Anxiety: An Interactive Story

[1] https://ncase.me/trust/

[2] https://www.patreon.com/ncase

https://www.webmd.com/add-adhd/rejection-sensitive-dysphoria

It passes if allowed to, but having someone complain about overreaction or try to push through it does not help. Sometimes an ADHD brain, especially an anxious one, can seem to react in an irrational way.

And it's true! But there's nothing they can do about it at that moment. They can learn how to smooth the curve or avoid getting into it in the first place, but not mid-panic.

If the latter, it could well be perfectionism getting in the way (shoddy existing work doesn't discount this possibility). Encourage 'iterated failures at any old sub-problem' perhaps? It's the only way I know how to deal with all three of those problems myself.

When I was starting out with small-ish programs, IDEs gave me performance anxiety. So I'd write in bits and pieces in Evernote or notepad, converting plain descriptions into code, and only merge it all into a single file ready for execution right at the end.

Fast, immediate feedback loops. Remove all barriers between doing an action and understanding the consequences of that action. I grew up trying to program on the command line and thinking it wasn't for me. Then I tried Macromedia flash, which had a timeline and a preview window as part of the IDE. I could see the changes I made instantly, rather than waiting a few seconds for my code to compile. It sounds ridiculous, that saving a couple of seconds could be the difference between your student self starting and being bored.

I didn't have time to get bored. I'd make a change, and then my brain would see the change and think of where to go from there. Before I could process that, I was writing new code and reloading the page and seeing the changes. It was like hacking the ADHD part of my brain to get things done. If your student takes to this, don't let your engineering sensibilities get in the way of your student's manic desire to see things happen. The discipline of thinking out your change and then executing it comes in time and with experience. Just get them excited about being able to make changes.

Even now, at 36 having managed ADHD for a long time, I have an attention budget for about 2 and a half seconds between my mid abandons the task at hand. If I make a code change and go to reload a webpage and it takes longer than 2 seconds, I'm already on a different tab or application window and my focus is already lost.

Again, for clarity: find a way to get immediate (I say immediate because I mean immediate, not 'quick' or 'fast') feedback to your student.

Some specific things to google for include “TDD” and “Definition of Done”.

What I'll add is: focus on being crystal clear above making the challenge less challenging.

I subscribe to the idea that anxiety (and ADHD) is not 'disorder', but rather 'hyper-order'. it's characterized by an intense need, whether necessary or not, to bring order to things, and one of the ways to minimize the problem is to make the challenge 'orderly' before you make it less challenging.

The approach might be different for ADHD compared to anxiety, but I think the root desire of being provided with order is similar. I can't speak for the former (at least not with a diagnosis), but I can for the latter: I'd be happy to be faced with a difficult challenge, as long as it's clear what the stakes are. what the pay-off is, as well as the consequence on failure. I'd probably want regular feedback, and a reminder that nothing I do is the end of the world. In the case of ADHD in particular, I suppose I might want regular feedback specifically to find out if I'm going down a path that isn't worth it in the grand scheme of things.

- Quick feedback loops

- Low formality experiments

These re-enforced the feeling of play, which felt much less high-stakes than 'work'. In a state of play, unexpected results aren't failures and interesting intermediate results provide a jumping-off point for informal social interaction, especially a shared anticipation of the achievement of the desired end product.

- High-touch guidance

- Pairing where I was driving

These significantly reduce the emotional energy barrier to asking questions and help teach norms about which aspects of product engineering require discipline vs which aspects that can be held loosely. Discipline and formality are expensive [at least for me] so saving the bulk of it for situations where it's essential allows much higher rates of progress in those directions where it isn't.

- Displays of vulnerability of my senior peers

- Stories of failure and its cost by the same

- Personal interest in me and my values

This helped me build trust in my team, which gave me additional space to feel safe playing around in. It also helped me start building a set of people for whom I no longer worried about wasting their time, allowing a bi-directional flow of value and a reinforcing of my motivation and sense of belonging.

All that being said, I have no context for your case beyond the above, so it's quite possible none of this is relevant, but hopefully it at least some useful fodder for your situation.

But if they work for you, it will give you a clue that medication could be helpful, and there are lot of options that are less addicting.

Some people will say that therapy is helpful. I'm sure it is for some people, but when you have a serious neurological problem - for me it was exactly like my 'fight-or-flight' response was permanently on for some reason. The longer it would be in that state, the more I would think about it, and it becomes a vicious cycle.

You have to break the cycle for a while until your mind / body relearns how to relax.

Imho this is because our emotional center are wired to take over our rational center to ensure survival. We can regain control but it takes time. Creating distance helps change perspective in that moment and short circuits the “I got to take action NOW” emotional path.

I have used that technique to great success in many instances in my life. It's helped me to deal with relationship distress, bad habits, addiction, and personal growth. I highly recommend it as a generally applicable principle.

It allows you to work to kill or reduce the influence of that part of you without feeling like you are losing your identity. It allows you to negotiate with those parts to see if there is a compromise that allows both (all?) parts to have their needs met.

It's remarkably effective and I have never heard it discussed before in general. I'm very curious if it's common practice in psychotherapy in any way.