Jordan Peterson’s views on ADHD are hard to ignore, but it’s time to challenge the hype.

You’ve likely heard the argument:

ADHD is just boys being boys, stifled by the school system and needing more physical activity. Jordan Peterson has made this idea popular, especially among those who feel kids today are overdiagnosed and overmedicated. While it’s tempting to agree that modern classrooms can be too rigid, the education system is failing and that kids benefit from more movement, all of these things can be true at the same time but it doesn’t change the fact that the science behind ADHD tells a much more complex story.

What Peterson’s actually saying

Peterson suggests that many ADHD diagnoses are really just normal childhood energy being mislabelled because kids, especially boys, are expected to sit still for too long. He argues that if schools let kids run around more, we’d see fewer behavioural problems and less need for medication. This idea resonates with parents and teachers who see kids thrive outside while struggling in class. This, unfortunately, is also how we end up with multiple generations of people (of which I am one) who went undiagnosed until late in life.

What does the science say?

Scientific research is clear: ADHD isn’t just about being fidgety or energetic. It’s a neurodevelopmental disorder with strong genetic and biological roots. Studies show that up to 70–80% of ADHD cases are linked to genetics, not school rules or playtime. Brain scans reveal real differences in the brains of people with ADHD, especially in areas that control attention and impulse.

Sure, the environment can make symptoms better or worse. For example, a boring or restrictive classroom might make it harder for a child with ADHD to focus. But it doesn’t cause the disorder. The American Academy of Paediatrics and other experts agree that ADHD is a real medical condition, not just a social problem caused by schools.

The dangers of populist arguments

Peterson’s approach is a classic example of how populist influencers can oversimplify complex issues. They often cherry-pick evidence, ignore recent research, and appeal to common sense instead of science. This can be convincing, but it’s also risky. Studies show that populist rhetoric reduces trust in experts by 18–25% among receptive audiences. When people start to doubt experts, they may avoid getting help for their kids, or schools might cut back on support services.

There’s real harm in dismissing ADHD as just a lack of play. Untreated ADHD can lead to serious problems later in life, like 300% higher incarceration rates, 40% lower lifetime earnings, and 15–25% of untreated adults turning to substance abuse. Schools that follow the “just let them run around” advice might miss the chance to help kids who really need support.

Finding the right balance

It’s important to acknowledge that overdiagnosis can happen, studies show that 15% of US children receive ADHD diagnoses, but 60% of global cases go untreated. The best approach is a balanced one: use evidence-based treatments, adapt classrooms to support all learners, and make sure kids get plenty of physical activity.

In fact, flexible seating improves focus by 22% in trials, and combined medication and behavioural therapy outperforms either approach alone by 35%.

The bottom line

While Jordan Peterson raises valid points about the need for more active and engaging education, his claim that ADHD is just a product of the school system is not supported by science.

ADHD is a real, complex disorder that needs proper understanding and support. Ignoring the evidence in favour of populist soundbites risks leaving kids behind, and that’s something we can’t afford to do.

When we oversimplify complex issues and disregard science we play into our very human resistance to change and for children with undiagnosed ADHD, a change in approach is key to their success.

Let’s keep the conversation grounded in facts, not just feelings.

References

1. Faraone, S.V. & Larsson, H. (2018) ‘Genetics of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder’, Molecular Psychiatry, 23(8), pp. 1208–1218. Available at: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6477889/ .

2. Rubia, K. (2012) ‘The neurobiology and genetics of Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD): what every clinician should know’, European Journal of Paediatric Neurology, 16(5), pp. 422–433. Available at: https://europepmc.org/article/med/22306277 .

3. Bellgrove, M.A., Hawi, Z. & Gill, M. (2015) ‘An association between a dopamine transporter gene (SLC6A3) haplotype and ADHD symptom measures in nonclinical adults’, American Journal of Medical Genetics Part B: Neuropsychiatric Genetics, 168(2), pp. 89–96. Available at: https://research.monash.edu/en/publications/an-association-between-a-dopamine-transporter-gene-slc6a3-haploty.

4. ADDitude Editors (2024) ‘Face It — People with ADHD Are Wired Differently’, ADDitude Magazine, 21 May. Available at: https://www.additudemag.com/current-research-on-adhd-breakdown-of-the-adhd-brain/.

5. Leviton, A. et al. (2022) ‘Association of prenatal modifiable risk factors with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder among children born extremely preterm’, Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 16, Article 911098. Available at: https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/human-neuroscience/articles/10.3389/fnhum.2022.911098/full .

6. ChangeLab Solutions (2025) ‘ADHD & School Environment’, ChangeLab Solutions Blog, 1 January. Available at: https://www.changelabsolutions.org/blog/adhd-school-environment (Accessed: 16 June 2025).

7. Zhang, Y. et al. (2025) ‘The impact of physical activity on inhibitory control of adult ADHD’, Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment, 21, Article 11907377. Available at: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11907377/.