Medicalization, Ambivalence and Social Control: Mothers’ Descriptions of Educators and ADD/ADHD
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Conrad notes that non-medical personnel often accomplish the routine, everyday work of medicalization. This is particularly so in the case of Attention Deficit (Hyperactivity) Disorder, where teachers, special educators and school psychologists identify, assess and administer medication to 'problematic' children. Drawing on data from interviews with Canadian and British mothers of ADD/ADHD children, this article explores mothers' perceptions of educators' roles in medicalizing children who are different, comparing medicalization in two divergent sites. In Canada, where ADD/ADHD is a highly medicalized phenomenon, and teachers have few alternative forms of social control available to them in classrooms, it appears that educators are prepared to identify problem children and press for medical treatment with remarkable vigor. In Britain, where medicalization remains incomplete, and where teachers and special educators have more stringent alternative forms of social control available to them, educators were often described as gatekeepers who will refuse the label or to administer medication.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it