Neurodiversity is a term that has gained significant attention and importance in recent years. It is formally defined as a person who differs in mental or neurological function from what is considered typical or normal. It refers to the concept that neurological differences are to be recognized and respected as any other human variation. This perspective advocates for the acceptance of diverse cognitive abilities, rather than viewing them as deficits or disorders. The term “neurodiversity” was coined in the late 1990s by sociologist Judy Singer. It encompasses a wide range of neurological conditions, including autism, ADHD, dyslexia, dyspraxia, and others. The neurodiversity movement challenges the traditional medical model, which often pathologizes these conditions, instead promoting a social model of disability that emphasizes accommodation and inclusion. At the time, the concept did not rapidly take off either in professional circles or within the popular culture. This is due to a variety of other factors which were dominating both the special education and mental health fields at the time. In the late 1990’s and up until the late 2000s, discussions were more focused on getting appropriate basic services for special education students and on providing classroom-based interventions focused on keeping students in the least restrictive environments possible. Simultaneously there was a uniform consensus among public schools that intensive early intervention services were essential in helping developmentally delayed students get on track with their development. As well these intensive EI services yielded significant cost savings for school systems down the road as the intensity and severity of these students needs were reduced because of the EI services they received. This progress was furthered by new regulations imposed by the Obama administration in 2014 requiring more equity for students receiving special education services.
It was in the 2020’s that the concept and movement towards neurodiversity fully took root. This was due to several factors. For one, as a direct result of the increase in EI services these students were exhibiting exceptional talents and abilities never seen in large numbers. It had become impossible for society to not recognize these incredibility gifted individuals. As well the exceptionally large representation of ND individuals in the technology space made it difficult for anyone to only talk about neurodiversity as a deficit. Pop culture also embraced these unique individuals for their talents. Starting with the amazing film Napoleon Dynamite in 2004 and then later followed by television shows like the Good Doctor on ABC and others furthered this strengths-based perspective. Topping it off was Elon Musk, one of the most powerful people in the world announcing his neurodiversity to the world on Saturday Night Live in 2021.
From my perspective, as a practitioner, one major reason this trend away from deficit model thinking to a strengths model is so positive is that it brings all the different forms of neurodiversity under one umbrella. If you were to ask any seasoned special education teacher about the differences between a learning-disabled student versus an ADD student versus a student with ASD, they will tell you there is much more intersection than there are differences. In the early 2000’s with the newfound awareness of ASD and neurodiversity in all its forms our clinic launched multiple social skills groups which were for “anyone on and IEP regardless of disability classification.” Yet some parents felt that their children with ASD need to be in a group by themselves because their children’s needs were unique from the other learning disabilities such as dyslexia; but that was before the concept, not just the term, of neurodiversity had taken root. And yes, words do matter in a big way!
It is this ability of the term neurodiversity and the concept of it, which has finally enabled all the people impacted by neurological disabilities to come together as one entity and not as distinct and separate parts, which focuses as much on the strengths of these conditions and not just the deficits of it; this greater inclusivity creates better synergies than the older models and it is the better path forward.