Okay, things are getting a LITTLE clearer in my mind, largely through reading many of the posts here... It seems that the evaluation of a neuro-psychologist is important if one hopes to get an accurate diagnosis. Part of my problem with "labels" is not just some philosophical objection but really, more to the point, that they seem to me so vague and unreliable. The human brain is clearly an extraordinarily sophisticated and complex mechanism, that we are very far from understanding completely... throwing out these diagnoses of supposedly neuro-biological disorders on the basis of a few questionnaires, for example, seems to me insulting of people's intelligence. So... I am heartened to learn that there may be a more reliable and solid way of going about things. If I got a diagnosis I could TRUST I would already feel happier in applying the label to my own little boy. ADHD does not seem to describe him, whereas hyperactivity does... rather than being forgetful and disordered, for example, he is highly perceptive and has a great recall of things he needs to take with him or where he has left them, for example... And there must be other children in the same boat. So it is curious to me that we haven't come up with something a bit more accurate than an ADHD catch-all... Why should not hyperactivity exist on its own, for example, presumably warranting a different treatment than inability to concentrate. Any thoughts welcomed!