The neurodiversity paradigm challenges the idea of a single, ideal form of neurocognitive functioning. In this blog post, you’ll learn about whether neurodivergence should be considered a disability and different models for understanding autism and ADHD.

The Neurodiversity Paradigm

The concept of neurodivergence challenges the idea that there is a single, ideal form of neurocognitive functioning, suggesting instead that this notion is a product of social construction. Autistic educator Nick Walker describes neurodivergence as the “infinite variation in neurocognitive functioning within our species.” She defines being ND as “having a mind that functions in ways which diverge significantly from dominant societal standards of ‘normal’,” whereas “neurotypical” refers to individuals whose neurological development aligns with (often ableist) societal standards.

Advocates of the neurodiversity movement describe autism and ADHD as distinct neurotypes. These neurotypes are not inherently pathological but represent natural variations in human neurocognitive functioning. They argue that just because NTs process information, communicate, and interact with others in ways deemed conventional, it doesn’t mean NDs are “broken” or “wrong” in how they experience the world.

Is Neurodivergence a Disability?

NDs frequently display “spiky” neurocognitive profiles characterized by significant variations in strengths and weaknesses across different aspects of functioning. NDs can manage and accommodate some of the functional impairments caused by these profiles and co-occurring conditions. For example, those with sensory differences may find they can perform their responsibilities if their workplace provides a quiet workspace and permits the use of earplugs.

Some NDs may experience and define such impairments as disabilities. That said, there are some within the ND community who prefer not to embrace the disability label, choosing to focus instead on the positive aspects of neurodivergence. This choice is an act of resistance against centuries of stigma that aims to counteract the negativity often directed towards NDs (neuronegativity). However, this approach can also be regarded as toxic positivity, as it overlooks the experiences of others, downplays their challenges, and dismisses valid concerns.

It’s possible that the desire among some NDs to avoid the disability label also stems from a fear of triggering external or internalized (self) stigma. Given the prevailing narratives about disability, which are often riddled with toxic stereotypes and overly-simplified “inspiration porn,” it’s no surprise that many NDs opt for disability label avoidance. It’s crucial to remember, however, that our stories are ours to tell, and embracing the disability label can be a powerful way to reclaim our right to define our identities as we choose.

Models of Neurodivergence

The neurodivergence movement is a human rights initiative that arose in response to prevailing narratives surrounding neurodivergence. It challenges the stigmatization and pathologization of NDs, advocating for acceptance, inclusion, and equal rights. These narratives often stem from the medical model of disability, which views atypical neurotypes as impairments to be treated or even cured. The social model of disability challenges the notion that neurodivergence disables, asserting that societal and environmental barriers are the actual source of disability. Proponents of this model recognize these barriers stem from ableism.

While the medical model provides a limited perspective on disability, its integration with the social model fosters a more comprehensive understanding. For this reason, I advocate for the biopsychosocial model, which merges these approaches to present a holistic view of disability as a multifaceted phenomenon. 

This model takes inspiration from George L. Engel’s biopsychosocial model of disease, which distinguishes between biological disease and the subjective experience of illness, generated through the interplay of biological, psychological, and social factors. Similarly, the biopsychosocial model of disability acknowledges that disability is not merely an attribute but emerges from the interaction of these factors, including structural ableism.

Concluding Thoughts

The neurodiversity paradigm advocates for recognizing and accepting natural variations in neurocognitive functioning, such as autism and ADHD. Understanding neurodivergence through the biopsychosocial approach offers a holistic view of these variations. This shift in perspective is essential for empowering neurodivergents and fostering a more inclusive society where everyone can thrive, regardless of their neurotype.