4 ms·

The incentive "these people clearly need help of some sort" isn't bad, I think. But it's bad if we have to pretend we understand something better than we do fo

The incentive "these people clearly need help of some sort" isn't bad, I think. But it's bad if we have to pretend we understand something better than we do for people to get the help they need.

steve_adams_86 5y ago
I think psychologists largely admit ADHD is a bit of a black box. Maybe genetic, maybe not, specific individual treatments are required, etc. Even meds won't work consistently from patient to patient. That's all fine though because generally some awareness that there's something neurologically aberrant occurring is one of the greatest tools to help cope and strategize. This is where the psychologist can really shine, offering families insight into how to live with ADHD. Whether it be a child, spouse, parent, whatever. No psychologist I've spoken to or read a book from has claimed to have a firm grasp on what ADHD is. They even admit the diagnosis is very much done "by feel", requiring as much history and cross-reference of family and friends' experiences to be certain.
- whimsicalism 5y ago
  Well yeah, because it's a social construct.
  - user_7832 5y ago
    I'm sorry, just to be clear, do you mean that ADHD is a social construct?
    - whimsicalism 5y ago
      Yes - ADHD is a social construct. But this is not unique to ADHD among mental disorders.
  - steve_adams_86 5y ago
    There are many significant findings about the atypical anatomical and neurological development of people diagnosed with ADHD. For example, parts of our brains seem to be smaller [1] and there appears to be less blood flow to the prefrontal regions of our brains [2]. It's well known that our ability to utilize and regulate dopamine efficiently is not on par with our peers - this is why someone with ADHD responds quite differently to stimulants than a neurotypical person does. Otherwise there seems to be various genes associated with ADHD, though that area of research is young. The same can be said with autism. The pathogenesis of ADHD isn't completely understood, but hard evidence of consistent anatomical, neuronal, and chemical differences is only increasing. There is something real happening without much doubt - the task now is to figure out what and why. Maybe I'm misunderstanding you when you say social construct, though. I'm not sure if you mean "ADHD isn't real" or "It's a bucket we throw similar types of disorders into". If you mean the latter, I'd agree - I wouldn't be surprised if in 10-15 years we see that sub types can be distinctly identified in some way. I have no idea if at that point we'll need to overhaul these categorizations, but, I suspect we will at least understand the pathology better. [1] https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanpsy/article/PIIS2215-0366(17)30049-4/fulltext https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanpsy/article/PIIS2215-0... [2] https://www.jpn.ca/content/35/5/330 https://www.jpn.ca/content/35/5/330
    - whimsicalism 5y ago
      I'm saying that the term "ADHD" is a social construct. We humans have constructed in our mind a category of human behaviors and drawn some fuzzy lines and planted a flag down saying "this is ADHD." Certainly, as you mention, you can draw trends between the two categories (ADHD vs non-ADHD), just as if you were to move from South Africa to Egypt you might notice that most of the people look different. But that doesn't make "Egypt" or "South Africa" any less of a human construct. The idea that ADHD is some abberant way of being that ought to be medicated into a teleological more ideal way of mental being is also, completely, a human construction - you can't get that conclusion just by looking at brain blood flow or anything like that.
      - steve_adams_86 5y ago

The incentive "these people clearly need help of some sort" isn't bad, I think. But it's bad if we have to pretend we understand something better than we do for people to get the help they need.

steve_adams_86 5y ago

I think psychologists largely admit ADHD is a bit of a black box. Maybe genetic, maybe not, specific individual treatments are required, etc. Even meds won't work consistently from patient to patient. That's all fine though because generally some awareness that there's something neurologically aberrant occurring is one of the greatest tools to help cope and strategize. This is where the psychologist can really shine, offering families insight into how to live with ADHD. Whether it be a child, spouse, parent, whatever. No psychologist I've spoken to or read a book from has claimed to have a firm grasp on what ADHD is. They even admit the diagnosis is very much done "by feel", requiring as much history and cross-reference of family and friends' experiences to be certain.

whimsicalism 5y ago
Well yeah, because it's a social construct.
- user_7832 5y ago
  I'm sorry, just to be clear, do you mean that ADHD is a social construct?
  - whimsicalism 5y ago
    Yes - ADHD is a social construct. But this is not unique to ADHD among mental disorders.
- steve_adams_86 5y ago
  There are many significant findings about the atypical anatomical and neurological development of people diagnosed with ADHD. For example, parts of our brains seem to be smaller [1] and there appears to be less blood flow to the prefrontal regions of our brains [2]. It's well known that our ability to utilize and regulate dopamine efficiently is not on par with our peers - this is why someone with ADHD responds quite differently to stimulants than a neurotypical person does. Otherwise there seems to be various genes associated with ADHD, though that area of research is young. The same can be said with autism. The pathogenesis of ADHD isn't completely understood, but hard evidence of consistent anatomical, neuronal, and chemical differences is only increasing. There is something real happening without much doubt - the task now is to figure out what and why. Maybe I'm misunderstanding you when you say social construct, though. I'm not sure if you mean "ADHD isn't real" or "It's a bucket we throw similar types of disorders into". If you mean the latter, I'd agree - I wouldn't be surprised if in 10-15 years we see that sub types can be distinctly identified in some way. I have no idea if at that point we'll need to overhaul these categorizations, but, I suspect we will at least understand the pathology better. [1] https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanpsy/article/PIIS2215-0366(17)30049-4/fulltext https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanpsy/article/PIIS2215-0... [2] https://www.jpn.ca/content/35/5/330 https://www.jpn.ca/content/35/5/330
  - whimsicalism 5y ago
    I'm saying that the term "ADHD" is a social construct. We humans have constructed in our mind a category of human behaviors and drawn some fuzzy lines and planted a flag down saying "this is ADHD." Certainly, as you mention, you can draw trends between the two categories (ADHD vs non-ADHD), just as if you were to move from South Africa to Egypt you might notice that most of the people look different. But that doesn't make "Egypt" or "South Africa" any less of a human construct. The idea that ADHD is some abberant way of being that ought to be medicated into a teleological more ideal way of mental being is also, completely, a human construction - you can't get that conclusion just by looking at brain blood flow or anything like that.
    - steve_adams_86 5y ago