Attention what?

[jackofallgeeks]

I don't think I believe that ADHD exists. I don't know anything, mind, I'm hardly a qualified professional and I've only done the barest amount of reading on the subject. But what I have found makes me think it's another case of self-overmedication that our society is so fond of. The 'symptoms' don't seem to be anything more than a lack of self-control or discipline, which most kids have naturally and will retain unless self-control and discipline are instilled in them by adults. That being the case, it wouldn't surprise me if more kids lacked necessary self-control because many parents can not or will not discipline their children, and 'finding' a new disease lets us medicate our children into a docile, managable state.

That's the theory i'm working on at the moment? any of you out there want to help do some of the foot work and point me toward articles et cetera that might support or contradict such a theory?

Comments

[circuit-four.livejournal.com]

Some further questions:

* We know that certain chemicals can alter attention levels in the brain. If that's true, is it not entirely plausible that an organic condition could raise or lower the production of, or ability to process, those chemicals? If this is the case, would that then qualify as a "disorder?"

* Say for the sake of argument we accept that attention is chemically modulated. What if it proved that an individual could entirely reverse the effects of an imbalance of those chemicals, by a simple conscious decision. Would that, by your definition, mean ADHD "did not exist?"

* How about if an individual could restore the balance and consciously decide to "act normally," but it was proved to be markedly more difficult for some than others? Would that difficult "be" ADHD, or not?

* What if it were possible for everybody, but was more uncomfortable for someone with a natural tendency to that chemical imbalance? Would it be a "lack of discipline or self-control," even if the starting conditions for them to exert discipline or self-control were made harder for them because of their own neurochemistry?

* What about if it turned out that what some call ADHD could be controlled, but it required a certain learnable skill?

* What if it turned out that the difference in "attention neurochemicals" was caused by genetic? How about environmental variables? What if it turned out that it only developed in kids who were raised a certain way? Or only in kids who did not learn a certain cognitive "skill" of self-control?

* What makes a disorder "real" or "not real," besides a doctor saying so? Is it a sliding scale where you might have 20% or 40% or 200% more difficulty concentrating and keeping still... or a binary yes/no condition that you either "really have" or "don't really have?"

These are the sort of questions that keep me awake at night, almost every night. :)

My own opinion, FWIW:

1. ADHD the neurochemical condition does exist, but on a sliding scale
2. ADHD the diagnostic condition is just a handy rule-of-thumb invented by medical science, usually based more on how dysfunctional a kid is than any objective neurological standards
3. thus ADHD "exists" in much the same way that rain exists, as a phenomenon and not a thing; in a sense, there's no such thing as rain, there is only water that is raining at whatever intensity (this gets into crazy Buddhist metaphysical stuff that'll take me all week to write about :) )
4. ADHD can be treated either by pharmacology or cognitive therapy; the latter is essentially indisguishable from "discipline" but is more scientific; CT is preferable to drugs
5. ADHD is not anybody's "fault" nor is it a "character flaw," but willful failure to acknowledge and adapt to it IS a character flaw