<p>Sound like a suck it up be strong, get over it mentality. Folks who have ADHD and don't get treatment can end up self medicating through drugs and alcohol. That is extremely common and more dangerous then getting prescribed medication under the care of a physician. There is a time and place for everything even medication especially when it makes a huge difference in students learning and ability to attend and retain information. My D is on medication, she did fine in high school but had difficulty when it came down to 3 hr standardized tests and with the amount of reading required in college. Once she was on medication she was not late for everything, not overscheduling and was able to complete her reading and do well in school. Without it she had to reread chapters 3 times. She is not lazy, works 2 jobs, volunteers and is in an honors program.</p>
<p>
[quote]
its damn near impossible for people that dont have ADHD/ADD to empathize with it isnt it.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I'll take it a step further. I have Tourette's Syndrome and when I see groups on facebook about people who wish they had Tourette's...well... it eats me up inside. I don't really have a problem with people making fun of the disorder because back in the day when I only had muscle tics, I also thought it was funny when I saw the infamous Deuce Bigalow movie. But believe me when I say that you would not wish it upon your worst enemy. It is kind of like constant cocaine withdrawal with some additional annoyances.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I'm an ADHD kid at Yale without any meds. I've lived my life without them, and while I lose everything, have trouble being organized, sitting down, standing still, etc. I have an energy that nobody around me does. I am fully aware of the complications, but at the same time, I rather be this hyperactive, somewhat childish big kid than dull.</p>
<p>But that's just me. I can still function without meds. For those that need them, eh.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I haven't taken any medication in a couple years and while it was my hope to continue without them like you have, I am most likely going to have to go back to some type of medication. While my ADHD is somewhat negated by my OCD (in terms of the forgetfulness), Tourette's is one of the most mentally draining disorders one could imagine.</p>
<p>In terms of ADHD, though, the actuality of the disorder comes to fruition when combined with Tourette's. When reading a book, for example, I tense my eyes at the sharp corners of page, jitter my eyes up and down, purposefully blur my vision, tense my jaw, and constantly think about a million other things. If I could focus on the task at hand (if I didn't have ADHD), things would be slightly easier, but the fact that my mind is always thinking about performing random tics and about random events in general, it is a real struggle.</p>
<p>Is ADD/ADHD over diagnosed? Probably, but it is definitely a reality for some individuals.</p>
<p>Most experts think ADD is actually under diagnosed. I don't notice people suggested asthma (my disease) is "over medicated" although there are people who refuse to take their asthma meds. </p>
<p>I don't understand the Puritanical attitude expressed here by some posters. Why would people ruin their lives by being "lazy" if they had a choice? If you have no choice we have to assume the cause is psychological trauma or organic. Iin the case of ADD scientists have demonstrated that the cause is organic. (See emerarldkity4's post.) If the cause is organic, medication provides a reasonable response, just as in diabetes or asthma. </p>
<p>I don't have ADD, but my son does (as well as my husband). I got tremendous hostility from thr community when I had him diagnosed and treated (in fifth grade) because he was a straight A, extremely well-behaved student. However it would take him four hours to write two paragraphs!</p>
<p>Presently, he is graduating high school with incredible stats and going to Williams. The medication doesn't cure his ADD; it just helps him manage it. Believe me, it gives him no unfair advantage and requires many sacrifices. For instance, he is less spontaneous and less creative on his medication. However, without it he can barely read or do math. I'm glad I don't have to make this choice.</p>
<p>There was a time when people denied the germ theory and hundreds of thousands of women died of childbed fever. Because you have never seen ADD doesn't mean it doesn't exist. And if you are not a sufferer, researcher or xlinician what would make you think you're an expert with a valid opinion?</p>
<p>Well stated mythmom</p>
<p>I have ADD myself, and was diagnosed in 7th grade. As a straight A student, I never had any problem before then, but when I was also diagnosed with bipolar disorder and SAD, the doctor also said I had ADD. For someone who doesn't have the condition, you have no place saying that it doesn't exist. Try living in my head for a day and see if you like it.</p>
<p>To the OP, please do the world a favor and don't ever have any children.</p>
<p>While not inviting of the most intellectual responses, I think the topic the OP opens up definitely needs more attention. I really want to write a book on this subject. While I definitely believe addressable cases of ADD/ADHD do exist, they are a very small subset of those who are currently being medicated for the disorder. There are many factors at work here: culture, parenting, genetics and even marketing. </p>
