6 ms·

A phony ADD/ADHD diagnosis is cheating because getting diagnosed as a "learning disability" entitles you to special accommodation. You're also a party to a fel

by Duff 16y ago

A phony ADD/ADHD diagnosis is cheating because getting diagnosed as a "learning disability" entitles you to special accommodation. You're also a party to a felony, since you are either committing insurance fraud from the bogus prescription or are an accessory to fraud by illicitly purchasing the pills from someone. When I was in college 15 years ago, I personally knew of at least a half dozen people who managed to get themselves diagnosed with late onset ADD or ADHD. Getting the diagnosis was trivially easy -- drug ads in major magazines at the time often included "quizzes" that happened to be very similar to whatever the doctor was told to ask by the pharmaceutical sales chick. The reason? You got "special accommodation" for your "disability" (ie. you get to take tests alone in a comfy chair in a private office without time limits) and you could easily sell or abuse the drugs that were prescribed. Many classes in the engineering programs were open-book exams -- being able to use a book for an unlimited period of time instead of the 60 minute window that you normally had was a tremendous advantage. I really don't care about the "learning outcomes", but I do care that we're creating a culture where casual abuse of medical diagnoses and health insurance for personal gain is acceptable.

grovulent 16y ago
You don't care about learning outcomes? Sorry - I'm gonna have a hard time caring about the rest of your argument until you justify that a little. I'm not arguing that people should fake ADD to get scripts. I do think this is a wrong and bad thing to do - but not because it makes them "academic cheaters" - it's because it forces up costs on the drug that genuine ADD people need just to be level with ordinary people. I know - because I genuinely am one - believe it or not. And I'm gonna be pissed if I have to start paying 100 bucks a bottle because the government's budget gets blown on a-holes who are faking it. But that's a different issue to what we're talking about here. Having said that - I think the solution to both problems is to throw open the market with certain controls to limit substance abuse - and let the free market bring down costs (since the larger market will allow greater economies of scale in production).
- yardie 16y ago
  The learning outcome is irrelevant. It's irrelevant to the cheaters and to the poster above. Someone taking amphetamines to cram is doing exactly that. They aren't learning, they are just cramming to get through the next set of exams. So to them the learning outcome is irrelevant if the only thing that matters is the grade.
- yardie 16y ago
  The learning outcome is irrelevant. It's irrelevant to the cheaters and to the poster above. Someone taking amphetamines to cram is doing exactly that. They aren't learning, they are just cramming to get through the next set of exams. So to them the learning outcome is irrelevant if the only thing that matters is the grade.
- Duff 16y ago
  Perhaps I should have said "I don't care about the learning outcomes of people looking for an edge" If you have a medical condition, the government or insurance company should be paying for the drug. I don't think passing out pills to get economies of scale makes sense here. My real beef, which I have done a poor job at expressing, is that folks are popping pills at someone else's expense because they want to party and still do well in school. Another, similar beef is that drug companies market these drugs to consumers. The end result is that folks are trying to get various drugs, and folks like you who have a genuine condition end up paying more. (A better example is heavily marketed and very expensive heartburn drugs, which can be substituted for cheap, OTC drugs for most cases of heartburn)
sofuture 16y ago
But we've already created a culture where your medical diagnosis is driven by the drug and health insurance company's gain! You admit that yourself, and then have the nerve to suggest that our medical diagnosis shouldn't lead to our personal gain! I'm relatively sure that's exactly what it should do. I think your argument that a phony diagnosis is cheating is valid -- but only in the sense of accommodations. For what it's worth, I know several people with legit diagnoses (and some with illegitimate diagnoses), none of whom have ever asked for or received special accommodation in school or during any sort of tests. As for the drugs -- why shouldn't an adult have the option to take amphetamine or modafinil or whatnot electively?
- dalore 16y ago
  Exactly. Is having a coffee considered cheating?
- Duff 16y ago
  I think personal integrity matters. Lying to a doctor to get an insurance company to pay for drugs that make you appear to be smarter is an issue in my book. If I did it, I don't think I would sleep well at night. I also want to agree with you that an adult should be able to just go buy some amphetamine... it's an argument that makes sense to me at a high level. The problem is, the devil is in the details. Do you want to be a passenger on a bus or a plane when the operator has been working for 14 hours hopped up on speed?
  - cowpewter 16y ago
    I don't think I'd want to be a passenger on a bus or plane where the operator has been operating for 14 hours straight, speed or not. Don't pilots nap on long international flights? That's why you have a co-pilot.
    - Duff 16y ago
      US military pilots in wartime are expected to operate for longer than 12 hours at a time, supported by speed pills. If it were legal for truck or bus drivers to do so, companies would compel them to as well.
true_religion 16y ago
> A phony ADD/ADHD diagnosis is cheating because getting diagnosed as a "learning disability" entitles you to special accommodation. Only if you disclose it to the school, and request special accommodation. If you remain quiet, you won't be treated differently from any other student. > You're also a party to a felony, since you are either committing insurance fraud from the bogus prescription or are an accessory to fraud by illicitly purchasing the pills from someone. Only if you have insurance, or decide to use your insurance for the prescription. You can always pay full price and be morally clear. Secondly, I'd take arms against the idea that the prescription is 'bogus'. It was given by a licence doctor, and who is to say that you don't have ADD/ADHD? If a condition can be prescribed for purely on self-reported statements such as "I have trouble concentrating sometimes... more than I think is normal", then who is to say that the patient is to blame rather than the professional system? In short, you've taken this situation and hyped an argument around possibility of someone already immoral acting to achieve the same ends that could easily be achieved through moral methods.

