Neurodiversity Is Not A Group of People

Neurodiversity is a political movement, a philosophy, and a personal framework

I made a rookie mistake.

I don’t use reddit, but recently discovered r/ADHD, and tried to post there without first reading the community rules and guidelines. I made a short, simple post introducing myself as a fellow neurodivergent, which was flagged by the moderator bot.

I received a message that directed me to the r/ADHD’s position statement on the neurodiversity movement.

To be fair, they attempted to provide a balanced statement, first outlining points on which they agree, and then respectfully describing the points on which they disagree and explaining their reasoning.

K, cool. I can live with respectful disagreement.

Except.

Most of the points listed are inaccurate.

I recognize that the post in question is more of a response to another reddit group, and I’m not really interested in their in-fighting. They can run their groups how they see fit and align with whatever philosophy suits them best.

That said, I figure if there is an entire group of people who thinks this way, then others must have the wrong impression as well, so it’s worth writing about.

I’ll list each of their points and explain how and why they’re inaccurate.

Mental health disorders are just differences in cognition.

First of all, ADHD isn’t a mental health disorder, it’s a neurodevelopmental disorder, which means our brains develop differently from the majority of the population. So there’s that.

Secondly, the neurodiversity movement does not state that being neurodivergent is simply a difference in cognition, that is a gross oversimplification.

In fact, it clearly states that while diversity in nature is imperative for the health of our species, some variations are positive changes and some are not.

What determines whether divergence is adaptive and functional or not is not just the change itself. More often, it’s the environment in which the change occurs. Timing is everything.

There is also, of course, diversity within the neurodiversity movement itself. Some feel the ecological model better aligns with their perspective, while others prefer the social model.

The ecological model of neurodiversity is built on the idea that, just as conserving biodiversity is necessary for a sustainable, flourishing planet, so respecting neurodiversity is necessary for a sustainable, flourishing human society.

The social model of disability defines disability as emerging from the social environment around an individual and focuses on issues related to barriers, attitudes, and exclusion.

For example, our current society is set up for the benefit of neurotypical folks, so all other neurotypes are often disabled by others’ lack of knowledge, lack of understanding, lack of accommodation, and inaccessibility.

“Neurodivergent suffering is primarily (although likely not totally) a product of societal exclusion and marginalization.”

— Robert Chapman

There is a very real risk in framing mental health disorders as gifts, or as beneficial.

Again, ADHD is not a mental health disorder, it’s a neurodevelopmental disorder.

I agree with the first part, many people do find the framing of living with a divergent brain as a gift to be invalidating, or dismissive of the struggles they face on a daily basis. Others find this to be true in their case, or find this framework helpful for them.

Many of us find some parts of our divergent neurology to be very beneficial, while other parts are extremely aggravating and sometimes distressing. That’s nuance. That’s real life. Sometimes it’s awesome, sometimes it’s shitty, and usually it’s somewhere in between.

Where the neurodiversity movement — and where I — disagree with this statement is the second part. Framing divergent neurotypes as beneficial does not mean that people don’t struggle because of their neurology. Beneficial does not mean perfect.

When those of us who advocate for the neurodiversity paradigm state that diversity is beneficial, we’re not referring to individual benefits, we’re talking about biodiversity and benefits on an ecological scale.

Neurodiversity goes further than saying variation is simply beneficial, it posits that neurodiversity is necessary for healthy variation in our population.

“Neurodiversity is necessary for a sustainable, flourishing human society.”

— Judy Singer

The medical model of disability is frequently rejected by the movement and we cannot accept this.

The statement continues:

“We deem it a necessary foundation that enables the treatment of ADHD and many other mental health disorders with medicine and other medical interventions.”

These comments are included in a single point in the statement to which I am responding, but the medical model and medical treatment are actually two very different concepts.

Rejecting the medical model is rejecting the tendency to pathologize differences simply because they’re different from the majority and don’t line up with neurotypical expectations.

Rejecting the medical model is rejecting the ableist idea that being neurotypical is inherently better:

“…the pathology paradigm divides the spectrum of human cognitive performance into “normal” and “other than normal,” with “normal” implicitly privileged as the superior and desirable state.”

— Dr. Nick Walker

Pathologizing occurs without looking critically at why those differences exist, and evaluating the political and societal circumstances which contribute to the suffering of neurodivergent people.

