[ufo2012]

(Original post by Hanshen)
The special school debate is a lot more complex than I think you guys/girls are giving it credit for. One may question the extent to which it is creating a disabling environment in the first place, and creating a wider discourse in which the able-bodied are privileged as the 'norm'. There is really no definite answer either way, however, I just wanted to highlight that segregatory education practices have been questioned as potentially problematic within social science/post modern/post structural literature.

Of course it is a massive issue. But these are just our opinions. Maybe it is not necessary for such kids (ADHD) to be in a "special" school per se, but at least to have their own separate class within a normal school would be beneficial. They most certainly CANNOT operate within the standard classroom and if they are asked to do so, neither can the "normal" kids alongside the problem kids - so effectively no-one wins in such an arrangement.

(Original post by Hanshen)
I am dyslexic and I can assure you it is quite real. It also has absolutely no bearing on intellect. People seem to have this delusional notion that dyslexia is synonymous with stupidity or laziness, however this simply isn't the case. I find I require a pale green colour filter to read proficiently, and I struggle with working memory issues that make even the smallest distractions into an absolute nightmare. Nevertheless, dyslexia certainly hasn't impacted upon my academic performance in the slightest, and I am by no means stupid.

It is a shame that dyslexia got dragged into this, as it is estimated there are quite a proportion of people who are dyslexic, but may not even know it.

As Hanshen mentioned, it is quite real, I also know people with it - but it is a shame that the ADHD brigade seem to have claimed it as something else to put into their pipe and smoke as if they are both equally on par - they are not. I think though this is because one parent sees another child with a mental issue getting benefits, so they want it for their kid also, even for something like dyslexia.

People with dyslexia can be quite normal people and so dyslexia does not fall under the definition of "Mental Retardation" (a term we don't use much any more because of the cliché "retard"), but on the other hand ADHD easily could and is Mental Retardation.

[Killuminati1989]

(Original post by scottkincaid)
Good answer my friend.

The drugs you get for 'ADHD' is more of a relaxant, so it 'mongs you out'... Which in conclusion: If you have 'ADHD' and you take your pills/medication then you aren't going to be in a state of mind fit for learning because you will be chilled out.

However, I know of people that don't take their medication on purpose to be little shi*s basically. So you can't win.

u obviously know didly squat about the medications for ADHD... research them and u will find they are actually stimulants: methylphenidate and dexamphetamine
the only non stimulant is atomoxitine

http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/Attenti...Treatment.aspx

[Hanshen]

(Original post by ufo2012)
It is a shame that dyslexia got dragged into this, as it is estimated there are quite a proportion of people who are dyslexic, but may not even know it.

As Hanshen mentioned, it is quite real, I also know people with it - but it is a shame that the ADHD brigade seem to have claimed it as something else to put into their pipe and smoke as if they are both equally on par - they are not. I think though this is because one parent sees another child with a mental issue getting benefits, so they want it for their kid also, even for something like dyslexia.

People with dyslexia can be quite normal people and so dyslexia does not fall under the definition of "Mental Retardation" (a term we don't use much any more because of the cliché "retard"), but on the other hand ADHD easily could and is Mental Retardation.

My father is dyslexic also, he was diagnosed in the last 10 years. He is also a Professor of Oral Implantology. It really is nothing to do with intelligence. It does annoy me when people assume I am an idiot because of my dyslexia. As I say, it has never had an impact on my academic performance, so I'm clearly not a fool (assuming that university examination procedure is an accurate reflection of ability, which I would perhaps contest).

[ufo2012]

(Original post by scottkincaid)
The drugs you get for 'ADHD' is more of a relaxant, so it 'mongs you out'... Which in conclusion: If you have 'ADHD' and you take your pills/medication then you aren't going to be in a state of mind fit for learning because you will be chilled out.

However, I know of people that don't take their medication on purpose to be little shi*s basically. So you can't win.

(Original post by Killuminati1989)
u obviously know didly squat about the medications for ADHD... research them and u will find they are actually stimulants: methylphenidate and dexamphetamine
the only non stimulant is atomoxitine

http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/Attenti...Treatment.aspx

Lol absolutely hilarious.

I think I preferred scottkincaid's answer though - it definitely "mongs" them out more

[ufo2012]

(Original post by chrissmithstoke)
People who say ADHD doesn't exist in my mind are ill informed or ignorant. While I think there may be a tendency to over-diagnose it or diagnose it to excuse bad behaviour I think it irrevocably exists and to suggest those diagnosed with it are just stupid is false. I would not consider myself stupid but was diagnosed with adult ADD just last week by an educational psychologist. ADD/ADHD is a condition whereby some benificial characteristics are exacerbated (abstract thinking/creativity, energetic) but also makes you inattentive, unpunctual and appear feckless and lazy. Analysis of statistical incidence of the condition lead many to believe it is genetic and there are theories to suggest (hunter/farmer theory) the reasons for the evolution of the ADD/ADHD trait. I have always done very poorly in lessons due to an inability to keep track of a one way conversation without day dreaming and as such got poor homework scores and U's/E's in examination mocks. However after poor mock results I would go through the textbook conversationally with my father and dramatically improve my score. This to me atleast is reasonable proof there is no correlation between intelligence and true diagnosis of ADD. As such I never attempted to get a ADD/ADHD diagnosis from the NHS as I ended up doing well in exams, my mum has thought I had the condition for about 5 years now, I was doubtful until recently. However now at university I have struggled with the lecture based course (I do a science degree and as such are expected to attend 10+ lectures a week). As such I have only recently attempted to get help, I think it is very easy for people to dismiss medically recognised conditions of which they do not suffer.

Hunter/Farmer theories? Typical psycho-babble from those trying to justify their reasoning for why now.

How can it have 'evolved'? It either existed or it did not. It is not something a person can "catch" like a disease, it is not bacterial. Nor does it mutate.

One thing is for sure though, it is definitely over-diagnosed and as mentioned in some cases diagnosed to excuse bad behaviour and this is where the problem arises because to some people then everyone and everything then comes under the same umbrella.

As with anything though there are levels of severity and again this is where part of the problem lies - because of over-diagnosis it irritates people and then it becomes an all-or-nothing attitude (it either exists or it doesn't) - but because of this over-diagnosis it also irritates many people with a similar thought pattern as the OP (including myself) so that anytime I hear someone mention the letters ADHD or ADD I almost just sigh and want to walk away. Again though, that is the fault of the over zealous over diagnosers who are ruining it for the honest people who need the help.

My main gripe from this thread has been as the OP suggested initially, parents running for a diagnosis so they can get extra benefits for their child - in some cases it is actually the parent who is stigmatizing the child by doing this. But of course parents know best for their children, don't they?

[Hanshen]

(Original post by I Gurn Hard)


EDIT: In response to a reply from a dyslexic person i'd like to add another point. I feel that those who suffer physical disability which prevents the brain from transferring information to the exam paper through the hand are worthy of an advantage over other, non-disabled students. However, a 'condition' which prevents the interpretation of data, I believe, does not warrant an advantage over others, simply because it is one step away from giving the less intelligent a helping hand. Imagine an exam hall full of people, and each row is assigned a different IQ boundary, 80-90, 90-100 etc. We are hovering close to this anyway, with teachers being encouraged to leave the intelligent children to their own devices to dedicate unrealistic amounts of resources to the ones who cannot, or will not learn (not unfounded, have two teachers in the family).

Obviously, when you are the one that is benefiting from the "aid", it's excellent - my problem for example is substance abuse, and if I could be given extra time in exams, or a laptop to aid study I would be justifying it every which way. But, from the viewpoint of someone who isn't receiving aid due to a non-physical disability (such as paralysis, MS etc) I believe that saying "oh, this person is really intelligent but is unable to read except through a green tinted filter and gets distracted every two seconds, so let's give him a laptop to aid study and extra time in the exams" is unnecessary and actually quite irritating for those who also have potentially serious problems that simply aren't recognised by the system.

I actually didn't accept a laptop because I already owned one, nor a printer, nor any of the other 'benefits'; with the exception of a green colour filter. To be honest, I don't think you understand exactly what dyslexia 'is'. Utilising a green filter aids me to be able to read. It is a simple, low cost solution, to a corporeal problem. You seem to be of the opinion that I am in someway of lower intelligence, however, seeing as I graduated top of my class from one of the country's top universities, have already had 2 papers published during my undergraduate career, myriad academic awards, and obtained perfect GCSE and A-Levels, all without any 'aid' or acknowledgement of my dyslexia I would certainly not class myself as stupid, nor in receipt of any unfair advantage. Having a green colour filter has made a problem, which you doubt the very existence of, manageable with only a negligible cost to 'the system'.