<p>At one time in this country, and in the world in general, children had far fewer ‘available’ excuses for their behavior. Parents would put more effort into classical conditioning and supplemental education than into searching for a ‘cure’. If someone couldn’t pay attention in school and no outside force helped them modify that behavior, they performed poorly and consequently were uneducated. As the years pass, it seems any acute deviation from perfection is labeled and treated as ADD/ADHD. While this isn’t in itself a bad thing, it is when it is treated with drugs – and in most cases, it seems that the route parents choose to taken. And why shouldn’t they? It’s exactly what the media and drug marketing are telling us. </p>
<p>At this point, one may say: “So what? If a little pill can fix my child’s problems, why shouldn’t I give it to him or her?” For me, it is THAT question that really needs to be answered. In my opinion, the implications are detrimental in the long-term. Firstly, it reduces or eliminates the need for parents to apply good child rearing practices. In turn, the child isn’t relayed as much information about how to address the problem with his or her future children. Secondly, not all the long-term side effects are known for many of these drugs. Lastly and most controversial, it encourages ‘bad genes’ to propagate through the human genome. As not to detract from the topic at hand, I will not explore the later aspect any further. </p>
<p>It seems more and more that we aren’t trying to progress a society, we are trying to evolve into a commune. At one time, moderate levels of obsession, compulsion, attentiveness (or lack thereof), aggressiveness, and depression were simply aspects of one’s personality.</p>
<p>I completely concur with NMF.</p>
<p>Traditional variations in behavior were not seen as pathologies in the past. It was expected that some people were more exhuberant, some shyer, some more depressed. We weren't all expected to conform to the same set of behavioral or emotional standards.</p>
<p>I contend that ADD is overdiagnosed because too many teachers are unable to deal with non-conforming or non-compliant children. Overcrowded classrooms require children to sit still and be quiet. As a result, children, most often boys, who do not sit still are pathololgized. If we didn't require children to sit for hours on end, doing repetitive and routine work, we would likely have fewer children on medication.</p>
<p>Similarly, the moment someone feels unhappy or sad, people are certain that said indiviudal is "depressed" and needs an SSRI. Many times there is situational depression, and it does not require a pill at all, but changes to the situation, or time.</p>
<p>Finally, we should be considered with the "pill can fill my children's problems" mentality, when very young children are being prescribed powerful antipsychotic medications for supposed bi-polar disorder, etc., often diagnosed as young as age three or four. Normal variations and developmental patterns in young children suggest that tantrums etc are developmentally appropriate, and not necessarily pathologies. Sometimes, poor parenting, limit setting, etc. results in behavior that is now being medicated with drugs that have never been tested on children, and for which we have no long term studies.</p>
<p>Certainly a number of illnesses, pathologies etc. exist, including in children. But people want an easy fix, want all behavior normalized (whatever that means) and for children to be compliant within a set of school or society standards that seems to limit the variations that are completely normal in human behavior. This is an increasingly worrying trend, as the number of medicated children continues to rise, exponentially, every year.</p>
<p>It's interesting to me that such a dynamic dialogue has started from such an obvious troll post. </p>
<p>That said, ADHD is real. When you have ADHD (one of the things) that happens is that your brain does not respond to "new feedback." It's a problem with the frontal lobe of the brain, concerning deficient "executive functioning" The results are the symptoms of ADHD. They have actual tests for this, that test your ability to respond to changing feedback. It's very real. Anyone who says it's not clearly does not have ADHD or experienced its very real symptoms.</p>
<p>As for the negative comments about treatment, most, if not all drugs give you side effects. But the side effects posted are like a menu. You rarely get all of them. Some people don't get any. The degree of severity varies. If you would rather have ADHD than headaches, Jman, you clearly have never had ADHD. </p>
<p>Furthemore, the logic that "Pills do nothing except get rid of the problem when you are taking them they dont make you change," and therefore you shouldn't take them, is oh so very flawed, Twista. That's what we call treatment. Some medical conditions are chronic. They never go away. Should people with Schizophrenia stop taking their medication because it will never make Schizophrenia go away? Come on. If someone has a disease, or a chemical imbalance, or a learning disability, or a brain malfunction (or whatever you want to call it), you treat it to make it better even if it will never go away. If you don't treat it, it will still never go away. This is the life that people with ADHD (and many other mental illnesses / problems) face. It's a hard way to live. So don't you dare delegitimize their obstacles, challenges, and suffering. </p>
