The ADHD “Scam” Myth: A Response to Misinformation
The Dangerous Ignorance of ADHD Stigma: A Response to Melanie McDonagh’s Article
The Power and Responsibility of Journalism
Journalism holds the power to shape public perception, influence policies, and foster societal progress. With this influence comes a responsibility: to ensure that reporting is informed, fair, and does not contribute to harm. Unfortunately, Melanie McDonagh’s recent article, “I’m Sorry, but ADHD Has Become a Scam That Is Wildly Overdiagnosed and an Excuse for Poor Behaviour,” published in The Standard, fails in this responsibility.
McDonagh acknowledges that her article is based on her personal opinion rather than expertise, yet she freely spreads harmful, outdated, and baseless misconceptions about ADHD. The problem isn’t just that she has an opinion—it’s that a major publication allowed an uninformed and inflammatory opinion to be published as though it holds weight in a scientific or social discourse.
The effects of such reckless journalism are serious: misinformation fuels stigma, discourages people from seeking help, and undermines the legitimacy of neurodivergent experiences. This article will address McDonagh’s claims one by one, citing real research and expert opinions from leading institutions.
ADHD is Not Overdiagnosed—It Has Been Critically Underdiagnosed for Decades
McDonagh argues that ADHD is overdiagnosed and implies that the increasing rate of diagnosis is due to a societal trend of “medicalising the human condition.” This statement reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of ADHD’s history.
The Truth: ADHD has been historically underdiagnosed, particularly in women, girls, and adults. Many individuals have gone through life struggling without recognition or support. Research from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) and the British Medical Journal (BMJ) has repeatedly shown that the rise in ADHD diagnoses is not a result of overdiagnosis but better awareness and (somewhat) improved screening criteria.
A 2021 study published in The Lancet Psychiatry found that ADHD remains severely underdiagnosed in adults, with many receiving a diagnosis only after years of misdiagnosis or being dismissed. Similarly, the Royal College of Psychiatrists states that women and high-masking individuals are particularly overlooked, which explains why many are only being recognised now.
So, the real question should be: Why has it taken so long for these people to receive support?
ADHD is a Neurological Condition, Not a Byproduct of Modern Life
McDonagh attempts to attribute the rise in ADHD diagnoses to smartphones and fast-paced modern living, suggesting that people are mistaking normal distraction for a disorder.
The Truth: ADHD is a neurodevelopmental condition with clear genetic and neurological evidence. It is not caused by lifestyle or smartphone use. Studies using MRI scans have demonstrated that individuals with ADHD show structural and functional differences in their brains, particularly in areas related to impulse control, attention regulation, and executive function (Shaw et al., American Journal of Psychiatry, 2007).
The National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) and the World Health Organization (WHO) have both confirmed that ADHD is a legitimate neurodevelopmental disorder, rooted in differences in brain chemistry—specifically in dopamine regulation. The notion that ADHD is just a byproduct of modern life is both unscientific and dismissive.
Accommodations Are Not a Cheat Code—They Level the Playing Field
McDonagh mocks the idea that students with ADHD get extra time in exams, suggesting that this is an unfair advantage rather than a necessary accommodation.
The Truth: Exam accommodations exist to create equal opportunities. ADHD impacts processing speed, working memory, and executive function, meaning that timed tests do not accurately reflect an individual’s abilities.
The British Psychological Society (BPS) and Educational Testing Service (ETS), which oversee learning accommodations, have conducted multiple studies confirming that students with ADHD perform significantly worse on timed assessments compared to their neurotypical peers, despite having equal intelligence levels.
Extra time doesn’t give an advantage—it compensates for the neurobiological differences in information processing. If McDonagh had taken the time to research this, she might have understood why accommodations exist in the first place.
The PIP Argument: Perpetuating Dangerous Welfare Stigma
McDonagh claims that ADHD is being used as an easy route to claim Personal Independence Payments (PIP), insinuating that many are exaggerating their struggles for financial gain.
The Truth: The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) itself has confirmed that PIP assessments are notoriously strict and difficult to qualify for, particularly for those with “invisible” disabilities. Many people with ADHD and other neurodivergent conditions struggle to get the support they need because the assessment system is not designed to accommodate executive function differences.
A 2022 report from Disability Rights UK found that more than 50% of PIP claims for ADHD are initially denied, with many claimants forced to go through lengthy appeals processes. This is not a system that hands out benefits easily—quite the opposite.
To suggest that people are “gaming” the system is not only factually incorrect but deeply offensive to those who genuinely struggle with daily tasks, employment, and mental health as a result of their condition.
ADHD is Not Just “Being Distracted” – It’s a Disabling Condition for Many
McDonagh dismisses ADHD symptoms as everyday struggles that everyone experiences, such as procrastination, impulse control, and distraction.
The Truth: ADHD is not just about getting distracted. It affects self-regulation, emotional regulation, executive functioning, memory, and time perception. The key difference between ADHD and typical distraction is severity, consistency, and impact on daily life.
The Royal College of Psychiatrists states that ADHD “significantly affects life outcomes,” contributing to higher rates of unemployment, financial struggles, substance use, and even premature mortality. Studies have shown that people with untreated ADHD are more likely to experience depression, anxiety, and suicidal ideation (Kooij et al., European Neuropsychopharmacology, 2019).
If ADHD were simply about putting down a smartphone, it wouldn’t be classified as a lifelong neurodevelopmental disorder by every major psychiatric and neurological institution in the world.
Reckless Journalism Feeds Stigma and Harms Society
Finally, the biggest issue with McDonagh’s article isn’t just her lack of knowledge—it’s that a major publication allowed her to publish an uninformed, harmful, and stigmatising piece without any factual basis.
Yes, she openly admits that this is just her opinion. But wouldn’t it be better for society if journalists prioritised truth and societal progress instead of fuelling misinformation and prejudice?
We live in a time where mental health stigma still prevents people from seeking help. Reckless journalism like this actively contributes to the suffering of millions, reinforcing barriers to diagnosis, treatment, and accommodations.
On another note, writing about a “trending” topic like ADHD in a “controversial” manner gains clicks and visibility. So in that regard—well done, McDonagh. You succeeded in getting attention, you got your name out there!
But at what cost?
So to Wrap This Up: Facts Over Ignorance
ADHD is not a scam, not a trend, and certainly not an excuse. It is a well-documented neurological condition with profound impacts on those who live with it.
The rising diagnosis rates are not evidence of overdiagnosis—they are evidence that more people are finally being recognised and supported after decades of neglect.
Rather than blaming individuals for seeking help, or accusing people of exploiting the system, we should be asking why it has taken society so long to acknowledge ADHD as a legitimate condition.
Publications like The Standard have a duty to promote factual, research-backed discourse, not give platforms to uninformed takes that contribute to stigma and misinformation.
To McDonagh, and to those who share her views: The facts are out there—you just have to look. If you disagree with them, you are entitled to your opinion, but opinions should not be used to dismiss lived experiences or spread misinformation that harms others. Respecting one another means engaging in discussions with integrity, openness, and a commitment to truth—without contributing to stigma or invalidating those seeking understanding and support.