Is neurodivergent a blanket term?

Definition of neurodivergent, related to or showing atypical neurological behavior and development, such as autism spectrum disorder or dyslexia. The broad spectrum of neurodiversity includes dyslexia, ADHD, dyspraxia, dyscalculia, autism spectrum and mental health. It's not a general term and it's important to remember that there are also HUGE differences and variations within the list above. Neurodivergence is an inclusive term that has gained popularity in recent years.

I see it being used especially in reference to ADHD and autism, but I've seen that depression, obsessive-compulsivity, and schizophrenia are also included in the new term. Do professionals who use the term use it for a subset of the mental illnesses referred to above, while still using mental illness for other subgroups? As a general substitute for mental illness?. Throughout this collection, collaborators use the terms “neurotypical” and “neurodivergent” to denote two different groups. The stories of Garcia, Neumeier and Brown, and Arnold, among others, use both terms.

Runswick-Cole, a disability specialist, has pointed out that these terms can create divisions, since they encourage a “us” and “them” mentality. It denounces a dichotomized vision of the world in which one is “inside” or “outside”. Viewpoint theorists support the idea that people with lived experiences have experience in their own area. This is the theoretical-epistemic stance that underpins this volume.

It assumes that views are relative and cannot be evaluated with any absolute criteria, but it assumes that the oppressed (autistic people) are less biased (or more impartial) than the privileged (people of the NT). The idea that people with lived experiences should have more authority to speak and make decisions about their own future, that is,. Their voices should be given more weight than others, and it has been the subject of criticism. To illustrate this, let's take the example of female genital mutilation (FMG), a widely abhorred practice.

The main promoters of these practices are usually the grandmothers of the girls involved, who in turn have been subjected to female genital mutilation. According to the epistemology of the point of view, these voices (who advocate female genital mutilation) should exceed those of Western medical experts. There is no such standard for the human brain. No matter how hard you look, there is no brain that has been pickled in a jar in the basement of the Smithsonian Museum or the National Institute of Health or anywhere else in the world that represents the standard by which all other human brains should be compared.

Since this is the case, how can we decide if any individual human brain or mind is abnormal or normal? Of course, you have to draw a line in the sand when you demarcated yourself as a politically mobilized group. In other words, for the neurodiversity movement to exist, there must be a banner, “Neurodivergent”, under which people can unite. Any group requires that you can defend the rights of some people and not others, defend services for some people and not for others. I'll leave the quotes around “Neurodivergent” for the rest of this article, since it's impossible to define an identity-based movement without having a group identity.

To also promote a positive self-identity, you first need a group identity. However, it is useful to note, along with this, that dichotomization can also cause difficulties. Another topic that applies to all identity policies is the problem of defining people in the category. The stories in the book don't always make it clear who is neurodivergent and who isn't.

However, this is a crucial issue. If you're advocating for legal protection against discrimination or advocating for support and accommodations, it's very important to be able to define who that group really is. If you are not sure exactly who you are fighting for, those rights cannot be enforced by law. The nature of the brain differences between autistic and non-autistic people is not well established or well replicated, and many neuroscientific studies on ADHD, Tourette syndrome, autism, and other neurodevelopmental conditions yield mixed results that are not well replicated.

The reality is that most of these conditions are diagnosed through observation, cognitive testing, or self-reporting, and not through neurological anatomy or physiology. Not many diagnoses involve brain scans, so the neurological differences between neurodivergent people are not seen but deduced. Perhaps, then, self-identification as ND is less of a problem? Giwa Onaiwu opted for this approach, “to accept the validity of people's self-identification, as has been said”, when compiling her intersectional anthology (see chapter 1). Self-definition certainly avoids the problems mentioned above, but it has caused enormous divisions in other areas of identity politics.

Discussions between the radicals of the feminist movement and transgender activists are once again an example. Some radical feminists have argued that being a woman should be defined by biological sex and by the fact that a woman is bought from birth, while transgender activists have argued that anyone who identifies themselves as a woman is a woman. Radical trans-exclusive feminists claim that decades of rights for which they have fought to have safe spaces only for women are now being undermined, if (or), men who identify themselves as women are now allowed to enter them men who identify themselves as women. This topic was satirized in the United Kingdom by a member of the Labour Party who was formerly on the list of candidates for female officials because she “identifies herself as a woman on Wednesdays”, according to the “self-identification rules” of the Labour Party.

