Assignment Task: Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD): ADHD has certainly been a subject of much controversy over the years. This condition was once thought to be a result of "toxic motherhood" at least by mental health clinicians who leaned toward the psychoanalytic perspective on human behavior. At the same time, this condition attracted the attention of pharmaceutical companies armed with CNS stimulants for which there were few legitimate medical applications. Drawing on earlier research studies, the pharmaceutical industry concluded that the CNS stimulant methylphenidate, or the amphetamines, could provide at least some degree of symptom control (Rasmussen, 2008).
Questions have been raised about whether ADHD is an actual disease or an excuse for parents and teachers to avoid dealing with a troublesome child's behavior (Whitaker, 2010). This perspective is supported by the observation that in some school districts child abuse charges have been filed against parents who refuse to sanction the administration of CNS stimulants to their child to control perceived ADHD. In other school districts, a teacher's affirmation that the child has ADHD is sufficient reason for a pediatrician to prescribe these medications to the child. To put this process into perspective, consider the following hypothetical conversation between a teacher and a physician:
Teacher: "I think that little Jimmy has cancer."
Physician: "All right, I will write the orders for chemotherapy."
As ludicrous as this might sound at first, the majority of cases in which ADHD is diagnosed are based on teacher complaints, and the children only rarely demonstrate the undesirable behaviors in a physician's office (Whitaker, 2010).
It is important to remember that psychiatric medications are a form of chemotherapy, although in this case the "disease" is not a form of cancer or cardiac dysfunction but a perceived neuro/psycho/behavioral/interpersonal problem. Pharmaceuticals used to treat a disease always hold the potential for bodily harm, and there is a growing body of evidence that suggests that many psychopharmaceuticals hold the potential to induce long-lasting (possibly lifelong) alterations in the physical structure and function of the patient's brain (Whitaker, 2010).
It has been argued that parents seek to have their children diagnosed with ADHD so that they have a convenient excuse for the child's misbehavior, their own lack of parenting skills, and as justification to use the "chemical straight jacket" of psychiatric medications (Rasmussen, 2008; Whitaker, 2010). The diagnosis of ADHD allows the child to access special school programs, and for adults, it provides protection against job termination under the Americans with Disabilities Act (Rasmussen, 2008). Not surprisingly, a significant percentage of the CNS stimulants prescribed to control perceived ADHD are diverted to illicit markets. A significant percentage of those who take the medication report that they do so for its ability to improve mood or, if misused, to induce euphoria (Higgins, 2009; Rasmussen, 2008).
Questions to answer:
Q1. Do you know someone who has been diagnosed with ADHD? On what was the diagnosis based?
Q2. What reasons might a teacher have for reporting that a student seems to have ADHD? What about a parent? Do you think such a diagnosis can benefit a child?
Q3. As demonstrated above, CNS stimulants have both legal and illegal uses. What should the factors be in deciding whether a drug should be available legally?