How Do We Understand Children’s Restlessness? A Critique of the Biopsychosocial Model and ADHD as the Dominating Perspective in Current Understanding and Treatment

Abstract

How is children’s restlessness understood and handled by surrounding adults? Two approaches are outlined in this article: one is the biomedical and later the biopsychosocial model, the other is a tradition that can be traced back to Foucault’s concept of historical ontology. The biopsychosocial model and ADHD is currently the dominating perspective when it comes to describing, understanding and treating restlessness in children. In this tradition, a focus on pathology and biology places the root of the problem within the child and positions the surrounding adults as neutral observers and helpers. By contrast, historical ontology opens up to questions about the neutrality and validity of a biopsychosocial approach by pointing to our active role as subjects in creating ideas of truth about children, in judging their behaviour and in “helping” them. Rather than claiming that one approach is better than the other, it can be useful to regard the two traditions as providing different levels of analysis and be aware of the possibilities and limitations pertaining to these.

Music therapy as an adjunct in cardiac device lead extraction procedures: A randomized controlled trial

“…Likewise, BPS has been criticized for the division of complexity into separated components-that is, the biological, the psychological and the social-as a consequence of following the medical model too tightly (Helle-Valle, 2014). This criticism also falls upon the present study, because it is repeatedly addressing one component at a time, while finally aiming at integrated patient care.…”

Do we understand children's restlessness? Constructing ecologically valid understandings through reflexive cooperation

“…The process of giving a child, often a boy, an ADHD diagnosis and medication is often seen as the mother's project (Olsvold, 2012 ). The medicalization of children's restlessness can be related to a need to understand and be released from responsibility and guilt (Helle-Valle, 2014 ; Neufeld & Foy, 2006 ), but medicalization of children's problem behavior seems to reconstitute oppressive cultural mothering ideals rather than pierce them (Singh, 2004 ). The physiologically focused explanations for (often boy's) difficult behaviors seem to transfer the blame from mother to brain and facilitate what Singh calls a “no-fault” model of behavior, as organic causes are not morally accountable.…”