Please write a letter to the economist. They regularly publish letters debating their articles. Or better still push them to publish a rebuttal article or articles by you! Thanks for your great work
I felt like I was punched in the gut when I read the Economist article. Learning that I have a disorder that explains why I have always struggled to function 'normally' has been life changing. I don't mind the term neurodivergent, but I have a f***ing disorder, and it has a huge impact on my life.
One can have a neurodivergent condition that impacts their life in terrible ways (and make them disordered). I don’t understand why these are mutually exclusive. The answer is both neurodiverse and disordered in varying degrees
@@imthinkingthoughts Because "neurodivergent" downplays the degree of the disorder. Those who push using "divergent" over "disorder" are almost always people who want to minimise the negative effects of these conditions and try to promote quasi-scientific upsides,. Usually they do this because they don't want you (or themselves...) to feel bad about the condition, but what it results in is people get a "it's really not that bad" mentality about something that is, in fact, that bad. When applied to ADHD it's an archetypical example of toxic positivity, becuase it also leads those who don't have ADHD to assume it's really not that bad and those who are impaired really bad (like I am!) won't be taken seriously any more.
@@Paveway-chan thank you profusely for expanding. The view you outlined is not my view at all and I wasn’t really aware of it. Neurodivergent does not, in my view, reduce the impact of the condition in any sense. It is simply stating that it is a difference in brain type. I totally disagree and am appalled that people use the term in a way that is effectively toxic positivity. This is not inherent to the label of neurodiversity, rather its use. So therefore there may be a pragmatic reason not to use neurodiversity, but this would be like saying some people use the more effective term wrong hence we won’t use the term (effectively policing language)
Employers use that language to fight ADHD as a disability. They will ruin your life just to say you're disobedient or unprofessional. They do not care about mental health at all. Dr. Barkely is doing amazing work, please do not stop.
That’s why they put out articles like these to diminish the truth, and to have ppl questioning if these tarnished ppl are just lazy, and not employable. They purposely put out info like this to harm people who deal with this. I wonder who is funding this article? Probably a big corporation that wants an excuse to fire certain targeted employees
Problem is that nosologically speaking the The Economist writers have it right - it's not a disease so therefore it's not a disorder. It IS a disability. And classification as disability shouldn't require pathologicity, but at present it does and that also makes no sense, so this seems symptomatic of systematic societal structuralization struggles
Agreed. Narcissism abounds in management everywhere I've traveled. If you don't believe exactly as they believe, behave exactly as they do, and react exactly how they do, then you shouldn't be allowed to exist at all. Any argument is moot. Ultimately this behavior will alienate them from communication with anyone reasonable, and exist only in an echo chamber. That is their undoing: they will weaken themselves to feed their ego. They are looking for reasons to punish people even though they punish themselves.
@@sageinit I agree with what you state from a nosological point of view, but their article really needs to cite and add references, as well as properly frame their subject. The article contains a mix of decent, incomplete, and misleading information, likely due to pressure on writers to produce quickly. Including valid research references would enhance its credibility; otherwise, it reads like a typical forum post lacking data. It makes it feel like a linguistic play producing a clickbait-ish article when they likely still invested time in it and I can empathize with how stressful those types of positions must be. More so these days. Hoping that this will not be received/perceived as an angry or ''what you said is wrong!!'' response. Open to further exchange. I think it is important to exchange, even more so when people have different points of views so we can meet somewhere in the middle. Or at least practice mental flexibility in opening up to different possibilities of how information ties together, forming patterns or not, where is nested context vs data vs biases, etc. I honestly appreciated finding your comment for exactly that reason, actually. Thank you. :)
People don't understand that ADHD is not just about school performance. ADHD is the reason I suck at social interaction, I can't focus on reading a book, even when the story caught my interest. ADHD is the reason my house is a mess and that I'm constantly having fatigue. I'm tired of ADHD being seen only through the lense of performance. I can't even be happy when I don't have to work. You can't adapt the whole world to ADHD. It's literally not possible.
100% agree. Also there is one very important factor here - the realization that you're struggeling with something that is very real. Before my diagnosis I believed that I am what I very often felt inside - dumb, lazy and unstable. No amount of social acceptance could change that as it was always inside of me. My diagnosis helped me realize that I had biological disadvantage all my life, it made me appreciate me more, because I not only survived through it and make it work to this day, I also managed to build decent life for myself and became decent person in spite of all of it. It made me understand I actually put much more work in everything I do, so I shouldn't be that devastated by my small failures, and at the same time be more grateful for every success. All of that with meds and therapy now helps me improve my life after almost 40 years of real struggle. It's really powerfull stuff. Media outlets pushing this kind of nonsense do more damage than they realize.
The Economist is run, for the most part, out of London, England. There is a feeling in certain places that “this mental health thing has gone too far”, and there’s a desire to rule all but the severely disabled as “fit (enough) for work” so that they can be thrown off extra benefits and put on base rate Universal Credit (around £100 a week, to cover everything) and bullied into work. Because of backdoor privatisation, funding for healthcare has been mostly going into private pockets, and mental health was the bottom of the list for funding to begin with, and within mental health fund allocation, ADHD is again bottom of the list. So we get diagnosed, given medication, and then we’re left to our own devices. If we wanted to make newly diagnosed people worse, this is how to go about it. So for those of us with ADHD it’s not even that they want our funding, they just want ADHD reassessed and labeled as no different from having ginger hair so we are thus exempted from any protections under law. A tragedy, because if they addressed it properly not only would most people cost a lot less over their remaining lives, many would likely become productive (earning and paying tax) without having to be coerced. The utter blindness that ideologically driven, short term budgeting decisions impose! Dark days ahead unless there’s some unforeseen change in direction. (The UK Government has already been censured by the UN for “systematic and grave violations of the rights of the sick and disabled”. The only Western nation in post ww2 history to have had such laid against them. They just shrugged and carried on. The UN exists to provide moral authority for Anglo-American foreign policy not to stick its nose where it isn’t wanted.)
So in a way, removing the "disorder" also removes the need for social protections. Wouldn't this be anti socialist? I would argue that this is not a socialist article but rather a liberal article and the Doctors perspective is perhaps USA centric perspective.
neurodiversity means well but the movement really discredits the need for things to BE DISORDERS for legal reasons. disorder is not a negative word! it has meaning and it is needed!
I seriously hate the term neurodiversity for two reasons. 1) It implies that we all benefit from the same treatment, ADHD/autism/depression etc. 2) By definition, psychopaths are “neurodivergent”.
It is a negative word! But that's okay because the condition is negative... We should stop being weak and accept reality, nobody want a blind child because it is negative... But if your child is blind you will tell him... no it's okay there's some positivity about it blah blah blah because you want to support him, doesn't mean it's not negative
I don’t think that “the neurodiversity movement” is behind this article. I am neurodivergent (ND), and nope, the article does not speak for me. Nor do I think that most of the ND people that I have met would write this article. For example, I don’t think that many ND people would argue that treatments or supports should be cancelled for everyone with an ND diagnosis, and that societal and environmental changes are sufficient to deal with their conditions. Now, it is true that ND people are trying to find the right words to describe their conditions. For example, some would like the word “disorder” replaced with “condition”. “Disorder” is a strong word, and may be inadequate to describe the mental state of someone who is well treated and accommodated for his condition. This nuance matters a lot to give people the right impression and idea. Other conditions like astigmatism also do not have “disorder” in their name, but still count as a condition that requires treatment. So, I am not convinced that the word “disorder” is the only choice we have in naming an ND condition.
@@Ouiofcourse Yes, I agree. Pretending that ADHD isn't a disorder and doesn't cause significant difficulties in people's lives doesn't help anyone who has it or even spare their feelings, all it does is make it harder for people to take it seriously and further burden those who have it with more unnecessary guilt/shame. "If ADHD isn't a real disorder than the problems it causes in my life must only be due to my moral failings and character defects." That's a hard pill to swallow even when it's true, but it's cruel to imply such things about people when it's false.
You would be surprised to read a disappointing majority on the autism subreddit that really do go all in on the ND movement, preaching that autism (of all neurodevelopmental 'conditions') and adhd is a.. well.. condition rather than a disorder. They do want treatments that inhibit or dampen some of their symptoms (mostly sensory issues) but begin talking about a hypothetical cure and you're getting downvoted and lectured how that would be an immoral wish to have. Then again, it's reddit so... @@OrafuDa
I appreciated you covering this article and I agree that the claims made by the Economist's writers sounded ignorant and out of touch. For my two cents however, as someone with ADHD and an academic background in Political Science, I'd argue this doesn't come off to me as all that left-wing. What I think is more accurately being reflected here is an author who is out of touch with the material realities of people with ADHD, and ESPECIALLY working class individuals with the disorder. I'm from the US and was diagnosed in my early 30's. I've seen first hand the difficulties people can face when seeking a diagnosis- everything from a lack of insurance to a lack of professional medical and mental health providers. I've also seen how hard it can be to pursue work place accommodations for any need, let alone ADHD. I work in an "at will" employment state where employers can easily dismiss an employee for any number of reasons. I've had coworkers fired while seeking accommodations- even if ADHD is recognized in the original Americans with Disabilities Act (1995), doesn't mean employers will respect the disorder or feel compelled to deal with accommodation requests. In fact, I think the greatest damage this type of article could do is to actually give more credence to less than scrupulous employers looking for reasons to ignore their employees' mental health needs. If ADHD isn't a disorder and simply a need for more organization or forgiving work environments, then the blame for ADHD symptoms falls back on those who simply didn't take advantage of said organizational tools. So oddly enough, this utopian idea of more accommodating institutions, in my mind, comes off less as a socialist pipedream, and more of a Professional Managerial Class writer totally detached from normal working class conditions. It comes off as ignorant, out of touch, and irresponsible.
I just wanted to say how thankful I am for your consistent uploads. All the effort you put in and your passion are so inspiring, and I really admire your commitment! Even from the other side of the world, here in Asia, South Korea, your videos have been a huge help to me. Please remember that you have supporters all around the world!
I was having so much suicidal thoughts 10 years ago as a teenage, also suffered severe anxiety and mental disorder. I got diagnosed with ADHD, spent my whole life fighting ADHD. Not until my husband recommended me to psilocybin mushrooms treatment. Psilocybin treatment changed my life for better. I can proudly say i'm totally clean for 6 years and still counting. Always look to nature for solution to tough problems, Shrooms are phenomenal.
I love hearing great life changing stories like this. I want to become a mycologist because honestly mushrooms are the best form of medicine (most especially the psychedelic ones) There are so many people today used magic mushrooms to ween off of SSRI medication- its amazing! Years back i wrote an entire essay about psychedelics. they saved you from death buddy, lets be honest here.
Hey mates! Can you help with the source? I suffer severe anxiety, panic and depression and I usually take prescription medicine, but they don't always help. Where can I find those psilocybin mushrooms? I'm really interested in treating my mental health without Rxs. I live in Australia don't know much about these. I'm so glad they helped you. I can't wait to get them too. Really need a reliable source 🙏
YES sure of mycologist Pedroshrooms. I have the same experience with anxiety, addiction. Mushrooms definitely made a huge huge difference to why am clean today.
I'm so very happy for you mate, Psilocybin is absolutely amazing, the way it shows you things, the way it teaches you things. I can not believe our world and our people shows less interest about it's helpfulness to humanity. It's love. The mushrooms heals people by showing the truth, it would be so beneficial for so many people, especially politicians and the rich who have lost their way and every other persons out there.
Can't we have a middle ground? Of course it's not logical to expect everybody to wait for us in schools and workplaces 24/7. But does a 10 minute delay have to be this shameful? Does it really? I repeated classes because I was 10 minute late to exams. I had professors who don't let anyone to enter the classroom literally after 1 minute. So much stress, so much anxiety. At my 7th year of college, I had to complete. So it was a "Do or die situation" So I managed to never be late for a year, but nobody knows the struggle behind the scenes. I've spent a year that most nights I slept 3 hours (inability to calm down at night, the anxiety of being late in the morning), I could only sleep at weekends. I've spent a year where most days my meals were only 8 cups of coffee and a banana. I had so much stress that 1/3 of my hair fell down. I had heart conditions, gastritis... So does it really worth it when being in time is this strict and seen as a character value?
Doc says "things have to be done in a certain time", Yet he failed to provide any evidence as to how that "certain time" was decided (see what I did there?) So I think you're totally right. Of course there are severe cases, completely disfunctional, but there are also many examples of abnormalities being advantages, and yes seizing those advantages for society require some management. In college I had an amazing group of study. Whenever we needed to work on a presentation they trusted my creativity, we would work together but I would simply fell asleep whenever the fatigue kicked in while they pulled all nighters, then they would wake me up and let me review the final cut and add the abstract, intro, conclusions and our papers and presentation were praised most of the time. ¿Did they picked up the slack or did we do an optimal allocation of our capabilities
@@alonsovelasquez2 I think this is the point. Assuming a genetic basis that is not recent, how do ADHD-style brains function on North Sentinel Island? From my perspective it’s a disorder in societies built for a very narrow selection of human diversity, not necessarily because what these brains are good at does not contribute valuable input in settings closer to those our ancestors spent most of their time in. I realise this is a slippery slope perspective, but the DSM does define all disorders in relation to specific societies. Until proper research is done in places like the Amazon we cannot really know for certain one way or the other.
Ugh this makes me so sad. Honestly it is devastating that there is so much stigma around adhd. I am embarrassed of telling people about my diagnosis because most people think it is not real. Articles like this are just confirming that bias. Thanks for taking the time to debunk it.
People will also label you as a helpless dumbass if you tell them you have ADHD. Trust me on this one. They won't tell you they feel this way, they will have no sympathy whatsoever, and they'll tell everyone else how dumb you are for outing your diagnosis to everyone since they would keep that a secret.
@@thejayroh0011 I'm really selective with whom I share my diagnosis. There is a stigma similar to what you described or people who just don't treat it seriously. I heard I have ADHD my entire life in a way that I'm just weird, impulsive and hyperactive, but nothing really to reflect on. Only recently after almost 40 days of struggling I found out I have severe ADHD and there is so much verity of different symptoms related to, it really shocked me. At the same time I watch and read tons of content on this stuff and while there is a lot of good info online, there's also loads of nonsense and misinformation, most of it is some kind of ideologically driven. I'm really thankful for dr Russel's channel, I hope it will grow exponentially.
