I know that the other branches technically do not, but if you ask really nice they usually still let you. The Marines however are very strict on not letting anyone with ADD join.
Why?
For that matter why does anyone in the military have such a big problem with it? It seems that it would be more of an annoyance then debilitating like bi-polar, or schizophrenia.
Assuming this is true, I can’t understand why you’re even asking this.
Granted I don’t know much about ADD, but I would think that any condition that causes your attention to wander while learning about things as central to the Marine Corps as shooting a rifle or learning small unit tactics would be a BAD THING. I don’t think I’d want to go into combat next to somebody with ADD, I’d be constantly wondering if he a) remembers that part in class about how to recognize a booby trap (etc.) or b) is going to lose interest in the mission/fighting at hand and start doodling in the dirt or some such thing.
Muad’Dib
“I know that the other branches technically do not, but if you ask really nice they usually still let you.”
Nope, show me an example.
“The Marines however are very strict on not letting anyone with ADD join.”
Actually, all of the armed forces do not allow people WHO HAVE BEEN ON MEDICATION FOR ADD. It’ not the disability/condition that gets people banned, it’s that that they have been on psychiatric medication.
“Why? For that matter why does anyone in the military have such a big problem with it? It seems that it would be more of an annoyance then debilitating like bi-polar, or schizophrenia.”
If you have to be on a medication to be “OK”, and you might not get your meds when we are in battle, well . . . ?
I think this is what Muad’Dib is talking about.
“OK, listen up maggots. This is the XYZ123 high-explosive fragmentation grenade. It will blow your head clean off, so pay attention.”
“Uh, Sarge? Will it really blow your head clean off? Wouldn’t that be kind of messy?”
“Pipe down, dogbreath. I said it would blow YOUR head clean off, not mine, and that’s because there’s nothing in there to make a mess. NOW, the XYZ123 fragmentation grenade is an elegant device, made with a mechanism so simple that even you pathetic simians might understand it. You just pull the pin like so…”
“Uh, Sarge?”
“SHUT THE **** UP!”
“But Sarge, I was looking at this one and wondering how you get the pin back in after that funny-looking-part falls off…”
As far as the Nav was concerned, when I was a recruiter (2 1/2 years ago), Ritalin was a disqualifier. Period. I guess that equals out to “significantly” reduced chance of enlisment. You can ask for a waiver all you want, it wouldn’t have been approved, and no good recruiter would waste time on a non-approvable waiver: It’s hard enough work recruiting applicants that can qualify, without adding extra fruitless labor.
As for this: “Disclosing past use of the stimulant can disqualify enlistees from joining the military”, well, that line there has nasty implications. Would-be recruits that try to conceal past drug use, medically supervised or not, are committing “Fraudulent Enlistment”, and that can be serious, indeed. If the service chooses to persue it, it’s Federal rap. And as to the success of attempts to hide the past, well, damn few applicants succeed. The RQAT (Recruit Quality Assesment Team) is good, and they catch in excess of 99% of missed information. 99% of recruits fess-up to something they failed to tell their recruiter when RQAT interviews them. Most often it’s a non-issue, something really minor, but now and again…
As for why ADD is an issue: The military deals with hazardous equipmnet, munitions, and chemicals on a daily basis. You want the people working on that stuff paying attention to what they’re about.
Disqualifying people on the basis of having taken Ritalin seems a bit sweeping. Are not a lot of children put on Ritalin mistakenly? Wouldn’t it make more sence to access if a given person does or does not actually have the condition?
So you are basically telling us that no service accepts anyone who has been on Ritalin? So if there is a new draft, you go to TJ and get a doctor to prescribe it and bring it to your induction examination? No going to Canada? Too bad I support this war (and am way too old to be drafted.)
In recent years three of the four major services had trouble meeting recruiting goals, the Marines did not. Not meeting goals? Lower the standard. Meeting goals? Keep your standards as high as you like. I do not know what recent recruiting has been like, I think it has improved for the Navy, Army, and Air Force lately. Just a thought.
