Agree with Halls. Had a "sprinter" daughter (meaning, she could burn brilliantly through any short-term project, but anything long-term would crush her) who was not formally diagnosed with ADHD until she was 20. The doc didn't just pull out a scrip pad. She was extensively tested.
Then doc starts talking to me, about me and my family history. Good grief, I and two brothers struggled like crazy with this back in the 50s. There is a hereditary component, and it was established then and there. (Looking back on my father's side of the family, there was a brother of his who was "no damned good, wouldn't stick to anything," back in the 30s. Poor bastard.)
Just because something is overdiagnosed doesn't mean it's nonexistent.
Exactly. I agree that it is overdiagnosed, but when you see your good-hearted child struggling for years and he comes home the first day he takes medication so excited because for the first time in his life, he was able to take notes. Somehow the information wasn't lost between his ears, his brain, and his hands. Our child, in particular, isn't a bad kid. He is a loving, mostly happy youth who has spent much of his young life grounded with no privileges because of perceived lack-of-effort on his part. The medication is not the sole answer, he still has to apply himself (which is challenging also!), but the immediate response to the medication drove it home to me that there IS a chemical imbalance that CAN cause SOME kids to have problems with concentration and retention. We don't WANT to medicate our child, but neither do we want him to be pushed aside as a kid who is just "destined to fail", like so many kids are. The medication DOES help him concentrate and retain information. Try not to judge until you've walked in our shoes.