It's very interesting that these articles should appear at the time when the UK government is looking for an excuse to remove financial help for people with ADHD and is hoping to manufacture widespread consent for the decision 🤔
No wonder, anti depressants and anxiety pills are given like candy, while stimulants are banned, why? Because they make people better! Plus the black market is a part of the big pharma and medical fraternity
Hear, hear!!! As a citizen of the UK I haven’t even attempted to add this to my PIP claim for Progressive Multiple Sclerosis as I don’t believe my longstanding executive functioning deficits will be considered or believed
I also find it offensive that they think I should just not be given tasks that are hard for my disorder. Everything is hard to do with ADHD. But if I apply myself and I have understanding and supportive people around me, I can do the hard things and that is good for my self esteem and also helps me learn strategies.
But the "hard tasks" for us can be very easy to do, but if they're uninteresting to us, we can't get to do them, that's the problem, at least in my case.
I'm currently a PhD student in a school psychology program and I was in total agreement with everything presented here regarding ADHD and am generally aware of the research that informs your views. However, the end of the video regarding the attitude of focusing on the environment as a "socialist" or "Marxist" approach seems completely disconnected. The Economist is largely a centrist-conservative platform. They are "liberal" on social issues in the traditional sense of the word liberal, not in the derogatory Fox News sense of the word... Both capitalist and "Marxist" approaches to economics have philosophies about what types of environments are conducive to human flourishing; I think it would be wrong to assume that the way we have constructed our current environments are the "default", natural, or correct way. The conclusions these articles make... that we can change the environment to accommodate ADHD and therefore ADHD is not a disorder is definitely a misleading perspective that is not informed by research. With that being said, I do think the "social model of disability" is useful for identifying ways in which we can change our built environments and our societies... While I would describe myself as a socialist, I believe many of these environmental changes are also compatible within a regulated capitalist society.
I agree entirely! The economist article is bad and I was enjoying this thoroughly insightful takedown right up until the utterly disconnected anti-socialist screed. It is very sad and disappointing to see otherwise intelligent experts in one field veer off into red-pill territory.
@@tyesamson It's not "red-pill territory" for Dr Barkley to point out the absurdity in believing that the social environment can be engineered into utopia to effectively eliminate all impairments. Nor is it "veering off" as psychology is implicated in that, which he is an expert in. Keep in mind he was primarily addressing Marxism ideology and the extreme ends of socialism, not the left in general.
@@iliyanovsloungeYour first sentence is a straw man because it's replying to a point I didn't make or even suggest. Your second sentence is at least a fairer point, but it's still a red herring that doesn't address the concern being raised. As the comment I was replying to already perfectly articulated: "Both capitalist and "Marxist" approaches to economics have philosophies about what types of environments are conducive to human flourishing; I think it would be wrong to assume that the way we have constructed our current environments are the "default", natural, or correct way." To not acknowledge this only reveals your own deeply entrenched cultural biases. Using "socialism" the way Barkley did here is a uniquely North Americanism misnomer which has become a meaningless slur that's only relevant within the context of the USA culture wars.
@@tyesamson Um, where did Dr Barkley claim that the current environmental structure of capitalism is the "correct way", exactly? Nowhere. Second, yes, different ideologies are philosophically different. Hence why Dr Barkley referred to a _specific_ ideology (Marxism) in the context of environmental accommodation to refute it. I really don't get what nuance you're trying to get at here.
for real, i was so caught off guard by the end of the video. it came out of nowhere and didn’t relate to the content in the article. it just felt like a weird culture war-y jab at leftism for the sake of it.
I really appreciate your directness and honesty on this topic. You've been immense in helping me understand, treat and handle my son's ADHD. Accepting that his ADHD was a disorder and also a somewhat poorly named disorder helped me take the steps needs to put him on a management and treatment plan, and help ensure he has the best change of a better life.
This takes the attempt to normalize mental health/neurodev issues way too far. Who do I delegate my self care and home life tasks to?? None of us WANT to dump on others. Only dx for a year - trying to dig out of a hole so I’m really in that phase of “doesn’t everyone have a little adhd?” and this kind of message anger me. Most of us don’t even want to disclose or have accommodations. In the scheme of things, I’ve covered so many times for coworkers with families! How ‘bout we just treat others as human beings?!?!
Quick caveat - I have not heard of these articles until watching your presentation. Now I am glad I had not, as there's a good chance reading one or both would have sent me over the edge. The fact these articles have been published is a serious slap in the face. There has been so much effort to break the stereotype of what ADHD is (a neurological disorder and NOT a character flaw 😤😡), and to increase awareness about how the disorder impacts those of us who live with it. Further, research and awareness regarding how ADHD presents in women and girls, and especially the impact of hormonal changes is lacking. This adds to the challenge of increasing education and awareness of not only ADHD, but other mental health disorders like autism, AuADHD, depression, etc. Like others who have commented before me, I thank you for this presentation. And, like other commenters, I hope you and fellow researchers push back on the disinformation and publicly call the authors out.
Thank you, Dr Barkley! Even as a fairly well-informed layperson, I was a bit confused and unsettled by the Economist article. It's incredibly good to get your very clear analysis, putting it all in perspective. I can't say enough good things about your videos on UA-cam, they're a massively helpful resource for us ADHD folks!
Thank you for your clarification! I can relate to the desire of the community to be seen as different, not as sick. But - a very big but: severe ADHS is so debilitating that it qualifies as a desease, simply because treatment is needed. When ADHD turns my every day life into an ordeal, that´s not a divergence, it´s a big problem. We don´t have the power to change the entire civilisation in a way, that makes life easier for neurodivergent people (although it would do a lot of good), so we have to adapt and we have to medicate, if needed. Additional point: those two articles show clearly the effects of superficial knowledge. Those journalists simply don´t know enough of the topic to post such opinion pieces.
Im really happy you made a video about it Mr. Barkley. I think this is a very discussed subject, especially in younger people. Will watch the video when I have the time for it. Thank you, stay safe. Edit: I watched it, and I couldn't help but laugh at the "article" of economist. I personally think (and i think mr barkley thinks so too) if a situation lowers your life quality, and you need to take medication for it to became normal; you do have a disorder. I know people are trying to make it seem like "we are just a little different" but thats just not true. Thank you again for the video, i really wanted you to talk about this subject.
I mean they publish a variety of articles by a variety of authors. There is no magazine or Newspaper that has not published some pretty bad articles. This is certainly a bad article but overall I don't think the Economist is a bad magazine. They're imo among the better ones in terms of overall quality but there are always bad examples to be found, which is why we need to always critically engage with such articles.
They are a good read, but you should never rely on writers to know anything, only provoke thought. No human is going to be trustworthy 100% and we should always be critical. Economist provides a wide variety of views which is ultimately healthy in the grand scheme, but sometimes they are bound to get things catastrophically wrong for the same reason. Be critical but not black and white.
@@ninjam77 You wouldn't need to tell me a magazine called the Econoimist dismissed ADHD...those are investor class not businessmen or entrepreneurs...investors have patience..too much. I wouldn't give my money to anyone even if it was promised 10x in return..unless it was immediately.
In one's own lifetime, a condition like ADHD can start out as a benefit and later give you comorbidities like anxiety and depression. Aging brings out the difficulties.
I’m so thankful for all of your easy to understand info about adhd. I’d really like for your videos to reach a larger audience. If you want some help creating thumbnails for your videos just holler. This is not a bot comment or a troll comment. Just a comment from Sweden from a guy in the adhd screening process (who also happen to have made a thumbnail or two 🙂) thank you for the info you provide!
I think you should write a piece on the dangers of bad reporting, pointing to their article and get it in a 'magazine' comparable in size (or bigger) to the economist
This is just the state of journalism Im afraid. Narcissistic shortcuts to knowledge, heavy reliance on unargued presuppositions, stupidity. And your observation of its socialistic undertones is bang on. Was watching a lecture by Dr James Lindsay on the subject of communism and its praxis and evolution and you can see how this religious ideology has infested all the high positions of state, media, education, medicine, corporation and so forth. Virtually everything has been ideologivally captured by these types.
It seems pretty obvious to me that it is more about not having to accommodate a disorder or a disability under the disability act in the workplace or schools that would cost those organizations money.
Yes. Agreed. Another responder, who seems to be from England, gave an excellent perspective on how the (Conservative party) government there has been trying to reduce the number of people their healthcare system needs to help, thus saving money. Also, it sends people’s money into private healthcare (shifting healthcare towards privatization is part of the Conservatives’ goals), because people actually need diagnosis and help & there’s too much of a backup in waiting for that to happen in the public system (not by accident). Those two articles really came across as propaganda. And I assume The Economist is trying to help out the Conservatives’ and free market proponents’ agenda So I think Dr. Barkley was off on trying to guess the editorial slant and reasons for the existence of these articles..
Spot on. The fact that the articles didn’t bother defining what a disorder is, just points to an apparent fact that ADHD is still widely misunderstood, not just by the mainstream, but even by more pointed publications like TE.
Thank you Dr. Barkley, as well as all dedicated researchers for your commitment regarding the production of valid, repeatable data based research while acknowledging the importance of minimizing bias and knowing when to state within a study that additional research needs to be conducted or that it is valid within a frames/set of frames/specific context(s). A lot of the popular media doesn't cite or add a list of references, and unfortunately I think a lot of people have not been thought about the importance of these, let alone how to read research, data, questioning what possible biases there could be, statistics and p-value... I understand how the employees are likely being pushed to produce these articles for strict, short deadlines and it saddens me that they are not given enough time to map their information out properly or write with an open end to interpretation of what they were able to write and publish within that time frame. I'm a (experimental/fine arts) animation undergraduate in my final year, and took an introductory class in linguistic sciences & an intensive introduction to psychological sciences. I was misdiagnosed with chronic generalized anxiety, which I would never known if I wasn't persistent in understanding why my performances are either very poor or high in contrast to peers dependingly if they let me approach the subject how I want to & provide extentions. My father has early onset alzheimers inherited from his mother, and many of my family members have disabilities. I'm very much considering finding a way to put my skills to use and persuing studies in creative therapy research. People like you from around the world, across time, are very inspiring. Again, thank you.
Thank you so much for helping to fight misinformation. Few minutes ago, as I was commuting to work, I wondered, if those people that make these claims were able to experience ADHD even for five minutes, they would beg to get rid of it. It's like "the matrix", you can only see it by yourself, and that's what happened to me and many friends when we had medication for the first time. Being able to stay put and quiet for minutes without having to shake my legs or move my fingers or constantly switching positions on the chair, I didn't even know I was doing it so much!
This article is so upsetting. The DISORDER is misunderstood enough, and to have a 'respected' outlet spread misinformation about it is irresponsible and dangerous to those of us who struggle. The further into this I get the more I believe my useless Kaiser psychiatrist contributed to it.
I think you meant the social model of disability (or social democracy?), as opposed to socialism! As always, super grateful that this channel (and all your scholarly research) exists!!!
yes, the statement Dr. B used took me aback. Indeed I think he meant as you pointed out. Perhaps it is because the "concept of socialism" has such a horrible connotation in the USA, that he used that term?? ....or could he be against socialised medicine systems?
It's baffling how some highly educated people come to conclusions. Recenlty, A management accountant told me about a cure he had come across for ADHD - cut out sugars!😡
So.... There are a few studies about how cutting out sugars help executive function so some say "it's a cure!" ..... But ADHD is obviously not just executive functioning
@@noshalom I have read the opposite...a steady stream of glucose keeps us functioning better. I'm certainly better with some sugar in me....not too much though.
I was so upset by this article, and I’m so glad you covered it. Thank you! However, I disagree with your political assessment of it. I’ve always seen the Economist as liberal on social issues, but center-right on economics. This article struck me as a very center-right economic argument. I imagined the writer was arguing for less diagnoses to be covered by their nationalized healthcare system. Lifelong healthcare for everyone with ADHD is probably way more expensive than a few likely-trivial environmental adjustments. It might be an anti-establishment argument as well, which is found on both sides, but is more popular on the right in the US…a general feeling that everyone is way over-medicated and over-diagnosed and that ordinary folks with common sense know better than the scientific consensus of the medical establishment.
I never knew there was a magazine left on social issues but center/right on economics..that is perfect for me. I'm a capitalist who makes money then gives it all away like an idiot.
Your words sound very eloquent to this psych undergrad, Dr. Barkley. Also, thank you for giving me something interesting to listen to while driving home from uni instead of the same music playlist.
Thank you for this clear explanation. I get what you're saying and it seems true and reasonsble - except for your assumption that this is communism or that Marxist theory would lead you down the path described in the two articles. I totally disagree. Significant for Marxism or materialist history as analytical tools are rather that they are deeply rooted in reality. Most people would be able to agree on or at least be able to recognise a Marxist description of reality. Then Conclusions can differ depending on ideology. The articles rather describe views often seen as a fusion between former marxists and quite heavy capitalists, which is quite disturbing in it self, wherever you stand on a political or scientific map.
Dr. Barkley -- I love your stuff, its been a huge resource for me. That being said, I can't help but find the line you drew from The Economist to socialism to be ridiculous -- The Economist is famously liberal in the European sense (i.e., liberal as in Adam Smith). Whatever this view says about The Economist, I don't think a socialist way of viewing society is one of them!
100% agreed, Dr Barkley displayed a kind of shocking lack of knowledge of the historical development of ideologies in those few moments. I think he's responding to something called the social model of disability (which is an academic concept as far as I'm aware, and not like, an ideology people are making political proposals on the basis of) and linking it in his head with an idea in his head that he has of communism and the economist
@@miancadonc He's a self professed libertarian and it's fairly common for them to frame neo-liberalism as socialism. It's probably the most blatanty example that I've seen of his own political bias uncritically informing a statement he's made on the channel.
