ADHD is NOT a Myth: Looking Beyond the Headlines

If you have ADHD (diagnosed or not) and felt hurt or unsettled by the framing of Channel 4’s recent documentary, you may not be alone. And if you are a parent or carer like me, supporting a child to navigate a world that isn't designed with their needs in mind, some of the conversations may have felt very close to home, given the impact on the whole family.

The programme raised important questions: How do we find the right support for each person? How can environments be adapted? Could our schools and workplaces do more to embrace different ways of thinking, learning and functioning?

These are conversations worth having. However, a neuroaffirming approach asks us to move away from “What is wrong with this person?” or “Does this condition even exist?” towards “What does this person need to be able to thrive?”

Aspects of the documentary’s framing of ADHD have been strongly challenged by ADHD clinicians and researchers. Professor Katya Rubia, who appeared on the programme, subsequently said her contribution had been “cherry-picked, truncated and presented out of context.”

Six claims worth looking at more closely

1. Is ADHD really a neurodevelopmental condition?

ADHD is internationally recognised as a neurodevelopmental condition. The World Federation of ADHD’s International Consensus Statement identified 208 empirically supported statements about ADHD, approved by 80 authors across 27 countries.

2. If a brain scan cannot diagnose ADHD, is there neurological evidence?

A brain scan cannot currently diagnose ADHD in an individual, but that is very different from saying ADHD has no neurological basis. Research has identified group-level differences in brain structure, function and connectivity, alongside substantial genetic evidence. Professor Rubia specifically challenged the programme's implication that the absence of an individual diagnostic brain scan means ADHD has no brain basis.

3. Are screens, diet and modern lifestyles causing ADHD?

Sleep, stress, screens and lifestyle can certainly influence attention, regulation and wellbeing. Supporting these areas can be valuable, but this does not establish that they cause ADHD. ADHD-like symptoms were described in medical literature as far back as 1775, long before smartphones and social media. The international consensus concludes that ADHD arises from complex genetic and environmental risk factors rather than a modern lifestyle cause.

4. Can anyone get an ADHD diagnosis if they know what to say?

The suggestion that almost anyone could obtain an ADHD diagnosis simply by saying the “right” things risks trivialising what should be a rigorous clinical process. The National Institute of Clinical Excellents (NICE) states that ADHD should only be diagnosed by a specialist psychiatrist, paediatrician or another appropriately qualified healthcare professional with specific training and expertise in ADHD.

Diagnosis requires a full clinical and psychosocial assessment, including developmental and psychiatric history, consideration of other possible explanations, and information about how difficulties affect everyday life. For children, this draws on information from different sources and settings, including home and school. Symptoms must meet recognised diagnostic criteria, cause significant impairment and occur across two or more important settings. NICE acknowledges that multiple clinic visits or observations may be required to reach a diagnostic decision.

The programme did not fully explore the important distinction between the format of an assessment—whether elements take place in person or remotely—and the quality and comprehensiveness of the clinical assessment itself. The quality of ADHD assessments should be scrutinised. But concerns about poor practice shouldn't be used to suggest that anyone can simply talk their way into an ADHD diagnosis. That risks trivialising both a complex clinical process and the experiences of people and families who may have spent years seeking answers.

5. Are we medicating children instead of changing their environment?

It doesn't need to be one or the other. NICE guidelines recommend environmental modifications and reasonable adjustments. For children aged five and over, medication is only recommended only when symptoms continue to cause significant impairment after environmental modifications have been implemented and reviewed. Whether modifications to daily life are actually made is up for debate.

This matters. Medication may be extremely helpful for one child, while another may need something different. We should also be asking whether someone is struggling because the environment is not meeting their needs.

6. Did the programme show that lifestyle changes can replace medication?

No, the programme followed one child while several things changed simultaneously, including medication, screens, diet, exercise and family activities. That child's experience matters, but scientifically it cannot establish which change produced which effect or be generalised to other children, unlike published research that controls variables. Professor Rubia highlighted this methodological problem and noted that the programme itself subsequently showed the child's difficulties at school increasing.

Neurodivergent People Belong!

For me, this is perhaps the most important part of the conversation. Too often, neurodivergent people are asked to change themselves to fit the classroom or workplace, rather than asking what changes might enable them to participate and belong.

Imagine repeatedly receiving the message that the way you move, concentrate, regulate, or experience the world is wrong. Continually masking, suppressing natural behaviours and trying to meet expectations designed around neurotypical functioning can carry a high emotional cost.

Behind many neurodivergent children are parents and carers working incredibly hard to help others understand. They may spend years attending meetings, requesting reasonable adjustments and trying to explain that behaviour labelled “difficult” may actually communicate distress, overwhelm or unmet needs. That advocacy can be exhausting, frustrating and lonely. It can also be heartbreaking to watch a child begin to believe that they are the problem.

Importantly, NICE recognises the “above-average parenting needs” of children and young people with ADHD. It also recommends working with schools to implement reasonable adjustments and environmental modifications. This may be easier said than done. Families shouldn't have to fight endlessly for their children to be understood.

Neuroaffirming practice doesn't deny difficulties or reject treatments that suit the individual. It asks us to see the whole person—their needs, strengths, struggles and individuality—and to create environments where neurodivergent people can feel understood, access the support they need, without sacrificing their mental health to conform to neurotypical standards.

If you are neurodivergent, or a young person, parent or carer feeling exhausted, confused or simply unsure what to do next, you don't have to navigate everything alone. A consultation can be an opportunity to talk things through, make sense of what is happening and think together about what might help make life feel more manageable.