Is this a new tool to diagnose ADHD, or is it just another neuro-scam?

When I was in elementary school, there were two kids in my class who always got “special medicine” at lunchtime. I didn’t understand this at the time, as they never looked sick to me, so I couldn’t comprehend why they would need to take a pill. One day I got up the courage (as only an impertinent seven year-old can) to ask my friend why she needed to take medicine every day, but her answer just confused me even more. She said that without the pill she would get too energetic and be unable to concentrate in class. But this didn’t make sense, as I knew that I often got quite excited and would sometimes talk out of turn, but I certainly didn’t need to take any medicine for this!

Flash forward twelve years, and in college nearly all of my friends were regularly taking Adderall to help them study for exams, whether they were prescribed it or not.

Pathologising the Norm: The spread of mental illness

ONE IN FOUR of us will struggle with a mental illness this year, the most common being depression and anxiety. The upcoming publication of the fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Mental Disorders (DSM) will expand the list of psychiatric classifications, further increasing the number of people who meet criteria for disorder. But will this increase in diagnoses really mean more people are getting the help they need? And to what extent are we pathologising normal human behaviours, reactions and mood swings?

The revamping of the DSM – an essential tool for mental health practitioners and researchers alike, often referred to as the ‘psychiatry bible’ – is long overdue; the previous version was published in 1994. This revision provides an excellent opportunity to scrutinise what qualifies as psychiatric illness and the criteria used to make these diagnoses. But will the experts make the right calls?