You also seem to be implying that ALL mental illness is in some way fraudulent, if you intend to pose such an argument at least refer to some anti psychiatry literature (or something of that ilk) to support your thesis, rather than deal entirely in inflammatory conjecture. You acknowledge that a PHYSICAL disability that impairs mental performance should receive benefit, what exactly to you mean by this? Do you discount all mental illness and learning disabilities?

Finally, why should those with dyslexia receiving assistance prevent the detection of other 'potentially serious problems' not 'recognised' currently by 'the system'? As far as I was aware the two are not mutually exclusive.

I do understand what you are eluding to. My argument however, is that your issue appears to be with fraudulent claims for DSA funding and extra academic assistance. No-one agrees with fraud, and I'm sure that dyslexia is used as an excuse for poor performance, but that should not preclude the fact that there are some people who genuinely suffer from dyslexia and do not fit into the social constructed 'norm'. After-all, there is an argument that all disability (yes even 'physical') is merely a social construct (contrary to the medical model of disability). Although, there are various critiques of such a position.

[ufo2012]

(Original post by Hanshen)
to I Gurn Hard:

You also seem to be implying that ALL mental illness is in some way fraudulent, if you intend to pose such an argument at least refer to some anti psychiatry literature (or something of that ilk) to support your thesis, rather than deal entirely in inflammatory conjecture. You acknowledge that a PHYSICAL disability that impairs mental performance should receive benefit, what exactly to you mean by this? Do you discount all mental illness and learning disabilities?

While I can't speak for I Gurn Hard, I think he/she may be suffering from the same "anti-mental illness" sentiments as I mentioned in my previous post - probably due to the over-diagnosis and haste to shove such people onto government-assisted benefits of some kind.

It seems if a person should speak out at all against such things though it is just not acceptable in society, as it is so difficult to determine who is truly in need of support and who is faking or straining their symptoms, even though it seems to be acceptable for the fraudulent over-diagnosis to continue draining the system.

Going right back to the OP's post though - if a kid spits in a teachers face, whether they have ADHD or not, that is just not acceptable and should be punished. Even a kid with ADHD knows the difference between right and wrong, this is not some disease that causes them to function like an animal with no brain or thought for the consequences of their actions - and as such they should be punished accordingly as a normal child would be for what they did in this instance.

[ufo2012]

(Original post by chrissmithstoke)
Do you not think it is quite ignorant of you to form a strong opinion on a recognised medical condition you evidentially have little understanding of. You comments on the hunter/farmer hypothesis and evolution indicate you do not understand the concept. You state 'how does it evolve'. Much like any trait ADHD-esque symptoms are likely dictated by a specific gene or gene series in this case related to the pre-frontal cortex of the brain. Short of been pseudo-science or psycho-babble this is a recognised quantifiable symptom of ADHD/ADD. In brain scans of diagnosed ADDers [sic] the pre-frontal cortex (related to social interactions and concentration) shows low activity whereas other regions (more archaic regions) show increased activity. The hypothesis is that before humans became agricultural (10,000 years ago) those with a genetic disposition to exhibit ADD/ADHD symptoms had a selective advantage in hunting circumstances whereas as we shifted towards cultivation greater utility of the pre-frontal cortex was selected for. Yes this is only a theory but to suggest such a condition could not be genetic is itself a pseudo-scientific claim and the aforementioned hypothesis is supported by research http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17467976. I am far more inclined to believe the work of qualified evolutionary biologists and neuroscientists than the unfounded musings of internet forum poster. ADHD exists irrespective of whether or not it is over-diagnosed and it is naive and irresponsible in my mind to suggest otherwise, especially from what appears to be an uniformed and speculative perspective.

I am not sure but I believe we may be talking about two entirely different things. I did not ask 'how does it evolve', I said "How can it have 'evolved'? It either existed or it did not."

I gave the example that while a bacteria may mutate into something else and form an entirely different disease, this is not the case here.