Glad to hear it wasn't just me that drew breath at that point then! Socialism is a dirty word for some it seems. Doc knows, for example, that most adhders absolutely hate being late, disorganised and .....well, we know the rest. Accommodations within acceptable and mutually agreed limits such as eg a late start time , are gold to sufferers. I have yet to meet a sufferer that expects societal redesign to accommodate their ADHD. And managing tasks that some can't perform and others do better is called teamwork. And good leadership. The suggestions didn't sound like advocacy to me. More like condemnation of those who can't adapt through no fault of their own.
This is why I should(n't) read earlier comments first 🙂 though I'm glad I didn't because I wouldn't want to have moderate my thoughts and yet would have. It seems at least that the reductionism to socialism caught others by surprise (though the inference to communism was even worse mind you).
Although so many misinterpretations and attempt to make the world to adapt to ADHD people, I can see some good points in the article in raising the importance of building scafolding for people with ADHD at home, school and workplace, but it should not excuse misbehavior or accountability!
Professor Barkley has really taught me a tremendous amount on the topic of ADHD, in general and in my own case. His no nonsense, scientific approach really changed my thinking, for the better. Imagine my disappointment when he concludes without a lick of support and some very flimsy thinking that this article somehow represents the "socialist approach" to mental health. This is not serious. If only because The Economist subscribes openly and wholeheartedly to free market capitalism. So no, it doesn't "certainly fit". But even if you look past that, what socialist exactly proposes that we design a few things differently in the environment and then just let things run in hopes of "perfect" behavioural outcomes? How many socialists think this kind of approach will "perfect mankind"? Any kind of reference would be nice, but the professor doesn't provide one. In contrast, the approach espoused in the article (as set out by the professor) reminds me of the kind of "light touch" regulation and "nudging" that doesn't fundamentally impede laissez-faire capitalism. Most socialists on the other hand would make universal access to health care their first priority. Has the professor even considered this? All in all, I'm deeply disappointed by how he abuses his (well-deserved) authority in the field of ADHD to discredit a world view that he disagrees with. Not just that, but he does so badly: no sources and flimsy reasoning. Incidentally, that's exactly the source of his beef with the original article in The Economist.
To play the advocate, some 100-200 years ago (19th century), how doable was to have what we have today (8 hours / 40 hours a week work), paid vacations, sick & paternity leave, and so on. At that time, everything in the video (towards the end that is) could be said and held rational in that we can't just change society because some people don't want or can't work 14 hours a day, every day. And yet, we agree today that it's best to have some limits on how many hours a day one can work, paid overtime, and that yes indeed someone else may technically cover a paternity leave --- because they'd do the same for us, and they do do that, when we get our paternity leave. To have this as norm _and_ law was probably unthinkable back a couple of centuries. That is to say, in my favorable reading of the conclusion from the (Economist) article, 200 years ago, ADHD diagnoses would double or triple, supposing it was diagnosable back then as it is today. Because the environemnt demanded more, but the environment changed drastically since then. Which means that the environment can change again. I'm neither a Marxist nor a anti-ADHD-as-a-disorder, but for example flexible working hours in/out of office isn't that radical, or new, for many jobs (IT is rampart with this... And work does get done, on par with with 9-5 in office or even better) and I could read the delegation of tasks a person with ADHD can't do to people who _can_ do them, in reverse: A person with ADHD is delegated tasks that can be done flexibly. I could also say, in reverse, that not everyone likes this flexibility, maybe many (most?) people _like_ the fact they come in at 9, leave at 5, and take vacations at exactly these two seasons of the year, while a person with ADHD wouldn't like that kind of rigidity. The working conditions we have today are a utopia for 200 years ago. I can't speak for the claims that ADHD isn't a disorder, but, and admittedly as a layman observer, I would say it's not out of question that 1) Environment is curiously a multiplier to how much symptoms show and 2) Environments can and do change, and that change can benefit everyone, actually.
I'm of the opinion technology is the disorder. I was fine writing and recording songs in 1990s on my 8-track....today using Abelton with so many options its too overwhelming...too complicated. Even modern photocopiers put me into a state of rage. Then there are those automated can-return machines...i hate it all.
@@stoneneils I always figure the modern software is designed to be approachable to the most general audience possible. That's good old rules of the market. The many features that may come in handy and even impressive to the beginner, actually get in the way for anyone who's done it (correctly), even if the old way makes more sense. Yyou don't actually need to be particularly knowledable in music theory to use Abelton, for example, and it's not immediately obvious whether this is a handicap to the producer or not if they already know the software -- but the fact younger generations know j*** s*** about computers despite growing up around them is a clue. The software features have become so convenient it handicaps over time, same happened with cars. I think that if you can find your way around Abelton features so that it only assists you in applying what you know of good old theory of music, then, when you master that part of the software, you really plug in what you need more, if and when you need it. That's the strategy I use for most everything nowadays. I know you're not asking for help, but I know where you're coming from and that's a tip.
@@ograda3120 Oh I mastered Abelton alright..the problem is its not linear like playing instruments, singing live and tape!! I never know what to do next, there is no set sequence..and because its so easy I am never satisfied..keep adding, rearranging..its insanity compared to just playing the song's part onto tape and voila you are DONE.
I really appreciate your clarity. The current social climate has a positive impact on being supportive in our use of language and not using pejorative terms, unfortunately there is also a populist climate which abrades descriptive and accurate vocabulary. The Economist is performing a fantastical utopian concept of social design as a method of soothing public perceptions. While accommodations are useful, the proposal for erasing ADHD is a market driven position which benefits capital. We must all be aware of how populism influences publications as well as social media in the current political climate. It is a challenge to interpret the motivations behind what we read and it's important to keep in mind who benefits from reduced healthcare spending.
I haven’t had the chance to read the economist article, and I agree with most of the points here, but accommodations should be made in schools and at jobs for adhd brains. Just like we require all buildings to be wheelchair accessible, the cost isn’t what matters, the humanity and inclusion is what matters. And if there is good research which shows allowing people to work at whatever time of day best fits their productivity, it will often benefit all to make a workplace which accommodates this. Obviously it would need to still work for the neurotypical people involved too, but encouraging society to make allowances for peoples differences and disorders shouldn’t be discouraged. Ever! Including assigning tasks which one person is good at to them and assigning tasks they are bad at to someone who is good at those tasks. Nearly every job already does this. Alice is good at art ask her to design the posters Bob is good at computer programming he gets asked to work on a new feature for the webpage etc. Let the adhd person take on mentoring the new students in the lab, and let the organized person keep track of submitting order forms on time once a week. It’s not hard to make such accommodations for adhd including ones which redistribute types of work in a way which benefits everyone.
I agree, but calling The Economist socialist is way off base. They're famous for their support of free markets and economic liberalism.The Economist is not a left-wing publication by any stretch of the imagination.
I think it’d be in everyones interest to stick to talking about what they know best here. Clearly Dr Barkley isn’t an expert in economics/politics, just as the economist has no idea about adhd.
Hi Dr Barkley, I'm a big fan of your clear and extensive videos on ADHD. I was wondering: how can one know the difference between Complex PTSD or ADHD? And what is the importance of the right diagnosis of the two? Thank you so much!
What shocks me is that no authorship is given on either of the two articles. So whose idea was it to force this viewpoint on its readership? Was it one editor’s agenda? Did some offshoot sociologist start talking to an editor and tell them they need to do this story? Is an editor prickly after their kid got diagnosed, and they worry about the kid being pointed out as different? There are no citations for all those claims, as Dr. Barkley remarks in this video, and that is such poor journalism. It’s horribly irresponsible. TIMES TWO! (why the heck did they need 2 articles like that on the sameme day?! Nuts!)
Society's view of ADHD is very serious. I said that I have ADHD in the group where I study singing. I noticed that some people think it's crazy and one of them asked me if I had feelings. In other words, we still have a long way to go before we are seen as equals.
About the spectrum therefore not disorder argument: even very mild pain can become unbearable if it is happening for a long time, and it can even snowball into mystical, larger pains as the neighboring muscles tense up. Likes once I changed my table to be ergonomic height my neck pain faded away.
It's the same thing as saying something is a 'superpower'. Depression isnt considered a super power but people with depression can do great stuff! I hope this thinking gets refined and we recognize the difference between overcoming or adapting disorders and writing them off
Excellent dissection of the article, however far from the article being driven by a socialist idealism of fixing culture, I'd say it is driven by the desire to avoid having the UK state pay for treatment at a time where spending is severely constrained. The defeated Conservative government ran our health system into the ground and the newly elected Labour government have a mandate to rebuild it. It is in desperate need of investment, and there isn't enough money to pay for assessment, treatment, and medication for 4% of the population. As a side note, American politics is so far to the right these days that everything else looks "socialist."
"As a side note, American politics is so far to the right these days that everything else looks "socialist."" You got that right (no pun intended). But most Americans don't even seem to know what socialism is.
Thank you for debunking this article! It’s frustrating that a major journalist publication would be putting out misinformation like this. I am 33 and in the process of getting evaluated for ADHD. I’m a business owner and have adapted a lot of my life to accommodate for my struggles, but even with that, I am still having daily struggles that are negatively affecting my work and life. I’ve made as many life and environmental modifications as I know how to. This has prompted me to seek diagnosis. So the idea that just changing the environment will fix it, from my experience is also false.
I have ADHD. I get what the writer is trying to say but it's an extremely short sighted fix to a problem with different solution. It's no one's job but my own to change my environment to help me function better. For children the parents play a role in that responsibility but that becomes complicated very quickly. The delegation of work is an idealized scenario but impractical. I'd rather outsource the things I struggle with and pay accordingly, so that I can focus on the things I do excel at. I understand how different I am to normal society and it does become frustrating but it would be pompous of me to expect society to change everything to suit my, oftentimes disorder. Clarity and understanding of reality on a national level are the only things that will actual improve everyone's experience who comes in contact with any disorder.
They would more of an argument that ADHD was a variant rather than a disorder if they maintained that it was binary. For example, left handedness is a variant not a disorder. It's also fairly binary. A person who is left handed finds it harder to get along in a right handed world and we should accommodate them more. Again...from a binary variance, not a spectrum. Let's be generous and say that what they are really trying to say is that the neurodivergant category that ADHD fits into is a spectrum and just a different way that brains function. But then the spectrum couldn't be called ADHD. And full ADHD the disorder would still have to exist at the end of it. So them what would the point be? What would change? Also, I have to point out that, as a person who lives on the cusp of diagnosable ADHD, my life can be very difficult even when I'm not squarely on the diagnosable side. So life on the spectrum of ADHD is still very disordered. Sometimes things shift and I hit the wall of the ADHD disorder and sometimes things are going well and I can get by. But compared to a "normal" person my life can be extremely hard and no amount accomodations will help that. Understanding, is helpful. Forgiveness. But there is no change to the way the world works that would make it any easier to be a person on the higher end of the ADHD spectrum.
I see fake adjustments to my environment which put me on autopilot in exact opposite direction & make me rebel because I am not a child . The answer and treatment for myself has already been discovered and worked, my life was liveable and impairments gone. Now I do not have evenings nor people nor normality . I had one day improving recently and really thought it was over … I could listen and learn ….
As someone with ADHD, the expectation that people should be waiting around to serve my needs when I show up is laughable. I'd never show up if I had no direction lol.
Pretty pissed seeing this, I thought the economist was a good source but no full of shit, ADHD and severe anxiety ruined my life, now medicated as an adult, realising l got fucked over by societies ignorance, we all diagnosed should start a class action lawsuit against the economist, stuck up pricks. Thank you. Dr Barkley for your work, you've helped me a lot.
Dr. Barkley, your videos are a great source of solid scientific information on ADHD. But whenever you venture into social topics, I cannot help but cringe. You present your own opinions on how societies should function with an aura of an expert, which is problematic as in these areas you are as out of your scope as The Economist journalists were on ADHD. Abstracting from the main topic of the article and your commentary (in which I agree with you on ADHD being a disorder), the comments you make regarding provision of accommodations is a prime example of ableism. Firstly, we are not born the same and have ranges of skills and challenges that are different. There is no single person on this planet that can do it all. In a complex and interdependent society we all dump some work on others. I don't grow my own food. I am not an engineer, so I am fine to dump bridge design on someone else. But I am happy to pick up work that a person without legs can't do. Organisations that can use their employee's strengths to their advantage tend to do better. Why is Microsoft specifically looking for autistic employees, for instance? I bet they are not sitting in the open-space office once hired... Secondly, along your thoughts, why are we bothering to have wheelchair access to public buildings, schools, universities, train platforms, even new private developments? Or why do we need street crossings with audible signalling and special markings? It is all bloody expensive and annoying. Eventually those without legs can crawl up the stairs or stay at home... It is a question whether we want more inclusive societies or not. European societies have made a good progress in this regard. But yes, we can do better. Especially in the area of invisible disabilities, such as those that relate to mental health. Practically, restructuring environments toward neurodivergent individuals means creating environments that are also more supportive for many of non-disordered people as well. At the end, we all benefit. Thirdly, flexible working time, hybrid work etc. can often be adapted without any detriment to work outcomes. Or with better outcomes. So, why not? On the side, I am not sure if you've actually ever read Marks or are familiar with how communism looks like in practice. It is not at all supporting the individual. This accusation that The Economist is promoting communist ideology doesn't hold up to scrutiny. Finally, the real problem of your stance is the not-so-hidden assumption that there is a golden standard of morally just norms and any behaviour outside of these norms is unethical, or at best disordered. It is an opinion, not science. Better stick to science.
Sorry but this is a strawman of the video. Dr Barkley was and is NOT against accommodations in general, just the idea that one can perfect mankind and reach utopia merely by designing the environment a certain way. That’s incorrect. Certainly he agrees some degree of accommodations should be put in, as he explicitly stated, just not to an extent that starts infringes on others too much and becomes impractical even for the disabled individual (as they would benefit substantially more from treatment).
This article reminds me of almost all articles on religion put on by Jehovas Witnesses I grew up with. References twisted, manufactured reasoning and manipulation. Thanks for putting this article right into it’s belonged place. A paper bin.
