The term Neurodiversity frames the cognitive and emotional properties characteristic of developmental disorders within the natural expression of human diversity (Masataka, 2017). Highlighting the principle that people experience and interact with the world in many different ways (Baumer & Frueh 2021) and rejecting the notion of “normal” brain function, celebrating the infinite range of neurocognitive functions. The term refers to the neurological diversity of all people, but the most commonly referred to neurominorities under the neurodiverse banner are autism, ADHD, dyslexia, dyspraxia, bipolar disorder, and OCD (Baumer & Frueh, 2021; Ne’eman & Pellicano, 2022; Doyle, 2020). The term Neurodivergent is often used to specifically refer to neurominorities within the conceptual understanding of neurodiversity. The estimated prevalence of all neurominorities with distinct brain organization within the population is around 15-20% (Doyle, 2020). This distinction can be reflected by differences in information processing, communication, and understanding. The following text discusses the discrimination faced by neurodivergent people and disability oppression. It talks about stigmatization and pathologization of neurodivergent forms.
Framing & Perspectives
The idea that atypical neurological development is a “normal” human difference stems from civil rights movements in the 1990s, with neurodivergent activists thought to have collectively shaped and coined the term through various means (Masataka, 2017; Botha et al., 2024; Beck, 2024). Judy Singer is often believed to have devised the term in their honors thesis in 1998, while the terms “neurological diversity” and “neurodiversity” were first printed in the work of Harvey Blume in 1998. However, the term gained momentum with the autistic community and has since spread to other categories of developmental difference, urging people to discuss neurodiversity in the same way as biodiversity and cultural diversity (Masataka, 2017).
Determining if the term is simply a fact of biological reality vs. a part of a social movement has become a note of contention amongst the community and researchers (Ne’eman & Pellicano, 2022). The use of terms “neurodiverse” and “neurodivergent” are increasingly common and are often associated with the individuals to whom the term neurodiversity applies. Some argue that grammatically, neurodivergent is the proper term to refer to the cognitive profile that functions differently from the dominant societal norm of “typical” (Legault et al., 2021, Walker, 2021). Arguing that everyone can be neurodiverse, but not everyone can feel neurodivergent (Legault et al., 2021). Where neurodiversity is a term of inclusion, neurodivergence is a term of exclusion. Walker (2014) argues that the terms neurodiversity and neurodiverse do not exclusively refer to neurodivergent people but include all forms of neurocognition and that the political implications of neurodiversity should be referred to as the Neurodiversity Paradigm. Separating it from what he says neurodiversity terminology should be; seen as a biological fact (Ne’eman & Pellicano, 2022).
The Neurodiversity Movement, or Neurodiversity Paradigm, is a social justice movement advocating civil rights, equality, respect, societal inclusion, and accessibility for neurodivergent people (Kapp, 2020; Walker, 2021). It is not a singular movement but consists of various groups, organizations, and collectives with different perspectives and goals (Walker, 2021). The neurodiversity movement was started to help remove the stigma associated with autism (Harris, 2017) and dates back to Sinclair’s (1993) essay “Don’t Mourn for Us,” which encouraged parents to shift their perspective from cure towards acceptance of their autistic child (Ne’eman & Pellicano, 2022; Beck, 2024). The movement values neurocognitive variations as an essential form of human diversity (Kapp, 2020; Walker, 2021), challenging our assumptions of “normal” and what is required for a person to live a meaningful life. Stressing the rejection of a single neurocognitive style and claiming that such standards are socially constructed, framing neurodivergence as another way of being human. Within this movement, disabling aspects of neurodivergence are mostly attributed to society’s failure to accommodate neurodivergent people’s needs. Emphasizing that any associated impairments do not change a person’s right to self-determination, dignity, privacy, and basic human rights (Bailin, 2019). While the neurodiversity movement does not oppose consensual medical support, it criticizes the pathologization of neurodivergent forms. Supporters of the neurodiversity movement want more autonomy for neurodivergent people in choosing their intervention goals. Asserting that while parents may choose to try different interventions to assist with specific symptoms, it is not a disease or disorder to be cured (Baron-Cohen, 2019). Activists within the community argue for a more political position. Expanding past the biological reality and reframing disability rights movements to include mental disability, making it more accessible and a moral necessity (Ne’eman & Pellicano, 2022).
Opponents of the neurodiversity movement argue that normalizing neurodivergent experiences overlooks real disability needs. They argue that the severe challenges associated with certain conditions like autism fit better alongside the medical model of disability to adjust to the environmental, linguistic, or learning disabilities that can cause substantial challenges in their daily life. The medical model of disability conceptualizes autism and other neurodevelopmental differences as disorders and deficits rooted in biological differences (Kapp, 2022 as cited by Dwyer et al., 2024), and therefore often call for the prevention and cure of the impairments associated with developmental disabilities (Baron-Cohen, 2019). Those in support of the neurodiversity movement argue that calls for prevention and cures for neurological differences can be harmful and threatening to their existence, no different than eugenics (Baron-Cohen, 2019).