<p>And to the above two posters, I would like to express an equal amount of distaste for you and your thoughts. Perhaps ADHD is sometimes overdiagnosed. But you cannot conflate that to mean that ADHD does not exist except for in rare situations. A does not equal B here. Have you stopped to think that the increasing number of people being medicated means that more people are being correctly diagnosed than before, and not that it's all a bunch of psychiatric hocus-pocus?</p>
<p>There is a big difference between "personality variations" like occasional depression or compulsiveness, and real depression and real compulsions, and you come dangerously close to equating the two. To even suggest they are the same is not only insulting, but delegitimizes the very real plight of many. Everybody gets sad sometimes. But some (many) people have real chemical imbalances that cause abnormal amounts of sadness. Most people feel compulsions or obsessiveness sometimes, and just like depression, there are real chemical imbalances that cause abnormal, life-interfering, compulsions and obsessiveness that are classified as OCD. You cannot ignore the scientific evidence that shows the lower levels of saratonin and dopamine in such cases. How can you even suggest closing your eyes to that and suggest that we are just trying to normalize everyone? Clearly you have never experienced real depression or real compulsions or you wouldn't so lightly and callously dismiss such problems. Additionally, only the person actually experiences the symptoms is in a position to qualify them (except for professionals who are trained to listen to and recognize symptoms). You, as in the two of you, can't just look at someone and say "you're clearly not sad enough to constitute a real illness" because you don't know how sad they feel!! </p>
<p>People used to tell people with depression to just buck up, the same way people are telling people with ADHD to just stop being lazy. But then people found out that there is a real chemical basis behind depresion, and that certain drugs can actually help. How can you ignore both the evidence of such a problem, and the evidence of improvement of the problem when certain drugs are administered? If it aint broke don't fix it. If something gets fixed...well...something was broken. </p>
<p>Furthermore, few people are actually looking for a quick fix. They are looking for a fix. I can't think of a single person with depression that JUST takes pills. They also have therpaists and work very hard on cognitive and behavioral changes that will lessen their depression. Likewise, people with ADHD learn strategies to maximize their concentration and focus. But without the medication the chemical imbalances that contribute to the problem won't get fixed. You can't will away a chemical imbalance. </p>
<p>Furthemore, many of the behaviors you work to correct are caused by the imbalances and malfunctions themselves. People feel so sad that they develop defense mechanisms that end up being unhealthy. People with ADHD have such a hard time focusing that they develop habits of avoding homework all together. </p>
<p>People like yourselves who promote such ignorance are an incredible detriment to the mentally ill community. It simply delegitimizes people who struggle with such problems and adds to the misunderstanding of their conditions. </p>
<p>This may have sounded harsh, but it is a serious issue, and needs to be treated as such.</p>
<p>ClaySoul: I totally agree with you, as you can tell from my earlier posts on this thread. My son, who has ADD, is not a behavoir problem in any way. He is a polite, well-behaved young man. We did an experiment this week to test dosages and the like and to explore whether or not he will need his medication when he goes away to college. Our test, randomly selected, involved two ACT math sections. Without his medication he got 8 wrong; with it, the next day, 1.</p>
<p>BTW: He got a 34 on the ACT, a 2200 on the SAT, graduated H.S. with a 97% average, took 10 AP courses and received 2 5's, 6 4's, and 1 3 and 1 2, both in Latin. He was accepted into U of C., Brown and Williams. He was concertmaster in his school orchestra, received a scholarship for being the "Renaissance Man" of his school and started a musical group to teach and play for the disadvantaged.</p>
<p>If I followed the advice posted above he'd be going to C.C., or something similar. Not that that is bad in any way, but it is well-beneath his potential. He wants to enter medicine to make a contibution to society.</p>
<p>I resent having my skills as a parent criticized because my son takes medication, and I resent the moralistic, Puritanical self-righteous tone to these posts. Parenting a child with ADD is more demanding than parenting a child who does not have ADD, as my daughter doesn't. I think one of my most responsible decisions was facing my fear and having my son tested for ADD and then having him medicated. My very bright, sensitive, compliant son finally began to be able to sleep through the night when he was 11 when he could finally perform at a level that pleased him. He became outgoing and stopped being afraid of insects and aliens once his anxiety lessened.</p>
