The only “offensive” claim I see in this thread is that ADHD is overdiagnosed. Do you disagree with that?
If that is the only claim you see, then you are not reading this thread.
Is it overdiagnosed? I don’t really know.
I think that this is directed to what I wrote, so let me address it.
I did not intend for the words “dehumanizing” and “weakness” to be taken the way you did. The word choices might have been less than ideal, so I can see how you read into them what you did. But let me explain.
I did not mean to imply that having ADHD, for instance, made someone weak or less human. Not in the least. What I meant was that because it is over diagnosed (which is my belief) that it gives people a way to surrender to a shortcoming. That without the misdiagnoses, many more people would find the power within themselves to overcome the difficulty. This does not mean that there are people for whom medication is the wise choice, only that over diagnosis gives too many people a too convenient excuse to not give their all to overcome it.
It’s real, but not to the extend diagnosed or demanded to be diagnosed by parents.
If you think your daughter has it and you have done reasonable research on the subject to weed out overzealous or indifferent doctors, then, OK, but nobody can agree or disagree with you about your daughter on the basis of a forum post alone.
ADHD has become an easy excuse at a much higher incidence rate compared to where it is a legitimate diagnosis, in my humble opinion.
I have no comment on your having to deal with the snide remarks or implied accusations. These are just rude behavior and have nothing to do with the validity of diagnosing a child with ADHD and putting them on medication for it.
If people become too intrusive and you don’t feel like telling them off, just tell them “She is not exposed to TV, we have daily and long personal interaction with her, but her reaction is not what we we’re expecting, yet.”
No more detail about your child should be disclosed to anyone but the closest of family.
All the best.
I think a more accurate paraphrasing would be:
…but there are any number of people, (and posters to this thread), who are willing to acknowledge that “some people” do actually suffer from ADHD, but that most of the time it is just being used to provide what might appear to be an easier way around the problem.
Even Sven, The difference is simple. People who actually have the condition respond different physically to the drugs, and find that it makes a world of difference in their ability to perform. It is not a degree of performance, it is the difference between being able to perform* at all*. While you might see a net improvement of a single grade level, they will see an improvement of several. Often, it is the difference between failing and passing with very high scores. It is more like the difference between a schizophrenic when they are on and off their medication. On they are lucid and capable; off they are in another world and potentially dangerous. People with true ADHD are unable to focus upon much of anything, find themselves losing time, daydreaming, forgetting things constantly, fidgeting, starting things and unable to finish and this affects every aspect of their lives. On meds, they are normal, functioning people with a high level of energy. The meds allow them the chance to function at what approaches a normal level for them. You on the other hand, do not need medication to perform adequately. That is the difference.
The condition is massively overdiagnosed and treated, and that is a crying shame since the tendency to medicate every fidgety kid is doing them a huge disservice in teaching them how to manage themselves in life.
I don’t know how it is in America, but a very similar problem occurs with depression in the UK.
As a long-term sufferer of depression it is a horribly misunderstood illness. So many people diagnosed as depressed that completely undermine the real sufferers.
To my knowledge it is less of an issue with ADHD in this country but I might just not know about it.
However, the next person that laughs at the idea of depression and says they just need to make themselves happy is going to get my fist inserted in them.
I just want to clarify - I am not looking for a diagnosis or validation for the diagnosis I believe she has. And I agree with you that the remarks and implications can be rude, but the fact is that I do hear it a fair bit, whether in direct response to something I have mentioned, or as a general comment without knowing my family’s situation, or simply on message boards or in the media. I have no desire to avoid conversations about it, regardless of the stance of the other person or the fact that it might make me feel sad or frustrated. I find it an interesting topic and like to hear other points of view and I like to share my point of view too. I’m sorry if anyone thought I posted this thread to get validation or pity. In fact, I thought there would be a lot more opposition than there’s been and I was curious to be able to see the arguments without taking them personally or feeling defensive (as I might if they came from a friend or family member) as well as to compare to the way I used to think. I’ve found the conversation very interesting.
I have a niece who is diagnosed with ADHD. When she entered middle school, her mother was suddenly bombarded with phone calls from teachers about her disruptive behavior. Walking around class while she was supposed to be working. Singing out loud. Incessantly talking and being silly and impulsive. Not being on task. She was prescribed medication, but she only takes it on a “as-want” basis. Her behavior has gotten a lot better since then and her mother no longer gets calls from teachers.
Personally, I don’t know what to think. Her behavior sounds familiar. I turned into a space cadet when I was her age, but I have never had attentional problems. And my teachers never called my parents when I was being “eccentric”; they just told me to “settle down” and I would. Could it be that her teachers back then were merely hypersenstitive to non-conformist behavior, and now that she’s a couple of years older, my niece cares more about what people think and has adjusted her behavior? Could it be that her hormones did mess her up a little, but she’s just learned to adapt? I have no idea.
