The treatment of ADHD, a mental disorder, is a popular topic among scientists, clinicians, and psychologists. However, controversy is present in the topic, and it is caused by much disagreement over whether ADHD is properly diagnosed, and which treatments for ADHD are most effective. Although both sides of each of the aforementioned conflicts consist of members that support their arguments and claims with solely blatant evidence, the sides also include members that invalidly attempt to support their own claims with opinionated statements and emotional manipulation, two factors that often contribute to biased, invalid arguments. Furthermore, all the groups of debaters that provide evidence to support their claims include debaters that make statements …show more content…
In this review and analysis, the author introduces ADHD itself, and he points out the fact that opinions of ADHD treatment vary with terms such as “varying” and “prevalence” (see paragraph one). In addition, the author states that the ADHD controversy is a “debate” over how much ADHD is diagnosed and whether it’s “overtreated” or “undertreated” (see paragraph 1). This suggests that the author approaches the issue of ADHD treatment with a neutral, unbiased attitude, indicating that the author does not take sides in the ADHD controversy. Next, he introduces the academic journal’s author, and states that he provides a “richly textured” and “historical” perspective on how today’s ADHD controversy came to be (see paragraph 2). While the term “historical” is used to indicate that the author of the academic journal includes historical context in his writing, the phrase “richly textured” shows that the author reviewing and analyzing the academic journal is slightly opinionated towards the contents of the …show more content…
The analyst includes the fact that while stimulants are popular in North America, diets are widely favored in the UK. This information has a significant relationship with the ADHD diagnosis controversy because it demonstrates that different places around the world disagree with what ADHD treatment methods are the most effective. However, the analyst adds that a “major oversight” in the journal is a lack of discussion of behavioral ADHD treatments (see paragraph six). Assuming that the analyst is truthful, this shows that the author of the academic journal did not include all types of ADHD treatments. Hence, the academic journal is less reliable because not all aspects of the ADHD diagnosis controversy have been covered. Despite omitting an ADHD treatment method, the author of the academic journal includes his own suggestion for limiting overdiagnosis, which involves “child-centered” classes, an increase in exercise, and other endeavors to constitute to a “healthy home environment” (see paragraph seven). Since the academic journal’s author made a suggestion which consists of executing a certain method for treating ADHD, he has approached the issue without neutrality. However, the analyst himself approached the issue with neutrality by suggesting that efforts to evaluate “each component” and compare efficacies should be funded (see
Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) is a serious neurodevelopment disorder that has affected an innumerable number of children and adults in the United States (Centers for disease Control and Prevention, 2013). It is one of the most common disorders that can cause difficulty at school and home and can also remain into adulthood. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)publishes a web page on ADHD to inform and persuade the public that ADHD is a condition that they should be concerned about. The web page provides facts on symptoms, diagnosis, causes, treatment plans, concerns, statistics and research to help expand the audience’s knowledge on the disorder. The CDC employs the rhetorical appeals of pathos, logos ethos and logos effectively by successfully employing emotional appeals, providing convincing fact and statistics, and building credibility by providing resources and evidence.
A large percentage of Americans suffer from attention deficit disorder also known as ADHD. The news article I chose to write about is a U.S News article by Rachel Pomerance Berl titled Meds or No Meds? How to treat a child with ADHD. This article discusses ADHD and how many Americans are affected by this disorder but also when to treat or not treat a patient who claims to have ADHD. This disorder affects the way people focus, causes over activity and poor impulse control. ADHD can often begin to affect the individual’s life if the disorder is not properly treated.
The core purpose of the CDC Website about Attention-Deficit/Hyperactive Disorder (ADHD) is to educate the public generally and then specifically to inform parents of children that might be suffering from ADHD. There are many unanswered questions about ADHD, and the CDC attempts to dispel some of the myths about the cause, diagnosis, and treatment of the disorder. They present highly logical information through the use of statistics and state by state comparisons. Additionally, there are a few appeals to one’s emotions, suggesting that parental negligence is not the cause of the disorder. Although the dry, mundane tone detracts from the appeal of the website, the inferential
One issue that this article has is the controversy of ADHD and its validity. Some people
There has been so much controversy around the diagnosis of ADHD. There is also a big debate about whether a child has a disorder or not. There is also a huge controversy over whether a parent should give their child the medication that a doctor prescribes for the disorder. Once parents finally decide to place their child on the medicine. They are making the decision that they feel is the best option for their child. Other parents may decide that other treatment options may be better to begin with to see if they cannot fix the problem therapeutically instead. Parents that decide that medicine is the best route may feel that their child would benefit from it, and that benefits outweigh the risks. Whereas to parents that decide otherwise; feel that their child is not that severe with the ADHD, and can handle trying other ways to deal
The increase of ADHD diagnosis has raised many questions and concerns among the public and doctors. However, the percentage of ADHD diagnosis has changed over the last several years. The rise of ADHD diagnosis is, in fact, occurring in the United States. According to (Brown University, 2013) the amount of children that received an ADHD diagnosis increased by 22 percent in a four – year period based on data from the CDC Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) also stated that the percentage of children with a diagnosis of ADHD continue to increase in the United States. The growth of ADHD diagnosis is detrimental to society because it affects how ADHD is diagnosed, treatment, and the estimated number of patients that received an ADHD diagnosis.
