Attention Deficit Disorder 1970s Article Summary

Posted: March 26th, 2020

Attention Deficit Disorder 1970s Article Summary

Name:

Institution:

Attention Deficit Disorder 1970s Article Summary

The article is focused on detailing of the inadequacies and problems associated with dealing with the hyperactive syndrome which in this case is specifically focused on attention deficit disorder. The primary objective as elaborated by the author is highlighting the key errors that are made in diagnosing and offering treatment to children depicting hyperactivity symptoms. This is primarily important because the diagnosis often has n influence over the child’s life and future (Duncan, 1979). Some of the errors that have been discussed at length include family centered diagnostic orientations that are considered inflexible, report writing, ineffective habits in obtaining medical histories, and inadequacy in medical follow-ups following diagnosis as well as semantic errors committed in special education programs that provide non-effective directives. The author further elaborates that there is great need to direct focus in debating on probable solutions that might be implemented in avoiding the occurrence of such erroneous mistakes.

Firstly, the author points to the mistakes included in published materials on hyperactive syndrome, which contain serious fundamental errors concerning the pathology of this condition, its diagnosis, and treatment. For instance, according to a publication, ADD has been categorized as the only medical condition observed in children that has an absolute indication of permitting medical trials (Duncan, 1979). This statement which was controversial leading to an uproar elaborates on the misconception that have since been associated with this condition particularly following the release of various clinical accounts and theory that either support or oppose its validity. The author also deliberates on the Freudian approach that is oriented in dealing with the conditions and symptoms of children exhibiting the ADHD syndrome (Duncan, 1979). According to the author, more factors should be considered other than these symptoms being reflective of the conditions within the family background and the relations created within this setups as well as their contribution to the overall wellbeing of the child. The diagnostic failures are attributed to the issues that children with ADHD often face in adult hood which create havoc in their daily lives and activities. The factors that contribute to this diagnosis often include rigidity observed within psychological practice that renders some established procedures, habits and training ineffective in dealing with children that tend to ADHD related symptoms.

Another error that has been consistently repeated in dealing with children with or assumed to suffer from ADHD is failure to seek adequate responses from the guardian or parent that allows for information to be gathered pertaining to the child’s developmental history as well as his ratings from the detailed list elaborating on behavioral characteristics (Duncan, 1979). An example that is clearly discussed in elaborating on this concern is of Mary and her son who was diagnosed with genetically based hyperactivity. This information was derived from the information his mother had provided regarding his developmental history and her responses from the structured checklist provided containing a description of various behavioral tendencies (Duncan, 1979). Following the diagnosis and treatment provided to him, her son was able to become better at school and an improvement in his performance was noted. Therefore, basing from this experience, the author clearly indicates that in conducting diagnosis, the prime aspects that should be placed in consideration include the information provided by the caregiver that can be either the parent or guardian of the child n behavior and developmental history in order to ascertain the diagnosis provided following the evaluation.  

An inadequate habit that has also been developed during conducting diagnosis and treatment of ADHD is the retention or report writing habits that are taught in the graduate levels of clinical psychology (Duncan, 1979). According to the author, it is important to learn the intricacies of the child under evaluation in terms of their mannerisms and depictions in behaviors rather than fully focusing on reporting everything notable during the assessment process. based on the rationality provided by author, the ,main issues that is associated with the intricate details pertaining to report submitted detailing on the patient’s condition its usability particularly if the practitioner who submitted the report is handing the case (Duncan, 1979). Additionally, he further elaborates that despite the fact that reports are necessary in order to indicate the seriousness and thoroughness dedicated by the psychology in providing treatment and diagnosis, it is also imperative to understand that developing comprehension on the behavioral characteristics that qualify a child for medication trials is highly prioritized as compared to report writing.

It is important that unnecessary mistakes in psychological diagnosis often affect the life of a patient, in this instance, a child assumed to have ADHD therefore necessitating the need for the display of absolute competence in dealing with these issues (Duncan, 1979). Some of the problems highlighted by the author included the solidification of semantic errors and their adoption as protocol in diagnosis should be addressed in order to provide adequate treatment for this condition and avoid misjudgment, which often affect the management of a child’s health condition and education.

References

Duncan, M. (1979). Attention deficit disorder (ADD) 1980: Unnecessary mistakes in diagnosis and treatment of learning and behavior problems of the MBD/hyperactive syndrome. Journal Of Clinical Child Psychology, 8(3), 180-182. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15374417909532915