<p>How dare you judge my parenting skills. I am proud of my daughter, my son, and myself for recognizing his issues early enough to ensure his emotional well being and his academic success. No one could discipline him or teach him to overcome the structural difficiencies of his brain. He makes sacrifices in his spontenaity to be able to excell. He is funny and kind and even popular.</p>
<p>NMF and allmusic: I don't think you know as much about this as you think you do.</p>
<p>I never said ADD wasn't real, or that anyone was a bad parent. I said most of these illnesses are way overdiagnosed, and there has been an exponential increase in the number of new cases and the amount of medication kids are taking, when MOST of the medication used to treat psychiatric issues (with the exception of Ritalin, and even then, we don't have longitudinal studies) HAS NEVER BEEN TESTED ON CHILDREN! </p>
<p>The pharmaceutical industry courts doctors, and if you don't know this, do a bit of research. It is rampant. As managed care has allowed fewer and fewer visits for mental health services, any doctor can "diagnose" (using a checklist from a teacher and a parent...hardly scientific or definitive) a whole host of mental health ailments. And it is PCPs and pediatricians doing most of the dxing/prescribing, as opposed to psychiatrists or psychopharmacologists, who have the MOST training. Think this isn't a dangerous trend? Of course it is! Many of these medications have black box warnings, which no one tells the parents! At least parents need to be aware of what substances their children are ingesting! FAR too many aren't!!!</p>
<p>Here's but one of MANY articles on the topic. Again, I am offering a viewpoint that may differ from yours, but has absolute legitimacy! Parents can do (and always do do!) what they like; but people need to be educated consumers. The last two posters here clearly are. But far too many parents are not, and the results could be catastrophic. Don't shoot the messenger who is just trying to help people.</p>
<p>
[quote]
The 'atypical' dilemma</p>
<p>Skyrocketing numbers of kids are prescribed powerful antipsychotic drugs. Is it safe? Nobody knows</p>
<p>...These drugs emerged in the 1990s and replaced the older, "typical" antipsychotics like Haldol or Thorazine, which are often associated with Parkinson-like shakes.</p>
<p>The atypicals were developed to treat schizophrenia and bipolar disorder in adults. But once on the market, doctors are free to prescribe them to children, and for uses not approved by the Food and Drug Administration.</p>
<p>There is almost no research on the long-term effects of such powerful medications on the developing brains of children. The more that researchers learn, the less comfortable many are becoming with atypicals.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>and this</p>
<p>
[quote]
Medicaid and insurance companies have fed the problem, encouraging the use of psychiatric drugs as they reimburse less and less for labor-intensive psychotherapy and occupational therapy.</p>
<p>Another factor: Doctors have been influenced by pharmaceutical companies, which have aggressively marketed atypicals.</p>
<p>Whatever the reasons for the soaring use of psychiatric drugs in children, things have gotten out of whack, according to Dr. Ronald Brown. Last year he headed an American Psychological Association committee that looked into the issue.</p>
<p>"The bottom line is that the use of psychiatric medications far exceeds the evidence of safety and effectiveness," Brown said.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Yes, and there are studies in the opposite direction that say ADD is inderdiagnosed. Believe me, there are serious side effects to my asthma medication, but I have never read an article stating that asthma is over diagnosed or that people were taking the easy way out in taking medication for their asthma.</p>
<p>You don't tell the other side of the story: that kids suffering from untreated ADD tend to self-medicate. The incidence of drug abuse and dropping out of high school is much higher in the untreated ADD population.</p>
<p>Your comment that "people want an easy fix" certainly does impugn our parenting skills and implies we are some how less ethical or moral than you are.</p>
<p>Why would you assume that parents making this truly difficult decision are not educated consumers? I have a PhD and am a trained researcher. Really, there is more than a whiff of superiority in your position, and your coming back with these quoted surveys does not show any compassion or humility. What is your investment here?</p>
<p>I wish DS did not have ADD. It makes his life more difficult. Medication cannot replace a completely well functioning brain. Your posts just make people who need to cope with a DISEASE feel even worse. I don't know any parents who make this decision lightly. I don't know parents who use medication to control behavior. We understand that we are taking risks we wish we didn't have to take with our beloved children's health. One thing I absolutely sure of is that there are risks to not medicating, among them my son never living a life that allows him to bring his true potential into the world. And I don't mean attending an elite college or making a lot of money. I mean having the opportunity to share his ideas and feel good about himself.</p>