Yes, a lot of children were put on it mistakenly, and at the same time, doing a medical assesment of each case isn’t cost effective. It’s expensive, recruiting dollars are highly limited, and few Recruiters are willing to go to that effort for an almost certain “no”.
The Rule was, when I was recruiting:
Few, if any, recruiters are willing to go to that much work, when for a similar effort, they could sign four, five, or more non-waiver contracts.
Mind you, rules change, and I haven’t looked at the current CRUITMAN (which changes about every six weeks), but that rule had stayed essentially unchanged during my 3 year tenure in CRUITCOM.
As for the other Services, well, you’d have to ask them.
ADD would be a real advantage in a combat situation, because because people with ADD tend to be more alert to thier surroundings(part of the problem is the inability to screen out external stimuli). However, they make lousy soldiers. They get bored easily, dont like to follow orders, forget mundane details that they dont feel are important etc. For instance, a person with ADD would be great when on patrol looking for bad guys etc, but would be a real hazzard as a sentry. They would get bored and the mind would wander, since they arent activly doing anything. Learing about stuff wouldnt be a problem as long as it were interesting(I for one, get into weapons and such, so I can study that all day). I never thought about it, but that is one job that someone like probably shouldnt have.
I would like to point out here that the Military seems to care about Ritalin, not about ADD. Perhaps there is something abour Ritalin that affects the users in such a way that they become less valuable to the Military. ADD itself should probably be left out of this discussion, after the article Duck Duck Goose linked to.
Oh, ADD was an issue as well, and was (likely still is) a disqualifier. I just never saw a verified case of ADD that didn’t have Ritalin associated with it while I was a Recruiter. You’re entirely correct, they are two seperate issues, but are so often linked as to almost be synonymous in common useage.
Eh…nuh uh… I think the point is that they DO care about ADD, and that whether or not you’re taking medication is just their somewhat arbitrary test. As tranquilis said, medical or psychiatric tests are more costly than the army is willing to undergo for every single possible recruit. If the recruit indeed has ADD but was not on medication, this would still be a problem and you would hope they screened people for this after accepting them.
That said, as somebody who’s often thought I have a minor form of ADD, I’ll be the first in the line at the psychiatrists to get diagnosed the second a draft starts up.
What the article seemed to be saying is that if you have ADD to such an extent that you require meds to function in your job or school, then they don’t want you. It is about ADD, not ritalin. Just some folk have a lesser degree of ADD than others, therefore they would not be as much of a problem.
As a 19-year-old with ADHD who has Ritalin since 4, I can personally tell you that I tend to panic under stress.
I doubt that any Marine with ADD would get board during a battle and start doodling in the dirt. I mean, we’re not a bunch of fucking retards, dammit!
Well, here’s a question for you: what about other meds given to those with ADD? Dexedrine is fairly common (although not to the degree that Ritalin is). Was the entire class (psychostimulants, as they call them) used as grounds for disqualification (or at least, effective disqualification)?
Dexadrine would require medical review, but IIRC (and I’d have to dig around to find my old CRUITMAN), it wasn’t necessarily a show-stopper, as it’s prescribed for other things besides ADD.
Let me be clear: During the time I was a Recruiter, ADD was a stopper. Ritalin was, for all practical purposes, a stoper. Ritalin with ADD was a “get the hell out of my station” stopper.
In my understanding there isn’t even a medical standard for ADD. It gets diagnosed in more and more children every year. So, Is ADD a disqualifier if a doctor diagnosed you with it when you were 4, or is ADD only a disqualifier if the recruit admits having it. and in that case, if a recruit HAS ADD and doesn’t know it, is there a way for the recruiter to quickly diagnose the problem? Is there a standard military definition for ADD?
In response to the OP, a classic Cecil quote: