Learning to drive with cognitive impairment : the experience of young ADHD diagnosed drivers and their parent supervisors

A subset of novice drivers exhibit executive function impairments which may adversely impact on the learn-to-drive period and subsequent driving experience, potentially explaining their overrepresentation in traffic offences and crashes. This paper presents the results of a qualitative analysis of a small series of in-depth semi-structured interviews undertaken individually with affected young drivers (n = 7) and each of their parent supervisors (n = 6). Young drivers were selected on the basis of their ADHD diagnosis, as a sample particularly affected by executive function impairments. Standardised rating scale measures confirmed the currency of the young drivers’ ADHD symptoms and executive function impairment. Results are discussed in terms of common experiences of the young affected drivers and those of their parents as supervising drivers of the learn-to-drive process and subsequent driving behaviour. Key themes included difficulties that were related to core executive function impairments symptomatic of ADHD. Themes also included common emotions that the young drivers associated with driving, with particular types of impact on their driving behaviour. Common strategies that were used by both the young driver and their parent during this learning process and their perceived effectiveness are also discussed. Those that were perceived to be most effective tended to focus on reducing the cognitive load for the young driver when introducing new information and skills.

A brief philosophical examination of ADHD

Concerns have been raised over ADHD from within a range of different disciplines, concerns which are not only voiced from within the hard sciences themselves, but also from within the social sciences. This paper will add the discipline of philosophy to that number, arguing that an analysis of two traditionally philosophical topics - namely "truth" and "free-will" - allows us a new and unsettling perspective on conduct disorders like ADHD. More specifically, it will be argued that ADHD not only fails to meet its own ontological and epistemological standards as an 'objective' pathology, but it also constitutes one more element in what has already become a significant undermining of a crucial component of social life: moral responsibility.

Free will, moral responsibility and ADHD

One of the oldest problems in philosophy concerns the relationship between free will and moral responsibility. If we adopt the position that we lack free will, in the absolute sense—as have most philosophers who have addressed this issue—how can we truly be held accountable for what we do? This paper will contend that the most significant and interesting challenge to the long-standing status-quo on the matter comes not from philosophy, jurisprudence, or even physics, but rather from psychology. By examining this debate through the lens of contemporary behaviour disorders, such as ADHD, it will be argued that notions of free will, along with its correlate, moral responsibility, are being eroded through the logic of psychology which is steadily reconfiguring large swathes of familiar human conduct as pathology. The intention of the paper is not only to raise some concerns over the exponential growth of behaviour disorders, but also, and more significantly, to flag the ongoing relevance of philosophy for prying open contemporary educational problems in new and interesting ways.

The logic of ADHD : a brief review of fallacious reasoning

This paper has two central purposes: the first is to survey some of the more important examples of fallacious argument, and the second is to examine the frequent use of these fallacies in support of the psychological construct: Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). The paper divides 12 familiar fallacies into three different categories—material, psychological and logical—and contends that advocates of ADHD often seem to employ these fallacies to support their position. It is suggested that all researchers, whether into ADHD or otherwise, need to pay much closer attention to the construction of their arguments if they are not to make truth claims unsupported by satisfactory evidence, form or logic.

Free will, moral responsibility and ADHD

One of the oldest problems in philosophy concerns the relationship between free will and moral responsibility. If we adopt the position that we lack free will, in the absolute sense—as have most philosophers who have addressed this issue—how can we truly be held accountable for what we do? This paper will contend that the most significant and interesting challenge to the long-standing status-quo on the matter comes not from philosophy, jurisprudence, or even physics, but rather from psychology. By examining this debate through the lens of contemporary behaviour disorders, such as ADHD, it will be argued that notions of free will, along with its correlate, moral responsibility, are being eroded through the logic of psychology which is steadily reconfiguring large swathes of familiar human conduct as pathology. The intention of the paper is not only to raise some concerns over the exponential growth of behaviour disorders, but also, and more significantly, to flag the ongoing relevance of philosophy for prying open contemporary educational problems in new and interesting ways.

