Sunday, February 6, 2011

Medicine and ADHD




I have been having a friendly debate with Lisa Nielsen over at the Innovative Educator blog recently about the use of medicine in children in ADHD. To paraphrase Nielsen's position the best way I can: pharmaceutical companies and doctors sponsored by big pharma are promoting the use of drugging children with ADHD, and profiting off of it. It is not that ADHD isn't a real disorder, but Nielsen believes that the real problem besides the influence of big pharma are that schools are too boring to keep the interest of students who have ADHD. So, rather than change the way lessons are taught, schools encourage parents to go to doctors, who will then put them on medication. Although I don't recall her saying anything like "medicine should NEVER be used on children with ADHD", that is what she seems to imply from everything I read from her on this subject. If I am incorrect in stating her position, I am sure Lisa Nielsen will correct me, as she should.

This debate of ours first started when I shared a story on a Ken Livingston video about changing the paradigm of education in America. I originally saw the video on Ms. Nielsen's website.   I said that while I agreed with Livingston's general arguments, I disagreed with the proposition that giving ADHD medication to children was one of society's more serious problems (I probably should have worded that with a little more detail and clarification). We debated this subject on Twitter, which inspired her to respond with a post dedicated to this subject. She has recently discussed this subject again on her blog here. Nielsen readily admits she is not a medical expert, but she does cite several medical experts who do say ADHD medication prescription to children is a serious problem. Nielsen herself says she either has ADHD, or likely has it, and has personal experience to draw upon.

I will admit I do not have the list of resources and articles that she does. I am sure if I took enough time to do the research, I could find lots support for the position that ADHD medication is a safe and effective option for treatment of ADHD in youth. All I am going to do is draw upon my own personal experience as someone who as ADHD practically his whole life.

I do not remember what age I was diagnosed with ADHD, nor do I remember when I started taking medication. The likely cause of my ADHD came from a series of seizures I had as a baby which were the result of negative reactions my body had from a particular childhood vaccination. I get the irony that I used one type of medication to help treat a medical condition that I received from another type of medication, but I digress. It wasn't just "boring schools" that my ADHD negatively effected, though it most certainly had an negative effect there.

My parents were often afraid to take me out in public because I might run around, decide to fiddle around or break expensive items in stores, or get lost. While listening to directions from adults can be difficult for any group of children, it was especially difficult for me. I am not referring to directions at school, but at fun, social events where instructions are often quite clear for most children. Instructions were often given in short, simple steps in subjects that were interesting to the children there (including myself), and often involved using one's hands or engaging in physical activity (day camps, scouting activities, athletics, etc).  Even then, my ADHD got in the way, and I would end up being confused with what I was supposed to do.  I would look quite foolish to my peers, and a great feeling ashamed happened because of this.

ADHD also effected my social upbringing. I was a very socially awkward child and had trouble making friends as a kids. There could be a number of other explanations for this, and I won't delve into most of those here (I don't want to use this blog as a personal therapy session more than I already am). But one reason for my social awkwardness was certainly my ADHD.  My impulsivity would cause me to instantly blurt things out whenever they came to my head.  What I said would often come out at inappropriate times, and the content of what I said could range from completely off-topic, to incredibly embarrassing statements and revelations.

As I said above, I don't remember when I took medication, but I know it was at a very young age (I am guessing around 6 years old or so).  I realize that all kids have a low attention span at that age, but mine was unusually poor for my age.  So much so, that it cause all of the problems I described in the preceding paragraphs.  And I know that growing up, medication did not stop all of my problems with ADHD.  It was not panacea for treating my ADHD.  I did received plenty of help and support from my parents, my special education teachers, and the few friends I had who were willing to look past my socially awkward behavior.  As I got into my teenage years, my parents and I wondered if it weren't perhaps time to go off of the medication.  We consulted with a physician, and I tried life without it.  I gave myself enough time to see if it could work, and it was a mess without the medication.  I soon went back on medication, and my problems immediately subsided

At this point in my life, I have full confidence that ADHD medication has been a positive factor in treating my ADHD, and I am better off because of it.  As I just metioned, it was not a panacea, and I also benefited greatly from lots of help and support from others.  However, I believe that my ADHD was so severe in my childhood that I would have been lost.  Not only would I have done more poorly in schools, but I believe my social skills, and capacity to do everyday life skills would have greatly suffered without the aid of medication.  I would rather not think about how my life could have turned out.

Now that I have gotten my story out the way, let me clarify some positions that I have on this subject.  Let me be clear: not every child that ADHD should be treated with medication.  Indeed, oftentimes, there aren't differences (in either behavior or academics) between ADHD children who take medicine and those who don't.  In fact, there are even times that children who take medication cannot handle the side effects of said medicine, and are better off without it.

I also worry greatly about the over-diagnosis of ADHD by physicians and psychologists, and the influence that pharmaceutical companies have had in promoting these drugs.  There is no doubt that for all of the good these companies can do with their medicine, they also benefit from profiteering and corruption.  This has lead to a major increase in the pushing of pill prescriptions that are either unnecessary, dangerous, or both. 

Finally, American schools are boring, and do not suit well for students with low-attention spans.  In fact, they don't even suit that well for students who don't fit into the traditional setting and methods of public schooling (pencil/paper/lecture/book/etc).  I am guilty of sometimes teaching in such a manner in my classroom, and I wish that we had more of a teaching culture that would look beyond such traditional methods.  It not as if we don't have good places to start.

When it comes to treating ADHD, I just don't believe that medication should be off the table.  It all comes down to having options.  The use of medication should be made by parents and their children if they are old enough to make reasonable decisions (with the advice and input of doctors).  I have benefited from the use of childhood medication as a treatment, and I know others who have as well.

1 comment:

Lisa Nielsen said...

Mr. Glassner,

Thank you for sharing this. It brings a few things that piss me off about the whole ADHD thing to mind. One, is the simplicity of the one-size-fits all-ness of the term. When someone has seizures that have impacted brain development, stroke, or other such injuries, I don't just lump that with ADHD. Many doctors, parents, educators, even you and other readers of my blog have been led to label these all as the same thing.

Next, my concern with you and others whom I’ve discussed this issue is that you only look at two choices for the child. A) Traditional school with meds and B) traditional school without meds as if those were the only options out there. I’ve shared in my discussions with you and my readers that I agree meds are the preferred choice of all parties involved if these are the only options available. The problem is that there is C – Z and beyond to consider as alternatives.

I wonder if things would have turned out differently as far as your need for meds as an adult if some alternative options were implemented during your youth. One of the side-effects of drugging children is that they end up having a life of dependency because they never developed the ability to regulate themselves as children.

I contend that it is only after investigating and trying out many other alternatives should a parent succumb to anesthetizing their children at the risk of life-long dependency, interference with normal brain development, heart-related problems, exacerbation of psychiatric problems, potential for addiction or abuse. If after investigating and trying out numerous alternatives a parent and child feel that a traditional school setting with meds is best, perhaps it is. The problem is, I’ve rarely seen parents of anesthetized children move beyond these choices. I have however, seen numerous parents who have moved beyond these choices decide not to medicate their children and instead provide alternative options for them.