[wdn]

This is a bad idea. Good idea for parents who don’t want to spend time with their kids.

When my son was 2, maybe 3, one of the best neurologist in my state diagnosed my son with mild ADHD. He was not talking either.

If med was available, I sure would sign up and give it to him. I was simply “too busy” with work. Instead of playing with him after work, I got busy with other “projects”.

I only got awakening up after my wife lectured me. From the moment on, I spent a lot more time with my children. As it turned out, he does not has ADHD and turned out really bright and have a lot of friends at school.

[shaftway]

> As it turned out, he does not has ADHD and turned out really bright and have a lot of friends at school.

You're setting up some really strong false dichotomies here. Surprisingly you can have ADHD and be smart. Or have friends. Or even have all three.

It's great that you have a better relationship with your kids. It's important to spend time with them on shared interests.

I have mild ADHD that I medicate for as-needed, and my son has severe ADHD. It's something that we have bonded over, and have long discussions about strategies to mitigate and cope with it. He is on medication most days, but it's his choice and he sees the benefits to it.

It's also possible for kids to have ADHD and need medication for it, and for their parents to want to spend time with them.

[barsonme]

If your physician diagnoses a 3 year old child with ADHD, find a new physician.

[okamiueru]

I approached the parent comment with immediate scepticism. I couldn't believe that a therapist would give such a diagnosis for a child of 2-3 years of age. I looked a bit into it:

> According to the 2010-2011 National Survey of Children’s Health, approximately 194,000 preschoolers (2-5 years of age) had a current ADHD diagnosis. Some children outgrow the symptoms, but others may not. Research shows that 3-year-olds who show symptoms of ADHD are much more likely to meet the diagnostic criteria for ADHD by age 13. [1]

And, I'm baffled. Surely, I thought, a "behavioural diagnosis" such as ADHD should not be used at an early stage of development? But, apparently it is. Which then begs the question as to why. Is this good for the child or the parents? Was this a blind study, or does the early "diagnosis" affect the judgment of a child meeting the criteria at age 13?

[1]: https://chadd.org/for-parents/preschoolers-and-adhd/

[barsonme]

Wow! That’s absolutely bananas. I mean, I don’t want to tell physicians or medical researchers how to do their jobs. So, I have to defer to them. But the SNR is so high at that age it seems crazy to make that diagnosis.

I was diagnosed with 'off the charts' ADHD. Looking back, my parents say they can now connect the dots back to preschool (so, 3-4 years old). But at the time, neither my parents nor my teachers could differentiate my behavior from that of my peers. My doctor didn’t even bring it up until high school. That’s all anecdotal, of course. But the three most important parties (parents, teachers, doctor) missing an apparently obvious disorder makes me question diagnosing 2-3 year olds.

[JoBrad]

While I’m glad that this addressed the issue for your family, it certainly doesn’t indicate that other children who struggle with ADHD have parents who are unwilling or unable to be involved with their life.

[The_rationalist]

Oh please it is painfully obvious that it is non mutually exclusive.