A just published study by a of researchers (which I am part of) has shown that it is the youngest children in the classroom who are most likely to be diagnosed with . The systematic review was published in the Journal of Child Psychology and . Seventeen studies covering more than 14 million children from various countries were examined. Lead author Martin Whitley commented in the Daily Mail that "It appears that across the globe some teachers are mistaking the immaturity of the youngest children in their class for ADHD." The study contributes to the central debate about ADHD and the question of medicalization: Do children diagnosed with ADHD have a disease?
Medicating the younger children in the classroom suggests that the medical community has mislabeled normal brain development as a pathology. If the ADHD children are simply the youngest children in the classroom, this would explain why researchers have not been able to develop an object test such as a brain scan, blood test, or genetic test to diagnose ADHD.
In spite of the fact that there are no biological markers that can be used to diagnose ADHD, official outlets can give the impression that this is the case. A recent brochure on ADHD from The National Institutes of Mental (NIHM) states that: “Brain-imaging studies have revealed that in youth with ADHD, the brain matures in a normal pattern but is delayed by about three years.” It continues, “More recent studies have found that the outermost layer of the brain, the cortex, shows delayed maturation overall.” It would be hard to fault the general public for concluding that brain scans can be used to identify ADHD. Not mentioned by NIMH is that the studies they refer to detected miniscule differences in a small group of children, and that the scans cannot be used in a doctor's office to determine if a child should be diagnosed with ADHD.
Birthdate is not the only source of variation when it comes to the diagnosis. The diagnosis also varies from one country to another: The CDC recently reported that one in every 10 children in the United States over the age of three has been diagnosed with ADHD, while in France, for instance, it is extremely rare. In the late 1990's, Gretchen Lefever reported that 20 percent of schoolboys in southeastern Virginia had been diagnosed and treated for ADHD. And children in Appalachia are more likely than children in California to be diagnosed—23 percent of school-aged boys in the South have received a diagnosis.
, citizenship, state of residence, and now birthdate have all been shown to play a role in who receives a diagnosis. These findings suggest that more than biology is involved.
This research was co-authored by researchers from the John Curtin Institute of Public Policy at Curtin University, University of Adelaide, including international researchers Sami Timimi from Lincolnshire Partnership NHS Foundation Trust, Jonathan Leo from Lincoln Memorial University in the U.S., Joanna Moncrieff from University College London, and Patrick Landman, a psychiatrist from France.
Schmohnathan on October 18th, 2018 at 15:32 UTC »
My sister is in graduate studies and recently wrote an essay on the topic of twice exceptional students. Students are generally exceptional if they are either in special education (whether that be on the high end or the low end) or if they have a disorder/disability that affects their education. Twice exceptional students are both in special education and have one or more disorders/disabilities that affect their education.
The findings of the papers that my sister referenced suggested that teachers, being untrained in psychology/psychiatry/medicine, have difficulty identifying twice exceptional students. They are often mischaracterized (e.g. a student with above average intelligence and ADHD may outwardly appear to be unmotivated or aloof in a regular class, so the teacher may make suggestions to help motivate the student rather than put the student in a more advanced class with a plan to get the student guidance about their ADHD) by the teachers and their academics suffer.
This study seems similar in that teachers make recommendations without training in the area that they are making recommendations, leading to issues. It is an unfortunate byproduct of the system currently in place and I'm not sure a good solution exists.
giro_di_dante on October 18th, 2018 at 14:37 UTC »
Malcolm Gladwell touches on this subject in his book Outliers. Not that younger kids are diagnosed with ADHD, but that older students are deemed "smarter" and receive preferential treatment, thus gaining a valuable advantage.
Same goes for athletes. The physical difference between an 9 year old and a 10 year old on the same team could be significant, resulting in preferential attention for the older player by the coach. Again, giving the older player further advantages. You could see the impact of the preferential treatment by looking at the birth dates of professional athletes, most of whom are born in a specific grouping of months in the year depending on the age cut-off markers for little league sports. Between the 10 year old and 9 year old on any team, the 10 year old has a significant leg up in terms of future success.
MmEeTtAa on October 18th, 2018 at 11:40 UTC »
I don't understand. Teachers cannot diagnose students. They could report to parents the behavior of children, but the burden is on the doctors who would be diagnosing them.