Changing the narrative round ADHD

I was critical of Max Pemberton in a previous post for what he said in one of his Daily Mail columns. But he has fronted what I think is quite a good and helpful Channel 4 programme ‘The great ADHD myth?’ (see last post). As he said in the programme, and in a Times article, Pemberton himself was diagnosed with ADHD in an online private assessment costing £1200 (the programme also talked a little about the profit motive in ADHD assessment and treatment - see eg. another previous post). He doesn’t accept the diagnosis as he feels it unnecessarily medicalises his personal traits. As he says, “Calling that [ie. ADHD] a disability, which is what I was told during my assessment, doesn’t describe me and it borrows a word that other people need.”

Changing the narrative round ADHD is not easy, when it is sold as a disorder of people with a different kind of brain, easily defined by subjective criteria of inattention and hyperactivity and impulsivity and predominately genetically caused. There is no evidence that there is a particular ADHD brain, it is not easy to define as the criteria used are so subjective, and genetics and environment interact and are not simply additive factors. We need to be far more cautious about medicating people with stimulant medication and the extent to which any apparent effects may be due to placebo.