86

At a time when schools are questioning their own authority in the face of a growing lack of discipline among students, child psychiatry has seen a rise in diagnoses of hyperactivity. It is impossible to confuse a rather unsettled child and one who has been recognized to have the “disability” that the DSM-V calls “ADHD” (Attention Deficit Disorder with or without hyperactivity). But there are variations between these two extremes that raise fundamental questions about the passage from the normal to the pathological. While a number of situations are still problematic, the creation of a partnership between schools, child psychiatry, and health and social organizations encourage such diagnoses through tests, like the Conners scale, which aim to quantify behavioral differences. Teachers who use these questionnaires act as “paramedical assistants”; meanwhile, medical, health, and social authorities provide responses in which the doctors themselves may play the role of “educational advisor.” This “partnership” raises a series of ethical questions: Are we trying to answer a disciplinary problem by pathologizing a behavior? What does this transfer of authority mean for schooling? How can we respect the responsibilities of all involved (teachers, medical staff, parents, and especially children)? How can we maintain the child’s privacy if their personal care is undertaken collectively? How can we recognize their vulnerability if everything conspires to reduce their “hyperactivity”? What conception of “care” is at work when dealing with a child that must be calmed at all costs? Does all this amount to care for a fragile being, a therapeutic response, or normalization?