This is a sample complaint, showing how the materials of Arguments Database - Ready Enough can be used to strengthen your Stage 2 Complaint, assuming you have mentioned A02. Direct Harm / Lack of Careful Consideration, A04. NHS Clinician Dr. Smith Bias and Inadequacy of comparison and A17. Clear breach of numerous BBC and Ofcom Guidelines in your Stage 1B complaint.
<aside> 🙏 Please, use this as reference point for your own writing. Find the link to detailed Argument page under the text and process and adjust it to your beliefs, views and position.
</aside>
<aside> ✍️ Your intro
</aside>
Detailed, character-optimised (242 words, 1740 characters)
<aside> ✍️ Output harms people with ADHD in the UK, a vulnerable group of over 1.5 million. People with ADHD are 5 times more likely to attempt suicide and have an average lifespan 10 years shorter than average population.
The questioning of diagnostic process and negative portrayal of private clinics worsen societal stigma surrounding ADHD. This rhetoric divides the audience, pitting individuals diagnosed privately and through the NHS against each other. Doubting diagnostic process may lead people to question their own diagnosis, leading to mental, physical, and social health issues.
The output's misinformation has adverse effects, including increase in rejection rate of shared care and difficulties with reasonable adjustments at work as reported by people affected. Friends, family, and GPs may question ADHD diagnoses more often, causing additional distress, as seen in this response: https://adhduk.co.uk/panorama-adhd-uk-response/
The attempt to support the audience through its the Action Line is inadequate and disproportionate to the harm done.
Suggesting that people with ADHD are fabricating their symptoms worsens stigmas associated with hidden disabilities. The social and health repercussions of untreated or unsupported neurodivergence, including higher incarceration rates, lower employment levels, and worse health outcomes, cannot be ignored. Questioning diagnoses and casting doubts on patients, risks exacerbating these negative outcomes.
The inclusion of editorialised suggestions, insinuating that people might be "drug seeking" under false pretences, further harms the perception of individuals with ADHD and potentially violates Sections 3.3.22-33 and 5.3.41-44.
</aside>
Detailed, character-optimised (245 words, 1604 characters)
<aside> ✍️ The output contrasts NHS and private assessments in its entirety. It relies on an NHS assessment that was conducted with either full (as per Section 6.3.1 - Informed Consent) or partial (crews, professional cameras, lights) understanding of the content and purpose of the output. It also wasn't signposted as "Sector Recording" This is compared to secretly filmed and heavily edited private assessments, violating Sections 3.2.22 and 3.2.33 - Production Techniques, leading to a skewed perception.
This significantly breaches several Sections: 3.1 mandates accuracy in sourcing and evidence. 3.3.1 emphasises considering relevant opinions and facts to arrive at the truth, including fact-checking and contextualising claims, 3.3.8 requires using a range of evidence to assess statistical claims accurately. 4.3.2 - 4.3.8 concerning Due Weight, Impartiality, and Controversial Subjects, are also violated.
Reporter admits to informing Dr. Smith about the research before the assessment (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-65534449): “I told him about my investigation and he said he also had concerns about how some private providers were operating. He agreed to show me how an assessment should be carried out.” Contrary to what was stated in the Stage 1B response. This undermines the credibility of the assessment as it was biased and unsuitable for comparison. Either that or BBC failed to follow Section 6.3.1 on consent, or if Stage 1 responses lied as well as sidestepping the direct address of the inadequacy of comparison in the output's foundation.
</aside>
Concise, character-optimised (58 words, 406 characters)
<aside> ✍️ The output violates Sections 1.2, 3.1, 3.3.1, 3.3.8, 4.3.2 - 4.3.8, and 3.3.22-23.
It unfairly targets and misrepresents private clinics, favours NHS assessment as the standard. Use of conversion %, online nature, and duration undermines private practices without context or corroboration for a balanced view.
The delay in correcting mistakes violates 3.3.28, causing measurable harm to people with ADHD.
</aside>
<aside> ✍️ Your outro
</aside>
Total: 545 words and 3,750. Rest are yours to adjust, rewrite, better tweak and adopt.
🚧 TODO