Hmm. Could that be why I fail to be a completionist in games? I play computer games, but don't give a rip about achievements or multiple playthroughs... They are fun, but as soon as I beat it, I move on.
My point being is that there is absolutely no reason to be a video game completionist.
But we don’t have the parent’s full context - they may have had a dozen other symptoms that they have finally been made aware of, and in that context this may be a symptom.
I don’t play video games enough for it to be one for me, but if I did, I would almost certainly have trouble being a “completionist.” That doesn’t mean I have ADHD, but coupled with about two dozen other personality traits and symptoms, and tons of self-reflection and medical help, it could be a part of that.
Seriously though, is there a dx for not having any common sense?
I feel like a lot of us here would be terminal cases
WTF does that even mean
There are similar phenomena of people doing that with all sorts of maladies or abstract identities, from chronic fatigue syndrome to being an introvert. I find ADHD to be an odd choice though, relatively. It seems like it's been at least a decade or two where over-diagnosis of ADD/ADHD was highly criticized, albeit when it comes to diagnosing children (mostly boys) and giving them Ritalin and not adults.
Yeah, and? There are literally no long term side effects of taking them (except for maybe some positive ones.)
I’m not sure this is true
Even the ADHD prescribed amphetamine medication is dextroamphetamine, not the scary methamphetamine.
There are also several medications that are not stimulants. While I do believe that children should be prescribed the minimum medications during their formative years, I've talked to several teachers whose students now have a prescription because the children were doing school at home and finally followed the teacher's recommendation.
I don't discount this completely, but I think the argument could be equally strong that we have gained a lot of additional understanding over the last 20 years. There are plenty of conditions that used to be rarely diagnosed (or didn't even exist in medical science) but now are. Just because something didn't used to have a label or definition, but now does, doesn't make it any less valid.
For example we can see differences in ADHD brains with fMRI - something only _relatively_ recently possible. And as medical science gets better at defining and describing these things, more information gets shared, more people talk about their experiences, and the net effect is that unsurprisingly more people identify with that new information. Some self-diagnose rightly or wrongly and leave it at that, others (plenty others I think) use this recognition as a cue to go and speak to a medical expert, which often precedes a formal, valid diagnosis.
Also, ADHD is in fact under-diagnosed, particularly in adults and especially in women.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4195639/
Some children are overmedicated, but there's evidence it's also underdiagnosed in children.
Funnily enough, I chanced upon a random YouTube video yesterday and the very top comment was someone mentioning ADHD and others chiming in, while skeptics criticizing the self-diagnosing and likening it to those who self-diagnose other conditions such as depression:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Ph3ZCriWAw&lc=Ugw0IXd-rBjzj...
Whether right or wrong, it definitely is a known internet social phenomenon. That's what the ancestral post in this current subthread was referring to by referring to ADHD as the new Asperger's.