I keep wondering what the limits are to neurodiversity.
Every time I think I know, something else challenges my understanding.
This is a good thing.
As someone who gets bored easily, I love a thought experiment. I love a challenge.
I’ve been digging into these questions with the literature, with some of my favorite resources on the topic, with friends and colleagues and patients.
And the more I learn about neurodiversity, the more I’m convinced that there is no such thing as 'neurotypicality.’ I would absolutely welcome your kind and respectful thoughts if you disagree. Seriously. I want to know, especially if you identify with a particular label or just the umbrella term itself.
The more neurodiversity assessments I do, the more I don’t question if there really is a clear end/beginning point to ‘typical’ versus atypical. I even don’t think I want to be using the term ‘neurodivergence.’ I think it’s better for us to be saying neurodiversity. To celebrate our differences instead of dividing us into ‘normal’ versus not.
So why does that matter?
In the end, it only matters if you feel supported and seen and safe. If the labels are right for you, then use them. For me as a clinician, what makes sense is exploring where a person is experiencing challenge. Where burnout is happening in your life and why. Does it matter what we label the umbrella, what color it is, as long as it protects us?