This sounds like Scientology propaganda. That being said, ADHD is one of the most abused labels I can think of. The label itself is one of the biggest issues with ADHD diagnosis and treatment. Symptoms commonly associated with ADHD can be caused by many things, namely various sources of stress. I think in many cases the ADHD term is applied in situations where it may only vaguely apply in an attempt to simplify the unavoidable complexity found whenever you study psychology.

I, in recent years, have developed a significant difficulty in focusing or concentrating on certain things. Foremost among them is reading. I can't enjoy a book anymore because by the time I finish a page, I have completely forgotten the page before it. I can spend all day sitting around doing nothing and still feel like I've never had the chance to relax because I cannot get myself to wind down. I am constantly churning over issues from work, family concerns, bills, etc. There's nothing unusual about these concerns; I imagine everyone here can say they have the same; but they seem to affect me differently.

One of the interesting things that's surfaced in the last few years is the view of ADHD not as a "malfunction" but simply as a different way of functioning. Many of us with classic ADHD symptoms also have benefits. As adults, we tend to multitask better and we tend to communicate more clearly and concisely.

Do I have ADHD? I imagine many doctors would slap that label on me and I imagine others would not. Frankly, I don't care what they label me so long as they can help me. "Help" should not mean medication, at least not so readily as it usually does now. Unlike the majority of modern anti-depressants and anti-anxiety medications, ADHD treatments have not come very far and still tend to bring significant drawbacks with them. Exercise, therapy and general stress-relief techniques can do wonders for many psychological issues. The most helpful thing I've ever found is simply being conscious and aware of what your issues are.

I don't think it's as black and white as most people want it to be.

It feels like the modern day dyslexia, there is still a lack of understanding of how to diagnose and certainly how to treat it, and as such it is natural there is still a great deal scepticism around it.

Ways of being. Definitions for. Categorizing such definitions, as Normal, and Not Normal, by degrees. Trying to modify/alter, ways of being that are divergent from Normal, with the desire to Normalize.

Treating symptoms, with drugs, may simply mask the causes, if they can be found, for stress/depression/disturbance. Masking causes can hinder meaningful help in the long term.

I was diagnosed as dyslexic, in my early teens. That helped, in that, until then, I was just considered slow. However, dyslexia is a term applied to a large range of differing traits. A description often given, is of a spectrum, with most people falling on it somewhere, manifesting different traits to different degrees. It seems to me, that ADHD is another blanket term, covering a vast array of symptoms. However, unlike dyslexia, where the response to diagnosis (at least for me) was an increase in empathy, understanding, and quality attention from the education system (not by a lot, but a little at least), the response to ADHD seems to be medication. This is not good.

What we are learning, is that humanity, and the human condition is complex. We don't understand ourselves, or life, yet. Responding to difference and complexity with an attempt to comprehend, respect, and meet differing needs, and promote differing gifts, is very different from "have some drugs".

I have personal experience of depression, in both myself, and my family, and i could relate well to a documentary Stephen Fry did into Manic Depression (from which he suffers) where he interviewed many different people with the condition, whilst exploring whether he would seek medication or not. He come to realise, taht to medicate, or not is a BIG personal decision, and not one you can make for someone else. For some people, medication allowed them to function, and that benefit was worth the cost of the side-efects, etc. For others, the cost of medication was to loose a part of themselves, their nature. When you medicate you alter the personality to an extent. Thats a massive invasion of the self.

I have never wanted to be medicated for depression, but, when suffering from it, wanted to understand the reason, and causes for it, and to understand myself and address the issues if i could. I have family who have medicated, and that was right for them. Not medicating is a risk, just as medicating is. But its my choice, not someone else's.

If a child's behavior is uncomprehended, is that a fault of the child, or a failing/lack in the people trying to understand? I'd say ti was a fault of neither, but that understanding should always be sought whit respect and empathy. Medication may "work" in the sense, of altering the behavior. For some, they may be essential. But its doing so at the cost of personality (behavior is more than just the expression of personality, but it is a part of it).

I see my dyslexia as more benefit, and gift, than burden, because of the complementary ways of thinking i have to some others, which i feel enriches us as people. Stephen Fry found that even Manic Depression could be something that became central, and valued, as part of self, and can definitely contribute to success/achievements/abilities, as well as having a cost. xxovercastxx mentions having benefits too.

Who are we to chose how to modify the personailites of our children?
Who are we to subject them to possible chemical dependance and sidefects?
I'm not a parent, and cant make such choices for anyone, but where we see complexity, our response shouldn't be to simplify humanity through chemicals. That is failing ourselves.

Thanks. I appreciate your thoughts on this. (Thylan, Redsky..Overcast) I posted this hoping to hear some advocating from both sides since I'm not sure of my own opinion on this. For years I've rallied against medicating children, but I've tried to be objective and realize that it maybe beneficial in some cases.
It is unfortunate that this label is so abused...it's a catch-all term for every child that has issues.

Just come across this BBC news article on this.

I never thought ADHD actually existed, even after I was diagnosed with it at the age of 12. I always believed it to be a elaborate sham by pharmaceutical companies. It's truly amazing how these leading experts in physiological disorders sound like pre-schoolers reciting the alphabet. Their ignorance on even being able to define what ADHD is, let alone when and to what extent medication should be used reinforces my 5th grade viewpoint.