ADHD Experience and Diagnosis: A Societal Perspective

Through the lens of Feminist Disability Studies

The premise of feminist disability studies lies in “body, bodily variety, and normalization central to analyses of all forms of oppression” (Hall, 6). Therefore, Wendell’s interrogations of physical disability and, as someone who lives with disability, emphasize the need for inclusion of disability ethics in feminism, and vice versa Wendell believes that "neither impairment nor disability can be defined in purely biomedical terms because social arrangements and expectations make essential contributions to impairment and disability," and that the "biological and the social are interactive in creating disability" (35). She claims that disability is “socially constructed in ways ranging from social conditions that straightforwardly create illnesses, injuries and poor physical functioning, to subtle cultural factors that determine standards of normality and exclude those who do not meet them from full participation in their societies" (36).She claims that on the one hand disability is a direct fallout of hectic lifestyle and people not getting enough nutrition and rest, thus physically getting disabled through factors such as alcohol, traffic accidents, yet on the other hand is the pillar of “expectations and performance" (37). As the aforementioned case studies reveal, “ADHD-types” are well aware of the latter. Disability impacts the physical and social organization of life, "much though not all, of the help that people with disabilities need is required because their bodies were damaged by social conditions, or because they cannot meet social expectations of performance, or because the narrowly conceived physical structure and social organization of society have placed them at a disadvantage, in their words, it is needed to overcome problems that were created socially" (41). Kathy Ferguson, speaking of her journey in the world of dyslexia reflects on the techniques of Ortin-Gillingham instruction methods, which intend to bolsters the “brains’ aptitude for linking letters to the sounds they represent,” observing that the techniques of the OG method are “not rocket science” and that potentially every teacher could adopt these methods of teaching and colleges of education could include these strategies in teacher training curricula (Gorman qtd. in Ferguson, 237, 244). Assessing every student for dyslexia and reading problems and customizing the curriculum through adjustments, all appear within the realm of possibility to Ferguson (244).
Dyslexia and ADHD, though, can both fall on the scale of “hidden disability” and “not fully parallel to more overt physical disabilities, suggesting both internal diversity and potential schisms within the disability movement” (Ferguson, 242). While Wendell does not rest the cause of disability on social factors entirely, she does claim “social response to and treatment of biological difference constructs disability from biological reality, determining both the nature and severity of disability" (42). Wendell distinguishes her thoughts on disability as a social/cultural construction from the standpoint of "approaches to cultural construction of 'the body' that seem to confuse the lived realities of bodies with cultural discourse about and representation of bodies, or that deny or ignore bodily experience in favor of fascination with bodily representation" (44). Wendell is also critical of the post-modernist stance on discourse; she says of Haraway's "The Bio-politics of Postmodern Bodies: Constitutions of Self in Immune System Discourse" that, "Haraway discusses the biomedical construction of "immune system discourse" as though the discourse and its political content are all that there is, without acknowledging either the reality of physical suffering…which surely has some relationship to the development of immune system discourse, or the effects of this discourse on the lives of people who are thought to be suffering from immune disorders" (44). Wendell herself does not think of her body as cultural representation, rather suggests that her experience of it is "highly interpreted and very influenced by cultural (including medical) representations," a notion that is nuanced in Kim’s account of feeling “defective” or Ananya’s account of feeling “stupid.” In another critique of postmodernists who are "critical of idealized, normalized and universalized representations of bodies, she says, "people with disabilities are invisible in discourses of postmodernism" (44, 45).
In sum, according to Wendell, factors that make disability a social construct are: "social conditions that cause or fail to prevent damage to people's bodies;” expectations of performance, “physical and social organization of societies on the basis of young, non-disabled, 'ideally shaped' healthy, adult male paradigm of citizens, cultural representation, and failure of representation" (45). Wendell offers an excellent discussion on accommodations and societal obligations with respect to disability, starting with a profound and practical question: "how much difference can be practically accommodated?” and, "how large a group must find a public place, a product, or an activity inaccessible before we must accept a social obligation to change it?" (47). In terms of ADHD we could ask, how badly does the student need to perform before a teacher decided to call for an evaluation? How do we collate performance at school with behaviors at home that may be identified as psychiatrist Soumya described, “behaving childishly?” While Wendell does not “want to offer an ethical formula for making decisions about how much to change existing structures, objects, and ways of doing things in order to accommodate how many people," she does recommend keeping four factors in mind:
First, likelihood of the number of people benefiting will be greater than expected because "many people are hidden in the private sphere because of assumptions that they belong there and because public places and facilities are inaccessible to them" (47). This could easily be applied to notions of "lack of aptitude" or "not smart enough" to, for instance, taking Advanced Placement (AP) and honors classes in high school. In parent Laurie’s words, “the kids who don’t have this component (ADHD) are in honors classes and AP classes and doing all they can to be recognized and I think these kids tend to get left behind.” Similarly, Kathy tended not to take academic risks while her close friends were in AP classes; instead she south leadership abilities outside academics and to date feels that going through school feeling “not good enough” closed off a lot of opportunities for her. Secondly, Wendell observes, "rates of disability increase with age." Therefore the benefit of strategies that benefit the most whether in education or physical structure will reach a wider demographic. Thirdly, she says, "presence of people with disabilities" has several benefits for those without; simply by there being "better knowledge of the forms of difference" thus leading to a lack of alienation and reduced fear of becoming disabled and subsequently the associated stigma (47). Wendell notes, "If schools, colleges, universities and work places were designed to modified to be fully accessible, and if discriminatory practices were ended, the extra help that a person with disability would need to meet his/her potential would not be very much greater than that needed by a non-disabled person" (51). So, as to what would count as disability, she goes on to clarify, "preventing disability requires providing, wherever possible, the ability to participate in all major aspects of life in a society, in which I would include (for Canada and the United States) at least work, social life, political life, religious life, cultural life, personal relationships, and recreation” (50). However she does not feel entirely satisfied with this description either and feels that merely participation is not enough that people with disabilities should be able to enjoy and live life to their potential. Then her conflict becomes should the goals of social responsibility and help go beyond those for people without disabilities?
Finally, she observes that attitudes that posit disability as a “personal or family problem (of biological or accidental origin), rather than a matter of social responsibility, are cultural contributors to disability” that work “against social measures to increase accessibility" (52). "I imagine a fully accessible society, the most fundamental characteristic of which is universal recognition that all structures have to be built and all activities have to be organized for the widest practical range of human abilities" (55). Commenting on hierarchies of power in rehabilitative institutions, where non-disabled-like people are at the top, she says “failure to control the body is one of the most powerful symbolic meanings of disability" (61).

This page has paths: