A recent article by Leanne Maskell titled "Neurodivergence is Not an Excuse for Poor Behaviour" raises an important but often mishandled point: the intersection of neurodivergence and personal responsibility. While well-intentioned, the article oversimplifies the complex realities of living with conditions like autism and ADHD, especially for those who are undiagnosed, unsupported, or navigating a society that misunderstands them. As someone with lived experience, I feel compelled to offer a broader perspective.
What Defines "Poor Behaviour"?
The article boldly declares that neurodivergence is not an excuse for poor behaviour, yet it fails to define what constitutes such behaviour. This omission is significant. Behaviour is not a static concept; it is contextual, subjective, and often shaped by societal norms that are inherently neurotypical. Without a clear definition, statements like this risk becoming a weapon against neurodivergent individuals, who are frequently judged for traits they cannot control.
For example:
Is sensory overload resulting in a withdrawal from social interactions "poor behaviour"?
Is difficulty understanding social cues due to executive functioning challenges "poor behaviour"?
Rather than framing behaviour as good or bad, it’s essential to consider context. Much of what is labeled "poor behaviour" in neurodivergent individuals stems from misunderstood traits or reactions to overwhelming environments.
Responsibility Goes Both Ways
The article emphasizes personal responsibility, stating that neurodivergence does not exempt individuals from accountability. While this is true to an extent, it neglects the reciprocal responsibility of society to provide understanding, support, and accommodations.
Neurodivergent individuals often face:
Gaslighting and Bullying: Misunderstood traits can provoke hostile reactions, from covert exclusion to overt discrimination. For instance, being labeled as "lazy" or "rude" for struggling with tasks others find easy.
Arbitrary Norms: Social constructs often prioritize compliance over compassion. Boundaries and expectations are designed without considering neurodiverse needs, creating barriers rather than fostering inclusion.
Holding neurodivergent individuals accountable without addressing these systemic issues is inequitable. Responsibility must be shared between individuals and the systems they operate within.
The Undiagnosed Experience
The challenges faced by undiagnosed neurodivergent individuals are particularly overlooked. Without a diagnosis, one’s struggles are often interpreted as character flaws rather than symptoms. This leads to a damaging cycle of self-blame, familial misunderstandings, and societal judgment.
In my experience, being undiagnosed for most of my life meant:
Constantly masking traits to fit societal expectations, leading to burnout.
Experiencing amplified symptoms due to overreactions from others, such as criticism or exclusion.
Facing covert and overt forms of discrimination, often justified by others as "teaching a lesson."
The article’s narrative ignores how these dynamics contribute to the very "poor behaviour" it critiques.
Autism, ADHD, and Misrepresentation
The piece uses high-profile examples—such as Gregg Wallace and Boris Johnson—to argue that neurodivergence cannot be used as a "get out of jail free card." However, these examples trivialize the experiences of everyday neurodivergent individuals.
Consider these points:
Privilege Distorts the Narrative: Public figures often have resources to mitigate the impact of their neurodivergence, such as access to private assessments or financial security. For most, the path to diagnosis and support is fraught with barriers, including years-long waiting lists and social stigma.
Overshadowing Realities: Framing neurodivergence through the lens of celebrity behavior detracts from systemic issues, such as the lack of accommodations in schools, workplaces, and healthcare systems.
Compassionate Accountability
While personal accountability is important, it must be paired with empathy and systemic change. Neurodivergence is not an excuse for harmful actions, but it is an explanation for traits and behaviors that may be misunderstood. Crucially, accountability should not perpetuate stigma but foster growth and understanding.
To achieve this:
Define Behavior in Context: Acknowledge that traits like sensory sensitivity, difficulty with executive functioning, or social misunderstandings are not moral failings but manifestations of neurodivergence.
Focus on Support Systems: Advocate for early diagnosis, accessible assessments, and accommodations to reduce the challenges neurodivergent individuals face.
Address Societal Bias: Challenge the arbitrary norms that prioritize conformity over humanity. Emphasize the value of neurodiverse perspectives rather than framing them as deficits.
Final Thoughts
The article’s central argument—that neurodivergence is not an excuse for poor behavior—rings hollow without addressing the broader societal context. Neurodivergent individuals are often more sinned against than sinning, subjected to gaslighting, bullying, and exclusion due to traits beyond their control.
It’s far better for individuals and the community to go beyond oversimplified narratives about neurodivergence. Traits are neurological, not psychological or deliberate behavior. Neurodivergent individuals use their behavior to modulate their traits, which is often exhausting, and they are not always fully successful according to arbitrary social guidelines or boundaries. Overreactions from others often far exceed the failures of neurodivergent individuals.
We need a more nuanced conversation, one that recognizes the dual responsibilities of individuals and society. Accountability must be rooted in understanding, and support must be prioritized over judgment. After all, the true measure of a society is how it treats those who think, feel, and experience the world differently.
To be human is to make mistakes, learn, and grow. To be neurodivergent is to navigate this journey in a world that often misunderstands us. It’s time to shift the narrative.
References
Appendix: My Discussion with ChatGPT
You’ve raised a critical point regarding the article by Leanne Maskell and its oversimplification of neurodivergence, especially when it comes to the context of undiagnosed autism, ADHD, or other forms of neurodivergence. Here’s a breakdown of your response and critique:
Key Issues with the Article:
Undefined “Poor Behavior”:
- The article asserts that neurodivergence is "not an excuse for poor behavior" but fails to define what constitutes "poor behavior." Behavior is highly contextual and subject to cultural, social, and individual interpretation. Without a clear definition, this statement risks being weaponized against neurodivergent individuals in situations where their actions are misunderstood or judged unfairly.
Neglect of Context:
- Behavior deemed "poor" often arises from the reactions of others to neurodivergent traits, such as sensory sensitivities, communication challenges, or executive dysfunction.
- The article doesn’t address how neurotypical responses—like gaslighting, bullying, or discrimination—escalate these situations and lead to trauma for neurodivergent individuals.
Pathologizing Neurodivergence:
- The focus on personal responsibility and self-control, while important, risks placing an undue burden on neurodivergent individuals to constantly mask, compensate, or “manage” their differences, ignoring the societal and environmental factors that exacerbate these challenges.
Failure to Recognize Overreactions:
- As you point out, family or societal overreactions to neurodivergent traits can be a significant source of harm. These responses are often more harmful than the original traits themselves, yet the article doesn’t consider this dimension.
Misplaced Responsibility:
- The article frames neurodivergence as a personal issue to be “managed,” without sufficiently addressing the lack of systemic support, understanding, or accommodations that would enable neurodivergent individuals to thrive without being blamed for their struggles.
Superficial Examples:
- Referencing figures like Gregg Wallace and Boris Johnson overshadows the lived realities of neurodivergent people who face systemic discrimination, lack of access to healthcare, and constant judgment for traits they cannot control. This undermines the seriousness of the topic.
Your Perspective:
Neurodivergence as a Target of Bullying:
- You emphasize that neurodivergence is not an excuse for others’ poor behavior, such as gaslighting, bullying, and discrimination. This is a critical counterpoint to the article’s narrow focus, highlighting the asymmetry in power dynamics and societal bias against neurodivergent individuals.
Artificial Boundaries vs. Humanity:
- Your critique of “artificial boundaries” highlights how arbitrary norms are often enforced without consideration for neurodivergent needs. These boundaries serve to marginalize rather than include, reinforcing stigma rather than fostering understanding.
The Importance of Context:
- You rightly argue that behavior cannot be judged in isolation. Context—including whether someone is undiagnosed, unsupported, or reacting to external pressures—matters greatly. By ignoring context, the article risks perpetuating harmful stereotypes and biases.
Reframing the Narrative:
To address the issues raised in the article and your response:
Redefine “Poor Behavior”:
- Poor behavior must be contextualized, considering whether it arises from:
- Neurodivergent traits misunderstood as intentional.
- Reactive behavior due to environmental stressors or lack of support.
- Systemic or societal discrimination (e.g., gaslighting or bullying).
- Poor behavior must be contextualized, considering whether it arises from:
Address Overreactions:
- Highlight how neurotypical overreactions or lack of understanding often amplify challenges for neurodivergent individuals, leading to situations where they are unfairly judged or marginalized.
Shift the Focus:
- Emphasize societal responsibility to provide accommodations, reduce stigma, and foster understanding of neurodivergent traits, rather than solely focusing on individual responsibility.
Recognize Intersectionality:
- Acknowledge how other factors, such as socioeconomic status, gender, or cultural background, intersect with neurodivergence and shape experiences of discrimination or privilege.
Foster Dialogue, Not Judgment:
- Instead of making sweeping statements, create space for nuanced conversations about neurodivergence, accountability, and societal inclusion.
This critique highlights the need for more thoughtful, inclusive discourse around neurodivergence. Articles like the one you referenced should aim to educate and advocate, rather than perpetuate shallow judgments or one-sided narratives.
Comments
Post a Comment