Psychiatrization Of Difference (ADHD)
In contrast many people dispute the medicalisation of ADHD, believing it offers a ‘quick fix’ to the issue regarding lack of expertise and knowledge to deal with the severity of challenging behaviours (Isaacs, 2006). Castel et al (1997) states that. ‘Psychiatrization of Difference’ is the way medicalisation legitamises deviancy as attributing unacceptable behaviour to medical terms normalises difference. Likewise Malacrida (2004:69) claims that teachers often feel frustrated about the lack of ‘social control’ which compels them into giving children with ADHD preferential treatment which is unwarranted; evidenced by low numbers of expulsions for those with ADHD. With this in mind, it is possible to suggest that educators are disempowered
…show more content…
Yet, parents may actually contribute to the difficulties which children have. Assuming they know the best course of action, parents may take control and make decisions on the child’s behalf without consulting with them beforehand; denying the child the right of choice (Davis, 2006). Children may also be confined indoors due to parents fearing that the locality is unsafe. Not only does this mean children are unable to relinquish excess energy, but it is likely that children have been overstimulated with a combination of excessive amounts of television and consumption of vast quantities of additives (Armstrong, 2006). In retrospect, therapy highly recommends outdoor play as integration with peers minimises negative behaviours and promotes development of all children experiencing ADHD (Taylor and Kuo, 2011). These events tally with the opposing theory which claims that ADHD is socially constructed. Under this concept, the ‘childhood disorder’ label is contested as the ‘indicators’ of ADHD reflect the abundance of energy all children typically possess (Stead, 2006). Likewise, there is no evidence to confirm the credibility of ADHD medication as the drugs have the same calming effect on all children (Isaacs, 2006). The main focus in this contrasting view sees ADHD as a maladaptive response to environmental factors and events within the cultural context, including exposure to hostility and inconsistent parenting (Ladnierand and Massanari, 2000). The understanding behind Attachment Theory helps explain some behaviours which present with ADHD as according to Crittenden (2007) ADHD often co-exists with insecure attachment
Yet, parents may actually contribute to the difficulties which children have. Assuming they know the best course of action, parents may take control and make decisions on the child’s behalf without consulting with them beforehand; denying the child the right of choice (Davis, 2006). Children may also be confined indoors due to parents fearing that the locality is unsafe. Not only does this mean children are unable to relinquish excess energy, but it is likely that children have been overstimulated with a combination of excessive amounts of television and consumption of vast quantities of additives (Armstrong, 2006). In retrospect, therapy highly recommends outdoor play as integration with peers minimises negative behaviours and promotes development of all children experiencing ADHD (Taylor and Kuo, 2011). These events tally with the opposing theory which claims that ADHD is socially constructed. Under this concept, the ‘childhood disorder’ label is contested as the ‘indicators’ of ADHD reflect the abundance of energy all children typically possess (Stead, 2006). Likewise, there is no evidence to confirm the credibility of ADHD medication as the drugs have the same calming effect on all children (Isaacs, 2006). The main focus in this contrasting view sees ADHD as a maladaptive response to environmental factors and events within the cultural context, including exposure to hostility and inconsistent parenting (Ladnierand and Massanari, 2000). The understanding behind Attachment Theory helps explain some behaviours which present with ADHD as according to Crittenden (2007) ADHD often co-exists with insecure attachment