ADHD or Not ADHD: Custody
and Visitation Considerations
Benjamin D. Garber, Ph.D.
The
following article first appeared in
The New Hampshire Bar News
(2/9/2001)
PROFESSIONALS
INVOLVED
WITH family law matters, particularly those who participate in
contested
custody issues, special education placement and even abuse and neglect
concerns,
have all come face to face with the ADHD monster.
Attention
Deficit
(Hyperactivity) Disorder (ADHD) is perhaps the most often diagnosed,
most
often medicated and least well understood mental health concern among
school-aged
children today. For this reason, family law professionals must have a
working
understanding of what ADHD is, what it is not, and how it bears on
custody
and visitation concerns.
What
is
ADHD? Once known as "Minimal Brain Dysfunction" and "Hyperkinetic
Reaction
of Childhood," this constellation of dysfunctional or disruptive
behaviors
is today recognized by the American Psychiatric Association as ADHD.
The
prototypical ADHD child is three times more likely to be male than
female,
has at least one parent (more likely father than mother) with similar
dysfunctional
patterns and can be identified in hindsight as having had behavioral
difficulties
as early as three to five years old.
 |
ADHD
children are
no less intelligent than their age-mates, but tend to be markedly more
impulsive
and inattentive than peers of the same age and gender. Even this is
misleading,
however, because ADHD kids can concentrate. It's not unusual for the
parents
of an ADHD child to argue, for example, that their son can sit for
uninterrupted
hours in front of his Nintendo. The critical difference only appears
when
the ADHD child needs to concentrate in an environment that presents
many
simultaneous sources of sensory input. Compared to his peers, the ADHD
child
has a much more difficult time filtering out unimportant (incidental)
sensory
inputs in order to remain focused on the critical sensory inputs.
The
typical public
school classroom may be the ADHD child's greatest challenge. Seated
randomly
among 20 or more peers, surrounded by colorful bulletin boards, mobiles
hung
from ceiling tiles, enticing activity centers, panoramic views of the
outdoors
and bombarded by the incident noises that leak in from adjoining
classrooms,
corridors and P.A. systems, it's a wonder that any child can focus on
the
math lesson spelled out in white chalk 20 feet away. Relatively unable
to
ignore all of these many simultaneous and competing stimuli, the ADHD
child
takes in a bit of everything, but rarely enough of any one thing.
Grades suffer.
Teachers criticize. Peers shun and make fun. Self-esteem plummets.
In
recognition of
this destructive spiral of events, the American Academy of Pediatrics'
(AAP)
new diagnostic guidelines for ADHD emphasize that, "evaluation of the
child
with ADHD should include assessment for coexisting conditions"
including
depression, anxiety and learning disabilities. The fact is that a
number
of common childhood mental health conditions may exhibit symptoms that
resemble
ADHD and are therefore often mistaken for ADHD, a dilemma which is at
least
as common as it is destructive.
The
chicken
or the egg?
For
family law practitioners
representing clients in a difficult divorce, an ADHD diagnosis of a
child
or children should be closely examined. What may appear to be a
contributing
factor to the divorce may actually represent something else: behaviors
that
are symptoms of the trauma of family conflicts. And whether or not the
child
is truly afflicted with ADHD or exhibiting behaviors associated with a
difficult phase of his or her life could have an impact on the best
course for litigation.
 |
Which
came first?
Is the inattentive child depressed and anxious because his
neurochemistry
creates what one researcher has called a "failure of behavioral
inhibition,"
leading the child to expect constant criticism, failure and rejection
experiences?
Or is the depressed and anxious child inattentive because intrusive
worries
about traumatic events, loss and fears interfere with an otherwise
normal
capacity for concentration?
Clues to
the ADHD
dilemma lie in understanding a given child's family tree, in the
longevity
of the concerns about the child and in as-yet impractical, but
promising,
neural imaging and neurochemistry studies. Until science creates a tool
as
definitive of ADHD as the x-ray is of bone fractures, the cause of a
given
child's inattention will remain a matter of heated debate. Heated
debate
about children is, after all, what family law is all about.
Before
they
reach your office
The
family law matters
that walk in most attorneys' front doors-the domestic violence,
restraining
orders, child visitation and custody complaints-each have long and
painful
histories. The kids have lived these histories minute by minute,
watching
their families disintegrate. In fact, children are barometers of family
tension,
registering parental fears and rage and sadness better than the best
meteorological instruments register the weather. Don't believe those
highly educated, socially
sophisticated parents who tell you they've kept the kids out of it.
They
may, indeed, have saved their children from the pain of outright
alienation,
abandonment and violence, but the kids still feel it. Sometimes silence
is
even louder than screaming.
These
same family
law matters are exactly the right circumstances in which to breed
childhood
depression, anxiety and anger, variously labeled Oppositional-Defiant
Disorder,
Intermittent Explosive Disorder and Conduct Disorder. These conditions,
in
turn, often cause a child to be disruptive, distracted and inattentive
in
the classroom, signs and symptoms most easily associated with ADHD.
Parents'
denial of
or simple wish to avoid facing a larger family or marital problem
frequently
compounds this misidentification. Many children are misdiagnosed with
ADHD
and inappropriately medicated because all involved have implicitly
conspired
to scapegoat that child rather than face the reality of the situation.
