Paper short abstract:

This paper examines the difficulties emerging when thinking about solutions for problems which are not considered as problems by those being targeted by the solutions being implemented.

Paper long abstract:

This papers draws on my fieldwork experience with children aged 10 and 11, diagnosed with Attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and under pharmacological treatment in a school in Santiago, Chile. ADHD is currently the most prevalent mental health disorder in children. Nevertheless, its existence has been challenged by critical approaches to the topic. In addition, the use of stimulant medication to treat the disorder has been publicly questioned, being contested by people arguing that its use correspond to a biological reductionism, whereas the origin of the problem is rather social and economically driven.

ADHD describes a symptomatic constellation which is supposedly disturbing to the well-being of the diagnosed child. Their school performance and difficulty to focus in one task has been described as problematic by specialized literature. Schools normally engages with diagnosed children in particular manners, attempting to boost their interest in school-related contents and topics. However, under the assumption that 'adults know best', both the definition of the problem -the idea of learning and behavioral difficulties- and the framing of the solution -biomedical and pedagogical approaches- leaves out of the picture the experiences and everyday lives of children themselves. In this paper I will explore to what extent are these problems and solutions really problematic or helpful to the diagnosed children. And if they are not helpful at all, how do children define what is problematic? How can adult researchers engage with this, and how can this become helpful when reflecting about research, and about potential solutions to these problems?