Producing ADHD

-->

The essay I am choosing to do my ethnographic review is, “Producing ADHD: An ethnographic study of behavioral discourses of early childhood” by Simon Bailey, MA, BSc. In the essay, Bailey discusses the construction of the diagnostic process of ADHD in a classroom setting that is shown through a ethnographic study in an actual school setting that explores the different factors in the discourse such as early education and social care, routinization, gender roles, responsibilization and emotional governance in which the author provides a different outlook on the social and cultural relevance of ADHD. And whether ADHD is a myth or reality in regards to the stigmas surrounding psychiatric disorders. Perhaps the stigmas exist because that the issue of mental health is relatively new and hence the reason why it is so controversial. With mainstream media and cultural representations, one can see that this paper does shed light on why psychiatric conditions itself are so controversial and the need to stress for the importance of mental health education. The author himself is also diagnosed with ADHD at a young age, which has a profound effect on his observations made on the ethnographic study of ADHD in children. As someone who is also diagnosed with ADHD I can understand the author and his work at a deeper level than someone without ADHD partly because the author is also in part trying to understand himself through his own work and observations (Bailey 2009, 17).  

The ethnography is about the social and cultural implications of ADHD in a rather institutionalized manner in which schools systematically adhere to routine and discipline and those who fall short of such norms are often associated with being bad that is ADHD is often viewed as something that is imagined or subjective. While there are some myths surrounding ADHD as a psychiatric condition itself there are personal and more individualized realities that can be explored considering that such condition is similar to that of a “I” disorder, which relates back to the article about how culture can affect psychosis and that in order to understand schizophrenia, since it is considered to be a “I” disorder such that it differs from person to person, one must understand the culture in addition to science to better the healing process of the patient. With the paper on ADHD, it is relatively to the same that people tend to generalize or have this myth in surrounding what this disorder entails without consciously realizing that it differs for every individual with ADHD. According to the DSM criteria for ADHD some may not be able to completely fit all the required check boxes to be diagnosed, thus ADHD can affect and vary from people to people. Even for the author himself, he uses the introduction chapter to discuss his experience with his ADHD in, “the nature of being someone with something” (Haraway, 1988) and in doing so personalizes the psychiatric condition to his own story rather than a set points of descriptions that he must fit in.

The myths and realities surrounding ADHD undermines the truth in what is to be said and understood in the psychiatric condition. There are several mediums such as scientific research literature, media reporting, popular science, and sociocultural critiques that only catalyze the ignorance and stigma surrounding ADHD. These misunderstandings can only distort the research being done, thus making some research more valid than others. And in doing so the author will then attempt to explore ADHD narratives of whether ADHD is nature or nurture and the truth that lies within such realms. The ethnography then goes into a gender analysis about how boys are diagnosed with ADHD more than girls and how societal norms and culture shape the way that boys and girls are suppose to act and that there is a gender bias in which we view childhood behaviors. Interestingly enough the different voices that come through this work seem to be children who are in school and the educators and less focused on medical professionals. The voices of the children seem to primarily be boys and female teachers. With such an emphasis on the different genders of the male students vs. female teachers, one can see that their perspectives are used to show how gender is constructed within a classroom setting and that there is a “feminization” of primary education and that the gender roles portrayed by the teachers and students are to be favored over others (Bailey 2009, 180).

In a short and rather brief introduction about ADHD one must know that it is the most commonly diagnosed psychiatric condition among children worldwide (Timimi, 2005b). With that being said the author implies that with such a rampant population of children with ADHD growing it is no wonder why that such a psychiatric condition is considered to be so new and controversial. It almost seem that there is this stereotype surrounding those with ADHD that we are all doomed to be type casted with this new identity that is stigmatized in society and more specifically in a classroom environment such that those who are considered special or this identity of being different lowers the expectations placed by educators that may be different than that of a child without ADHD. Those with ADHD are presumably viewed as emotionally and behaviorally difficult to deal with. While I do agree that with the author that children who are viewed as abnormal are treated differently with lowered educational expectations, but I do have to note that children with ADHD learn differently than the children without and thus have to be treated differently to some extent. It may not be that an educator should lower their expectations, but should not expect a child with ADHD to be able to learn at the same pace or process as a child without ADHD. Though institutions systematically reward those who are able to learn better or achieve the better grade, it must also recognize those who have a difficult time achieving the same grades as with the “normal” children. The education system fails to acknowledge the efforts made by children with ADHD. While a child without ADHD may receive an A in assignment and a child with ADHD may receive an B+, the amount of time and effort in that grade difference vastly differs from the mainstream process of achieving such grade. In my classes I have to work twice hard compared to my non-ADHD peers in order to achieve the same grade. And these efforts are not simply made by studying more, but in taking medication, a proper diet that is well suited for the ADHD brain, and exercise. Without all these necessary steps I do fall behind in class easily. It is not that I am less competent or that my intelligence is lacking, but rather it is methods in which way I learn efficiently. Though it is different and non-conventional, I believe that my educators should look at my differently, not in the way of expecting anything less of me, but in taking a different path to learning. Thus, children with ADHD should not be treated as though they are less competent than that of a normal student, but rather in the differences of the process in achieving higher grades that should be tended to.

