The news that more than 100,000 people in Britain receive disability benefits for ADHD has provoked justified disbelief. Over the past two years alone, the Government has approved an average of 40 new PIP awards every day where ADHD is the primary condition. The number of claimants has risen from 71,528 to 100,207, more than half of whom are aged between 16 and 24. Around 40% receive the highest rate of support, paid without any expectation that they seek or prepare for work. Yet the greatest cost may not be financial. Instead, it may be the growing expectation that large swaths of the population will never work.

In the Victorian era, there was the concept of the “undeserving poor”. Later came the “underclass” and the “work-shy”. Today, we seem to be moving into the era of the “diagnostically disabled”, which has contributed to the comforting myth that Britain has become kinder. We tell ourselves that we are now more progressive and no longer write others off as morally deficient. Instead, we write them off medically.

The problem is that when there is no expectation for people to seek work, it sends out a message that they are incapable of working. To tell an 18-year-old that nothing is expected of them is to invite an existential crisis, and work remains one of the most reliable ways of finding a purpose.

Psychologist Martin Seligman introduced the concept of learned helplessness. He observed that when people repeatedly experience situations in which they believe they have no control, they eventually stop trying, even when opportunities become available. Learned helplessness is particularly insidious because it is not weakness that defeats people, but instead the conviction that effort is pointless. A health benefits system that removes the expectation to work risks teaching that lesson precisely.

This is why the latest figures should concern anyone who cares about the future of young people. Around one in five children is now identified as having special educational needs. Are these labels lowering expectations?

The message might seem compassionate. In fact, it can be insidiously cruel and dismissive. Many of history’s most successful people achieved extraordinary things because they learned to harness their differences. Richard Branson has spoken openly about his ADHD and credits aspects of it with his entrepreneurial creativity. Michael Phelps was diagnosed with ADHD as a child and became the most decorated Olympian in history. While it would be absurd to suggest that every child with ADHD is a budding Michael Phelps or Richard Branson, it is arguably more dangerous to tell young people that a diagnosis means they should expect a life supported by financial benefits, as they will always need the leg-up.

There is, of course, a place for diagnosis. Some people require substantial support, and that support should always be available. The danger arises when relatively mild conditions become self-limiting identities. A diagnosis can sometimes become more disabling than the condition itself because it may shape and deform how a young person sees themselves.

Work structures time. It demands responsibility and encourages maturity. Few things protect us more effectively against anxiety, depression and hopelessness.

The current emphasis on diagnosis risks creating a belief that is far more disabling than the diagnosis itself. A compassionate society should not merely alleviate suffering. The purpose of a welfare state is to provide a safety net, not a cage of convenience.

Individuals do not flourish when expectations are low. Everyone needs a sense of meaning and purpose, and without this, we gradually diminish. As disability payments for ADHD soar, it’s worth remembering that, for most people, work remains one of the surest ways to find that purpose.

---

Stella O’Malley is a psychotherapist and bestselling author. She is Founder-Director of Genspect, an international organisation that advocates for a healthy approach to sex and gender.

stellaomalley3

---