What is “Neurodiversity”? Is it a biological fact, a perspective, or even a social justice movement? More importantly, who does neurodiversity address?
While some may have provided confident answers to the questions posed above, there’s still a great percentage of individuals who are utterly confused- so let’s break it down.
The term “Neurodiversity” was first coined in 1998 by Judy Singer, a sociologist with autism, to address the neurological diversity amongst human brains, and more specifically, to suggest that those with autism are merely “programmed differently”.
For those who are unfamiliar, autism is defined as a neurodevelopmental difference within an individual. Individuals with autism ultimately have neural wiring that’s dissimilar to those who are neurotypical, meaning their neurocognitive functionality falls within society’s standards of “normal”. Autism is often characterized by or associated with common traits, such as, “difficulty with social interactions and communication, restricted interests, repetitive behaviours, and sensory sensitivity, symptoms that ‘hurt the person’s ability to function properly in school, work, and other areas of life’”, according to the US National Institute of Mental Health explains it. Nevertheless, no two people with autism are the same, hence why many describe the experience of having autism as being “on the spectrum”.
According to the NeuroCosmopolitanism’s article, “Neurodiversity: Some Basic Terms and Definitions”, Dr. Walker differentiates between “Neurodiversity”, the “Neurodiversity Movement” and the “Neurodiversity Paradigm”. Dr. Walker explains that “Neurodiversity [itself] is not a political or social activist movement [nor is it] a trait that any individual possesses…[instead] When an individual diverges [or separates] from the dominant societal standards of “normal” neurocognitive functioning, they don’t “have neurodiversity,” they’re neurodivergent (Neurodiversity, Dr. Walker). Some well-known forms of neurodivergence include autism, dyslexia, Asperger’s syndrome, ADHD, epilepsy, and Tourette syndrome (TS) and obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD).
In addition, the movement commonly known for propelling the agenda of neurodivergent individuals and advocating for social change for their betterment of life, is the “Neurodiversity Movement”, “a social justice movement that seeks civil rights, equality, respect, and full societal inclusion for the neurodivergent” (Dr. Walker, Neurodiversity Movement). The foundational principles of the Neurodiversity Movement stem from the “Neurodiversity Paradigm” and its three fundamental ideas: “(1) Neurodiversity is a natural and valuable form of human diversity, (2) The idea that there is one “normal” or “healthy” type of brain or mind, or one “right” style of neurocognitive functioning, is a culturally constructed fiction..and (3) The social dynamics that manifest in regard to neurodiversity are similar to the [social power inequalities] that manifest in regard to other forms of human diversity, [but] by which diversity, when embraced, acts as a source of creative potential” (Dr. Walker, Neurodiversity Paradigm). Furthermore, it is important to note that while there are many supporters of the Neurodiversity Movement, one community that has a seemingly split verdict about the movement is the autism community.
Historically, the Neurodiversity Movement was birthed from the Autism Rights Movement, and even though they are different entities, there is immense overlap between them. A major distinction between the two movements is that the Neurodiversity Movement includes all neurodivergent individuals, not just those with autism. However, many individuals with autism disagree with the Neurodiversity Movement because they resonate with the validity of labelling autism a “disorder” and supporting those who want to be cured (Dr. Walker, Neurodiversity Movement). Critics of Neurodiversity argue that its agenda, which promotes the “little quirks” of neurodiverse people only favors individuals on the autism spectrum who are *“high-functioning”, while those who have more difficulty accomplishing everyday tasks or even communicating effectively are overlooked. Here are some opinion pieces from those who oppose Neurodiversity:
Against Neurodiversity
“I have two kids with nonverbal autism,’ said Jill Escher, founding president of the [National Council on Severe Autism]. ‘It’s an extremely severe neurodevelopmental disability – they can’t talk, can’t read or write, can’t add one plus one, and lack any capacity for abstract thought. [Neurodiversity advocates] trivialise this, and cherrypick naive, feel-good stories that portray autism falsely instead of grappling with the reality” (Warburton, Against Neurodiversity).
Autism is a disability, not an identity!
"In the online sphere, autism and neurodiversity are worn almost like fashion items by people who can often blend imperceptibly into the so-called neurotypical population." and "The 'neurodiversity' movement trivializes what can be a debilitating and life-denying disorder [says Tom Clements, autism advocate]” (Clements, Autism is a disability, not an identity!)
Although Neurodiversity is not a bad term to use, nor is the Neurodiversity Movement or Paradigm not well-intentioned or positively impactful, it is imperative to see “both sides of the coin” when deciding to support a movement and understand why you’re doing so. Furthermore, be mindful that there is no pressure to be 100% on board with any movements’ agenda or platform. Every movement that is advocating or supporting a specific group of people, are bound to unknowingly exclude or overlook certain individuals and experiences, i.e. people of color, the LGBTQIA+ community, or women and women of color. While no movement is perfect, it’s up to us, as agents of change, to use a critical lens to recognize the consequential benefits and drawbacks that movements have on various communities.