[vector_spaces]

There are indeed several widely used objective metrics that can be used to identify hallmark symptoms of ADHD. The difficult part isn't really identifying those symptoms so much as distinguishing from other conditions that can cause many similar symptoms. But OP is not correct in suggesting that there aren't objective metrics -- ADHD probably has more of these than any other psychiatric illness.

In any case, I still think of ADHD and a lot of psychiatric diagnoses as models. We try to make these models useful to relieve suffering. They are far from perfect, but it doesn't make sense to throw the baby out with the bathwater and discount the many people who have been helped

[andoando]

>But OP is not correct in suggesting that there aren't objective metrics -- ADHD probably has more of these than any other psychiatric illness.

What am I missing?

>In any case, I still think of ADHD and a lot of psychiatric diagnoses as models. We try to make these models useful to relieve suffering. They are far from perfect, but it doesn't make sense to throw the baby out with the bathwater and discount the many people who have been helped

This is what it keeps getting down to every time I have this discussion. But I really feel like the discourse is hindering having an deeper understanding of the topic. The mental model and the resulting language, like people saying "I HAVE X,Y,Z" seems to be somewhat philosophically askew. Everything I read seems to point more to "X is a real objective thing, and were trying to find better ways of diagnosing it", rather than "X is what we call these assortment of symptoms alot of patients seem to exhibit which is helped by Y"

From a patient standpoint I think its a monumental difference with people saying things like "I am like Y because I HAVE X", as if X, what was the observed collection of (possibly unrelated) symptoms, now being a cause in itself.

[vector_spaces]

RE what you are missing -- from your other comments I feel you haven't done much prior reading on the topic. There's lots out there, so go for it!

There has been lots and lots of writing on the phenomenology of mental illness and modern mental health culture. There is lots to not like: for instance it tends to encourage excessive rumination and negative feedback loops and over-identification with these designations, as you say. This is why I prefer to think of my diagnoses as models -- they are approximate descriptions of my behavior, and the treatments prescribed are also approximations, and it's up to me to use these as tools to improve my life. But you might enjoy reading some prior art on the topic

But in any case, if the tools aren't useful, then discard them -- I was diagnosed with PTSD in my early 20s, and at the time it was a tremendously helpful and eye-opening -- it hadn't occurred to me that the violence I experienced was impacting me so many years later, but when someone pointed it out to me, I was able to adjust the ways I related to myself and other people, and for the most part, my symptoms are in remission today. I no longer think of myself as "someone with PTSD" -- it's no longer a helpful lens through which I can understand myself

[cmorgan31]

Perhaps you’d find Stephen Grossbergs models on how the ADHD brain processes information interesting. I can’t disagree that ADHD might be too wide an umbrella and I find the medicine is best taken on an as needed basis to augment other coping mechanisms.