The man has already been suspended from the party. Exclusivity also lends itself to the spread of prejudice and misinformation about the excluded group. Chapter Several people with vocal autism and their parents have complained that the movement is mainly comprised of people with fewer disabilities who do not represent people with more serious problems. I have also heard people comment at conferences on autism that people in the movement do not represent most adults or children in North Dakota and are not well appointed to speak on their behalf.

I understand that the argument is that, in general terms, parents of children with more severe disabilities want to receive treatments to alleviate their children's condition, while the neurodiversity movement is considered an anticure. Activists say that the movement advocates for supports that mitigate the weaknesses associated with autism, and arguably focuses more on improving access to reliable communication and, certainly, more on essential services (which are mostly for people with the greatest needs) than most organizations and individuals interested in curing autism. However, it's important to note that many parents are in the movement, including some who write here. The movement provides space for parents and other allies.

Sometimes, their children, as in the case of Des Roches Rosa, do not have the language skills needed to participate in conventional activism. Therefore, parents are another way in the movement in which those who cannot directly represent themselves are represented in formal activism. A public relations campaign that emphasizes the many positive qualities associated with some presentations of autism: creativity, increased tolerance for repetition, improved empathy, superior ability to master content in specific subject areas, and exceptional memory, while erasing or minimizing the experiences of autistic people with severe disabilities. Science and Technology academic Silverman criticizes the kinship argument in her book Understanding Autism, explaining that autism advocates base their claim to represent the autistic community on “supposed neurological and genetic similarity to other autistic people” (p.

Silverman argues that this supposed relationship provides ethical legitimacy and the right to be representatives of the entire group, but points out a contradiction if the group adopts genetic and neurological explanations, but rejects genetic research. Adopting a more nuanced understanding may be a better reflection of reality, but perhaps it neglects the impact that causal models can have on the real world. For parents of autistic children, for example, the genization of autism has meant that thousands of mothers are free from the guilt and guilt generated by the “refrigerator mother” theory. For neurodiversity activists, neuromodels can be a powerful tool for guaranteeing housing, services and rights, and obtaining political recognition.

We were so used to being misunderstood, condescended and pathologized (Dekker) The dangers of using a selective pathological description (Baggs) The undue pathologization of its traits (Seidel) These are some of the criticisms faced by the neurodiversity movement. Although the movement seeks a form of identity that does not pathologize and the community of autistic activists and their allies have made a unique contribution in this regard, this objective can sometimes be uncomfortable with the pragmatic forms adopted by their activism. CrossRef Google Scholar You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar Correspondence to Ginny Russell. Faculty of Social Sciences and International Studies at the University of Exeter, Exeter (United Kingdom) Provided by the Springer Nature ShareEdit content sharing initiative More than 10 million scientific documents at your fingertips.

If your child's neurodivergence causes developmental delays or disabilities, identifying him at an early age may allow him to participate in programs from birth to three years old, speech therapy, occupational therapy, and other services that can help him develop functional and communication skills that allow him to be more independent in the future. There is a technical description of neurodivergence that defines it more or less reasonably as “outside normal parameters”. So, anyone can be considered neurodivergent by changing the parameters a little or setting them so low that everyone needs “help”. Often, information about raising neurodivergent children created by neurotypical adults does not take into account the needs and voices of the community.

Professionals in the neurodivergent community have long used them to help restore a sense of calm in children with sensory overload problems. Even if this isn't directly expressed to the child, children are aware of their parents' feelings and may feel unwanted or unloved if the parents haven't agreed to have a neurodivergent child. Therefore, if you start to assume that part of your employees are neurodivergent before waiting for them to tell you, you can start supporting them by creating a space to tell open stories and normalizing the difference. A neurodivergent person may face great difficulties in some areas of daily life and have pronounced strengths in other areas that help them to be very successful.

The expression “neurodivergent” is also now becoming a kind of genus, like a biological family tree. Here's what you need to know about neurodivergence, the conditions and disorders associated with neurodivergence, the neurodiversity movement, and more. Many neurodivergent teens and young adults see the term “neurodivergence” as validation to help them understand that there is nothing inherently “wrong” with them; their brains just work a little differently than neurotypical brains, and that's okay. Traditionally, neurodivergence has been considered an “anomaly” or a problem that needs to be solved, but mental health professionals have opted for a more affirmative model that emphasizes the unique strengths that come with neurodivergence.


Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *