As a young boy in elementary school I was supposedly diagnosed with Attention deficit disorder. To this day both my father and I never believed that I really had ADD. Attention deficit disorder (ADD) is the subject of two widely challenged debates in medicinal practice. One, the argument for ADD being a clinical and mental "disorder", is in favor of medical treatment, claiming the diagnosis is attributable to brain damage or neurological defects. The second gives an alternative idea behind ADD, stating that people showing traits of the disorder often exemplify characteristics such as creativity, inventiveness, and even giftedness. As a rising percentage of children are being diagnosed with the disorder, more and more research has been called for, in an attempt to find an actual cause. The intent of this paper is to provide arguments and evidence on both sides of the issue, followed by standard and alternative methods for dealing with ADD.
             The history of attention deficit disorder goes back to World War 1, when a number of soldiers who experienced head injuries demonstrated hyperactivity as a side effect (Staff, 1). It was then that ADD was classified as a disorder related to either brain damage or a defect of some kind in the brain. It has been proven, however, that this is false. ADD or attention deficit hyperactive disorder (ADHD) can also be attributed to giftedness. Most studies show that 3 to 5 percent of the population possesses attention deficit disorder. The two major types are ADD with hyperactivity, and ADD with inattention. The diagnostic criterion includes failing to give close attention to details or making careless mistakes difficulty sustaining attention.
             Traditionally, children diagnosed with ADD have been prescribed with medications. Ritalin, Dexedrine, and Cylert are examples of the powerful stimulants used to correct the disorder. Ritalin, which is in the same family as cocaine, has
             ...