My parents decided that my ADHD was just a personality flaw, and all I needed was more discipline. A lifetime of mental health issues later, and I can tell you, that the type of thinking this article is promoting is dangerous and irresponsible
Russell Barkley completely misconstrues The Economist's politics. I understand that politics is not "his lane." The Economist is diametrically opposed to socialism of any sort. The Economist's approach to politics and public policy is neoliberal, meaning a limited welfare state, "free" markets with limited government oversight and regulation, austerity and deficit fear, anti-union, privatized, for-profit healthcare. Countries such as Sweden, Canada, Australia, and many other countries are generally more effective at treating ADHD because they have free (or affordable) and universal access to psychiatric treatment and ADHD meds. In the US, if you lack insurance or are underinsured, the cost of the meds and psychiatric care are prohibitively expensive. In Ohio, a stimulant med such as Vyvanse requires telehealth or in-person appointment with a psychiatrist or NP every 3 months, and the price without insurance can be well over $100 per month.
I've never heard of The Economist being called socialist before! 😀 The transatlantic Overton Window across the atlantic really must have shifted onto another planet.
It may claim to lean libertarian in its stance on some economic matters but its endorsement of Kamala Harris for US president (www.economist.com/in-brief/2024/10/31/why-the-economist-endorses-kamala-harris) fits with its left leaning social and cultural statements. Harris was voted the most far left Senator to have currently held office, sided with other far left congressional candidates, and proposed policies that were clearly socialist if not communist in nature prior to and even during her run for office, though she tried to be more centrist in the final weeks of her campaign. They should have simply stayed clear of endorsing any candidate in our Presidential race entirely. And I didn't say it was socialist on everything just on some of its more recent articles and opinion pieces. My focus was on what I detected to be more obvious socialist solutions proposed in those articles on ADHD. Just my view and I could be wrong on even that. Thanks for watching. Be well.
Regarding the number of identified genetic variants that cause ADHD: SelfDecode says that I am "More likely to have ADHD based on 271,537 genetic variants we looked at". It says that my risk is at the 81st percentile. I do in fact have ADHD. They don't say what studies they used to determine that those 271,537 genetic variants are risk variants for ADHD. That's a huge number.
Oh, if you use Selfdecode and want to know your risk percentile for something they don't show it for--use DecodyGPT and ask it, "what is my percentile risk for neurodivergence" (or whatever it is you want to know it for).
If it is not a disorder or disfunction, then getting reasonable accommodations from an employer is impossible. Even with a medical diagnosis of ADHD as a disorder, it is still difficult to get reasonable acccomodations. Think of it as something similar to partial amputation of a hand. Missing a finger, not much available, or need for accommodation. Three fingers, you may not be able to type very fast. Whole hand, you will need some accomodations.
Why would The Economist be talking about mental disorders anyway? And why would anyone listen? What I see behind this is a drive to get rid of legal protections and required accommodations.
Sorry for the off-topic, but I just watched your video on neurofeedback, and I started wondering why this is so frequently recommended whereas traditional cognitive training is not. It would be especially interesting to learn whether cognitive training apps like Luminosity or Peak show any positive effect on ADHD patients. Are there any studies in that regard?
Feel very demeaning to say that people shouldn't even try to better themselves in spite of whatever ailment they've got. As if they are incapable. "Just give in, there's no point anyway". Really shows how little these people think of us with ADHD.
Doc, you lost me on the last bit, because its a gross misrepresentation of what is being suggested, though perhaps, and I'm going to go out of a limb here, its the US/UK cultural divide. Dr Doyle and Prof Kirby are actually quite instrumental in shaping the concept of neurodiversity within the workplace in the UK. In Neurodiversity at Work (Prof Kirby and Theo Smith) they do outline some of interventions. BTW, I'm South African so I'm an outsider to both these dimensions, but I will mention that I grew up in a country that used "rooigevaar" (red (communism) fear) during apartheid - its not helpful to reduce egalitarianism to communism (or socialism), nor to frame ND as such. Realistic egalitarianism is a balance between idealistic equality and the practical considerations of human diversity. I agree that the article itself is too loose with ideas (though that seems to be how people want to read nowadays) because I don't believe that ND promotes ADHD(&ASD) as "normal", they promote a natural variation of cognitive processing - and a variation still suggests that there is a "normal" anchor. Those at the extreme ends of the spectrum are recognised for needing support beyond simple empowerment so it doesn't simply suggest that we can re-order society and voila everyone is fixed. I realise that inclusivity in the US is an anathema at the moment, but in the non militant ND space inclusivity is not about changing the entire system to accommodate the ND (because that then disadvantages the NT), but to rather accommodate within the system. The article is brief in context but I'm not sure the response is helpful in correcting their errors. Outsourcing certain executive functions is not asking people to "pick up our slack", its the idea that if there are things that you find more difficult to do and someone else is better at it then outsource - I still need to hire a plumber when I'm a bad handyman. Time flexibility is not "start whenever you want" but recognises that there is room in this new world to not be time rigid - deadlines are still necessary. I really do think your conclusion is not helpful in advancing discussions that we need to have. BTW, the disorder argument is a little more insidious and not really a ND movement mainstay - its actually your colleagues that are the most virulent in wanting to demote ADHD as a disorder and to dismiss the DSM. Allen Frances, MD (DSM IV task force chair) is very vocal in this regard, and a newcomer on the block, Mark L Ruffalo, is very dismissive of ADHD as a "fad". The latter has already blocked me on X for challenging his bias against ADHD, and the former doesn't engage. But the reality is that the main challenges of the disorder dynamic are inhouse - and the lay person is left questioning the authenticity of everything. Sorry, a bit long but under the current circumstances we have to be clear on language because nuance is being lost to the bombasts.
Calling it a disorder is not the issue - the stigma that comes with it is. One part of creating a better social environment for "everyone to be perfect" is to reduce the stigma within a society and increase acceptance / tolerance, and the term "neurodivergent" helps with that. I dare to assume that rebranding it as "not a disorder" just to avoid the stigma will just keep people with AD(H)D guessing what's wrong with them, because people are still going to treat them with disdain and have unrealistic expectations of them with lines like "just focus" or "just work harder". It will not eleviate people with AD(H)D from having to deal with the pressure of stigmata.
While I agree with most of the points of your argument, I don't see this as exclusive to socialism. All political ideologies seek to reorder society in some way otherwise they wouldn't be a political ideology we would just call it societal conventions or practices. As someone living with ADHD I would be far happier with someone trying to help make my life easier than all the other people who seek to make it more difficult. I really like your insights and videos but I really couldn't disagree more with the comments on socialism. Additionally, the economist is not really socialist, it seems to me to follow a more Neo-liberal ideology. I don't really know of any socialist I follow, read, or talk with who would think The Economist magazine is in agreement with their political views. Most socialists would want to help with more research and funding into all mental health disorders. The sort of thinking you seem to describe could come from all different political ideologies. It strikes me less a political ideology and more as fantasy concocted by the writer(s) who don't even want to attach their names to their toilet paper of an article.
I wonder if there is research about how many motor vehicle wrecks are caused by a driver with ADHD. I believe my "disorder has caused me to, for example, back into a big yellow pole and a big parked truck.
I like that the economist regularly tries to go out on a limb in their topics, but it really irks me when any writer decides to publish a piece without ever looking at the dictionary. Any person, even children, can make up definitions based on vibes. That's objectively poor writing, at best, and downright willful ignorance bordering on propaganda were they to have a political agenda at worst. It is absolutely dumbfounding the writer and editor never bothered to even check chat gpt before publishing this.
God I hate the super power fetishization of adhd. As someone diagnosed with combined presentation a year ago as an adult, this stuff is not fun. This is not a helpful way of being. Life is much more difficult.
The disrespect these views present!😮 As if anyone would benefit from hindering treatment of ADHD. Imagine living with norms that expect an untreated person with ADHD to define and be aware of when to draw the line or be told to a) give up doing - or striving for being able to do - a certain common thing. b) Demand that the person accept that even though treatment is known, it's not socially acceptable to get. They would be prevented from an opportunity to function better, more independently and without the frustration and pain this would lead to in all aspects of life. I can't even! So the person who has difficulty with concentration, perception, making decisions, impulsivity, regulating emotions, maintaining a stable energy level - as if that wasn't difficult enough - should understand , be aware, self regulate and accept to give up possible autonomi, ability and possibility to contribute . hand that over to....hmmm.... Yes who? The untreated depressed person? I guess we could change the environment for them too. Take turns stroking their cheeks and tell them that we've evolved and because sadness and the purpose of living are subjective concepts on s spectrum we no longer treat depression. The untreated diabetic person? Type 1? Type 2? The paralyzed person without a wheelchair? Thank you, Russell Barkley for speaking up.
Interesting commentary as always Dr Barkley. Particularly interesting comment about the Fabian-esque socialist idea of shaping the environment in order to shape the perfect individual. Currently we're experiencing it from the other end of the political spectrum. The more fascistic - let's not waste the more legitimate title of "conservative" on them. The fascistic side has the idea that the person should be a particular way and so we must reshape all institutions to shape that individual. Not everyone will emerge such that only that ideal person will survive and all others will be eliminated, at least politically and socially, if not in fact at the extremes. Both ends of the political extremes come together in some ways. The fascists just added an intervening step where we define the perfect person and then we shape the environment they say we'll shape everyone who doesn't fit the ideal, and will back it with physical force. Thank you.
Dr Barkley would you be so kind to make a video about the upcoming secretary of health (RFK) and the trump administration’s impact on access or quality of healthcare and stigma for people with ADHD? Thank you.
It does depend a lot on the work - many jobs today can be done remotely and without a rigid daily schedule. In these cases, insisting on a 'traditional' mid-industrial-revolution style fixed routine is purely arbitrary and frankly petty. On the other hand, even in those cases there will often be points of contact that need to be mutually scheduled, such as meetings & planning sessions. Of course there are still a great many jobs i.e. production line work, construction / trade teams, or customer service, where keeping regular hours is an essential part of the work, either because you need the full set of workers present and ready to begin work at all, or because you're interacting with a public that has an expectation that the store or service will be available during regular hours. Obviously in those situations 'accommodation' is a nonsensical concept.
Maybe I'm naive but.. why does a magazine like "The Economist" venture into the field of medical issues? Stick to your guns, is what they say, isn't it?
Sure, just like autism is a form of neurodivergence that can range from being very subtle to overwhelmingly impairing. I like the concept of neurodiversity - I think it's important to recognize that everyone's brain is unique and works in its own way - but I take issue with the notion that a condition which directly affects someone's cognitive abilities should be tolerated instead of treated. I mean, CTE is a form of neurodiversity too, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't pathologize it.
As a philosophical exercise, neurodivergence is an okay concept, but I don't like the way people apply it in the real world. You can be not-normal in ways that are very damaging to yourself or to others. We need to be able to classify something as a disorder or a problem in order to have a solution to it.
This approach is purely ideological in nature that's why it has little to do with the research, science or basic logic. As progressive movements push narration around stuff like gender dysphoria to be viewed as purely different level of identity and stage of normal rather than a disorder, they want also to include neurodiversity in that category. I think it leads people into thinking there are unique and have all the right to demand special treatment from society while trying to remove everything that can lead to stigma including facing the reality of the situation which can be also important motivator for people to do hard work themselves to adjust and improve their life's. Fighting with the stigma by educating people on the topic, and objectively looking for best treatment for the people affected by disorders while helping them realize that they are struggling with something that is very real is the way to go. Instead the progressive ideologs want people to choose easiest route possible by redefining norms, definitions and focus on semantics, which may make them feal better short term, but can have some really dear consequences. If ADHD is not a disorder but different part of the order, everything is practically alright. What is supposed to be the main drive then for ADHD people to better their lives?
May be they should be more specific with the labeling, for example, somebody might have mild cognitive impairment and cannot be in the criteria of Alzheimer's,
![TOTAL-EMPTY - Сльози крізь шрами / Tears Between The Scars [Audio Visualizer]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Q39CPZl2bsM/mqdefault.jpg)
Please write a letter to the economist. They regularly publish letters debating their articles. Or better still push them to publish a rebuttal article or articles by you! Thanks for your great work
Seconded! There's probably a good chance they'll publish it since Dr. Barkley is a well known expert on the topic.
Agreed! Please, please call them out for disinformation! 🙏🏼
Yesssss
That'd be great!
Honestly it's embarrassing they include articles like these in their publication to begin with.
I felt like I was punched in the gut when I read the Economist article.
Learning that I have a disorder that explains why I have always struggled to function 'normally' has been life changing. I don't mind the term neurodivergent, but I have a f***ing disorder, and it has a huge impact on my life.
One can have a neurodivergent condition that impacts their life in terrible ways (and make them disordered). I don’t understand why these are mutually exclusive. The answer is both neurodiverse and disordered in varying degrees
AMEN!!! As another ADHD...I agree with you...and more importantly with Dr. Barkley...on many of his comments, as well as on his science.
@@imthinkingthoughts
Because "neurodivergent" downplays the degree of the disorder. Those who push using "divergent" over "disorder" are almost always people who want to minimise the negative effects of these conditions and try to promote quasi-scientific upsides,. Usually they do this because they don't want you (or themselves...) to feel bad about the condition, but what it results in is people get a "it's really not that bad" mentality about something that is, in fact, that bad. When applied to ADHD it's an archetypical example of toxic positivity, becuase it also leads those who don't have ADHD to assume it's really not that bad and those who are impaired really bad (like I am!) won't be taken seriously any more.
@@Paveway-chan thank you profusely for expanding. The view you outlined is not my view at all and I wasn’t really aware of it. Neurodivergent does not, in my view, reduce the impact of the condition in any sense. It is simply stating that it is a difference in brain type. I totally disagree and am appalled that people use the term in a way that is effectively toxic positivity. This is not inherent to the label of neurodiversity, rather its use. So therefore there may be a pragmatic reason not to use neurodiversity, but this would be like saying some people use the more effective term wrong hence we won’t use the term (effectively policing language)
Employers use that language to fight ADHD as a disability. They will ruin your life just to say you're disobedient or unprofessional. They do not care about mental health at all. Dr. Barkely is doing amazing work, please do not stop.