But looking at her family history, it fits in with a larger picture of inheritable disruption in a certain part of the brain (the basal ganglia). Her mother and I both have abnormalities there–though manifested differently–as well as a cousin, a late uncle, and a couple of aunts (all on the same side of the family). We’ve all developed problems that did not really manifest until adulthood. So while it may be that she doesn’t actually rise to the level of having a true disorder, the signs that she does exhibit may serve as a warning that she needs to be watched.
So yes, I believe it is a real thing. Some people may not need medication (just like some depressed people do not need medication), but I think it describes a real disorder of the brain.
I can’t argue one way or the other about the “misdiagnosed” thing. But I will say this: Just because a ton of people seem to have the label doesn’t mean it’s made-up. A lot of people had small pox and the swine flu, too. ADHD could very well be over- or mis-diagnosed…or it could be symptomatic of stressors in our environment. Our modern society is rife with variables that did not exist just fifty years ago. Kids are watching TV as soon as they are born and everything–including our food and water–contains plastics. We can turn a blind-eye to these things and say to ourselves that because we don’t know what impact these things have on us, there MUST be no effect. But I’m skeptical. It may be that neurological abnormalities like ADD/ADHD and autism are side-effects of a highly industrialized society. Just as pharmaceutical interests have a motive to push various diseases on us, there are other groups that have a vested interest in convincing us that everything is 100% alright about our consumer goods, air, and water.
And since no one has provided any evidence beyond personal impressions that such diagnoses occur “most” of the time, it is accurate to presume that there is, generally, an attack on people who are dealing with such diagnoses, in themselves or their children, since the odds of them being in the “some” that you are willing to acknowledge are far less than the “most” that you assert without any basis.
If anyone came here with evidence of overdiagnoses, I would certainly consider it, but since that claim has simply become an accepted assertion without any factual support, it becomes a gratuitous assertion that I gratuitously deny.
I have no idea whether the diagnosis of ADHD falls into the realms of a few real cases bolstered by a popular trend, a lot of serious cases in which the popularity of the treatment has swept up a few extra medical practitioners, or somewhere in between. Barring evidence for one or another, I consider broad assertions of overdiagnosis as an attack on people struggling with a real problem.
I am not going around attacking people on the “overdiagnosis” side of the discussion, but when charges of “defensiveness” are laid, I am goning to point out that being “defensive” is a legitimate response to attacks.
Any evidence out there?
Awesome. I guess you win the conversation. since you claim exclusive rights to talk about the subject and freedom to shut anyone down whenever you like.
Is there really not way to express a complicated, nuanced opinion without it instantly being construed as a personal attack?
I really think the “mental illness is exactly like a broken arm” paradigm has been taken too far. There was a time when mental illness was deeply stigmatized and we needed to emphasize that they are legit medical problems, and not simply personal weaknesses. Useful as that is, it is not an exact metaphor. Mental disorders are a complex intersection between behavior, culture, physical happenings in the brain and an individual.
And I think the culture aspect is what people are addressing here. Illness and disability is surprisingly cultural. For example, in the US it’s not unusual or considered a major problem to know someone who has trouble walking a mile- we might just say he is out of shape. In a place where you need to walk long distances to get water, this would be a life-altering disability. In our reading-heavy culture, even slightly bad vision is a big problem that needs correction. In a cultural of illiterate farmers, vision can get pretty poor before it starts being considered a problem.
Likewise, it’s possible for sufferers of ADHD to be perfectly honest and legit about their diagnosis, while ADHD on the whole is over-diagnosed. It may be, for example, that our sedentary society simply isn’t a good match for a lot of kids, and maybe it would be better to modify our education system to suit the needs of borderline ADHD children rather than relying on medication to mold them into our school system. There are areas where 15% of children are being diagnosed with ADHD. At this point, maybe some of it is normal variation, in which case we have some interesting ethical questions about cognitive performance enhancing drugs.
Making up other posters’ opinions is not a good way to actually discuss anything. I have not attacked anyone’s position in this thread, except when you stepped outside the discussion to accuse others of being defensive.
There probably is, but you have not demonstrated that with your claims about defensiveness.
Asthma is also being diagnosed at much higher levels than any previous decades. Does this mean that it is overdiagnosed? Or does it mean that earlier cases of asthma were being missed due to a more porous system of seeking it? Or does it mean that more cases are being caught due to improved diagnostic procedures? Or does it mean that changes in environmental factors have led to an actual increase in the number of cases? Absent actual information, a rise in diagnoses means that more cases are being diagnosed and nothing more. Provide the external information and we can examine whether there is overdiagnosis or an increase in occasions of the situation.
Some differences being that asthma is not generally treated with controlled drugs that provide a recreational/performance-enhancing benefit to almost anyone who takes them, and that a discussion of the possible overdiagnosis of asthma is less likely to be immediately characterized as an “attack” on asthma sufferers.
Disclaimer: I know very little about ADHD, but I think I can answer the OP:
-
No one had heard of ADHD half a century ago, now it is apparently a “problem”.
