’s behaviour at home and at school?”

This allows the father to describe the behaviour, his concern and his expectations.

 

Time-efficient data gathering

Use a structured approach:

  • What behaviours are concerning?
  • When did they start?
  • Where do they occur?
  • Who has noticed them?
  • What is happening at home, school and between parents?
  • What is the impact?
  • What has already been tried?

Summarise early to ensure you are addressing the right problem:

“So just to summarise what I’ve heard so far… Ricky is active and struggles to focus at home, but there’s no similar concern from school or mum. This behaviour started after you and his mum separated, and it seems more prominent when he’s with you. Does that sound right?”

This helps:

  • Demonstrate synthesis.
  • Check the agenda.
  • Avoid premature diagnosis.
  • Keep the consultation focused.

High-yield questions

 

Behaviour pattern

  • “What does Ricky do that worries you most?”
  • “How often does it happen?”
  • “How long has it been going on?”
  • “Is it getting worse, better or staying the same?”

Settings

  • “Does this happen at school?”
  • “Have his teachers raised concerns?”
  • “Does it happen at his mum’s house?”
  • “Is the behaviour different when he is with different people?”

Impact

  • “Has this affected Ricky’s school, friendships or family life?”
  • “Is it affecting your relationship with him?”
  • “Does it affect daily routines like bedtime, meals or getting ready?”

 

Family context

  • “How often does Ricky see each parent?”
  • “Are routines similar between homes?”
  • “How has Ricky seemed since the separation?”
  • “How is communication between you and Ricky’s mum?”

 

Sleep and routine

  • “How is Ricky sleeping?”
  • “What is his bedtime routine like?”
  • “Does he use screens before bed?”
  • “Is he tired during the day?”

Expectations

  • “What were you hoping would happen today?”
  • “Were you hoping for a referral, advice, or something else?”
  • “What worries you most if this continues?”

 

Functional, psychosocial or contextual assessment

Explore:

  • Parental separation.
  • Consistency of routines between homes.
  • Emotional impact on Ricky.
  • Parenting stress.
  • Communication between parents.
  • Sleep patterns.
  • School functioning.
  • Friendships.
  • Family life.

Be curious, not judgemental. Family structure, routines and stressors are often key to understanding child behaviour.

 

Explore ideas, concerns and expectations

If the father is seeking diagnosis or treatment:

“It sounds like you’re wondering whether this could be ADHD and whether Ricky needs a referral or medication. Is that right?”

Then explore:

  • What he understands by ADHD.
  • Whether he expects medication.
  • Whether he feels under pressure or unsupported.
  • Whether he has tried behaviour strategies.
  • Whether he wants school or parenting support.

 

Recognise and respond to cues

Important cues include:

 

Parental separation

This may contribute through stress, emotional insecurity, inconsistent routines or different discipline between homes.

 

Father wanting referral or medication

This may reflect frustration, stress or belief that a medical solution is needed.

 

Behaviour only happening at home

This is diagnostically important because ADHD should cause impairment in more than one setting.

 

Ricky’s mother not being involved

ADHD assessment needs input from both parents and school where possible.

Useful response:

“To get a full picture, we really need to understand how Ricky is in all the places he spends time — with you, with mum and at school.”

 

Useful consultation phrases

“ADHD stands for Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder. It can affect how a child concentrates, stays still and manages their impulses.”

“Children with ADHD are often more active than other children their age, can be more impulsive and may find it harder to focus on a task.”

“In ADHD, these behaviours usually need to happen in more than one place, like at home and at school, and they usually affect learning, relationships or daily routines.”

“Some children have lots of energy or are struggling with changes around them, like big changes at home or not getting enough sleep, and that can look similar to ADHD.”

“Getting more information will help us work out whether this is ADHD or something different.”

 

Consultation flow and signposting

  1. Explore the father’s main concern.
  2. Clarify Ricky’s behaviour: what, when and how often.
  3. Ask where it happens: dad’s home, mum’s home, school.
  4. Explore impact on school, friendships and family life.
  5. Explore sleep, routines and family separation.
  6. Clarify father’s expectations about referral or treatment.
  7. Summarise and check accuracy.
  8. Explain ADHD diagnostic principles.
  9. Agree information gathering and support plan.
  10. Arrange follow-up and safety-netting.

 

Summarising and checking understanding

A helpful synthesis might be:

“From what you’ve told me, Ricky is very active and can struggle to focus when he is with you, but school has not raised concerns and we do not yet know whether mum is seeing the same pattern. This started after the separation, so we need to understand whether this is ADHD or a response to changes and routines.”

Check:

“Does that sound right? Is there anything important I’ve missed?”

