Martin
1 Are you saying that ADHD does not ever exist?
2 Are you saying that there is never a case for prescribing medication to respond to severe ADHD symptoms?
3 In the case of Claire Murray, is there anything known about why she was first taken to a paediatrician at age 12 while she was an A grade student?
4 If it was behavioural issues at home, what pathway would you suggest to a parent to take if they are very concerned by chronic impulsive, inattentive behaviours at home and in the absence of an academic problem at school?
5 People with impulse control problems (who turn up in the diagnosed/ADHD category?) will turn in the category of recreational drug users; it does not mean that it is necessarily their diagnosis or medication prescribed that will lead to them turning to recreational drug use, but rather their underlying problem with impulse control.
6 Do you argue against the involvement of psychologists in tackling ADHD-type symptoms? And if so, why?
7 How are people who present with “ADHD type symptoms” to get access to professional responses around “behavioural therapy” if they are discouraged from going near ANY psychologist because SOME psychologists are open to (lean towards) a medication model?
8 Do you acknowledge that there are many (a majority) of psychologists who go from a diagnosis of behavioural problems to behavioural therapy strategies ?
9 Do you see a role of psychologists in dealing with the behavioural issues that present?Cheers
Tom
thanks Martin – much appreciated – another thought:
Use of the term “ADHD” as a label – i guess that is a problem with labels, that they do generalise; and run the risk of being an oversimplification that can lead to causing other problems; I guess the medical diagnosis “has cancer” covers a lot of conditions; a whole spectrum of problems; I guess it is a “dumbing down” to say that someone “has cancer”; but using a term for a condition that features a spectrum of issues has some sort of natural inevitability about it; it is convenient to have a label; it is perhaps even necessary short-hand for normal discourse, and professional discourse; and sometimes systems (i.e. government support programs) require labels for the purpose of allocating resources…. the problem is not so much having a label, but misusing labels; pretending that a label is a precise diagnosis of a precise condition.
Hi Tom
Cancers are many and varied and everybody understands that there are many subtypes. All cancers involve demonstrable changes to cell biology with real adverse consequences. The term Cancer doesn’t dumb down government policy resposes or medical treatment resposes.
The same can not be said for ADHD. Legitimising the label invites dumbed and harmful responses from both the medical profession and government. If all it ever was regarded as was a loose description of a set of behaviours perhaps it would be harmless. However, it has been so agressively marketed as a medical condition (often equated with real disease like insulin dependent diabetes). The label ADHD has done too much damage to be rehabilitated it must be rejected and abandoned.
I have a child who’s been diagnosed with ADHD. He is incredibly bright and capable and a lovely child. He also requires a lot more work from my husband and myself. We have been through the OT, speech, physio and nutritionist for help. We have daily homework from a range of therapists to help him.
He has an addictive personality. When he enjoys something he hyperfocuses to the extent of obsessiveness. He can be so focussed on somethings but can’t concentrate on others without a lot of help.
We prefer not to medicate and with the school’s help and the help of his paediatrician and various specialists we are managing his ADHD without medication but with a lot of training on how to be organised, how to respond to social cues, how to speed up/slow down/switch focus, etc.
He has an addictive personality and even if we don’t medicate him in the future, he is at greater risk of becoming addicted. We are already trying to counteract this by informing him of the negative implications of drugs and by directing his interests and finding friends from ‘good’ families to try and limit the risk of heading that way when he reaches his teens.
Being a parent to a child with ADHD is not easy. It is made harder by the media who make ‘medication’ out to be evil and ADHD to be about bad parents and not a medical condition.
It seems to Me that ‘Mum of a child with ADHD’ has a good handle on her sons individual circumstances and responds appropriately. However, the obvious question is does the label ADHD add anything to understanding and supporting him?
As for him being obsessive with things that interest him and disinterested in things that don’t, I am exactly the same. At risk of stating the obvious, I think it is perfectly natural to find interesting things interesting, and boring things boring.
If as ‘Mum of a child with ADHD’ says her son has an addictive personality then it is doubly important that he is not on ADHD ‘medications’. As these ‘medications’ are in most cases highly addictive amphetamines (dexamphetamine) or near amphetamines (Ritalin , Concerta etc) which are certainly not good for people with addictive personalities.She was failing at school before she was diagnosed and medicated, or they wouldn’t have taken her to the paediatrician in the first instance. Claire did not fail at school or drop her grades because of the medication. She was already unwell, regardless of what you call her condition.
Regarding the statement that Mick and Val put in the West Australian, I say this; WHY, oh why, did it take THIRTEEN YEARS to read the drug information sheet contained within Claire’s medication? They actively gave their 12 year old child a controlled drug that they knew NOTHING about? No wonder Claire was a drug addict.
Stop solely blaming the prescription. Her condition was prevalent prior to the use of dexamphetamine, or she wouldn’t have been prescribed in the first instance. How about the parents sit back and think about what they could have done better to help their unwell daughter. Knowing what they were administering into her small body would probably have been the first step. The second would be realising that Claire wasn’t having much fun inside her mind and perhaps talking to her, or having her talk to someone else could have been a wiser move?
In your time within politics, why did you only fight the Doctors to limit prescriptions and not the Government themselves for the woeful mental health system we have? Why didn’t you push for mandatory (and Govt funded) therapy for all Australians diagnosed with ADD/ADHD as well as fight against medicinal solutions? If you did, why has no mention been made of that? Don’t you think that is a more appropriate thing to tackle? “Okay, so he’s limited the Doctor prescriptions… but what now?” You are fighting the symptoms, not the root cause.
I’m not saying that you are completely wrong, but you certainly aren’t completely right. There are plenty of people who become drug addicts in life with no prior use of Dex or Meth. And not all users of Dex and Meth become drug addicts. Drawing conclusions on the direct correlation between Dex and Heroin in Claire’s case is mere speculation and you’ve no right to scare anyone into such assumptions.
Before posting this reply, I tried looking on this website for some tips on how to manage ADD/ADHD without medication. I looked for a list of medical professionals that could be seen in WA for guidance. I looked for information on studies about progressive and proven successful therapies, with tools that parents could use to help their position, and I found nothing. All I found was quotes from people who have conducted studies.
You’ve put an entire website together fighting one thing, but offered no solution. In your own story “The Psuedosciences supporting ADHD” you’ve included a quote that contradicts what you are trying to prove. “The three-year data also showed that children using behavioural therapy alone had ‘a slightly lower rate of substance abuse’ ” A SLIGHTLY lower rate? Doesn’t sound particularly encouraging. While slightly less is better than the former, it is still not offering any solution to a problem that took the 90′s by storm.
I think you’re doing a good job at ensuring we don’t have a generation of drugged up zombie kids, and for that I thank you, but I think you’ve failed to make any credible points as you’ve not offered any solution about “what to do next” if people decide not to use medication. In order to stop one thing, you have to offer a substitute solution. I’ve seen “behavioural therapy” written in all of your articles, but not a single direction of who to see, where to go and effective tools people can use at home to manage the behaviour issues.
Well done on being passionate about this, but I think you would have far more support if you offered genuine solutions.
7 comments
Comments feed for this article