The neurodiversity movement does not reject modern medicine and does not say people should not seek out and receive appropriate treatment and support for symptoms that cause them distress.

Sometimes nature fucks up. Sometimes nature is cruel. I mean, have you ever watched Planet Earth? Nature can be deadly, but so can this medical model.

Major issues with the medical model

The medical model characterizes neurodivergence as something wrong, as though neurodivergent people are sick and we need to be treated and fixed.

Many doctors, psychologists, teachers, and other professionals tell parents they need to teach their children how to be as neurotypical as possible, so that they can fit in with mainstream society and “function”.

As a result, many neurodivergent children have been mistreated, even abused, under the guise of “helping” them. As Dr. Nick Walker recently stated in an interview,

“…this pathology paradigm consistently resulted in autistics being stigmatized, misrepresented, dehumanized, abused, harmed, and traumatized by professionals and by their own families.”

— Dr. Nick Walker

Medical vs. Social Model

The problem with the medical model is that it places the onus entirely on neurodivergent people. We’re broken and need to be fixed so that we can fit into the idealized neurotypical society.

Except our neurotypical society is broken too. It’s far from ideal, causing many of us to wonder, why the hell would anyone aspire to that? We’re a hot mess, they’re a hot mess, everyone’s a hot mess! Stop telling us that we should change to try to be more like them simply because they don’t want to change.

Problems with ableism reach well beyond individuals, or even a group of individuals, who support and believe in the neurodiversity movement. It’s much larger than that.

These political and social issues stem from our largest institutions, especially government and other institutions which have a significant influence on public policy.

“…social institutions enhance specific patterns of thought, feeling, and behaviour by providing a normative framework that rewards, reinforces, or discourages particular kinds of ways of thinking and behaving.”

— Michelle Maiese

Placing the blame on individuals — rather than seeing how our societal, cultural, and political policies are harmful — shifts accountability away from those in power, who actually have the ability to improve circumstances for all oppressed minorities.

“Society’s normative expectations define our differences, and potentially cause further psychological ‘disability’ via a culture and ideology of ‘normalcy’.”

— Damian Milton

If we’re sick, then public policy doesn’t need to change to be inclusive, we need to get “better”. If we’re broken, then we don’t need laws to protect us, we need to be fixed — or better yet, to fix ourselves and stop being a drain on the system.

Although many of our differences are strengths, we may need accommodation in order for those strengths to shine through. Needing accommodation, however, is often seen as a weakness and an inconvenience to others.

“…our genuine social cognitive differences are not a match for the way most social institutions work, but also are not identified and recognized, and therefore do not become targets for accommodation and flexibility within such institutions” — (Livingston et al., 2019).

In the medical model, we don’t need to look at the fact that our current system is harming many people, not just neurodivergents. We don’t need to acknowledge the fact that our current ways of operating are in need of a total overhaul, because it’s not them, it’s us.

Instead, those of us who are outside the majority need to adapt and change the entire essence of who we are, harmful as that is. People who profit from a system benefiting those who already have excessive privilege, and continues to oppress those who are already disadvantaged, don’t want it to change — why would they?

Take what you need from it

Research has found that those who perceived having ADHD as a difference had significantly higher self-esteem than those those who perceived their divergent brain as a deficit.

Like any philosophy, embrace the one that works for you, but please don’t cast out an entire movement based on a few misinterpreted statements.

When you join medium, as a member you’ll have access to unlimited reads for only $5 per month. If you use my referral link, I’ll earn a small commission, and you’ll earn my undying gratitude.

Neurodiversity Is Not A Group of People

Neurodiversity is a political movement, a philosophy, and a personal framework

I made a rookie mistake.

Mental health disorders are just differences in cognition.

There is a very real risk in framing mental health disorders as gifts, or as beneficial.

The medical model of disability is frequently rejected by the movement and we cannot accept this.

Major issues with the medical model

Medical vs. Social Model

Take what you need from it

Related Stories

What is Neurodiversity?

Exploring the meaning of the word and the significance of the Neurodiversity movement.

Fighting My Internalized Ableism.

My internalized ableism and I are doing battle and I’m going to win because I’m stubborn AF.

I was Masking for So Long, I Lost Myself

Or maybe I never really figured out who I was

References