 

Data gathering self-check

Before moving to management, the trainee should know:

  • What behaviour is concerning.
  • How long it has been present.
  • Whether it occurs in more than one setting.
  • Whether school has concerns.
  • Ricky’s mother’s perspective, if known.
  • Impact on learning, friendships and routines.
  • Sleep pattern and bedtime routine.
  • Parental separation and custody arrangements.
  • Consistency of routines between homes.
  • Father’s expectations about referral or treatment.
  • Whether there are safeguarding or significant stress concerns.

Assessment domain mapping

 

Data gathering

  • Behaviour pattern and duration.
  • Settings: home, school, mother’s home.
  • Impact on family, school and friendships.
  • Sleep, routines and family context.
  • Father’s concerns and expectations.

 

Clinical management

  • Explain ADHD diagnostic requirements.
  • Gather school and mother’s views.
  • Behaviour diary and sleep diary.
  • Parenting support.
  • School nurse or Early Help input.
  • Follow-up and safety-netting.

 

Relating to others

  • Non-judgemental exploration of family separation.
  • Validating parental concern.
  • Avoiding premature diagnosis.
  • Shared planning with both parents where possible.

‍

📝 Section 3: Clinical Reasoning and Personalised Management

Prioritised differential diagnosis or clinical reasoning

Appropriate differential, based on NICE NG87 and the case details:

  1. Normal range development or temperament variation — most likely.
  2. Disrupted behaviour secondary to sleep deprivation.
  3. Situational reaction to family breakdown or separation.
  4. Adjustment disorder.
  5. Neurodevelopmental disorder, such as ADHD — less likely if not seen in more than one setting.
  6. Anxiety or mood disorder — rare at age 5, but possible if further cues are identified.
  7. Other medical or neurological cause — rare, such as hearing or vision problem or epilepsy.

 

Clinical reasoning script

“At Ricky’s age, lots of children are very active. ADHD is one possible explanation, but we usually need to see difficulties in more than one setting, such as home and school, and we also need to think about sleep, routines and family changes. Because this seems mainly at home so far, the next step is to gather more information before deciding whether this is ADHD.”

 

Red flags and risk assessment

Monitor for:

  • Behaviour worsening.
  • New concerning features.
  • Significant impairment at school, home or with friendships.
  • Safeguarding concerns if identified.
  • Significant family stress.
  • Symptoms suggesting sleep deprivation.
  • Possible hearing, vision or neurological issues if raised by history.

 

Decision points

Key decisions include:

  • Is Ricky’s behaviour present in more than one setting?
  • Has it been present for at least 6 months?
  • Is there at least moderate impairment?
  • Could sleep, family stress or normal development explain the behaviour?
  • Do both parents and school need to provide information?
  • Is referral appropriate now, or should information gathering and support come first?
  • Is parenting support or Early Help needed?
  • Is there any safeguarding concern?

 

Management priority

The management priority is to gather a fuller picture and support the family now, rather than jumping straight to diagnosis or medication.

Management options

 

1. Reassurance

Explain that many 5-year-olds are very active and this can be within normal development.

Avoid dismissing the father’s concern. Reassurance should be paired with a plan.

 

2. Gather information from Ricky’s mother and school

With appropriate consent, seek information from:

  • Ricky’s mother.
  • Teachers.
  • School staff.

Example phrase:

“I’d like to get your agreement to talk to Ricky’s mum and his teachers so we can understand how he’s doing everywhere and decide together what might help.”

 

3. Behaviour and sleep diary

Encourage both parents to keep a diary of:

  • Concerning behaviours.
  • Triggers.
  • Timing.
  • Sleep patterns.
  • Bedtime routine.
  • Screen use.
  • What helps.

This may identify patterns or situational triggers.

 

4. Sleep hygiene advice

Discuss normal sleep patterns and practical sleep hygiene:

  • Consistent bedtime.
  • No screens before bed.
  • Wind-down routine.
  • Consistent routines across homes where possible.

 

5. Parenting support

Signpost to parenting support programmes or local parenting classes.

These are first-line and recommended in NICE NG87 for primary-school-age children showing hyperactivity or behaviour difficulties.

 

6. School nurse or Early Help support

Consider:

  • School nurse involvement.
  • Early Help.
  • Family Front Door.
  • Parenting or behaviour advice.

 

7. Monitoring and follow-up

Arrange review in a few weeks to see whether the behaviour changes or persists and to review information from school and Ricky’s mother.

 

8. Safety-netting

Advise earlier review if:

  • Behaviour worsens significantly.
  • New concerning features appear.
  • School raises concerns.
  • Family stress escalates.
  • Safeguarding concerns emerge.

 

Personalised plan

A plan tailored to this family might include:

  • Explain why ADHD cannot be diagnosed from behaviour in one setting.
  • Ask the father to speak with Ricky’s mother about behaviour at her home.
  • With consent, gather school or teacher perspective.
  • Keep a behaviour and sleep diary.
  • Offer sleep routine advice.
  • Signpost to parenting support.
  • Consider Early Help if family stress is significant.
  • Arrange follow-up in a few weeks.
  • Invite Ricky’s mother to a future appointment if appropriate.