That’s why they put out articles like these to diminish the truth, and to have ppl questioning if these tarnished ppl are just lazy, and not employable. They purposely put out info like this to harm people who deal with this. I wonder who is funding this article? Probably a big corporation that wants an excuse to fire certain targeted employees
Problem is that nosologically speaking the The Economist writers have it right - it's not a disease so therefore it's not a disorder. It IS a disability. And classification as disability shouldn't require pathologicity, but at present it does and that also makes no sense, so this seems symptomatic of systematic societal structuralization struggles
@@sageinit I think you are making a great point here!
Agreed. Narcissism abounds in management everywhere I've traveled. If you don't believe exactly as they believe, behave exactly as they do, and react exactly how they do, then you shouldn't be allowed to exist at all. Any argument is moot. Ultimately this behavior will alienate them from communication with anyone reasonable, and exist only in an echo chamber. That is their undoing: they will weaken themselves to feed their ego. They are looking for reasons to punish people even though they punish themselves.
@@sageinit I agree with what you state from a nosological point of view, but their article really needs to cite and add references, as well as properly frame their subject.
The article contains a mix of decent, incomplete, and misleading information, likely due to pressure on writers to produce quickly. Including valid research references would enhance its credibility; otherwise, it reads like a typical forum post lacking data. It makes it feel like a linguistic play producing a clickbait-ish article when they likely still invested time in it and I can empathize with how stressful those types of positions must be. More so these days.
Hoping that this will not be received/perceived as an angry or ''what you said is wrong!!'' response. Open to further exchange. I think it is important to exchange, even more so when people have different points of views so we can meet somewhere in the middle. Or at least practice mental flexibility in opening up to different possibilities of how information ties together, forming patterns or not, where is nested context vs data vs biases, etc. I honestly appreciated finding your comment for exactly that reason, actually. Thank you. :)
People don't understand that ADHD is not just about school performance.
ADHD is the reason I suck at social interaction, I can't focus on reading a book, even when the story caught my interest.
ADHD is the reason my house is a mess and that I'm constantly having fatigue.
I'm tired of ADHD being seen only through the lense of performance. I can't even be happy when I don't have to work.
You can't adapt the whole world to ADHD. It's literally not possible.
100% agree. Also there is one very important factor here - the realization that you're struggeling with something that is very real. Before my diagnosis I believed that I am what I very often felt inside - dumb, lazy and unstable. No amount of social acceptance could change that as it was always inside of me. My diagnosis helped me realize that I had biological disadvantage all my life, it made me appreciate me more, because I not only survived through it and make it work to this day, I also managed to build decent life for myself and became decent person in spite of all of it. It made me understand I actually put much more work in everything I do, so I shouldn't be that devastated by my small failures, and at the same time be more grateful for every success. All of that with meds and therapy now helps me improve my life after almost 40 years of real struggle. It's really powerfull stuff. Media outlets pushing this kind of nonsense do more damage than they realize.
The Economist is run, for the most part, out of London, England. There is a feeling in certain places that “this mental health thing has gone too far”, and there’s a desire to rule all but the severely disabled as “fit (enough) for work” so that they can be thrown off extra benefits and put on base rate Universal Credit (around £100 a week, to cover everything) and bullied into work.
Because of backdoor privatisation, funding for healthcare has been mostly going into private pockets, and mental health was the bottom of the list for funding to begin with, and within mental health fund allocation, ADHD is again bottom of the list. So we get diagnosed, given medication, and then we’re left to our own devices. If we wanted to make newly diagnosed people worse, this is how to go about it. So for those of us with ADHD it’s not even that they want our funding, they just want ADHD reassessed and labeled as no different from having ginger hair so we are thus exempted from any protections under law.
A tragedy, because if they addressed it properly not only would most people cost a lot less over their remaining lives, many would likely become productive (earning and paying tax) without having to be coerced.
The utter blindness that ideologically driven, short term budgeting decisions impose!
Dark days ahead unless there’s some unforeseen change in direction. (The UK Government has already been censured by the UN for “systematic and grave violations of the rights of the sick and disabled”. The only Western nation in post ww2 history to have had such laid against them. They just shrugged and carried on. The UN exists to provide moral authority for Anglo-American foreign policy not to stick its nose where it isn’t wanted.)
I'd rather be ADHD than JIN-JER.
You know that's a joke right?
@@jonr6680 yeah, I know
Yup, spot on....I hear it at work as well....good to hear Dr B. put it straight.
So in a way, removing the "disorder" also removes the need for social protections. Wouldn't this be anti socialist? I would argue that this is not a socialist article but rather a liberal article and the Doctors perspective is perhaps USA centric perspective.
@@vectorizationindeed. The Tory policy has been to aggressively attack social benefits for all disabilities.
neurodiversity means well but the movement really discredits the need for things to BE DISORDERS for legal reasons.
disorder is not a negative word! it has meaning and it is needed!
I seriously hate the term neurodiversity for two reasons. 1) It implies that we all benefit from the same treatment, ADHD/autism/depression etc. 2) By definition, psychopaths are “neurodivergent”.
It is a negative word! But that's okay because the condition is negative...
We should stop being weak and accept reality, nobody want a blind child because it is negative...
But if your child is blind you will tell him... no it's okay there's some positivity about it blah blah blah because you want to support him, doesn't mean it's not negative
I don’t think that “the neurodiversity movement” is behind this article. I am neurodivergent (ND), and nope, the article does not speak for me. Nor do I think that most of the ND people that I have met would write this article. For example, I don’t think that many ND people would argue that treatments or supports should be cancelled for everyone with an ND diagnosis, and that societal and environmental changes are sufficient to deal with their conditions.
Now, it is true that ND people are trying to find the right words to describe their conditions. For example, some would like the word “disorder” replaced with “condition”. “Disorder” is a strong word, and may be inadequate to describe the mental state of someone who is well treated and accommodated for his condition. This nuance matters a lot to give people the right impression and idea. Other conditions like astigmatism also do not have “disorder” in their name, but still count as a condition that requires treatment. So, I am not convinced that the word “disorder” is the only choice we have in naming an ND condition.
@@Ouiofcourse Yes, I agree. Pretending that ADHD isn't a disorder and doesn't cause significant difficulties in people's lives doesn't help anyone who has it or even spare their feelings, all it does is make it harder for people to take it seriously and further burden those who have it with more unnecessary guilt/shame. "If ADHD isn't a real disorder than the problems it causes in my life must only be due to my moral failings and character defects." That's a hard pill to swallow even when it's true, but it's cruel to imply such things about people when it's false.
You would be surprised to read a disappointing majority on the autism subreddit that really do go all in on the ND movement, preaching that autism (of all neurodevelopmental 'conditions') and adhd is a.. well.. condition rather than a disorder. They do want treatments that inhibit or dampen some of their symptoms (mostly sensory issues) but begin talking about a hypothetical cure and you're getting downvoted and lectured how that would be an immoral wish to have.
Then again, it's reddit so... @@OrafuDa
I appreciated you covering this article and I agree that the claims made by the Economist's writers sounded ignorant and out of touch.
For my two cents however, as someone with ADHD and an academic background in Political Science, I'd argue this doesn't come off to me as all that left-wing.
What I think is more accurately being reflected here is an author who is out of touch with the material realities of people with ADHD, and ESPECIALLY working class individuals with the disorder.
I'm from the US and was diagnosed in my early 30's. I've seen first hand the difficulties people can face when seeking a diagnosis- everything from a lack of insurance to a lack of professional medical and mental health providers. I've also seen how hard it can be to pursue work place accommodations for any need, let alone ADHD. I work in an "at will" employment state where employers can easily dismiss an employee for any number of reasons. I've had coworkers fired while seeking accommodations- even if ADHD is recognized in the original Americans with Disabilities Act (1995), doesn't mean employers will respect the disorder or feel compelled to deal with accommodation requests.
In fact, I think the greatest damage this type of article could do is to actually give more credence to less than scrupulous employers looking for reasons to ignore their employees' mental health needs. If ADHD isn't a disorder and simply a need for more organization or forgiving work environments, then the blame for ADHD symptoms falls back on those who simply didn't take advantage of said organizational tools.
So oddly enough, this utopian idea of more accommodating institutions, in my mind, comes off less as a socialist pipedream, and more of a Professional Managerial Class writer totally detached from normal working class conditions. It comes off as ignorant, out of touch, and irresponsible.
Well said, I was about to say something along the same lines but you nailed it
UK peeps here pointing out the connection with current efforts by the UK government to cut people off from disability benefits corroborate your point.
I just wanted to say how thankful I am for your consistent uploads. All the effort you put in and your passion are so inspiring, and I really admire your commitment! Even from the other side of the world, here in Asia, South Korea, your videos have been a huge help to me. Please remember that you have supporters all around the world!
Yep 🇦🇺
I was having so much suicidal thoughts 10 years ago as a teenage, also suffered severe anxiety and mental disorder. I got diagnosed with ADHD, spent my whole life fighting ADHD. Not until my husband recommended me to psilocybin mushrooms treatment. Psilocybin treatment changed my life for better. I can proudly say i'm totally clean for 6 years and still counting. Always look to nature for solution to tough problems, Shrooms are phenomenal.
I love hearing great life changing stories like this. I want to become a mycologist because honestly mushrooms are the best form of medicine (most especially the psychedelic ones) There are so many people today used magic mushrooms to ween off of SSRI medication- its amazing! Years back i wrote an entire essay about psychedelics. they saved you from death buddy, lets be honest here.
Hey mates! Can you help with the source? I suffer severe anxiety, panic and depression and I usually take prescription medicine, but they don't always help. Where can I find those psilocybin mushrooms? I'm really interested in treating my mental health without Rxs. I live in Australia don't know much about these. I'm so glad they helped you. I can't wait to get them too. Really need a reliable source 🙏
YES sure of mycologist Pedroshrooms. I have the same experience with anxiety, addiction. Mushrooms definitely made a huge huge difference to why am clean today.
I'm so very happy for you mate, Psilocybin is absolutely amazing, the way it shows you things, the way it teaches you things. I can not believe our world and our people shows less interest about it's helpfulness to humanity. It's love. The mushrooms heals people by showing the truth, it would be so beneficial for so many people, especially politicians and the rich who have lost their way and every other persons out there.
Where do I reach this dude? If possible can I find him on Google
Can't we have a middle ground?
Of course it's not logical to expect everybody to wait for us in schools and workplaces 24/7.
But does a 10 minute delay have to be this shameful? Does it really?
I repeated classes because I was 10 minute late to exams.
I had professors who don't let anyone to enter the classroom literally after 1 minute.
So much stress, so much anxiety.
At my 7th year of college, I had to complete. So it was a "Do or die situation"
So I managed to never be late for a year, but nobody knows the struggle behind the scenes.
I've spent a year that most nights I slept 3 hours (inability to calm down at night, the anxiety of being late in the morning), I could only sleep at weekends.
I've spent a year where most days my meals were only 8 cups of coffee and a banana.
I had so much stress that 1/3 of my hair fell down.
I had heart conditions, gastritis...
So does it really worth it when being in time is this strict and seen as a character value?
Doc says "things have to be done in a certain time", Yet he failed to provide any evidence as to how that "certain time" was decided (see what I did there?)
So I think you're totally right. Of course there are severe cases, completely disfunctional, but there are also many examples of abnormalities being advantages, and yes seizing those advantages for society require some management.
In college I had an amazing group of study. Whenever we needed to work on a presentation they trusted my creativity, we would work together but I would simply fell asleep whenever the fatigue kicked in while they pulled all nighters, then they would wake me up and let me review the final cut and add the abstract, intro, conclusions and our papers and presentation were praised most of the time. ¿Did they picked up the slack or did we do an optimal allocation of our capabilities
@@alonsovelasquez2 I think this is the point. Assuming a genetic basis that is not recent, how do ADHD-style brains function on North Sentinel Island?
From my perspective it’s a disorder in societies built for a very narrow selection of human diversity, not necessarily because what these brains are good at does not contribute valuable input in settings closer to those our ancestors spent most of their time in.
I realise this is a slippery slope perspective, but the DSM does define all disorders in relation to specific societies. Until proper research is done in places like the Amazon we cannot really know for certain one way or the other.
Ugh this makes me so sad. Honestly it is devastating that there is so much stigma around adhd. I am embarrassed of telling people about my diagnosis because most people think it is not real. Articles like this are just confirming that bias. Thanks for taking the time to debunk it.
People will also label you as a helpless dumbass if you tell them you have ADHD. Trust me on this one. They won't tell you they feel this way, they will have no sympathy whatsoever, and they'll tell everyone else how dumb you are for outing your diagnosis to everyone since they would keep that a secret.
Worst thing is they probably think they normalize it and remove the stigma around it. It's ignorance in the purest form.
@@thejayroh0011 I'm really selective with whom I share my diagnosis. There is a stigma similar to what you described or people who just don't treat it seriously. I heard I have ADHD my entire life in a way that I'm just weird, impulsive and hyperactive, but nothing really to reflect on. Only recently after almost 40 days of struggling I found out I have severe ADHD and there is so much verity of different symptoms related to, it really shocked me. At the same time I watch and read tons of content on this stuff and while there is a lot of good info online, there's also loads of nonsense and misinformation, most of it is some kind of ideologically driven. I'm really thankful for dr Russel's channel, I hope it will grow exponentially.
It's very interesting that these articles should appear at the time when the UK government is looking for an excuse to remove financial help for people with ADHD and is hoping to manufacture widespread consent for the decision 🤔
No wonder, anti depressants and anxiety pills are given like candy, while stimulants are banned, why? Because they make people better! Plus the black market is a part of the big pharma and medical fraternity
Hear, hear!!! As a citizen of the UK I haven’t even attempted to add this to my PIP claim for Progressive Multiple Sclerosis as I don’t believe my longstanding executive functioning deficits will be considered or believed
I also find it offensive that they think I should just not be given tasks that are hard for my disorder. Everything is hard to do with ADHD. But if I apply myself and I have understanding and supportive people around me, I can do the hard things and that is good for my self esteem and also helps me learn strategies.
But the "hard tasks" for us can be very easy to do, but if they're uninteresting to us, we can't get to do them, that's the problem, at least in my case.