Unfortunately
for everyone, especially the stigmatized, medicated child, this
strategy
rarely succeeds in alleviating the family or marital issue at the root
of
the problem.
 |
The
impact
on family law
There is
a substantial
difference between a child who genuinely has ADHD and one whose
behavior
and learning have been disrupted by long-standing family turmoil. After
all
is said and done, the child with genuine ADHD has a chronic disability
that
will require careful intervention, support and behavior management for
years
to come. On the other hand, a child misdiagnosed with ADHD may instead
be
reacting to difficult situations at home, circumstances that the
divorce
court is often in a position to modify.
In
responding to
family law matters involving children for whom ADHD has been diagnosed
or
suggested, professionals should look beyond the labeling and consider
whether
the environment of a deteriorating family relationship has contributed
to
the presence of symptoms that mimic ADHD.
First,
the family
should be prepared-as definitively as possible-to investigate whether
ADHD
actually exists. The diagnosis of ADHD requires comprehensive
assessment
of a child's functioning in different areas and contexts by a
multi-disciplinary team of professionals. This must include, at a
minimum, physical examination, vision and hearing evaluations, tests of
intelligence and achievement (in an effort to rule out learning
disabilities), review of family and developmental history, classroom
and family observations and completion by teachers and parents of
structured assessment tools (e.g., Connors' Rating Scale).
If
ADHD
diagnosis is confirmed
When
these data converge
to determine the presence of genuine ADHD, a child-specific
constellation
of interventions and supports must be established to optimize
achievement
and minimize the potential for secondary depression, anger and anxiety.
These
interventions often include individual cognitive-behavioral
psychotherapy,
behavior management planning with parents and teachers, medication
consultation and consideration of a 504 or Individualized Educational
Plan (IEP) in the
schools.
The
presence of genuine
ADHD calls for a high degree of structure, predictability and
consistency
in all contexts of a child's life. Caregivers must be willing and able
to
learn about ADHD, to modify pre-existing behavior management strategies
in
consultation with professionals and in cooperation with co-parents and
educators.
The presence of ADHD makes the need for constructive communication
between
parents and caregivers all that much more important. Of particular
concern
is the ability of caregivers to agree on critical decisions for the
ADHD
child including academic identification for an IEP and medication.
 |
A
caregiver that
disregards these supports may well be compromising the child's
educational
achievement and putting the child at risk for serious secondary social
and
emotional concerns. The consistency, structure and many decisions
necessary
in the course of raising a child with ADHD are crucial, requiring
constant
reconsideration and modification. Given the high degree of cooperation
involved,
it may be necessary for the courts to assign one party as the
medical/mental
health decision-maker for parents in shared custody arrangements that
are
unable to consistently communicate and cooperate.
If it
isn't
ADHD
The
determination
that a child's ADHD-like symptoms are secondary to a reactive emotional
state
calls for another approach. In this instance, the child's dysfunction
and
distress may reasonably be expected to diminish once the family turmoil
subsides
(although often lagging behind by weeks or months). The converse is
true,
as well: The more prolonged and heated the family strife, the worse the
child's
symptoms may become. This situation obviously calls for a prompt
resolution
of the family turmoil.
A
circular and destructive
situation arises when family law decision-making is weighed down by
arguments
about a child's needs when, in fact, the child's needs might best be
served
by a prompt resolution to the family law matter. The distinction
between
primary ADHD and its reactive, ADHD-like cousin is again relevant here.
The genuine ADHD child's need for multiple, coordinated interventions
and supports
may reasonably delay court proceedings and benefit this child in the
long
run. By contrast, the child with reactive ADHD-like symptoms often
gains
little and risks losing a lot when family law decision-making is
protracted.
Certainly,
genuine
ADHD and family-reactive ADHD-like distress can coexist and often do.
In
fact, the parenting demands and stresses posed by a hyperactive,
inattentive
and defiant child can be the straw that breaks the back of the
marriage,
creating family turmoil which adds a layer of depression, anxiety
and/or
anger to the child's pre-existing ADHD. In these cases it can be
difficult
or impossible to pull these two factors apart clinically, leaving
conservative
professionals to diagnose that which is behaviorally evident
(Oppositional-Defiant Disorder, for example) while conceding that ADHD
may underlie or co-exist
with these concerns. In these situations, perhaps the only adequate
diagnostic
tool is cessation of the family conflict long enough to determine
whether
underlying inattention, distractibility and impulsivity persist.
No matter
the genuine
cause of a child's ADHD-like behavior, post-litigation conflict,
alienation
and indecision will continue to harm the child. When courts choose not
to
assign one caregiver as the medical/mental health decision-maker, it
may
make sense to assign a neutral, child-centered third party to mediate
subsequent
disputes and hopefully forestall future litigation.
Benjamin D. Garber,
Ph.D., is a clinical psychologist practicing in Merrimack. He
previously
has written for the NH Bar Journal, professional psychology journals
and
is the author of three books on parenting. The author may be reached at
papaben@healthyparent.com
.
He also posts a Web site at www.healthyparent.com.
|