The negative reaction to this ad campaign must have been truly overwhelming to cause Harold Koplewicz, the guy behind it, to have it be suddenly canceled. It seems to have been somewhat similar to the ongoing campaigns of NAMI and the TAC in that it portrayed the people it claimed to be trying to help in very negative ways, and focused on their failure to seek proper treatment - or at least on the failure of their parents to do so for them - as the main source of trouble. I think it shows that many people in the so-called "helping professions" don't seem to realize (or to care) that public perceptions of people thought to be disabled can often be bigger handicaps than the actual disabilities. It also illustrates how the efforts of these professionals can backfire on them when they talk about the people they claim to be helping without first talking to them and acknowledging the importance of their thoughts and ideas.

These ads caused enough pain for parents who know their kids have serious problems... however, I suspect they were aimed more at parents who wonder if their child "might" be ADHD or "might" have a cognitive or emotional problem. The sort of child whom some teacher, doctor or know-it-all neighbor has suggested "might" need to take meds. Apparently Dr. Koplewitz has a dismal history as a coauthor of one of the infamous research studies purporting to show that Paxil worked for childhood depression. The ad agency in question, BBDO, does work for both Pfizer and GSK. Just how "pro bono" an effort is this, anyway?