The ADHD “Getting Better” Debate Shows Why Functioning Is a Poor Scorecard
A Reddit post titled “My ADHD isn't getting better and imposter syndrome is eating me alive” captures a familiar tension in ADHD discussions: a person can understand their diagnosis, try strategies, and still feel that daily problems are winning. The result is not only frustration with symptoms. It is suspicion of the self.
The post is one person’s discussion prompt, not representative evidence about people with ADHD. But the reaction it invites points to a broader issue in how functioning is discussed online and in everyday life. “Getting better” is often treated as if it should mean fewer visible problems, steadier output, and less need for support. That standard quietly turns ongoing difficulty into a character judgment.
The verified fact available here is limited: the Reddit user reports that their ADHD does not feel improved and that imposter syndrome is causing significant distress. The wider interpretation—that many people measure progress through output alone—is an analysis of the discussion pattern, not a finding established by this single post.
For neurodivergent people, that distinction matters. Attention and executive functioning do not occur in a vacuum. Task clarity, sleep, stress, interruptions, interest, time pressure, and recovery can change what a person is able to do. A tool may help under one set of conditions and fail under another. That does not prove the tool was useless or the person was not trying. It may show that the support was too narrow for the demand.
There is also a difference between being able to perform a task and being able to sustain it without an unreasonable cost. Someone may complete work in a last-minute burst, manage a crisis, or produce excellent results when the subject is engaging. Those outcomes are real. They do not automatically show that the person can repeat the process on demand or without exhaustion.
Mike/TALA’s analysis is straightforward: the useful question is not only whether symptoms remain. It is where the process breaks and what the conditions are costing. A missed deadline may involve remembering, starting, estimating, switching, prioritizing, or recovering after interruption. Treating all of those as one personal failure makes the problem harder to adjust.
A more grounded review would identify one recent breakdown, describe the exact point where it occurred, and test one change. Make the first action visible. Remove a step. Put the reminder at the place where the task happens. Reduce the size of the commitment. Protect a short recovery period before adding another demand. Then observe rather than immediately declaring the experiment a success or failure.
This does not mean every difficulty should be explained by ADHD. Changes in functioning can overlap with burnout, depression, physical health concerns, medication questions, grief, or an environment that has become unsustainable. Those possibilities require appropriate professional support when they are present. The practical point is narrower: ongoing struggle should not be treated as automatic proof that a person is an imposter.
The unresolved question raised by this discussion is how progress should be measured. If the only acceptable outcome is constant performance, many people will conclude that support has failed whenever life becomes more demanding. If progress also includes recovering sooner, identifying mismatches earlier, asking for support, reducing unnecessary cost, or building conditions where strengths appear more reliably, the scorecard becomes more honest.
That is not lowering the bar. It is measuring the thing we actually care about: a workable life rather than a convincing performance of normality.
Sources
- Reddit discussion: “My ADHD isn't getting better and imposter syndrome is eating me alive” — https://www.reddit.com/r/ADHDers/comments/1w6wadt/my_adhd_isnt_getting_better_and_imposter_syndrome/
Go deeper with the TALA knowledge base:
Read the TALA article
