I had already seen The Medicated Child, and nothing about my opinion has really changed - I have ADHD, and am currently unmedicated because of lack of access, but I function so much better while on medication, and getting diagnosed earlier than I did would have been life changing for me. I do think medication is useful, and I do think it can have a positive effect - but I've also worked with a lot of teachers who talk about medicating children who simply talk "too much" or act out in class. I also think that the association between the symptoms of ADHD and the symptoms of childhood PTSD/trauma should always be discussed, because why on earth would we medicate a child to the point of near-sedation (which I have seen) when instead what that child needs is family support and therapy? It's such a complicated issue - I saw no real solution when I watched TMC the first time, and I see no real solution now. It's just something that needs to be handled on a case by case basis, even though that's obviously not ideal.
Like some of my classmates, I was also not impressed by the language in the Smith article - I think trauma treatment should be centered around the needs and wellbeing of the client themself, not the people around the client. Girls with trauma might be more likely to have certain "undesirable" behaviors, but they are also traumatized and hurting, and that's where the behavior comes from. It's much more important in my opinion to focus on the root cause of behaviors rather than the behaviors themselves. There was also very little discussion of race and its impact on development and trauma in this article, which in my opinion weakens any findings stated in the article. So, as far as questions go - how can we study/research trauma in a way that is more, well, trauma informed?