If you are actually debating what I am actually talking about, are you meaning to tell me that because of what these "qualified evolutionary biologists and neuroscientists" tell you, that you think ADHD has "evolved" from something else and didn't already exist all along?

[ufo2012]

(Original post by chrissmithstoke)
I mean unless the primitive cells in which we evolved from circa 3.8 billion years ago had ADHD I suggest we (humans) did evolve these neuro-traits at some point as opposed to the alternative you propose of having them all along. I would suggest that the more archaic brain chemistry make-up is the ADHD form and the non-ADHD genetic traits to be more derived as outlined in the above scientific paper, and hence the ADHD traits evolved before the non-ADHD traits which due to it's better suiting to a cultivating society and now even more so in modern society that it has become the more pronounced phenotypic trait. Regardless it is reasonably well accepted now in behavioural neuroscience that ADHD is a recognised condition which is likely predominantly genetic but potentially also influenced or exacerbated by environmental conditions.

You are getting into an entirely different issue, that of existence, creation and all that goes with it and I am not going to take it down this line as it is completely off-topic here and we obviously would not agree on that either. Regardless of whether these people are "qualified evolutionary biologists and neuroscientists" or not, it does not mean their "opinion" is any more correct than the next person. Numerous people with a range of qualifications can pose theories, it doesn't make any of them necessarily correct.


Getting back to the OP though:

"I honestly think that it is a lot of nonsense. It just doesn't make sense to me.

I just think that it's an awful reason for parents to justify why their child/children are misbehaving.

I would say that it's a little bit too far to call it a disability."

(Original post by chrissmithstoke)
I think there is a worrying trend in modern society to be dismissive towards mental conditions in comparison to physical afflictions as they are not as visible. What is the difference between a gene affecting someone's physical capabilities than there mental capabilities. This especially as there is no correlation between intelligence and whether or not they have dyslexia or ADHD (it is widely thought Steve Jobs for instance had the condition). Therefore if we can recognise and diagnose conditions and put in to practice techniques to help those afflicted reach there potential it would be wrong to ignore this.

The difference is 'physically' obvious, that's where the difference is.

As mentioned a few times, the problem is probably down to over-diagnosis, although if you go back to the OP has an interesting point: "it is a lot of nonsense", and maybe it is just "a little bit too far to call it a disability".

I can almost understand how and why he could think that, read the DSM about ADHD - you could nearly diagnose half the population or more with it. I don't even know if THEY know what the real estimate is, but I don't think it's as high as 1 in 2.

[mimile]

I think theres also another way to think of thongs like dyslexia or ADHD. It may bd not an illness in sole way. People who have it are different for sure. But i think its only a disability because they are disadvantaged in our education system. So theyre not ill but different. And maybee instead of trying to change people we should change the system.

This was posted from The Student Room's Android App on my HTC Sensation XE with Beats Audio

[williewalliewoolie]

(Original post by scottkincaid)
I don't mean to offend anybody with ADHD or anybody that knows somebody with ADHD. I have a friend that has it too.

I honestly think that it is a lot of nonsense. It just doesn't make sense to me.

Somebody with ADHD can spit in a teachers face and get away with it and called 'brave' and receive a new gaming console or something. If somebody like you or me did it we'd probably be kicked out of education personally.

I just think that it's an awful reason for parents to justify why their child/children are misbehaving.

I would say that it's a little bit too far to call it a disability.

What are your thoughts on this?

I do understand you in some way, however I think your generalisation is wrong. There are many different traits of ADHD, some mild and some harsh cases.

I admit that I have ADD, even though I don't have the hyperactivity trait I find it so very difficult to concentrate on one thing at once!

I'm sure that you know, 'taking medicine' is never good for you. Our medicine changes our brain substances which doesn't sound too appealing does it?

I think you have to suffer what ADHD, ADD people go through in order to really understand how it is.

Ps. I don't get extra time, but I need it. Instead I get to 'chill outside' in the exam for a few minutes which I never use.


This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App

[mimile]

Why do they let you "chill outside"?

This was posted from The Student Room's Android App on my HTC Sensation XE with Beats Audio

[CJ99]

There are clearly unintelligent people that get diagnosed with dyslexia and unfocused (ie normal) kids who get diagnosed with ADHD that have no such thing. I'm more inclined to think ADHD by and large doesn't exist. However as someone who has been diagnosed with dyslexia it certainly does exist in some form whether as an actual illness or as a range of related learning difficulties, though I'd agree that far more research needs to be done into it as it's currently quite vague.

