Browsing by Subject "häiriö"

Objective. The objective of this study was to analyse the difference between the explana-tion models given for ADHD in two different disciplines, medicine and sociology. With my research questions guiding me I studied how ADHD is defined in the two disciplines, how the explanation models differ from each other and complement each other, and further how the awareness of these models is applicable to the context of basic education. Earlier studies have reported that the two disciplines have very different views on the etiol-ogy of ADHD and on the need to diagnose the disorder. Medicine sees ADHD as a neuro-psychiatric disorder and classifies it as a disease, where the diagnosis is made through the evaluation of the three core symptoms – inattention, hyperactivity and impulsivity. In the field of sociology on the other hand the diagnosis is questioned through medicalization cri-tique, and seen as medicalization of human behaviour. Methodology. The study was carried out as a literature review, where the explanation models of the two disciplines were first studied separately, and then discussed, compared and further applied to the context of basic education, with the help of the concept of multicausality. Results and conclusions. The study found, that the chosen disciplines had very differing views on ADHD. Medicine based the definition of the disorder mainly on biology and ge-netics, with the aim to heal the patient, while sociology viewed it as a social construct, even questioning the need for the existence of the diagnosis. In the field of education the diagnosis does not affect the process of identifying special needs of students, or offering them the support they are entitled to. Therefore the knowledge of different explanation models broadens the understanding of teachers in order to give their students appropriate support. It can also help teachers learn, how multifaceted the phenomenon of ADHD is.