Additionally, the medical models of neurodivergence are informed by colonialism and imperialism (Diemer & Gerstein, 2022). The binary gender bias within white-western psychology and medical research impacts neurodivergent people who are not white cis-men (Johnson, 2019). For example, autistic and ADHD cis-women are diagnosed at an older age compared to cis-men (McDonnell et al., 2020; Johnson, 2019). Diagnostic frameworks around neurodivergence leave out Black and other racially marginalized neurodivergent people. Systemic racism and ableism intersect to create additional barriers for BIPOC neurodivergent people, who are less likely to receive appropriate healthcare and support compared to white neurodivergent people (Gilborn, 2015; Kwaw-Mensah, 2024). Diagnostic criteria now focus on support needs rather than functioning levels, switching the language from a person being “able” to function in a capitalist and imperialist society to centering the label around the support a person needs. Disability justice advocates argue the new labels remain unjust without input from neurodivergent people. Without systemic change, the new labels mirror functioning levels (Neuroabolition, 2024).
Relevance
The diversity of neurodivergent people’s support needs is part of neurodiversity itself (Angry Autist, 2024). People can be multiple neurodivergent when their neurocognitive functioning diverges in multiple forms from the societal standard (Walker, 2021). Autism, ADHD, gastrointestinal pain, epilepsy, dyspraxia, dyslexia, anxiety, and depression co-occur at higher rates than in the general population (Casanova et al., 2020; Parmeggiani, 2014; Deb et al., 2022). For example, autistic youth report high rates of co-occuring anxiety and depression (Zaboski & Storch, 2018; Pezzimenti et al., 2019). Discrimination faced by neurodivergent people and disability oppression intersects with other forms of marginalization, such as race, class, gender, and sexuality (Invalid, 2016; Cagulada, 2021; Johnson, 2019). Neurominorities are more likely to be hospitalized for “challenging behavior” (Udonsi, 2022) and face higher rates of victimization, arrest, and longer sentences within the criminal legal system compared to non-disabled people (Leotty & Slayter, 2023; Oberholtzer, 2017; Vallas, 2016). Economic factors among disabled people increase survival-based criminalized behaviors (Leotty & Slayter, 2023; Vallas, 2016). Incarcerated disabled people often face unmet needs, worsening their circumstances (Leotty & Slayter, 2023). Obtaining a formal diagnosis can be very difficult, but an umbrella term for embracing these neurodiversities can be helpful for self-concept and accommodations. Acknowledging the intersectionality of identities allows societies to work towards creating more inclusive and equitable spaces that support all members of the community (Loy-Ashe, 2023).
Keywords: Neurodivergence, Neurodivergent, Bodies, Neurodiversity Movement
Connected terms: Neurotypical (Neuromajority), Ableism, Bodily Autonomy
References
Angry Autist [@angry_autist]. (2024, March 6). Thoughts on neurodiversity and what it actually means. There are many facets of neurodiversity, including support needs, speaking ability, sensory differences, learning differences, and so much more. [Post]. Instagram. https://www.instagram.com/p/C4LwL0xPVDB/
Bailin, A. (2019, June 6). Clearing Up Some Misconceptions about Neurodiversity | Scientific American. https://www.scientificamerican.com/blog/observations/clearing-up-some-misconceptions-about-neurodiversity/
Baron-Cohen, S. (2019). The Concept of Neurodiversity Is Dividing the Autism Community. Scientific American, 30(4), 30. https://doi.org/10.1038/SCIENTIFICAMERICANMIND0719-30
Baumer, N., & Frueh, J. (2021, November 23). What is neurodiversity? – Harvard Health. https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/what-is-neurodiversity-202111232645
Beck, T. J. (2024). Neurodivergent culture and embodied knowledge beyond neoliberal identity politics. Culture & Psychology, 30(3), 736-756. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354067X231191489
Botha, M., Chapman, R., Giwa Onaiwu, M., Kapp, S. K., Stannard Ashley, A., & Walker, N. (2024). The neurodiversity concept was developed collectively: An overdue correction on the origins of neurodiversity theory. Autism, 28(6), 1591-1594. https://doi.org/10.1177/13623613241237871
Cagulada, E. (2021). All the Weight of Our Dreams: On Living Racialized Autism by Lydia XZ Brown, E. Ashkenazy, and Morénike Giwa Onaiwu. Journal of Literary & Cultural Disability Studies, 15(4), 499-502.
Casanova, M. F., Frye, R. E., Gillberg, C., & Casanova, E. L. (2020). Editorial: Comorbidity and Autism Spectrum Disorder. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 11, 617395. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2020.617395
Deb, S.S., Perera, B., Bertelli, M.O. (2022). Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder. In: Bertelli, M.O., Deb, S.(., Munir, K., Hassiotis, A., Salvador-Carulla, L. (eds) Textbook of Psychiatry for Intellectual Disability and Autism Spectrum Disorder. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-95720-3_17
Diemer, M. C., Gerstein, E. D., & Regester, A. (2022). Autism presentation in female and Black populations: Examining the roles of identity, theory, and systemic inequalities. Autism, 26(8), 1931–1946. https://doi.org/10.1177/13623613221113501
Doyle, N. (2020). Neurodiversity at work: A biopsychosocial model and the impact on working adults. British Medical Bulletin. 135. 10.1093/bmb/ldaa021.