I'm currently a PhD student in a school psychology program and I was in total agreement with everything presented here regarding ADHD and am generally aware of the research that informs your views. However, the end of the video regarding the attitude of focusing on the environment as a "socialist" or "Marxist" approach seems completely disconnected. The Economist is largely a centrist-conservative platform. They are "liberal" on social issues in the traditional sense of the word liberal, not in the derogatory Fox News sense of the word...
Both capitalist and "Marxist" approaches to economics have philosophies about what types of environments are conducive to human flourishing; I think it would be wrong to assume that the way we have constructed our current environments are the "default", natural, or correct way.
The conclusions these articles make... that we can change the environment to accommodate ADHD and therefore ADHD is not a disorder is definitely a misleading perspective that is not informed by research. With that being said, I do think the "social model of disability" is useful for identifying ways in which we can change our built environments and our societies... While I would describe myself as a socialist, I believe many of these environmental changes are also compatible within a regulated capitalist society.
I agree entirely! The economist article is bad and I was enjoying this thoroughly insightful takedown right up until the utterly disconnected anti-socialist screed. It is very sad and disappointing to see otherwise intelligent experts in one field veer off into red-pill territory.
@@tyesamson It's not "red-pill territory" for Dr Barkley to point out the absurdity in believing that the social environment can be engineered into utopia to effectively eliminate all impairments. Nor is it "veering off" as psychology is implicated in that, which he is an expert in. Keep in mind he was primarily addressing Marxism ideology and the extreme ends of socialism, not the left in general.
@@iliyanovsloungeYour first sentence is a straw man because it's replying to a point I didn't make or even suggest. Your second sentence is at least a fairer point, but it's still a red herring that doesn't address the concern being raised. As the comment I was replying to already perfectly articulated: "Both capitalist and "Marxist" approaches to economics have philosophies about what types of environments are conducive to human flourishing; I think it would be wrong to assume that the way we have constructed our current environments are the "default", natural, or correct way." To not acknowledge this only reveals your own deeply entrenched cultural biases. Using "socialism" the way Barkley did here is a uniquely North Americanism misnomer which has become a meaningless slur that's only relevant within the context of the USA culture wars.
@@tyesamson Um, where did Dr Barkley claim that the current environmental structure of capitalism is the "correct way", exactly? Nowhere. Second, yes, different ideologies are philosophically different. Hence why Dr Barkley referred to a _specific_ ideology (Marxism) in the context of environmental accommodation to refute it. I really don't get what nuance you're trying to get at here.
for real, i was so caught off guard by the end of the video. it came out of nowhere and didn’t relate to the content in the article. it just felt like a weird culture war-y jab at leftism for the sake of it.
Fantastic video. The idea that ADHD is another way of being normal is ludicrous. If it were, it wouldn’t be the subject of so much work and research.
ADHD is normal. It just doesn't jive with a 9 to 5 in modern society
I really appreciate your directness and honesty on this topic. You've been immense in helping me understand, treat and handle my son's ADHD. Accepting that his ADHD was a disorder and also a somewhat poorly named disorder helped me take the steps needs to put him on a management and treatment plan, and help ensure he has the best change of a better life.
Just don't buy him a gun for xmas please. :)
This takes the attempt to normalize mental health/neurodev issues way too far. Who do I delegate my self care and home life tasks to?? None of us WANT to dump on others.
Only dx for a year - trying to dig out of a hole so I’m really in that phase of “doesn’t everyone have a little adhd?” and this kind of message anger me. Most of us don’t even want to disclose or have accommodations. In the scheme of things, I’ve covered so many times for coworkers with families! How ‘bout we just treat others as human beings?!?!
Quick caveat - I have not heard of these articles until watching your presentation. Now I am glad I had not, as there's a good chance reading one or both would have sent me over the edge.
The fact these articles have been published is a serious slap in the face.
There has been so much effort to break the stereotype of what ADHD is (a neurological disorder and NOT a character flaw 😤😡), and to increase awareness about how the disorder impacts those of us who live with it.
Further, research and awareness regarding how ADHD presents in women and girls, and especially the impact of hormonal changes is lacking. This adds to the challenge of increasing education and awareness of not only ADHD, but other mental health disorders like autism, AuADHD, depression, etc.
Like others who have commented before me, I thank you for this presentation.
And, like other commenters, I hope you and fellow researchers push back on the disinformation and publicly call the authors out.
Thank you, Dr Barkley! Even as a fairly well-informed layperson, I was a bit confused and unsettled by the Economist article. It's incredibly good to get your very clear analysis, putting it all in perspective. I can't say enough good things about your videos on UA-cam, they're a massively helpful resource for us ADHD folks!
Thank you for your clarification! I can relate to the desire of the community to be seen as different, not as sick. But - a very big but: severe ADHS is so debilitating that it qualifies as a desease, simply because treatment is needed. When ADHD turns my every day life into an ordeal, that´s not a divergence, it´s a big problem.
We don´t have the power to change the entire civilisation in a way, that makes life easier for neurodivergent people (although it would do a lot of good), so we have to adapt and we have to medicate, if needed.
Additional point: those two articles show clearly the effects of superficial knowledge. Those journalists simply don´t know enough of the topic to post such opinion pieces.
Im really happy you made a video about it Mr. Barkley. I think this is a very discussed subject, especially in younger people. Will watch the video when I have the time for it. Thank you, stay safe.
Edit: I watched it, and I couldn't help but laugh at the "article" of economist. I personally think (and i think mr barkley thinks so too) if a situation lowers your life quality, and you need to take medication for it to became normal; you do have a disorder. I know people are trying to make it seem like "we are just a little different" but thats just not true. Thank you again for the video, i really wanted you to talk about this subject.
Shocking. I thought that this news site was trustworthy. I am so glad you are able to point this out for people to avoid false news.
No news source is completely trustworthy
I mean they publish a variety of articles by a variety of authors. There is no magazine or Newspaper that has not published some pretty bad articles.
This is certainly a bad article but overall I don't think the Economist is a bad magazine. They're imo among the better ones in terms of overall quality but there are always bad examples to be found, which is why we need to always critically engage with such articles.
They are a good read, but you should never rely on writers to know anything, only provoke thought. No human is going to be trustworthy 100% and we should always be critical. Economist provides a wide variety of views which is ultimately healthy in the grand scheme, but sometimes they are bound to get things catastrophically wrong for the same reason. Be critical but not black and white.
@@ninjam77 You wouldn't need to tell me a magazine called the Econoimist dismissed ADHD...those are investor class not businessmen or entrepreneurs...investors have patience..too much. I wouldn't give my money to anyone even if it was promised 10x in return..unless it was immediately.
In one's own lifetime, a condition like ADHD can start out as a benefit and later give you comorbidities like anxiety and depression. Aging brings out the difficulties.
In what way does it start off as a benefit?
@@vans4lyf2013it really doesn't. Broski doesn't know what they're on about.
I’m so thankful for all of your easy to understand info about adhd. I’d really like for your videos to reach a larger audience. If you want some help creating thumbnails for your videos just holler. This is not a bot comment or a troll comment. Just a comment from Sweden from a guy in the adhd screening process (who also happen to have made a thumbnail or two 🙂) thank you for the info you provide!
I think you should write a piece on the dangers of bad reporting, pointing to their article and get it in a 'magazine' comparable in size (or bigger) to the economist
Thank you for your continued dedication, so important that this type of misinformation is called out!
This is just the state of journalism Im afraid. Narcissistic shortcuts to knowledge, heavy reliance on unargued presuppositions, stupidity.
And your observation of its socialistic undertones is bang on. Was watching a lecture by Dr James Lindsay on the subject of communism and its praxis and evolution and you can see how this religious ideology has infested all the high positions of state, media, education, medicine, corporation and so forth. Virtually everything has been ideologivally captured by these types.
It seems pretty obvious to me that it is more about not having to accommodate a disorder or a disability under the disability act in the workplace or schools that would cost those organizations money.
Yes. Agreed.
Another responder, who seems to be from England, gave an excellent perspective on how the (Conservative party) government there has been trying to reduce the number of people their healthcare system needs to help, thus saving money.
Also, it sends people’s money into private healthcare (shifting healthcare towards privatization is part of the Conservatives’ goals), because people actually need diagnosis and help & there’s too much of a backup in waiting for that to happen in the public system (not by accident).
Those two articles really came across as propaganda.
And I assume The Economist is trying to help out the Conservatives’ and free market proponents’ agenda
So I think Dr. Barkley was off on trying to guess the editorial slant and reasons for the existence of these articles..
Spot on. The fact that the articles didn’t bother defining what a disorder is, just points to an apparent fact that ADHD is still widely misunderstood, not just by the mainstream, but even by more pointed publications like TE.
For me a disorder is any condition that makes someone scream and yell over nothing. Guilty as charged!! :)
OMG i just realized..i am indeed charged with harassment and am going through stages to get it dropped!! I didn't even realize it when i posted that!!
Thank you Dr. Barkley, as well as all dedicated researchers for your commitment regarding the production of valid, repeatable data based research while acknowledging the importance of minimizing bias and knowing when to state within a study that additional research needs to be conducted or that it is valid within a frames/set of frames/specific context(s).
A lot of the popular media doesn't cite or add a list of references, and unfortunately I think a lot of people have not been thought about the importance of these, let alone how to read research, data, questioning what possible biases there could be, statistics and p-value... I understand how the employees are likely being pushed to produce these articles for strict, short deadlines and it saddens me that they are not given enough time to map their information out properly or write with an open end to interpretation of what they were able to write and publish within that time frame.
I'm a (experimental/fine arts) animation undergraduate in my final year, and took an introductory class in linguistic sciences & an intensive introduction to psychological sciences. I was misdiagnosed with chronic generalized anxiety, which I would never known if I wasn't persistent in understanding why my performances are either very poor or high in contrast to peers dependingly if they let me approach the subject how I want to & provide extentions. My father has early onset alzheimers inherited from his mother, and many of my family members have disabilities. I'm very much considering finding a way to put my skills to use and persuing studies in creative therapy research. People like you from around the world, across time, are very inspiring. Again, thank you.
I love The Economist, but I got so mad when I saw the article full of the same bs as usual. Thank you for addressing this.
Thank you for being a voice for us🙌🏻
I'm confused as to why such a groundless article could be published
Thank you so much for helping to fight misinformation.
Few minutes ago, as I was commuting to work, I wondered, if those people that make these claims were able to experience ADHD even for five minutes, they would beg to get rid of it.
It's like "the matrix", you can only see it by yourself, and that's what happened to me and many friends when we had medication for the first time. Being able to stay put and quiet for minutes without having to shake my legs or move my fingers or constantly switching positions on the chair, I didn't even know I was doing it so much!
This article is so upsetting. The DISORDER is misunderstood enough, and to have a 'respected' outlet spread misinformation about it is irresponsible and dangerous to those of us who struggle. The further into this I get the more I believe my useless Kaiser psychiatrist contributed to it.
Thank you, Dr. Barkley. 🙏
I think you meant the social model of disability (or social democracy?), as opposed to socialism! As always, super grateful that this channel (and all your scholarly research) exists!!!
yes, the statement Dr. B used took me aback. Indeed I think he meant as you pointed out. Perhaps it is because the "concept of socialism" has such a horrible connotation in the USA, that he used that term?? ....or could he be against socialised medicine systems?
It's baffling how some highly educated people come to conclusions. Recenlty, A management accountant told me about a cure he had come across for ADHD - cut out sugars!😡
So.... There are a few studies about how cutting out sugars help executive function so some say "it's a cure!" ..... But ADHD is obviously not just executive functioning
@@noshalom I have read the opposite...a steady stream of glucose keeps us functioning better. I'm certainly better with some sugar in me....not too much though.
@@stoneneilsit probably works both ways, if you're lacking or in abundance you can have issues in focus so on and so forth
I was so upset by this article, and I’m so glad you covered it. Thank you! However, I disagree with your political assessment of it. I’ve always seen the Economist as liberal on social issues, but center-right on economics. This article struck me as a very center-right economic argument. I imagined the writer was arguing for less diagnoses to be covered by their nationalized healthcare system. Lifelong healthcare for everyone with ADHD is probably way more expensive than a few likely-trivial environmental adjustments.
It might be an anti-establishment argument as well, which is found on both sides, but is more popular on the right in the US…a general feeling that everyone is way over-medicated and over-diagnosed and that ordinary folks with common sense know better than the scientific consensus of the medical establishment.
I never knew there was a magazine left on social issues but center/right on economics..that is perfect for me. I'm a capitalist who makes money then gives it all away like an idiot.
It's nick-named the "E-communist" for a reason.
Your words sound very eloquent to this psych undergrad, Dr. Barkley. Also, thank you for giving me something interesting to listen to while driving home from uni instead of the same music playlist.
Thank you for this clear explanation. I get what you're saying and it seems true and reasonsble - except for your assumption that this is communism or that Marxist theory would lead you down the path described in the two articles. I totally disagree. Significant for Marxism or materialist history as analytical tools are rather that they are deeply rooted in reality. Most people would be able to agree on or at least be able to recognise a Marxist description of reality. Then Conclusions can differ depending on ideology. The articles rather describe views often seen as a fusion between former marxists and quite heavy capitalists, which is quite disturbing in it self, wherever you stand on a political or scientific map.
Bro called the economist a socialist rag lol
wish i'd said that hahaha
Dr. Barkley -- I love your stuff, its been a huge resource for me. That being said, I can't help but find the line you drew from The Economist to socialism to be ridiculous -- The Economist is famously liberal in the European sense (i.e., liberal as in Adam Smith). Whatever this view says about The Economist, I don't think a socialist way of viewing society is one of them!
100% agreed, Dr Barkley displayed a kind of shocking lack of knowledge of the historical development of ideologies in those few moments. I think he's responding to something called the social model of disability (which is an academic concept as far as I'm aware, and not like, an ideology people are making political proposals on the basis of) and linking it in his head with an idea in his head that he has of communism and the economist
@@miancadonc He's a self professed libertarian and it's fairly common for them to frame neo-liberalism as socialism. It's probably the most blatanty example that I've seen of his own political bias uncritically informing a statement he's made on the channel.
