Content area
Full text
In this article, I integrate research in social construct theory, the medicalization of attentiondeficit/ hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), and strengths-based theory to propose a change in the way American society negatively labels and interacts with people diagnosed with ADHD. This article presents examples of global perspectives on ADHD, the nature of stigma that occurs to those who receive a medical diagnosis of ADHD, and the need to reframe ADHD from a disease to that of a positive difference. The reader is asked to consider the implications for millions who suffer from the stigma of ADHD. Starting with children diagnosed with ADHD, I suggest that members of society begin to reframe ADHD as a social construct recognizing the strengths and positive traits because there are many. This is a call to all members of society, especially those professionals of the medical, psychological, social, and educational systems, to adopt a strengths-based model of support for those diagnosed with ADHD.
Keywords: ADHD; social construct; strengths-based theory; reframing; stigma; negative label; medicalization; positive psychology
The concept of social construction, as defined by Berger and Luckman (1966), starts with people in the social system who interact together. These interactions create concepts of each other's actions over time, and people become accustomed to these roles by frequent exposure or repetition. As these roles or experiences are introduced to other members of society and are understood and practiced by society at large, these interactions become institutionalized and adopted by society as knowledge. The method of transmission of this knowledge is through language. Berger and Luckman (1966) explain how only a portion of human experience is retained in the conscious mind. They explain that as these experiences are retained, they become sedimented, as in settled or deposited in a more stable state. As these experiences are shared with others, intersubjective sedimentation occurs as more and more individuals share this common biography. These shared experiences are made available to an entire community, and,
. . . language provides the means for objectifying new experiences, allowing their incorporation into the already existing stock of knowledge, and it is the most important means by which the objectivated and objectified sedimentations are transmitted in the tradition of the collectivity in question. (pp. 63-64)
Social construction theory...