Dev. Psych. Week 1: French et al (2025)

What’s French et al. generally about?

• Need for respectful language about ADHD

• Balancing conceptual models → medical model + social and neurodiversity models

• Reflective guidance over terminology bans

• Replacing stigmatising terminology

• Adressing systemic and historical challenges

What do French et al. say about the purpose and impact of language?

Language shapes clinical practice, public perception, scientific understanding and the self-concept and expectations of individuals with ADHD

What’s the aim of French et al.’s article?

To initiate a constructive, international dialogue around using respectful, non-stigmatising and non-discriminatory language in ADHD research and clinical practice

What do French et al. say about the shift towards neurodiversity?

Psychiatry is undergoing a transition toward neurodiversity-affirmative approaches (which value diversity and involve the community itself)

• Language discussions in autism research are well-established

• Formal conversations and framework building in ADHD language are staying behind! Needs some work!

What do French et al. say about the medical model?

This defines ADHD primarily by perceived functional impairments and difficulties

• This model is valuable for diagnosis and treatment access

• But! Medical language risks promoting a view without context → can cause harm/disrespect

What do French et al. say about the social/neurodiversity model?

This emphasises environmental context, individual strenghts and holistic views

• Uses language that empowers individuals with lived experience

What do French et al say about a balance between the models?

Effective clinial care and impactful research require finding a balance between the medical and social/neurodiversity models

French et al. encourage researchers to reflect on self-guiding questions inspired by frameworks in autism research, in the following themes:

• Human dignity and equality

• Neurodiversity vs fix/cure

• Context and autonomy

• Strenghts and non-judgmental language

French et al. selected some examples of language to avoid + alternatives:

• Disease and cure → condition

• Abnormal, normal and aberrant → differences, comparison group, neurotypical, non-ADHD group

• Unhealthy and healthy

• Deficit → challenges, needs

French et al. make the following suggestions for implementation and evolving perspectives:

• Compassionate dialogue vs. terminology banning → it’s about considering the impact of words, not about policing right/wrong terms. Banning terms can backfire by offending people who identify with current terminology

• Core terminology & diagnostic scales → embedded terms like “deficit” and “disorder” form the core name of ADHD.

  • To adress these challenges, we need sensitive clinical administration, updated future versions of instruments and integrated strengths-based frameworks

  • We also need neurodiversity perspectives