ABSTRACT
After presenting the established biomedical conception of Attention-Deficit / Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), it is shown to be unsustainable, for several reasons. Among these reasons, the tautological character of the diagnosis based on four fallacies of reasoning stands out, in addition to the lack of biological markers. To understand how it is possible for ADHD to be established and yet unsustainable, the scientific and clinical practices on which it is based are analysed. According to this analysis, it is shown that scientific and clinical practices tend to be self-confirming of their own conception. Thus, for example, they do not so much describe a phenomenon, as they select the aspects that fit their model, leaving out aspects that would allow them to understand it in another way. Considering the symptoms by which ADHD is diagnosed, it can be seen that they correspond to characteristics of our society. Since the characteristics of our society include naturalisation of the discomforts that it creates, the acceptance of a biomedical diagnosis, even without evidence for it, is understood. In a social-cultural perspective, non-diagnostic based approaches are possible as alternatives that help children who could be labelled as having ADHD, and their families.
