[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.