<p>He started medication when he was 11. Up until then there was not one night he didn't make us up extremely anxious and unhappy. He would sit at the table and cry over having to write one paragraph. It took him hours. He could not complete his "work alone" assignments at school. Instead of being a behavior problem, he was EXTREMELY well behaved. I don't think he got into trouble once during his entire school career. He was a straight A student so no one supported me in this decision except the extremely compassionate practitioner we saw. After his extensive testing, she said he scored within the normal range on tests but tester sent a long analysis of the marked indicators of an extreme anxiety disorder. He was such a good boy he was putting an unlivable amount of pressure on himself to perform. She suggested trying the meds. After one day he said it was the first time he had ever felt good.</p>
<p>The experts you quote, though well meaning I'm sure, have their own political agenda, yes as do experts on the other side as well. These ideas are not gospel. I wish that DS, whom I absolutely adore, did not have this problem and did not have to take medication. He does and he does.</p>
<p>What I find missing from your approach is any respect for the people who are actually coping with ADD and any acknowledgement that we might know what we're doing. Oh, and thank you for your expressions of compassion and your congratulations on DS's striking success despite his disability.</p>
<p>While I do understand, as a mother, your need to be personal and defensive, Mythmom, no one was questioning your decision as a parent. I am glad things worked out well for your son. It's all any of us wish, that our children be productive and happy.</p>
<p>As to political agendas, I don't know how anyone speaking up for children could be accused of a political agenda, partisan or otherwise. </p>
<p>Facts are facts. These medications are not approved by the FDA for use on children. No one knows the long term effects. There is an exponential increase in both diagnosis and medication of childhood psychiatric disorders, just as managed care is limiting treatment options and these issues land in the hands of corporate insurance and pharmaceutical industries. </p>
<p>As I said, sorry you don't like the message, but there are two sides to every story. Glad yours has worked out well. Other people haven't been so lucky (like this little girl, diagnosed with bi-polar disorder at 2 1/2, an age when tantrums are totally normal, who died of an overdose of antipsychotic medications):</p>
<p>Sigh. You don't understand my point. I am not defensive since I am not unsure of my decision. I was offering personal history as an example, not because it dominates my landscape. Your statement, "Facts are facts" is the essence of our disagreement. If you don't see that positions on ADD and medications are value laden, even on the part of experts, then you have a false idea of the possibility of objectivity. </p>
<p>I don't object to your "message." As I said, this is a difficult decision to make because of the risks involved and the examples you cite. However, children die of asthma medication as well. This is why any parent would wish that their child did not suffer from this disorder and difficult decisions did not have to be made. My decision had to comprehend possible risks against known risks, and it was not easy.</p>
<p>I truly do understand that you do not wish me any ill, but judgemental statements such as "people want an easy fix" do do harm as does your assumption that you know more about this than the people coping with it. And I am not writing merely on my own behalf, but on the behalf of those without the confidence to defend themselves against these attacks on their character.</p>
<p>Neither you nor NMF expressed your ideas in a speculative manner. You said you completely concurred with NMF who equated ADD with "excuses for bad behavior." If you can't see the angry self-righteousness in this position, let me assure you I can. Both of your posts tell one selective side of the story. I don't completely invalidate these ideas, but bear in mind that there are those who are completely convinced that vaccinations are not worth the risks they pose. We all weigh risks/benefits equations all the time.</p>
<p>Yes, I agree that there are problems with medication, but right now that's all we have. Come up with a cure for S's ADD and I will joyfully take him off medication. I truly miss the zany, fun person he is off his meds and prefer it to the more sober person he becomes on them. However, then he can't read, can't do math, can't practice his violin, all things HE loves.</p>
<p>What I object to is the smug criticism of others and the assumption that we need you to educate us. And frankly, I am a bit surprised that you don't understand my point because I have admired your thoughtful comments on other threads. If anything, I think your holding onto your position without budging at all in the face of someone's experience is defensive.</p>
<p>Well, no attempt to be smug on my part. I am hardly a smug type!;)</p>
