I understand that hyperactivity and attention deficit does not take into account the experience of fear of losing friends. In fact, I agree with this post in an unexpected way: I think the DSM is a joke, especially when the DSM authors themselves say it should not be used for diagnoses and treatments. Especially when they say that the theoretical bases for the DSM, the neo-Krapelian model, has not found the evidence it needs to justify itself (i.e. reliable biomarkers in the brain).
But I think it’s fair to evaluate the post. The goal is to evaluate its accuracy, the truth behind it.
If we do it, my mind immediately goes to the literature on the effects of attention. Attention training has all sorts of benefits. You see it in mindfulness training. You see it in focusing-on-the-breath training. You see it even in focusing-on-your-feet training.
Attention is not trivial. It is quite literally your experience of your existence, of your life. It determines what you notice and what you don’t. It determines what you do and what you don’t.
Heck, even I have struggled with attention. I know what it is to lack it and to train it.
All of this makes me think that, yeah, maybe ADHD is not called “my-friends-might-hate-me-and-I’m-terrified-of-that disorder”, but the attention part is accurate. Attention matters profoundly.
More broadly, I think it’s easy to dismiss psychology. Yes, it is a fraught science. Yes, it carries the baggage of Freudian and psycho-analytic bullshit, as well as neo-Krapelian bullshit. However, not all psychology is unscientific. And not all psychology is inaccurate.
Even with these problems, psychology has noticed something. It has noticed that there’s a cluster of symptoms. And it turns out that there’s a defining feature of this cluster of symptoms: a lack of attention (and hyperactivity).
In calling this cluster of symptoms this way, psychology made a choice. It chose to emphasize the defining feature. It did not choose to describe its symptoms or its effects. And I don’t think that is a problem.
It’s similar to how cancer is not called “you-will-get-scared-shitless-and-lose-your-hair disease”.
I think the OP has a stick-it-to-the-man sentiment. And I agree that there’s plenty of space for that in psychology. But I really don’t see that in the naming of ADHD. I would much rather sticking it to Freudian bullshit and the bases of the DSM.
I don’t have time for a proper response (sorry!) but I quickly searched for sources. This is from the DSM-V work group, the people who built the DSM-V: (page 8 of the pdf here as well as page 18 of the pdf here).
And it turns out that there’s a defining feature of this cluster of symptoms: a lack of attention (and hyperactivity)
Except hyperactivity is not a defining feature of the cluster. This belief, in fact, has historically biased practitioners against correctly diagnosing women with ADHD because ADHD tends to present differently in women. And to call the relationship of a person with ADHD to their attention a “lack” is a massive oversimplification. Sometimes we have too much attention and hyperfocus on a single thing for what neurotypical people consider an unusual amount of time. That’s just as much a part of my ADHD as are the moments where I “lack” attention. The defining feature is a disorder in dopamine regulation.
It’s funny cos when I was young I recall it being called (at least sometimes) ADD. So the H has been added (or made mandatory in the name) at a time when we’re realising that hyperactivity is not a necessary symptom.
I understand that hyperactivity and attention deficit does not take into account the experience of fear of losing friends. In fact, I agree with this post in an unexpected way: I think the DSM is a joke, especially when the DSM authors themselves say it should not be used for diagnoses and treatments. Especially when they say that the theoretical bases for the DSM, the neo-Krapelian model, has not found the evidence it needs to justify itself (i.e. reliable biomarkers in the brain).
But I think it’s fair to evaluate the post. The goal is to evaluate its accuracy, the truth behind it.
If we do it, my mind immediately goes to the literature on the effects of attention. Attention training has all sorts of benefits. You see it in mindfulness training. You see it in focusing-on-the-breath training. You see it even in focusing-on-your-feet training.
Attention is not trivial. It is quite literally your experience of your existence, of your life. It determines what you notice and what you don’t. It determines what you do and what you don’t.
Heck, even I have struggled with attention. I know what it is to lack it and to train it.
All of this makes me think that, yeah, maybe ADHD is not called “my-friends-might-hate-me-and-I’m-terrified-of-that disorder”, but the attention part is accurate. Attention matters profoundly.
More broadly, I think it’s easy to dismiss psychology. Yes, it is a fraught science. Yes, it carries the baggage of Freudian and psycho-analytic bullshit, as well as neo-Krapelian bullshit. However, not all psychology is unscientific. And not all psychology is inaccurate.
Even with these problems, psychology has noticed something. It has noticed that there’s a cluster of symptoms. And it turns out that there’s a defining feature of this cluster of symptoms: a lack of attention (and hyperactivity).
In calling this cluster of symptoms this way, psychology made a choice. It chose to emphasize the defining feature. It did not choose to describe its symptoms or its effects. And I don’t think that is a problem.
It’s similar to how cancer is not called “you-will-get-scared-shitless-and-lose-your-hair disease”.
I think the OP has a stick-it-to-the-man sentiment. And I agree that there’s plenty of space for that in psychology. But I really don’t see that in the naming of ADHD. I would much rather sticking it to Freudian bullshit and the bases of the DSM.
I don’t have time for a proper response (sorry!) but I quickly searched for sources. This is from the DSM-V work group, the people who built the DSM-V: (page 8 of the pdf here as well as page 18 of the pdf here).
I’m not saying you’re wrong, I’m making fun of the situation the DSM V finds itself in
Except hyperactivity is not a defining feature of the cluster. This belief, in fact, has historically biased practitioners against correctly diagnosing women with ADHD because ADHD tends to present differently in women. And to call the relationship of a person with ADHD to their attention a “lack” is a massive oversimplification. Sometimes we have too much attention and hyperfocus on a single thing for what neurotypical people consider an unusual amount of time. That’s just as much a part of my ADHD as are the moments where I “lack” attention. The defining feature is a disorder in dopamine regulation.
It’s funny cos when I was young I recall it being called (at least sometimes) ADD. So the H has been added (or made mandatory in the name) at a time when we’re realising that hyperactivity is not a necessary symptom.