-
A “problem” that conveniently allows the medical sector to sell more drugs to people, ie there is a clear financial incentive for the medical sector as a whole to diagnose as many people as possible.
-
Most diseases have some sort of objective, physical test, while “psychological disorders” are diagnosed by asking questions. Very subjective questions.
-
The checklist of symptoms that signify ADHD reads like a list of normal childhood behaviour, the type that children are supposed to “grow out of”.
Examples:
“Often has trouble playing or doing leisure activities quietly.”
“Often has trouble keeping attention on tasks or play activities.”
“Often avoids, dislikes, or doesn’t want to do things that take a lot of mental effort for a long period of time (such as schoolwork or homework).”
“Often does not give close attention to details or makes careless mistakes in schoolwork, work, or other activities.”
Whether someone is diagnosed or not seems to depend on their parents definition of “often” - if the symtoms said “sometimes” instead, then the list would fit any child. Here’s the full list that Joey P posted earlier. Symptoms and Diagnosis of ADHD | CDC
5) ADHD is described as a “chemical imbalance”. Everyone’s brains are different to some degree (ie everyone has some amount of “chemical imbalance” in their brains), everyone behaves differently to some degree. So there must be some arbitrary cutoff point, ie someone somewhere made the entirely subjective decision of when someone’s behaviour is ok, and when it is a “disorder”. Since they don’t seem to actually check for the magnitude of chemical imbalance (correct me if I’m wrong), it comes down to a behaviourial checklist, where if the subject is not behaving like he or she is supposed to, they are given correctional drugs rather than being taught how to behave better.
-
The drug prescribed for ADHD produces a increase in performance in ADHD sufferers, but also in “normal” people. Most medicines only do you any good if you are sick.
-
The list of criteria for diagnosis has changed over the years.
-
Much of the information for diagnosis is provided by teachers and school administration. They have a clear incentive to encourage the medication of disruptive kids whether they have the disease or not.
I don’t know enough about ADHD to give an informed opinion on it, but these are some of the reasons people (including me) are skeptical about it.
carm: Every single one of your objections is addressed in the talk I linked to earlier. Please make at least a little bit of an effort to educate yourself.
Yeah, its a 40 page report, not that interested. Wanna summarise it?
Also, the OP wasn’t asking “Is ADHD real?”, the OP asked “Why do you not believe in ADHD?”
See the difference?
While it may be true that ADHD medications will produce a positive result in the general population in addition to ADHD sufferers, the difference they can make to an ADHD sufferer can be huge. My son, unmedicated, regresses YEARS and starts acting like a small child. He starts playing with string and rolling around on the floor and stuff. He’s sixteen! On his medication, he acts sixteen. We won’t let him drive if he forgets his medication, for example (he only has a permit, so we have to be in the car for him to drive, so this is easy to enforce).
In my own personal case, I notice a difference in my ability to complete tasks without getting sidetracked, but more importantly, I’m able to stay focused on what people are saying when I’m having a conversation. This used to be awful for me, because no matter how hard I tried to pay attention, my mind would get derailed and start thinking about something else, and I’d come back to the conversation and realize I missed a chunk. This was very embarrassing and if the other person ever caught wind of it, would be perceived as quite rude. The medication has made a huge difference with this.
As for the abuse potential in the medication (you didn’t mention it but it was mentioned by someone), I don’t think that at the dosages that are prescribed (at least for me) that it’s got much abuse potential. When I take my Adderall the only difference I can detect physically is that I’m more awake sooner in the morning than if I don’t take it. I’ve never felt any sort of “high” or “buzz” from it, I just feel more capable of doing things and carrying on conversations. I know what an amphetamine buzz feels like, from my very early 20s when I experimented with such things, and Adderall is nothing like that. At all. It wakes me up and makes me more alert, the way a couple of cups of coffee would, and it makes it easier for me to do my job and talk to people. That’s it.
I would have much less problems believing people weren’t attacking legitimate cases if they didn’t keep referring to the medication as speed. It poisons the well.
And I really wish people would learn about mental disorders–they aren’t bright line diagnostics and they never were intended to be. All the criteria require is that the problematic thinking or behavior fall along certain lines and are significantly negatively affecting your life.
So, guess what, even sven? The fact that you are coping means you don’t have it. The fact that someone else can’t cope means they do have it. Why assign some negative value to these people, assuming that they are just like you and could cope if they just put their mind to it? How do you know that they aren’t coping just as well as you, but that their base level is lower than yours?
And I second the desire for actual studies that show that ADHD is being overly applied. Because, while I do say you shouldn’t trust your doctor 100% completely, I do not say you should distrust them when you can’t find evidence or at least other doctors who disagree. It’s silly to argue that you, though anecdotal experience, know more than the people who actually work in the field and study it.
Yes, and if my grandmother had wheels, she’d be a bus.
While the request for studies is reasonable, what will be considered compelling evidence? Neither doctors nor their patients are likely to come forward and admit that they participated in a questionable diagnosis.