Glad to hear it wasn't just me that drew breath at that point then! Socialism is a dirty word for some it seems. Doc knows, for example, that most adhders absolutely hate being late, disorganised and .....well, we know the rest. Accommodations within acceptable and mutually agreed limits such as eg a late start time , are gold to sufferers. I have yet to meet a sufferer that expects societal redesign to accommodate their ADHD. And managing tasks that some can't perform and others do better is called teamwork. And good leadership. The suggestions didn't sound like advocacy to me. More like condemnation of those who can't adapt through no fault of their own.
This is why I should(n't) read earlier comments first 🙂 though I'm glad I didn't because I wouldn't want to have moderate my thoughts and yet would have. It seems at least that the reductionism to socialism caught others by surprise (though the inference to communism was even worse mind you).
@ffbotha, yes, I was quite taken aback at how Americans view socialism. Neo liberalism never seems to be on their radar.
Although so many misinterpretations and attempt to make the world to adapt to ADHD people, I can see some good points in the article in raising the importance of building scafolding for people with ADHD at home, school and workplace, but it should not excuse misbehavior or accountability!
Professor Barkley has really taught me a tremendous amount on the topic of ADHD, in general and in my own case. His no nonsense, scientific approach really changed my thinking, for the better. Imagine my disappointment when he concludes without a lick of support and some very flimsy thinking that this article somehow represents the "socialist approach" to mental health. This is not serious. If only because The Economist subscribes openly and wholeheartedly to free market capitalism. So no, it doesn't "certainly fit". But even if you look past that, what socialist exactly proposes that we design a few things differently in the environment and then just let things run in hopes of "perfect" behavioural outcomes? How many socialists think this kind of approach will "perfect mankind"? Any kind of reference would be nice, but the professor doesn't provide one. In contrast, the approach espoused in the article (as set out by the professor) reminds me of the kind of "light touch" regulation and "nudging" that doesn't fundamentally impede laissez-faire capitalism. Most socialists on the other hand would make universal access to health care their first priority. Has the professor even considered this? All in all, I'm deeply disappointed by how he abuses his (well-deserved) authority in the field of ADHD to discredit a world view that he disagrees with. Not just that, but he does so badly: no sources and flimsy reasoning. Incidentally, that's exactly the source of his beef with the original article in The Economist.
To play the advocate, some 100-200 years ago (19th century), how doable was to have what we have today (8 hours / 40 hours a week work), paid vacations, sick & paternity leave, and so on. At that time, everything in the video (towards the end that is) could be said and held rational in that we can't just change society because some people don't want or can't work 14 hours a day, every day. And yet, we agree today that it's best to have some limits on how many hours a day one can work, paid overtime, and that yes indeed someone else may technically cover a paternity leave --- because they'd do the same for us, and they do do that, when we get our paternity leave. To have this as norm _and_ law was probably unthinkable back a couple of centuries.
That is to say, in my favorable reading of the conclusion from the (Economist) article, 200 years ago, ADHD diagnoses would double or triple, supposing it was diagnosable back then as it is today. Because the environemnt demanded more, but the environment changed drastically since then. Which means that the environment can change again.
I'm neither a Marxist nor a anti-ADHD-as-a-disorder, but for example flexible working hours in/out of office isn't that radical, or new, for many jobs (IT is rampart with this... And work does get done, on par with with 9-5 in office or even better) and I could read the delegation of tasks a person with ADHD can't do to people who _can_ do them, in reverse: A person with ADHD is delegated tasks that can be done flexibly. I could also say, in reverse, that not everyone likes this flexibility, maybe many (most?) people _like_ the fact they come in at 9, leave at 5, and take vacations at exactly these two seasons of the year, while a person with ADHD wouldn't like that kind of rigidity.
The working conditions we have today are a utopia for 200 years ago. I can't speak for the claims that ADHD isn't a disorder, but, and admittedly as a layman observer, I would say it's not out of question that 1) Environment is curiously a multiplier to how much symptoms show and 2) Environments can and do change, and that change can benefit everyone, actually.
I'm of the opinion technology is the disorder. I was fine writing and recording songs in 1990s on my 8-track....today using Abelton with so many options its too overwhelming...too complicated. Even modern photocopiers put me into a state of rage. Then there are those automated can-return machines...i hate it all.
@@stoneneils I always figure the modern software is designed to be approachable to the most general audience possible. That's good old rules of the market. The many features that may come in handy and even impressive to the beginner, actually get in the way for anyone who's done it (correctly), even if the old way makes more sense. Yyou don't actually need to be particularly knowledable in music theory to use Abelton, for example, and it's not immediately obvious whether this is a handicap to the producer or not if they already know the software -- but the fact younger generations know j*** s*** about computers despite growing up around them is a clue. The software features have become so convenient it handicaps over time, same happened with cars.
I think that if you can find your way around Abelton features so that it only assists you in applying what you know of good old theory of music, then, when you master that part of the software, you really plug in what you need more, if and when you need it. That's the strategy I use for most everything nowadays.
I know you're not asking for help, but I know where you're coming from and that's a tip.
@@ograda3120 Oh I mastered Abelton alright..the problem is its not linear like playing instruments, singing live and tape!! I never know what to do next, there is no set sequence..and because its so easy I am never satisfied..keep adding, rearranging..its insanity compared to just playing the song's part onto tape and voila you are DONE.
@@stoneneils so there's a technology that confuses and distracts you while others use it just fine. Maybe you simply have ADHD?
@@neithere That was my point. I;m diagnosed and medicated. Thank god. Indeed its much more manageable now.
We have the same issue in France with most journalist unable to interview the correct experts and write rigorous and informative papers 😏
I really appreciate your clarity. The current social climate has a positive impact on being supportive in our use of language and not using pejorative terms, unfortunately there is also a populist climate which abrades descriptive and accurate vocabulary. The Economist is performing a fantastical utopian concept of social design as a method of soothing public perceptions. While accommodations are useful, the proposal for erasing ADHD is a market driven position which benefits capital. We must all be aware of how populism influences publications as well as social media in the current political climate. It is a challenge to interpret the motivations behind what we read and it's important to keep in mind who benefits from reduced healthcare spending.
I haven’t had the chance to read the economist article, and I agree with most of the points here, but accommodations should be made in schools and at jobs for adhd brains. Just like we require all buildings to be wheelchair accessible, the cost isn’t what matters, the humanity and inclusion is what matters. And if there is good research which shows allowing people to work at whatever time of day best fits their productivity, it will often benefit all to make a workplace which accommodates this. Obviously it would need to still work for the neurotypical people involved too, but encouraging society to make allowances for peoples differences and disorders shouldn’t be discouraged. Ever! Including assigning tasks which one person is good at to them and assigning tasks they are bad at to someone who is good at those tasks. Nearly every job already does this. Alice is good at art ask her to design the posters Bob is good at computer programming he gets asked to work on a new feature for the webpage etc. Let the adhd person take on mentoring the new students in the lab, and let the organized person keep track of submitting order forms on time once a week. It’s not hard to make such accommodations for adhd including ones which redistribute types of work in a way which benefits everyone.
Thank you, Dr Barkley!!
I agree, but calling The Economist socialist is way off base. They're famous for their support of free markets and economic liberalism.The Economist is not a left-wing publication by any stretch of the imagination.
Well, not far-left or socialist.
@@spacetoast7783The Economist is not any form of 'left' whatsoever! It's neo-liberal centre-right.
@@tyesamson okie dokie 👌 😂😂
I think it’d be in everyones interest to stick to talking about what they know best here. Clearly Dr Barkley isn’t an expert in economics/politics, just as the economist has no idea about adhd.
I'm a socialist capitalist and what that means is i build businesses well....but can't run them for sh*t!! lol
Hi Dr Barkley, I'm a big fan of your clear and extensive videos on ADHD. I was wondering: how can one know the difference between Complex PTSD or ADHD? And what is the importance of the right diagnosis of the two? Thank you so much!
What shocks me is that no authorship is given on either of the two articles.
So whose idea was it to force this viewpoint on its readership?
Was it one editor’s agenda?
Did some offshoot sociologist start talking to an editor and tell them they need to do this story?
Is an editor prickly after their kid got diagnosed, and they worry about the kid being pointed out as different?
There are no citations for all those claims, as Dr. Barkley remarks in this video, and that is such poor journalism.
It’s horribly irresponsible. TIMES TWO! (why the heck did they need 2 articles like that on the sameme day?! Nuts!)
Society's view of ADHD is very serious. I said that I have ADHD in the group where I study singing. I noticed that some people think it's crazy and one of them asked me if I had feelings. In other words, we still have a long way to go before we are seen as equals.
About the spectrum therefore not disorder argument: even very mild pain can become unbearable if it is happening for a long time, and it can even snowball into mystical, larger pains as the neighboring muscles tense up. Likes once I changed my table to be ergonomic height my neck pain faded away.
It's the same thing as saying something is a 'superpower'. Depression isnt considered a super power but people with depression can do great stuff! I hope this thinking gets refined and we recognize the difference between overcoming or adapting disorders and writing them off
Excellent dissection of the article, however far from the article being driven by a socialist idealism of fixing culture, I'd say it is driven by the desire to avoid having the UK state pay for treatment at a time where spending is severely constrained. The defeated Conservative government ran our health system into the ground and the newly elected Labour government have a mandate to rebuild it. It is in desperate need of investment, and there isn't enough money to pay for assessment, treatment, and medication for 4% of the population.
As a side note, American politics is so far to the right these days that everything else looks "socialist."
"As a side note, American politics is so far to the right these days that everything else looks "socialist.""
You got that right (no pun intended). But most Americans don't even seem to know what socialism is.
Amazing how it always seems to be adhd they're attacking, feeding the stigma machine. Dr B is a light in a dark world!
Thank you for debunking this article! It’s frustrating that a major journalist publication would be putting out misinformation like this. I am 33 and in the process of getting evaluated for ADHD. I’m a business owner and have adapted a lot of my life to accommodate for my struggles, but even with that, I am still having daily struggles that are negatively affecting my work and life. I’ve made as many life and environmental modifications as I know how to. This has prompted me to seek diagnosis. So the idea that just changing the environment will fix it, from my experience is also false.
I have ADHD. I get what the writer is trying to say but it's an extremely short sighted fix to a problem with different solution. It's no one's job but my own to change my environment to help me function better. For children the parents play a role in that responsibility but that becomes complicated very quickly.
The delegation of work is an idealized scenario but impractical. I'd rather outsource the things I struggle with and pay accordingly, so that I can focus on the things I do excel at.
I understand how different I am to normal society and it does become frustrating but it would be pompous of me to expect society to change everything to suit my, oftentimes disorder. Clarity and understanding of reality on a national level are the only things that will actual improve everyone's experience who comes in contact with any disorder.
They would more of an argument that ADHD was a variant rather than a disorder if they maintained that it was binary. For example, left handedness is a variant not a disorder. It's also fairly binary. A person who is left handed finds it harder to get along in a right handed world and we should accommodate them more. Again...from a binary variance, not a spectrum.
Let's be generous and say that what they are really trying to say is that the neurodivergant category that ADHD fits into is a spectrum and just a different way that brains function. But then the spectrum couldn't be called ADHD. And full ADHD the disorder would still have to exist at the end of it. So them what would the point be? What would change? Also, I have to point out that, as a person who lives on the cusp of diagnosable ADHD, my life can be very difficult even when I'm not squarely on the diagnosable side. So life on the spectrum of ADHD is still very disordered. Sometimes things shift and I hit the wall of the ADHD disorder and sometimes things are going well and I can get by. But compared to a "normal" person my life can be extremely hard and no amount accomodations will help that. Understanding, is helpful. Forgiveness. But there is no change to the way the world works that would make it any easier to be a person on the higher end of the ADHD spectrum.
I see fake adjustments to my environment which put me on autopilot in exact opposite direction & make me rebel because I am not a child . The answer and treatment for myself has already been discovered and worked, my life was liveable and impairments gone. Now I do not have evenings nor people nor normality . I had one day improving recently and really thought it was over … I could listen and learn ….
As someone with ADHD, the expectation that people should be waiting around to serve my needs when I show up is laughable. I'd never show up if I had no direction lol.
Pretty pissed seeing this, I thought the economist was a good source but no full of shit, ADHD and severe anxiety ruined my life, now medicated as an adult, realising l got fucked over by societies ignorance, we all diagnosed should start a class action lawsuit against the economist, stuck up pricks. Thank you. Dr Barkley for your work, you've helped me a lot.
Dr Berkley, would you be willing to talk about how DSM manual was developed and what you think of it?
It's an ideological hit-job, plain and simple.
Goodness! That makes no sense at all! If it’s not a disorder, all that changing the environment wouldn’t be necessary!
Thank you. Thank you so much.
Dr. Barkley, your videos are a great source of solid scientific information on ADHD. But whenever you venture into social topics, I cannot help but cringe. You present your own opinions on how societies should function with an aura of an expert, which is problematic as in these areas you are as out of your scope as The Economist journalists were on ADHD.
Abstracting from the main topic of the article and your commentary (in which I agree with you on ADHD being a disorder), the comments you make regarding provision of accommodations is a prime example of ableism.
Firstly, we are not born the same and have ranges of skills and challenges that are different. There is no single person on this planet that can do it all. In a complex and interdependent society we all dump some work on others. I don't grow my own food. I am not an engineer, so I am fine to dump bridge design on someone else. But I am happy to pick up work that a person without legs can't do. Organisations that can use their employee's strengths to their advantage tend to do better. Why is Microsoft specifically looking for autistic employees, for instance? I bet they are not sitting in the open-space office once hired...
Secondly, along your thoughts, why are we bothering to have wheelchair access to public buildings, schools, universities, train platforms, even new private developments? Or why do we need street crossings with audible signalling and special markings? It is all bloody expensive and annoying. Eventually those without legs can crawl up the stairs or stay at home... It is a question whether we want more inclusive societies or not. European societies have made a good progress in this regard. But yes, we can do better. Especially in the area of invisible disabilities, such as those that relate to mental health. Practically, restructuring environments toward neurodivergent individuals means creating environments that are also more supportive for many of non-disordered people as well. At the end, we all benefit.
