Overdiagnosis is not a problem, but misdiagnosis may be as people are driven into the private sector by long waits, and sadly, missed diagnoses remain common —Tamsin Ford
Experts are warning that far from being over-diagnosed, people with ADHD are waiting too long for assessment, support and treatment.
You cannot equate ADHD and spectrum mental conditions with disease. For one they are not a disease, you cannot catch them and you cannot give them to other people. They are the way people’s brains work. People are just born that way, same way people are born gay or trans, smart or dumb, handsome or ugly. You can’t have an outbreak of ADHD or autism the same way you have an outbreak of the flu or covid.
People have been searching for environmental factors for autism, ADHD, depression, and all kinds of mental conditions for years. Other than crackpot anti-vaxxers and people like RFK Jr who try to throw life saving vaccines and common medications like Tylenol under the bus with literally no literature whatsoever to back it up, there has been no links discovered. Genetics and fetal gestation is weird and people just get born different sometimes. We as a society need to accept that and stop thinking these are diseases that need to be “fixed”.
I agree, the only way I meant to compare them is that we diagnose and treat both with medication.
I also agree 100 % with this, and it’s part of what I’m trying to get at with my “option a”. As of today, there are regions where over 20 % of the population are diagnosed with, and treated for, ADHD. At that point, I’m asking the question if we’re creating a problem by treating something that appears to be within the spectrum of how “normal people just are” as a problem that needs to be fixed. My point is exactly what you’re saying here: If a large fraction of the population has this “problem” that needs to be “fixed”, haven’t we just gotten to a point where we have a too narrow definition of what is “normal” and “healthy” human behaviour? Shouldn’t we in that case rather be looking at how we can structure our society in such a way that a larger span of the population is capable of functioning in it without medication, rather that trying to force everyone to conform to the same, ever narrowing, mould?
The minority will never be adequately provisioned for without access to intervention. In theory, that can instead be legal or political. Many schools or workplaces put in provisions for ADHD, mostly because of laws. Society does have a “problem” that needs to be “fixed”. The “mould” problem is a deliberate authoritarian tool, beyond the scope of this discussion.
But you need to understand that this is access to medication, nobody is forcing this down our throats. If people want it, it exists, and it helps reduce scary mental health (we’re talking suicide), ableist restriction of access to interventions is super dangerous.
I honestly have the impression that we agree on pretty much all points here but that we’re talking past each other. I agree to pretty much everything you’re saying, and I’m all for helping as many people as possible live as good lives as possible.
What I’m trying to say is basically that problematising the large volume of (and increase in) psychological diagnoses can be valid, and doesn’t have to be founded in trying to downplay those diagnoses. To take a very concrete example: Kids that are disposed to growing very short or tall can be offered growth (blocking) hormones, such that they grow to a “more normal” height. Today, very few kids are offered, or take, these hormones. Now, let’s say some area suddenly saw a rapid increase where 20 % of kids needed growth hormones to grow to “ordinary” height. I would say that we need to figure out what has happened: Is there something about the environment that has caused stunted growth to become ver common? Has the window for what is “normal” gotten narrower?
Of course, in this example, it’s very was to compare to historical records of human height. The same isn’t true for mental disorders. That doesn’t mean the same discussion isn’t worth having- at its core, this is a discussion about how we can make society as good as possible for as many as possible. That also involves discussing what should be treated as a disorder that disproportionately makes people’s life objectively worse, and what is within the “normal” range that we should rather build society around accepting.