<p>I just look at it as sharing information. I said from the get go that I know that these pathologies and illnesses exist (some disagree, even with that). I hold onto my position because I have seen too many kids overpathologized/overmedicated (including serious "cocktails" of medications), which has also compromised their lives. So, I offer another viewpoint. </p>
<p>That's the thing with opinions and viewpoints...we don't all have to change ours, even based on someone else's experiences, just listen respectfully. If you think my opinion wasn't respectful, sorry about that. However, I will continue to hold my views, and share them, because I think it is important to look at the other side (uncomfortable though it makes people).</p>
<p>Okay. As you say, your prerogative. The palpable pain in ClaySoul's post made me determined to offer support. I know you to be a person of good will so we'll leave it at that.</p>
<p>In your attempt to "share information," you are showing disrespect. Of course people are going to get defensive when you assert that their life-interfering problems are nothing but overdiagnosed variations in behavior.</p>
<p>The fact that the number of people being diagnosed with ADHD is increasing does not prove that it is being over diagnosed! Perhaps ways of recognizing ADHD are better than they were before (and I would assert they are, given the testing now available), and more people are being correctly diagnosed instead of being underdiagnosed as in the past. When penicllin was invented, and distributed to the masses at exponential levels, where we simply overmedicating? Or were we responding to an actual problem. You are jumping on a very popular bandwagon and asserting that ADHD is not a very real problem. Sure, you agree that it does exist, but you are asserting that it is not as serious as many professionals, and those who experience its affects (both sufferers and parents of sufferers) believe. You are not trained professionals in the field, and have no basis other than an article here and an article there to come to this conclusion. Mythmom is completely correct in saying you are being smug to pass such judgements. Few people try to be smug. That doesn't mean you aren't being smug. </p>
<p>Mythmom makes a very good point in bringing up the risks about not being medicated. ADHD sufferers self medicate and drop out of school. Depressed people kill themselves. People with OCD lead very difficult lives. Schizophrenic people become dellusional, homeless, and sometimes (though rarely) violent. You're right. More studies need to be done. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't take the information we already have that shows the benefits of many drugs and use them. Like you said, facts are facts. And the fact is, that despite that there have been few longitudinal studies, ritalin and other drugs help people. </p>
<p>As for the ONE girl who overdosed on antipsychotics, I think that is very rare, and hardly evidence against drugs in general. </p>
<p>What you are not picking up on is how things have not worked out well for Mythmom's son. The misery he felt before he was medicated, and the problems I'm sure he still faces. You do a great disservice to such people by attempting to delegitimize their conditions.</p>
<p>No one delegitimized anyone's condition. </p>
<p>And you have no idea whatsoever my credentials, training or career. Let's just leave it that I have not formed my opinions by a few articles on the internet.</p>
<p>That's exactly what you are doing. You are saying that people are overdiagnosed and simply searching for an easy fix. You have agreed that diagnosing people with certain conditions is a way of "normalizing variations in behavior" That's called delegitimizing. </p>
<p>So what are your credentials, because you are making some bold and sweeping statements.</p>
<p>Allmusic-
It might be helpful to separate out the meds that have not been officialy approved for use in kids from those that are. Your statement
[quote]
MOST of the medication used to treat psychiatric issues (with the exception of Ritalin, and even then, we don't have longitudinal studies) HAS NEVER BEEN TESTED ON CHILDREN!
[/quote]
can be misleading. Just because a med hasn't been officially approved for use in kids does not mean that its use had not been studied in children. You sound like you are "in the field" (as am I), and I am sure you know that the length of time it takes from research to published study to FDA approval is extremely long. There are many psychostimulants and similar acting meds that are approved for use in kids. Same for the use of antidepressants, despite the black box warning. Many of the other meds (some of the newer generation antipsychotics, the anticonvulsants, etc) have been used off-label with good success for management of a lot of behavioral dyscontrol issues.</p>
<p>And, I couldn't agree with you more that the insurance companies are pushing providers to do it "faster and cheaper", and not aurthorizing full evaluations that can help differentiate the underlying issues. However, many good parents will pay for the best care for their child. Many can simply not afford to, and are doing the best they can for their kids. As for me, I rather that ADHD kid driving mommy's SUV have taken his/her psychostimulant before they get on the road in their vehicle! Just my opinion...</p>