The ADHD debate and the philosophy of truth

There is ongoing and wide-ranging dispute over the proliferation of childhood behaviour disorders. In particular, the veracity of the category Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), has been the subject of considerable scepticism. With no end to the debate in sight, it will be argued here that the problem might effectively be approached, not by addressing the specific features of ADHD itself, but rather by a philosophical analysis of one of the terms around which this entire problem revolves: that is, the notion of truth. If we state: “It is true that ADHD is a real disorder”, what exactly do we mean? Do we mean that it is an objective fact of nature? Do we mean that it fits seamlessly with other sets of ideas and explanations? Or do we simply mean that it works as an idea in a practical sense? This paper will examine the relationship between some of the dominant models of truth, and the assertions made by those in the field of ADHD. Specifically, the paper will contrast the claim that ADHD is a real disorder, with the claim that ADHD is a product of social governance. The intention is, first, to place some significant qualifications upon the validity of the truth-claims made by ADHD advocates, and second, to re-emphasise the potential and promise of philosophical investigation in providing productive new ways of thinking about some obstinate and seemingly intractable educational problems.

ADHD : a case study in fallacy

This paper has two central purposes: the first is to survey some of the more important examples of fallacious argument, and the second is to examine the frequent use of these fallacies in support of the psychological construct: Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). The paper divides twelve familiar fallacies into three different categories—material, psychological and logical—and contends that advocates of ADHD often seem to employ these fallacies to support their position. It is suggested that all researchers, whether into ADHD or otherwise, need to pay much closer attention to the construction of their arguments if they are not to make truth claims unsupported by satisfactory evidence, form or logic.

Community knowledge and beliefs about ADHD

Accurate knowledge and positive attitudes within the community are important for the effective diagnosis, treatment and support of people with ADHD. Most previous research about knowledge and attitudes has focused only on professional groups and parents of children with ADHD. The aim of this study was to explore knowledge about ADHD characteristics and causes, and attitudes towards issues such as medication in the general population. Six hundred and forty-five members of the Australian community, all of whom were parents, completed a questionnaire. The findings showed that the core features of ADHD were well-known, but there were misconceptions and considerable uncertainty about many aspects. Most respondents failed to recognise the genetic basis of the disorder and its potentially lifelong nature. Fathers were less knowledgeable than mothers. Although most participants believed that ADHD is a genuine disorder and recognised the benefits of medication, the majority believed that it is diagnosed too frequently and that medication is prescribed too readily. The study concluded that, in many respects, the public is not well-informed about ADHD and suggested that the media may have an important role in enhancing community awareness of the disorder through responsible, sensitive and accurate reporting.

Teachers' and education students' perceptions of and reactions to children with and without the diagnostic label 'ADHD'

Thirty-four elementary school teachers and 32 education students from Canada rated their reactions towards vignettes describing children who met attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) symptom criteria that included or did not include the label “ADHD.” “ADHD”-labeled vignettes elicited greater perceptions of the child's impairment as well as more negative emotions and less confidence in the participants, although it also increased participants' willingness to implement treatment interventions. Ratings were similar to vignettes of boys versus girls; however, important differences in ratings between teachers and education students emerged and are discussed. Finally, we investigated the degree to which teachers' professional backgrounds influenced bias based on the label “ADHD.” Training specific to ADHD consistently predicted label bias, whereas teachers' experience working with children with ADHD did not.

Countering the ADHD epidemic : a question of ethics?

Recently in Australia, another media skirmish has erupted over the problem we currently call “Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder”. This particular event was precipitated by the comments of a respected District Court judge. His claim that doctors are creating a generation of violent juvenile offenders by prescribing Ritalin to young children created a great deal of excitement, attracting the attention of election-conscious politicians who appear blissfully unaware of the role played by educational policy in creating and maintaining the problem. Given the short (election-driven) attention span of government policymakers, I bypass government to question what those at the front line can do to circumvent the questionable practice of diagnosing and medicating young children for difficulties they experience in schools and with learning.