With this chapter, we lay out-necessarily partially-some key elements of the ADHD research field. After summarizing research concerned, albeit often in differing ways, with pathology and diagnosis, we move on to look in some detail at 'alternative' narratives of ADHD. Through a consideration of strength-based and cognitive difference approaches, we move towards a tentative notion of what a Critical ADHD Studies (CADS) might resemble, noting points of comparison and divergence with Critical Autism Studies (CAS) as we go. We suggest a summary of elements that CADS could work towards: the epistemic value of situated knowledge; the need for intersectionality and interdisciplinarity; a critical eye on behavioural norms and their role in conceptualizing and pathologizing ADHD; and a need to 'unknow' and to 'relearn' what we think we know about ADHD. Within CAS, considerable tensions have arisen from sometimes exclusive (re-)definitions of what CAS is or should be. Here, we explicitly avoid laying claim to a definitive definition of CADS. Rather, we seek out points of articulation between approaches holding potential for epistemically and ethically just ways that ADHDers might be centred as agents, and ADHD discourse 're-storied.'