Learn more about
Dr. Meyerhoff
Michael K. Meyerhoff, Ed.D.
Last semester I had a noteworthy student in the human development class I teach at a local college. During class this young man would fidget constantly in his seat. Whenever he had a question he would blurt it out without bothering to first raise his hand and wait to be recognized. If another student was making a comment and he had something to say about it, he usually would jump right in even before his classmate was completely finished.
About three weeks into the semester, he approached me after class and said rather sheepishly, "You'll have to forgive me, I'm ADHD [Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder]."
I looked him in the eye, smiled, and calmly replied, "You are not ADHD ‚ you are a pain in the butt."
The fact of the matter is that a lot of people are occasional pains in the butt for many reasons. Sure, this young man's behavior was problematical now and then, but he was a good kid ‚ quite bright and very personable ‚ and he was essentially well liked by his professor and his peers. And though there were times when his outbursts were somewhat disruptive, they were never devastatingly so. I just didn't see a compelling need for his periodically annoying antics to result in him being labeled diseased, disabled, defective, or disordered in any way. And I certainly didn't see a need for him to be removed from the class and/or medicated.
As I had been teaching in my class and would continue to teach, human development is not a neat and orderly affair. Every individual has his or her own unique rate and pattern of development, every individual has his or her own unique learning style, and every individual has his or her own unique collection of personality and behavioral characteristics. Like snowflakes, sunsets, and other miracles of nature, no two human beings are ever exactly alike.
Unfortunately, our present-day public school system and our modern society in general tend not to respect this fundamental principle of human development. It seems as if there is a growing trend to use standardized curricula, standardized tests, standardized procedures, and standardized everything else. And it seems as if the standards are becoming more narrow and rigid. Furthermore, any deviation from these standards now results in some kind of label being applied, followed by the administration of drugs and/or placement in a special program. Woe to any individual who happens to fall outside the little box.
As I've indicated in previous columns (see Volume 19 Number 3 and Volume 20 Number 7), this trend has resulted in "Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder" and "Learning Disabilities" reaching virtually epidemic status. And it is clear to me ‚ and it should be clear to anyone with a knowledge of human development ‚ that the epidemics are largely the result of drastic and widespread changes in expectations rather than massive and multitudinous changes in the behavior and performance of children. By narrowing the definition of "normal" we have turned what used to be mere "differences" in development into developmental "deficits," and we consequently have created a slew of "problems" that previously were non-existent.
Sometimes there is a simple lack of knowledge involved. For example, I recently saw a set of guidelines suggesting that a child who was not yet speaking by 18 months of age should be labeled has having an "Early Expressive Language Delay." However, specialists in human development have long recognized that the true normal range for the onset of expressive language extends all the way up to the second birthday. Many children who eventually exhibit superb language skills do not say much prior to 23 or 24 months of age ‚ at which time they often begin speaking in complete sentences. To label a child as "delayed" at 18 months may be reflective of attitudes in our competitive present-day society, but it is inaccurate, unfair, and not particularly productive.
Sometimes it is a lack of tolerance that is involved. For example, several decades ago I was working in a program for autistic children. Back then, "Autism" was a diagnosis for kids who made no eye contact, could not speak, and spent the entire day rocking back and forth lost in their own private world. Although there were degrees of the disease, the Dustin Hoffman character in the movie "Rain Man" would have been considered at the outer limits of the diagnosis.
Today we have "Autistic Spectrum Disorders" and spin-offs such as "Asperger's Syndrome." Children diagnosed with one of the more "mild" forms of this "disease" are typically quite functional but not quite "normal." These are the kids we used to think of as a bit strange, weird, odd, etc. ‚ but we never considered referring to them as diseased, defective, disabled, or disordered.
What is behind this alarming trend? In my opinion, it stems from tight finances and family comfort. On one hand, standardization is a very inexpensive route to take. Requiring everyone to do everything at the same time and in the same way eliminates the need for keeping the number of students in the classroom small enough so that every child gets the individual attention he or she needs and deserves. On the other hand, once the little box has been created, it is unsettling for a child's parents when their offspring falls outside and is perceived as problematical. Under these circumstances, especially in our competitive modern society in which mothers and fathers are constantly comparing their child's performance and progress to that of other children, it is nice to have some kind of disease, disability, defect, or disorder ‚ a convenient demon ‚ upon which to place the blame when their kid is designated as "delayed" or "different."
Regrettably, the effects of this are extremely detrimental for the children. First, there are the consequences for self-esteem. When a child is labeled diseased, disabled, defective, or disordered, the child can't help but develop a feeling of inferiority ‚ a sense that he or she is not as good as others and can't do what others can do. As the years go by, the inferiority becomes an integral part of the child's personal identity, which obviously can lead to unhappiness in the intra-personal realm. Furthermore, it can lead to severe problems in inter-personal relationships. As any pop psychologist will tell you, before you can love someone else, you first have to love yourself ‚ and it is rather difficult to love yourself when you are saddled with the sense that you are not as good as everyone else.
In addition, there are problems with regard to future progress. In many cases, the label becomes not only a "diagnosis" but an "excuse" as well. Instead of recognizing that perhaps there are small "shortcomings" to be overcome or slight "aberrations" to be adjusted, the disease, disability, defect, or disorder is offered as a reason to simply accept the status quo, which in turn leads to a lack of motivation. Consequently, slow progress in the future is less often due to the original "problem" than it is to the "learned helplessness" that results from the labeling process.
In any event, by turning differences into deficits, we not only violate fundamental principles of human development, we obliterate one of the fundamental blessings of humanity. It is incredible to me that as we currently strive to recognize, respect, and celebrate "diversity" in racial, ethnic, and cultural backgrounds, we seem to be simultaneously striving to eliminate it in personal characteristics and performances. And just as it is recognized that the "multiculturalism" movement is greatly enriching our society, it should be recognized that the narrowing definition of "normal" as it applies to individual characteristics, behavior, and performance is diminishing the health of our society.
I don't have the answer to stopping and reversing this unhealthy trend. And I definitely don't want to imply that there are no children with genuine problems that should be labeled and addressed. But I do believe that if the big picture will ever be altered, it will be because parents always attempt to ensure that their child is not swallowed by the system and take responsibility for guaranteeing that their child's individuality is not only protected and preserved but cherished as well. That may not be easy, but the long-term payoff will be well worth whatever effort is required.
This discussion always reminds me of the story about the mother who is watching her son parade past her as a member of his school's marching band. Bursting with pride, she elbows the mother standing next to her and loudly declares, "Would you look at that! My Bernie is the only one in step!" The world will be a better place if every kid has a parent like that.
Michael K. Meyerhoff, Ed.D., is executive director of The Epicenter Inc., "The Education for Parenthood Information Center," a family advisory and advocacy agency located in Lindenhurst, Illinois. He may be contacted via e-mail at epicntrinc@aol.com.
May not be reproduced in any format without written permission.