Example phrase:

“It sounds like Ricky’s behaviour is mainly happening at home, and to get a full picture we really need input from both parents. How would you feel about us inviting mum to a future appointment so we can all look at this together?”

 

Shared decision-making

Agree shared goals with the father:

  • Understand whether Ricky’s behaviour happens in more than one setting.
  • Improve communication between parents.
  • Support consistent routines.
  • Decide whether referral is needed based on fuller information.
  • Reduce stress at home.

Ask:

“Does that make sense? Is there anything you’re worried we haven’t talked about?”

Safety-netting

Explain that the family should seek review earlier if:

  • Ricky’s behaviour becomes unsafe or much more difficult to manage.
  • School or nursery reports significant concerns.
  • Sleep deteriorates.
  • Ricky becomes very distressed or withdrawn.
  • New developmental, hearing, vision or neurological concerns appear.
  • Safeguarding or family-stress concerns arise.

 

Ethical, legal and safeguarding considerations

Consider:

  • Clarify custody and communication arrangements.
  • Avoid misunderstanding between separated parents.
  • Support co-parenting where possible.
  • Be curious, not judgemental, about family structure and routines.
  • Escalate if safeguarding or significant stress concerns are identified.

 

Documentation points

Document:

  • Father’s concerns and expectations.
  • Behaviour described.
  • Duration and settings.
  • School view, if known.
  • Mother’s view, if known.
  • Parental separation and routine differences.
  • Sleep and diary advice.
  • ADHD explanation and diagnostic requirements discussed.
  • Parenting support or Early Help signposting.
  • Follow-up plan.
  • Any safeguarding concerns or absence of such concerns.

 

Common unsafe management plans

Avoid:

  • Referring for ADHD assessment without checking settings and impairment.
  • Offering medication or implying ADHD diagnosis prematurely.
  • Ignoring school and mother’s perspectives.
  • Dismissing the father as overreacting.
  • Failing to explore sleep and family separation.
  • Not arranging follow-up.
  • Ignoring safeguarding concerns if they emerge.

 

Follow-up and coordination with other professionals

Coordinate with:

  • Ricky’s mother, with appropriate consent and involvement.
  • School or teachers.
  • School nurse.
  • Early Help or Family Front Door where appropriate.
  • Parenting support programmes.

Follow-up should review:

  • Behaviour diary.
  • Sleep patterns.
  • School feedback.
  • Mother’s feedback.
  • Impact on family life.
  • Whether symptoms are persistent and impairing across settings.
  • Whether referral becomes appropriate.

Learner checkpoint

Have I gathered enough information across settings before deciding whether ADHD assessment is appropriate?

‍

📝 Section 4: Key Guidance, Resources and References

Relevant guidance areas

This includes guidance and resources on:

  • ADHD diagnosis and management.
  • Consultation structure and synthesis.
  • Parent training and behaviour support.
  • Relating to others in consultation.
  • Family context, routines and co-parenting.

 

NICE guidance

  • NICE NG87: ADHD in children and adults.

 

RCGP and SCA resources

  • RCGP SCA Toolkit: Relating to Others.
  • MRCGP annual reports and research.

 

Key principles to remember

  • Start with the parent’s story and main concern.
  • Synthesis matters: do not just collect data.
  • ADHD diagnosis should not be based on symptoms in one setting only.
  • Symptoms should be present for at least 6 months, evident before age 12 and cause at least moderate impairment in more than one setting.
  • Consider sleep, anxiety, adjustment, family stress and developmental stage before referral.
  • Behaviour only at home suggests possible situational or family-context triggers.
  • Input from both parents and school is important.
  • Parent training programmes are first-line for primary-school-age children with hyperactivity or behaviour difficulties.
  • Use follow-up to review diaries, school input and parental perspectives.

 

Transferable learning for future cases

In child behaviour consultations:

  • Ask where the behaviour happens, not just what the behaviour is.
  • Explore family changes, sleep and routines before medicalising.
  • Use summaries to check you are solving the right problem.
  • Involve both parents and school where appropriate.
  • Pair reassurance with practical support and follow-up.
  • Avoid premature diagnostic labels.

 

Supervisor or examiner lens

A supervisor or examiner is likely to look for:

  • Open, structured data gathering.
  • Recognition that symptoms only at home make ADHD less likely.
  • Exploration of parental separation and routines.
  • Explanation of ADHD diagnostic requirements.
  • Plan to gather school and mother’s input.
  • Parenting support and sleep advice.
  • Follow-up rather than premature referral or dismissal.

‍

Final learner takeaway

Possible ADHD in a 5-year-old requires synthesis across settings: behaviour only at home is a cue to explore sleep, routines and family context before diagnosing.

‍

Authoring credit:

Clinitalk team