Thirdly, flexible working time, hybrid work etc. can often be adapted without any detriment to work outcomes. Or with better outcomes. So, why not?
On the side, I am not sure if you've actually ever read Marks or are familiar with how communism looks like in practice. It is not at all supporting the individual. This accusation that The Economist is promoting communist ideology doesn't hold up to scrutiny.
Finally, the real problem of your stance is the not-so-hidden assumption that there is a golden standard of morally just norms and any behaviour outside of these norms is unethical, or at best disordered. It is an opinion, not science. Better stick to science.
Sorry but this is a strawman of the video. Dr Barkley was and is NOT against accommodations in general, just the idea that one can perfect mankind and reach utopia merely by designing the environment a certain way. That’s incorrect. Certainly he agrees some degree of accommodations should be put in, as he explicitly stated, just not to an extent that starts infringes on others too much and becomes impractical even for the disabled individual (as they would benefit substantially more from treatment).
I'm not able to be productive and accomplish my goals in life... well you're just different that's all good 😂
And this article is harmful for people with ADHD as people come to false conclusions and don’t treat us or dismiss and invalidate our experiences.
This article reminds me of almost all articles on religion put on by Jehovas Witnesses I grew up with. References twisted, manufactured reasoning and manipulation. Thanks for putting this article right into it’s belonged place. A paper bin.
My parents decided that my ADHD was just a personality flaw, and all I needed was more discipline. A lifetime of mental health issues later, and I can tell you, that the type of thinking this article is promoting is dangerous and irresponsible
Someone I'm married to thinks the same way - it's a behavioral problem that should be met with consequences (not the good kind).
Russell Barkley completely misconstrues The Economist's politics. I understand that politics is not "his lane." The Economist is diametrically opposed to socialism of any sort. The Economist's approach to politics and public policy is neoliberal, meaning a limited welfare state, "free" markets with limited government oversight and regulation, austerity and deficit fear, anti-union, privatized, for-profit healthcare. Countries such as Sweden, Canada, Australia, and many other countries are generally more effective at treating ADHD because they have free (or affordable) and universal access to psychiatric treatment and ADHD meds. In the US, if you lack insurance or are underinsured, the cost of the meds and psychiatric care are prohibitively expensive. In Ohio, a stimulant med such as Vyvanse requires telehealth or in-person appointment with a psychiatrist or NP every 3 months, and the price without insurance can be well over $100 per month.
I've never heard of The Economist being called socialist before! 😀 The transatlantic Overton Window across the atlantic really must have shifted onto another planet.
It may claim to lean libertarian in its stance on some economic matters but its endorsement of Kamala Harris for US president (www.economist.com/in-brief/2024/10/31/why-the-economist-endorses-kamala-harris) fits with its left leaning social and cultural statements. Harris was voted the most far left Senator to have currently held office, sided with other far left congressional candidates, and proposed policies that were clearly socialist if not communist in nature prior to and even during her run for office, though she tried to be more centrist in the final weeks of her campaign. They should have simply stayed clear of endorsing any candidate in our Presidential race entirely. And I didn't say it was socialist on everything just on some of its more recent articles and opinion pieces. My focus was on what I detected to be more obvious socialist solutions proposed in those articles on ADHD. Just my view and I could be wrong on even that. Thanks for watching. Be well.
In my experience, ADHD is a disorder, that leads to developmental deficits. The environmental “order” does not wait for me.
Regarding the number of identified genetic variants that cause ADHD: SelfDecode says that I am "More likely to have ADHD based on 271,537 genetic variants we looked at". It says that my risk is at the 81st percentile. I do in fact have ADHD. They don't say what studies they used to determine that those 271,537 genetic variants are risk variants for ADHD. That's a huge number.
Oh, if you use Selfdecode and want to know your risk percentile for something they don't show it for--use DecodyGPT and ask it, "what is my percentile risk for neurodivergence" (or whatever it is you want to know it for).
If it is not a disorder or disfunction, then getting reasonable accommodations from an employer is impossible. Even with a medical diagnosis of ADHD as a disorder, it is still difficult to get reasonable acccomodations. Think of it as something similar to partial amputation of a hand. Missing a finger, not much available, or need for accommodation. Three fingers, you may not be able to type very fast. Whole hand, you will need some accomodations.
Why would The Economist be talking about mental disorders anyway? And why would anyone listen?
What I see behind this is a drive to get rid of legal protections and required accommodations.
completely agree.
Sorry for the off-topic, but I just watched your video on neurofeedback, and I started wondering why this is so frequently recommended whereas traditional cognitive training is not. It would be especially interesting to learn whether cognitive training apps like Luminosity or Peak show any positive effect on ADHD patients. Are there any studies in that regard?
Bravo 👏 👏👏👏
Feel very demeaning to say that people shouldn't even try to better themselves in spite of whatever ailment they've got. As if they are incapable. "Just give in, there's no point anyway". Really shows how little these people think of us with ADHD.
That’s like saying level 2 or 3 ASD isn’t a disorder because “it’s on a spectrum.” 🙄
Doc, you lost me on the last bit, because its a gross misrepresentation of what is being suggested, though perhaps, and I'm going to go out of a limb here, its the US/UK cultural divide. Dr Doyle and Prof Kirby are actually quite instrumental in shaping the concept of neurodiversity within the workplace in the UK. In Neurodiversity at Work (Prof Kirby and Theo Smith) they do outline some of interventions.
BTW, I'm South African so I'm an outsider to both these dimensions, but I will mention that I grew up in a country that used "rooigevaar" (red (communism) fear) during apartheid - its not helpful to reduce egalitarianism to communism (or socialism), nor to frame ND as such. Realistic egalitarianism is a balance between idealistic equality and the practical considerations of human diversity.
I agree that the article itself is too loose with ideas (though that seems to be how people want to read nowadays) because I don't believe that ND promotes ADHD(&ASD) as "normal", they promote a natural variation of cognitive processing - and a variation still suggests that there is a "normal" anchor. Those at the extreme ends of the spectrum are recognised for needing support beyond simple empowerment so it doesn't simply suggest that we can re-order society and voila everyone is fixed.
I realise that inclusivity in the US is an anathema at the moment, but in the non militant ND space inclusivity is not about changing the entire system to accommodate the ND (because that then disadvantages the NT), but to rather accommodate within the system.
The article is brief in context but I'm not sure the response is helpful in correcting their errors. Outsourcing certain executive functions is not asking people to "pick up our slack", its the idea that if there are things that you find more difficult to do and someone else is better at it then outsource - I still need to hire a plumber when I'm a bad handyman. Time flexibility is not "start whenever you want" but recognises that there is room in this new world to not be time rigid - deadlines are still necessary. I really do think your conclusion is not helpful in advancing discussions that we need to have.
BTW, the disorder argument is a little more insidious and not really a ND movement mainstay - its actually your colleagues that are the most virulent in wanting to demote ADHD as a disorder and to dismiss the DSM. Allen Frances, MD (DSM IV task force chair) is very vocal in this regard, and a newcomer on the block, Mark L Ruffalo, is very dismissive of ADHD as a "fad". The latter has already blocked me on X for challenging his bias against ADHD, and the former doesn't engage. But the reality is that the main challenges of the disorder dynamic are inhouse - and the lay person is left questioning the authenticity of everything.
Sorry, a bit long but under the current circumstances we have to be clear on language because nuance is being lost to the bombasts.
Calling it a disorder is not the issue - the stigma that comes with it is. One part of creating a better social environment for "everyone to be perfect" is to reduce the stigma within a society and increase acceptance / tolerance, and the term "neurodivergent" helps with that.
I dare to assume that rebranding it as "not a disorder" just to avoid the stigma will just keep people with AD(H)D guessing what's wrong with them, because people are still going to treat them with disdain and have unrealistic expectations of them with lines like "just focus" or "just work harder". It will not eleviate people with AD(H)D from having to deal with the pressure of stigmata.
While I agree with most of the points of your argument, I don't see this as exclusive to socialism. All political ideologies seek to reorder society in some way otherwise they wouldn't be a political ideology we would just call it societal conventions or practices. As someone living with ADHD I would be far happier with someone trying to help make my life easier than all the other people who seek to make it more difficult.
I really like your insights and videos but I really couldn't disagree more with the comments on socialism. Additionally, the economist is not really socialist, it seems to me to follow a more Neo-liberal ideology. I don't really know of any socialist I follow, read, or talk with who would think The Economist magazine is in agreement with their political views. Most socialists would want to help with more research and funding into all mental health disorders. The sort of thinking you seem to describe could come from all different political ideologies. It strikes me less a political ideology and more as fantasy concocted by the writer(s) who don't even want to attach their names to their toilet paper of an article.
The critique of the irresponsible journalism was great. The straw-manning rant about socialism was unnecessary.
I wonder if there is research about how many motor vehicle wrecks are caused by a driver with ADHD. I believe my "disorder has caused me to, for example, back into a big yellow pole and a big parked truck.
I like that the economist regularly tries to go out on a limb in their topics, but it really irks me when any writer decides to publish a piece without ever looking at the dictionary. Any person, even children, can make up definitions based on vibes. That's objectively poor writing, at best, and downright willful ignorance bordering on propaganda were they to have a political agenda at worst.
It is absolutely dumbfounding the writer and editor never bothered to even check chat gpt before publishing this.
God I hate the super power fetishization of adhd. As someone diagnosed with combined presentation a year ago as an adult, this stuff is not fun. This is not a helpful way of being. Life is much more difficult.
The disrespect these views present!😮
As if anyone would benefit from hindering treatment of ADHD. Imagine living with norms that expect an untreated person with ADHD to define and be aware of when to draw the line or be told to
a) give up doing - or striving for being able to do - a certain common thing.
b) Demand that the person accept that even though treatment is known, it's not socially acceptable to get. They would be prevented from an opportunity to function better, more independently and without the frustration and pain this would lead to in all aspects of life.
I can't even! So the person who has difficulty with concentration, perception, making decisions, impulsivity, regulating emotions, maintaining a stable energy level - as if that wasn't difficult enough - should understand , be aware, self regulate and accept to give up possible autonomi, ability and possibility to contribute . hand that over to....hmmm.... Yes who?
The untreated depressed person? I guess we could change the environment for them too. Take turns stroking their cheeks and tell them that we've evolved and because sadness and the purpose of living are subjective concepts on s spectrum we no longer treat depression.
The untreated diabetic person? Type 1? Type 2?
The paralyzed person without a wheelchair?
Thank you, Russell Barkley for speaking up.
Thats journalism for you mate. Its a cess pool of illogic, narcissism and stupidity.
Interesting commentary as always Dr Barkley. Particularly interesting comment about the Fabian-esque socialist idea of shaping the environment in order to shape the perfect individual. Currently we're experiencing it from the other end of the political spectrum. The more fascistic - let's not waste the more legitimate title of "conservative" on them. The fascistic side has the idea that the person should be a particular way and so we must reshape all institutions to shape that individual. Not everyone will emerge such that only that ideal person will survive and all others will be eliminated, at least politically and socially, if not in fact at the extremes. Both ends of the political extremes come together in some ways. The fascists just added an intervening step where we define the perfect person and then we shape the environment they say we'll shape everyone who doesn't fit the ideal, and will back it with physical force. Thank you.
Dr Barkley would you be so kind to make a video about the upcoming secretary of health (RFK) and the trump administration’s impact on access or quality of healthcare and stigma for people with ADHD?
Thank you.
This!!!
I did. It’s coming out tomorrow morning. Thanks!
@@russellbarkleyphd2023 thank you so much!!! 🥹🙏🙏🙏
It does depend a lot on the work - many jobs today can be done remotely and without a rigid daily schedule. In these cases, insisting on a 'traditional' mid-industrial-revolution style fixed routine is purely arbitrary and frankly petty. On the other hand, even in those cases there will often be points of contact that need to be mutually scheduled, such as meetings & planning sessions.
Of course there are still a great many jobs i.e. production line work, construction / trade teams, or customer service, where keeping regular hours is an essential part of the work, either because you need the full set of workers present and ready to begin work at all, or because you're interacting with a public that has an expectation that the store or service will be available during regular hours. Obviously in those situations 'accommodation' is a nonsensical concept.
Maybe I'm naive but.. why does a magazine like "The Economist" venture into the field of medical issues? Stick to your guns, is what they say, isn't it?
Sure, just like autism is a form of neurodivergence that can range from being very subtle to overwhelmingly impairing. I like the concept of neurodiversity - I think it's important to recognize that everyone's brain is unique and works in its own way - but I take issue with the notion that a condition which directly affects someone's cognitive abilities should be tolerated instead of treated. I mean, CTE is a form of neurodiversity too, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't pathologize it.
As a philosophical exercise, neurodivergence is an okay concept, but I don't like the way people apply it in the real world. You can be not-normal in ways that are very damaging to yourself or to others. We need to be able to classify something as a disorder or a problem in order to have a solution to it.
Somebody doesn't understand Socialism. 😂😂 I agree with most of your broader points, though.
This approach is purely ideological in nature that's why it has little to do with the research, science or basic logic. As progressive movements push narration around stuff like gender dysphoria to be viewed as purely different level of identity and stage of normal rather than a disorder, they want also to include neurodiversity in that category. I think it leads people into thinking there are unique and have all the right to demand special treatment from society while trying to remove everything that can lead to stigma including facing the reality of the situation which can be also important motivator for people to do hard work themselves to adjust and improve their life's. Fighting with the stigma by educating people on the topic, and objectively looking for best treatment for the people affected by disorders while helping them realize that they are struggling with something that is very real is the way to go. Instead the progressive ideologs want people to choose easiest route possible by redefining norms, definitions and focus on semantics, which may make them feal better short term, but can have some really dear consequences. If ADHD is not a disorder but different part of the order, everything is practically alright. What is supposed to be the main drive then for ADHD people to better their lives?
May be they should be more specific with the labeling, for example, somebody might have mild cognitive impairment and cannot be in the criteria of Alzheimer's,