There is a difference between the ability of someone to analyse and to perceive and I certainly find the former very easy and the latter quite difficult at times. Should the fact that I take longer to read and input information have a baring on my grades if my ability to analyse that is of an extremely high level? Good question though I'm inclined to say no.

Back to ADHD, I personally think society needs to accept that human children aren't designed to sit still in school all day and perform cognitive tasks so a child's inability to do so isn't a disability but a societal intolerance. However there are some cases where children with ADHD among other things clearly have a problem and need help. I think a ADHD diagnosis in these situations is simply the easiest/best way to get help atm.

[williewalliewoolie]

(Original post by mimile)
Why do they let you "chill outside"?

This was posted from The Student Room's Android App on my HTC Sensation XE with Beats Audio

Who knows... I've never taken the 'advantage' before. Tbh, I personally think its not really worth it.


This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App

[I Gurn Hard]

(Original post by Hanshen)
I actually didn't accept a laptop because I already owned one, nor a printer, nor any of the other 'benefits'; with the exception of a green colour filter. To be honest, I don't think you understand exactly what dyslexia 'is'. Utilising a green filter aids me to be able to read. It is a simple, low cost solution, to a corporeal problem. You seem to be of the opinion that I am in someway of lower intelligence, however, seeing as I graduated top of my class from one of the country's top universities, have already had 2 papers published during my undergraduate career, myriad academic awards, and obtained perfect GCSE and A-Levels, all without any 'aid' or acknowledgement of my dyslexia I would certainly not class myself as stupid, nor in receipt of any unfair advantage. Having a green colour filter has made a problem, which you doubt the very existence of, manageable with only a negligible cost to 'the system'.

You also seem to be implying that ALL mental illness is in some way fraudulent, if you intend to pose such an argument at least refer to some anti psychiatry literature (or something of that ilk) to support your thesis, rather than deal entirely in inflammatory conjecture. You acknowledge that a PHYSICAL disability that impairs mental performance should receive benefit, what exactly to you mean by this? Do you discount all mental illness and learning disabilities?

Finally, why should those with dyslexia receiving assistance prevent the detection of other 'potentially serious problems' not 'recognised' currently by 'the system'? As far as I was aware the two are not mutually exclusive.

I do understand what you are eluding to. My argument however, is that your issue appears to be with fraudulent claims for DSA funding and extra academic assistance. No-one agrees with fraud, and I'm sure that dyslexia is used as an excuse for poor performance, but that should not preclude the fact that there are some people who genuinely suffer from dyslexia and do not fit into the social constructed 'norm'. After-all, there is an argument that all disability (yes even 'physical') is merely a social construct (contrary to the medical model of disability). Although, there are various critiques of such a position.

I am not concerned with fraudulent claims as such - more with the fact that almost 25% of the total students in my school were awarded extra time for, seemingly, no reason.

Sure, maybe I don't understand dyslexia as much as someone who suffers from it, and I do sympathise. I certainly am not implying that you are stupid, nor belittling your obvious achievement. It's just that for me, dyslexia is an (albeit frustrating and possibly debilitating) differentiation between humans, not a disability. I therefore thinking that the sheer amount of resources that are poured into helping the dyslexic children (in my school at least) is excessive.

And i'm certainly not implying that mental illness is fraudulent. I do however know of people who played the system to qualify for aid, whether through exaggeration or blatant lying. These people (some of them are my friends) never wanted to bother doing any work and so just rolled with it when some overly concerned professional referred them for "assessment". Maybe it's just my school but a lot of them would smirk at the people in the normal rows during exams, in a sort of cheeky way, and brag about the extra time afterwards, often saying "I didn't write more than a page anyway" or equivalent.

I just feel that dyslexia is less of a problem than say depression, substance abuse disorders, and perhaps even eating disorders. I do not think anyone deserves extra help in the exams - if you can't cope, you can't cope in a high pressure job either (this view is despite me being given the chance to take my A levels in hospital - if i'd have had a say I would've turned them down and resat the year). It's nothing against people who suffer from a debilitating condition, but I feel that there are many worse conditions which aren't diagnoses anywhere near as often, and too much fuss is made over the children who have a frustrating (for them) differentiation or who played the system for their own benefit (maybe 33% of the those awarded extra time at my school were confirmed cheats - but that isn't the basis of my argument).

