> who says that people with ADHD are incapable of working in a modern corporation
ADHD is a disorder whose primary feature is the inability to control concentration. It's a disorder because the feature is strong enough that a person has trouble interacting with society without help. So, someone who is diagnosed with ADHD has trouble interacting with society without help.
There is no modern institution which supports an inability to control concentration as a money provider. Paintings need to be completed. Novels need to be completed. Abstract thoughts need to be written down.
Any advantage experienced by those with ADHD is also experienced by those who have trouble directing their concentration, but not to a severe enough degree to require assistance interacting with society. I can bet a lot of folks with ADHD would rather live at that point on the spectrum.
There is nothing in the definition of a mental disorder that implies that a person requires assistance to interact with society. You can certainly have ADHD while being capable of coping on your own.
The DSM-IV definition for ADHD requires "clinically significant impairment in social, academic or occupational environments".
This was (somewhat controversially) softened to "clear evidence that the symptoms interfere with, or reduce the quality of, social, academic, or occupational functioning" in DSM-V (2013).
'Inability to function' is a straw man, 'requires assistance' was what you claimed was nowhere implied by the definition of a mental disorder.
One could certainly exhibit ADHD-like _symptoms_ while still being capable of coping on their own (= low 'impairment'), but an ADHD diagnosis would be incorrect in this case [1]. By definition (DSM-IV Criterion D 'clinically significant impairment'), an ADHD diagnosis is appropriate only when the symptoms cause severe enough impairment that require assistance (e.g., 'clinical intervention') to function.
Well, "incapable of working in a modern corporation" was the original claim.
> One could certainly exhibit ADHD-like _symptoms_ while still being capable of coping on their own (= low 'impairment'), but an ADHD diagnosis would be incorrect in this case [1].
I don't see how your source backs this statement up. Yes, it's possible to have many symptoms but low impairment, but your premise that "capable of coping on one's own" is the same as "low impairment" is simply false.
For sure. And I think it's important to note that in a disorder characterized by a mismatch between a person and their environment, changing the environment can apparently make the disorder disappear.
For example, imagine a musician with ADHD. They might struggle a good deal in school, which requires doing a lot of to-them-boring stuff. But once they're out of school, they might be perfectly good at earning a living, because the environment they create is suited to their approach to the world.
I was talking just recently with a software developer with ADHD. They preferred a pair programming environment because that was much more engaging to them than solo coding.
ADHD is a disorder whose primary feature is the inability to control concentration. It's a disorder because the feature is strong enough that a person has trouble interacting with society without help. So, someone who is diagnosed with ADHD has trouble interacting with society without help.
There is no modern institution which supports an inability to control concentration as a money provider. Paintings need to be completed. Novels need to be completed. Abstract thoughts need to be written down.
Any advantage experienced by those with ADHD is also experienced by those who have trouble directing their concentration, but not to a severe enough degree to require assistance interacting with society. I can bet a lot of folks with ADHD would rather live at that point on the spectrum.