The gender disproportionality between male and females in being diagnosed with ADHD is not inferred through the neurochemical differences, but is rather constructed by society and culture. In class we learned that culture cannot be biologically inherited, but rather it is transmitted through language, a medium that can be taught or learned through which can be expressed, in the case of gender and ADHD, privately. There seems to be this western culture in having a limited scope of how boys and girls should act. That there is this system of winners and losers that have this cultural impact on psychiatry, as it becomes a “cultural defense mechanism” for those who lay outside of what is considered normal (Bailey 2009, 173). For boys they are expected to behave “naturally” in a sense that they tend to be more aggressive and tend to act out more so than girls. Though this behavior is socially constructed by a rather conservative society it has embarked on the diagnosis process of children of ADHD. Boys are diagnosed with ADHD five times more than girls (Jenkins, 1973). I wish the author could explore more on the cultural construction of gender bias. I feel as though there are no significant natural differences in the behaviors or personalities express in both sexes. Sex is the biological difference, whereas gender is in what is presented or conveyed by that individual. If there is a gender bias in ADHD could it be said that the criteria for diagnosing a child can also be misconstrued by how that particular individual portrays him or herself? While boys are expected to behave badly, girls can also misbehave, but when they do they are punished and ostracized more so than a boy. Hence the reason why females are socialized to behave properly and one must always act like a “lady”. In the cultural context of being a lady it can vary from different cultures. So can it be safe to say that the gender bias in diagnosing ADHD is different in each culture? Rather than focusing on just the diagnosis of boys why not do a study on girls who have ADHD and how they differ from their male student counterparts. Perhaps in doing so one can understand why females are able to slip pass the DSM psychiatric system in being diagnosed with ADHD because we are not expected to behave “like a boy”. I was not diagnosed until my second year of college and in retrospect I was probably not diagnosed because of the fact that I am a female. In my elementary school reports my teacher has stated several times that I have a difficult time paying attention because I am too talkative. In analyzing this females are stereotyped to be more talkative and so I was not thought of to have ADHD even though I was quite hyper and fidgety.

While the author does provide good insight on the stigmas surrounding ADHD in gender bias and a culturally constructed view on what is considered normal, the author fails to infer reasons why ADHD is so commonly diagnosed and how it affects those who were able to find a loop hole in the DSM psychiatric system to be falsely diagnosed with ADHD. As someone who is personally affected by ADHD it is difficult for me to witness the ignorance surrounding mental health and how easily people can joke about it. Examples would include an individual who does not have ADHD and is jokingly stating that he or she does because of an isolated incident of being ADHD-like. For me, it is something I struggle with everyday, not only as a student, but also as a person. Though it does affect me at a greater level academically. And it is difficult for me to see people who are blatantly ignorant about ADHD claiming to have it from an isolated incident so that they can be prescribed medication in order to study effectively. I do not see these people constantly reading and researching on the latest news about ADHD or conduct self-experiments in how one should manage the symptoms. As discussed in class, a symptom is something that is more subjective than objective. Though I do agree with the author that ADHD is more subjective and can vary for each individual, for each case there are certain commonalities that we all share as a community that outsiders may not be able see. Because ADHD is subjective to some extent, people outside of that community may see it as made up or imagined, thus the reason why ADHD is so controversial because of the varying symptoms. And in class we watched several videos and did an exercise about the assumptions behind ADHD. In one of the videos a psychiatrist stated that ADHD is socially constructed and that it is not a disease. I find it most difficult that even my own parents, who are of Chinese heritage, do not believe that psychiatric conditions exist. ADHD inhibits me from learning effectively. It is not that I cannot learn, but rather I am distracted easily from having a neurophysiological difference from a non-ADHD brain. Although my disability (in terms of how I learn) is not manifested physically, it does not mean that it is not there and should not be tended to. And it almost seem as though ADHD is a global issue as we have learned in class that it is a consideration of health that goes beyond the different countries and governmental institutions as the author has made observations in different schools (Bailey 2009, 183).

Overall the paper written by Bailey was nothing short of impressive. I chose this paper because it was his master thesis for his doctorate degree, which is something I also wish to pursue. Almost all aspects of ADHD were explored at a scientific and social level, which is something I am also most passionate about and would also like to do research on. Something to take from this paper is that ADHD is subjective to some extent and should not be treated differently than someone who has diabetes and that there should be more scientific research done in order to raise more awareness about mental health in order to eliminate the stigmas and ignorance surrounding it. Also as someone who is personally affected by ADHD, I don't must say that I do not have linear conversations, which in part is probably the reason why this paper in itself is not as coherent and organized as it should be. But nonetheless regardless of whether it is ADHD or not, there is a need to promote mental health education. 

Resources:

Haraway, D. (1988). Situated knowledges: The science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective. Feminist Studies, 14(3), 575-599.

Timimi, S. (2005b). The rise and rise of ADHD. In C. Newnes & N. Radcliffe (Eds.), Making and breaking children's lives. Ross-on-Wye: PCCS Books.

Bailey, S. (2009). Producing ADHD: An ethnographic study of behavioral discourses of early childhood. 

Jenkins, R. (1973). Behavior disorders of childhood and adolescence. Springfield, Il: Charles C. Thomas.