Anyway, congrats on your achievements, hope it didn't sound like I was getting at you. I'm just of the school of thought that exams should consist of one standard for everyone, and if you don't pass this standard, then you shouldn't whine about it. It's pot luck in many ways - not everyone can succeed in exams, and we shouldn't be trying to force everyone to meet the gradually declining acceptable standard when some people simply are unwilling or unable to meet it.

[Billton]

Hmm, my younger sister has ADHD. It's really sad to see her getting so frustrated with normal things. It's a lot more than just bad behavior and being a little hyper. Most teenagers are like that (well, they were at my school!)
I also have a little cousin who is severly autistic. One of my friends at Uni has autism and I didn't realise until about 18 months later. I never picked up on it because I'm so used to being around it.
I think there's a lot of factors and levels of ADHD, and although some children are possibly wrongfully diagnosed, I don't think it means that is doesn't exist.

PS, someone posted something about the majority of ADHD kids coming from families on benefits. That made me giggle quite a bit

[Hanshen]

(Original post by I Gurn Hard)
Sure, maybe I don't understand dyslexia as much as someone who suffers from it, and I do sympathise. I certainly am not implying that you are stupid, nor belittling your obvious achievement. It's just that for me, dyslexia is an (albeit frustrating and possibly debilitating) differentiation between humans, not a disability. I therefore thinking that the sheer amount of resources that are poured into helping the dyslexic children (in my school at least) is excessive.

What exactly is a disability? You may well enjoy some of the disability literature. A disability only becomes a disability in relation to a broader societal discourse of normality. Have a look at Foucault's history of madness (a will to knowledge) or some of the college of france lectures, you would probably find it really interesting. If your argument is that dyslexia is a categorisation of 'natural' differentiation, then what is any disability if not a variation from a perceived norm? For instance, if you cannot walk, should you receive a wheelchair? Afterall not everyone can excel at walking, if we were to rate that ability through a standardised method of assessment (such as is the case with examinations), eg. a 100m sprint, I would say that their ability may be impaired. If as, by your own admission, the human condition is fundamentally heterogenous then how can a ubiquitous method of evaluation ever be a valid system of assessing educational attainment?


A disability is a biological differentiation that is made into a problem through a disabling environment. All extra time and the various other 'benefits' given to dyslexics really does is try to find a relatively simple way of shoehorning people into an homogenous system.

Anyway, I agree, there are people who fraudulently claim to be dyslexic, and it belittles those who legitimately suffer with it.

[OU Student]

(Original post by Billton)
One of my friends at Uni has autism and I didn't realise until about 18 months later. I never picked up on it because I'm so used to being around it.

Some of us do try to hide it. Despite that, it was the first question someone asked me last year. I don't even know her. According to a friend of mine, it's not that much of a surprise (he has it too) that I've been diagnosed with it. With him, it's really obvious.

A cousin of mine supposedly has ADHD - he can sit and watch a film.

Regarding ADD - is calling it ADHD-PI (can't remember what PI stands for - intermittent or something) an American thing?

[Blackburn_Allen]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=zDZFcDGpL4U
Wait until 3:40.

[ufo2012]

(Original post by chrissmithstoke)
Having learned you are a creationist or don't believe in evolution I feel this is almost a pointless argument. If you ignore the cold hard evidence of evolution you can hardly be expected to accept the less strenuous evidence for ADHD. It is increasingly apparent you have no real reason to disbelieve the existence of ADHD. I pose to you to list me the reasons you believe it to be a fictitious condition. What scientific research have you personally seen to persuade you to this view point? Personal experience of individual(s) you belief to have been incorrectly diagnosed is hardly fair basis to disregard an entire medically recognised condition.

You are completely correct, this is a pointless argument especially since I don't think you have read my posts correctly at all.

You have jumped to conclusions at some point or become defensive because you must believe I am attacking you or the condition of ADHD. At no point have said that I disbelieved the existence of the condition.

Re-read my posts less aggressively and you will see this for yourself.