by Duff 16y ago

grovulent 16y ago

You don't care about learning outcomes? Sorry - I'm gonna have a hard time caring about the rest of your argument until you justify that a little. I'm not arguing that people should fake ADD to get scripts. I do think this is a wrong and bad thing to do - but not because it makes them "academic cheaters" - it's because it forces up costs on the drug that genuine ADD people need just to be level with ordinary people. I know - because I genuinely am one - believe it or not. And I'm gonna be pissed if I have to start paying 100 bucks a bottle because the government's budget gets blown on a-holes who are faking it. But that's a different issue to what we're talking about here. Having said that - I think the solution to both problems is to throw open the market with certain controls to limit substance abuse - and let the free market bring down costs (since the larger market will allow greater economies of scale in production).

yardie 16y ago
The learning outcome is irrelevant. It's irrelevant to the cheaters and to the poster above. Someone taking amphetamines to cram is doing exactly that. They aren't learning, they are just cramming to get through the next set of exams. So to them the learning outcome is irrelevant if the only thing that matters is the grade.
yardie 16y ago
The learning outcome is irrelevant. It's irrelevant to the cheaters and to the poster above. Someone taking amphetamines to cram is doing exactly that. They aren't learning, they are just cramming to get through the next set of exams. So to them the learning outcome is irrelevant if the only thing that matters is the grade.
Duff 16y ago
Perhaps I should have said "I don't care about the learning outcomes of people looking for an edge" If you have a medical condition, the government or insurance company should be paying for the drug. I don't think passing out pills to get economies of scale makes sense here. My real beef, which I have done a poor job at expressing, is that folks are popping pills at someone else's expense because they want to party and still do well in school. Another, similar beef is that drug companies market these drugs to consumers. The end result is that folks are trying to get various drugs, and folks like you who have a genuine condition end up paying more. (A better example is heavily marketed and very expensive heartburn drugs, which can be substituted for cheap, OTC drugs for most cases of heartburn)

sofuture 16y ago

But we've already created a culture where your medical diagnosis is driven by the drug and health insurance company's gain! You admit that yourself, and then have the nerve to suggest that our medical diagnosis shouldn't lead to our personal gain! I'm relatively sure that's exactly what it should do. I think your argument that a phony diagnosis is cheating is valid -- but only in the sense of accommodations. For what it's worth, I know several people with legit diagnoses (and some with illegitimate diagnoses), none of whom have ever asked for or received special accommodation in school or during any sort of tests. As for the drugs -- why shouldn't an adult have the option to take amphetamine or modafinil or whatnot electively?

dalore 16y ago
Exactly. Is having a coffee considered cheating?
Duff 16y ago
I think personal integrity matters. Lying to a doctor to get an insurance company to pay for drugs that make you appear to be smarter is an issue in my book. If I did it, I don't think I would sleep well at night. I also want to agree with you that an adult should be able to just go buy some amphetamine... it's an argument that makes sense to me at a high level. The problem is, the devil is in the details. Do you want to be a passenger on a bus or a plane when the operator has been working for 14 hours hopped up on speed?
- cowpewter 16y ago
  I don't think I'd want to be a passenger on a bus or plane where the operator has been operating for 14 hours straight, speed or not. Don't pilots nap on long international flights? That's why you have a co-pilot.
  - Duff 16y ago
    US military pilots in wartime are expected to operate for longer than 12 hours at a time, supported by speed pills. If it were legal for truck or bus drivers to do so, companies would compel them to as well.

true_religion 16y ago

> A phony ADD/ADHD diagnosis is cheating because getting diagnosed as a "learning disability" entitles you to special accommodation. Only if you disclose it to the school, and request special accommodation. If you remain quiet, you won't be treated differently from any other student. > You're also a party to a felony, since you are either committing insurance fraud from the bogus prescription or are an accessory to fraud by illicitly purchasing the pills from someone. Only if you have insurance, or decide to use your insurance for the prescription. You can always pay full price and be morally clear. Secondly, I'd take arms against the idea that the prescription is 'bogus'. It was given by a licence doctor, and who is to say that you don't have ADD/ADHD? If a condition can be prescribed for purely on self-reported statements such as "I have trouble concentrating sometimes... more than I think is normal", then who is to say that the patient is to blame rather than the professional system? In short, you've taken this situation and hyped an argument around possibility of someone already immoral acting to achieve the same ends that could easily be achieved through moral methods.