Balentine, and Donald R. Lynam worked in attempt to prove that under the DSM diagnosis for ADHD, ADHD-I should not be categorized under the ADHD umbrella in their 2001 article titled, ADHD Combined Type and ADHD Predominantly Inattentive Type Are Distinct and Unrelated. While their goal was to demonstrate that ADHD-I should be removed from the ADHD classification and is distinct and unrelated to ADHD, they acknowledge the need for research to further examine the variances within the currently labeled disorder. Removing a disorder from a classification is no small task. The ripple effect is large in terms of the documentation required as well as the new approach to treatment and prevention that would be required. If Milich et al. (2001) are clearly stating the need for additional research, then they are also recognizing an information gap. To ask for such a wide-reaching change to be applied when additional research is clearly necessary, is irresponsible. The research attained needs to confirm accuracy prior to making such a far-reaching
Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) seems to be the affliction of this generation of children. It seems more prevalent every year. However, diagnosis criteria for ADHD is so subjective, what qualifies, who qualifies? There is no specific clinical cause for ADHD but it obviously exists. So many questions remain to be answered about ADHD. Are more children really being diagnosed with ADHD annually and is it really on the rise as it appears? Are too many children being wrongly diagnosed with ADHD as an easy way out because of other behavioral problems? And when ADHD is properly diagnosed are we overmedicating our children to make it easier for parents and teachers to cope? How often are other afflictions
Whether or not ADHD is a true illness is subjected to debate. Despite the continuous efforts of experts in updating ADHD criteria within the DSM, the diagnosis for it continues to be controversial due to over reliance on vague evidences obtained from perceived irregularities in a patient’s mood and behaviour (Szasz, 2008). I believe ADHD, particularly in children, should not be considered legitimate illness.
From the very beginning of the research, the authors were very detailed with background information about the ADHD prescription phenomenon reporting that the rise in the number of
Over the past couple of decades there has been a huge increase in the diagnosis and prescriptions given out for Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder. According to a news report done by USA Today over the past five years use of ADHD medications have risen 40% totaling 39.5 million individual prescriptions ("New findings," 2009). When statistics like this are seen it is only normal for someone to ask questions. People are becoming curious about the legitimacy of the disorder, and whether or not the treatments being given to individuals are appropriate. The argument seems to be strong on both sides of the fence, but the extensive research done on ADHD leaves it hard for one to believe that it is a made up disorder.
Currently, there is a debate in the medical community on the ethics of diagnosing and treating young children with ADHD. This has stemmed from the fact that the rates of ADHD and prescription of stimulants to these children has risen dramatically in recent years. Many experts find that the condition is over diagnosed and that physicians are prescribing children these powerful stimulants for which we don’t know the long-term effects on their health. On the other hand, many experts are of the belief that the drugs aren’t the problem so much is it is the physicians that are doing the diagnoses and the writing the prescriptions.
The increase of ADHD diagnosis has raised many concerns among doctors in the United States. In 2013, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported new data that showed the number of children diagnosed with ADHD grew by 22 percent in a four-year period Brown University, (2013). The information from the Center for Disease Control & Prevention (CDC) raised questions and concerns about the growth of ADHD diagnosis. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) also stated that the percentage of children with a diagnosis of ADHD continue to increase in the United States. This information was provided by the Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (CDC) to inform the public and raise awareness for ADHD. Researching the growth of
When it comes to giving an evaluation of the Mayo Clinic's work on ADHD in children, it is vital to also give consideration to the factors of currency, logic, and authority. Currency with respects to evaluation is the question as to when the source in question was either published or posted. The impact of the currency depends on the actual content and also to a large extent on what the reader's intentions are with respects to consuming the content in question. For example using a CDC report on heart disease from 1970 would be wise if the reader intended to incorporate such information into a paper that discusses the evolution in the medical community on heart disease. However, the same report would also be a terrible source of the reader sought to instead use it in a paper discussing the effectiveness of heart disease prevention as the data is too old to be reliable due to the advancements of medical knowledge. Next to be considered is the logic that is used within the material in terms of the claims and proposals that the author makes. The central point in this regards is to simply examine where the basis for such claims are made since the reliability of the writing depends on being based on sound logic. Strong logical writing will base such persuasion in solid facts and data with a high degree of objectivity rather than using dubious
Given all the information around the negative outcomes of youth with ADHD, there are currently treatments and psychopharmacological interventions commonly used to help reduce symptoms and improve functioning. Typically, individuals diagnosed with ADHD are typically given a prescription of psychostimulants by a physician (Singh et al., 2015). Although stimulations help to improve functioning, there are limitations to this form of treatment. Limitations concerning the lack of evidence of benefits of long-term educational achievement. Along with, school’s personals inability to control or implement this form of intervention. In consequence, the study proposes a hypothesis that