Dwyer, P., Gurba, A. N., Kapp, S. K., Kilgallon, E., Hersh, L. H., Chang, D. S., Rivera, S. M., & Gillespie-Lynch, K. (2024). Community views of neurodiversity, models of disability and autism intervention: Mixed methods reveal shared goals and key tensions. Autism, 0(0). https://doi.org/10.1177/13623613241273029
Gillborn, D. (2015). Intersectionality, critical race theory, and the primacy of racism: Race, class, gender, and disability in education. Qualitative inquiry, 21(3), 277-287.
Harris, Y. R. (2017). The complexities in conceptualizing neurodiversity: Comment on “Implications of the idea of neurodiversity for understanding the origins of developmental disorders” by Nobuo Masataka. Physics of Life Reviews, 20, 115–118. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.PLREV.2017.01.020
Invalid, S. (2016). Skin, tooth, and bone. The basis of movement is our people: A disability justice primer. Sins Invalid: https://www. sinsinvalid. org/disability-justice-primer.
Johnson, V. (2019). Divergent Mind: Thriving in a World That Wasn’t Designed for You.
Kapp, S. K. (2020). Autistic community and the neurodiversity movement: Stories from the frontline. Springer Nature.
Kapp, S. K. (2022). Models of helping and coping with autism. In The Routledge International Handbook of Critical Autism Studies (pp. 255-269). Routledge.
Kwaw-Mensah, L. (2024). Black autistic experience: existence in a society that seeks to erase us (Doctoral dissertation).
Legault, M., Bourdon, JN. & Poirier, P. From neurodiversity to neurodivergence: the role of epistemic and cognitive marginalization. Synthese 199, 12843–12868 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-021-03356-5
Leotti, S., & Slayter, E. (2023). Disability and the Criminal Legal System. Social Work Practice and Disability Communities: An Intersectional Anti-Oppressive Approach.
Loy-Ashe, T. (2023). Neurodivergence is also an LGBTQ+ topic. University of California, Berkeley, Institute for Parks, People, and Biodiversity, and the George Wright Society. . https://parks.berkeley.edu/psf/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/psf_392_loy-ashe_web.pdf
Masataka, N. (2017). Implications of the idea of neurodiversity for understanding the origins of developmental disorders. Physics of Life Reviews, 20, 85–108. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.PLREV.2016.11.002
McDonnell, C. G., DeLucia, E. A., Hayden, E. P., Penner, M., Curcin, K., Anagnostou, E., Nicolson, R., Kelley, E., Georgiades, S., Liu, X., & Stevenson, R. A. (2020). Sex differences in age of diagnosis and first concern among children with autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology, 50, 645–655. https://doi.org/10.1080/15374416.2020.1823850
Ne’eman, A., & Pellicano, E. (2022). Neurodiversity as Politics. Human Development, 66(2), 149–157. https://doi.org/10.1159/000524277
Neuroabolition [@neuroabolition]. (2024, March 23). Functioning labels versus support needs. [Post]. Instagram. https://www.instagram.com/p/C43xLeQuvv8/?img_index=1
Oberholtzer, E. (2017). Police, courts, jails, and prisons all fail disabled people. Prison Policy Initiative.
Parmeggiani, A. (2014). Gastrointestinal Disorders and Autism. In: Patel, V., Preedy, V., Martin, C. (eds) Comprehensive Guide to Autism. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-4788-7_122
Pezzimenti F, Han GT, Vasa RA, Gotham K. Depression in Youth with Autism Spectrum Disorder. Child Adolesc Psychiatr Clin N Am. 2019 Jul;28(3):397-409. doi: 10.1016/j.chc.2019.02.009. Epub 2019 Apr 4. PMID: 31076116; PMCID: PMC6512853.
Sinclair, J. (1993). DON’T MOURN FOR US. Autism Network International. https://philosophy.ucsc.edu/SinclairDontMournForUs.pdf
Udonsi, P. (2022). Young, gifted and black: the intersectionality of race, intellectual disability and neurodivergence. Critical and Radical Social Work, 10(2), 226-241.
Vallas, R. (2016). Disabled behind bars: The mass incarceration of people with disabilities in America’s jails and prisons. Center for American Progress, 17-24.
Walker, N. (2014). Neurodiversity: Some basic terms & definitions. https://neuroqueer.com/ neurodiversity-terms-and-definitions/
Walker, N. (2021). Neuroqueer heresies: Notes on the neurodiversity paradigm, autistic empowerment, and postnormal possibilities. Autonomous Press.
Zaboski BA, Storch EA. Comorbid autism spectrum disorder and anxiety disorders: a brief review. Future Neurol. 2018 Feb;13(1):31-37. doi: 10.2217/fnl-2017-0030. Epub 2018 Jan 17. PMID: 29379397; PMCID: PMC5772195.
