Image 1 of 1
Introduction
Language is not fixed; it shifts over time. Words that were once considered neutral or appropriate can become outdated or harmful, especially when they reflect dominant perspectives that overlook lived experience. This is particularly true for the language used to describe Neurodivergent people. Neurodiversity-affirming language comes from within the Neurodivergent community. It is shaped by the values of the Neurodiversity Paradigm and the broader Neurodivergent Movement. At its heart is the belief that neurological differences are part of human diversity, not deficits to be corrected.
What is neurodiversity-affirming language?
Neurodiversity-affirming language is rooted in the Neurodiversity Paradigm (Walker, 2021; Hartman et al., 2023). While Judy Singer first used the term neurodiversity in her 1998 thesis, the paradigm itself emerged through collective effort in online forums and communities during the 1990s. It builds on the Social Model of Disability, viewing Neurodivergent people as minorities whose needs are often unmet in a neurotypical world.
This language respects and uplifts Neurodivergent identities. It does not pathologise or attempt to separate individuals from how their brains and bodies experience the world. Instead, it affirms that Neurodivergent lives are valid and worthy, exactly as they are.
Why use neurodiversity-affirming language?
Neurodivergent people experience multiple forms of oppression, often compounded by other intersecting marginalised identities such as race, gender, sexuality, and disability (McAuliffe et al., 2023). The words we use shape how people are treated by institutions, communities, and themselves. Using affirming language:
Challenges ableism and stigma.
Supports community autonomy.
Creates safer, more inclusive environments.
Builds solidarity, whether you are Neurodivergent or an ally.
Key concepts and terminology
-
Refers to the full spectrum of neurocognitive bodymind variation across all people. Neurodiversity is a fact of human diversity, like biodiversity or cultural diversity. It does not refer to a person or group.
Example:
“The human existence is enriched by neurodiversity.”
-
Describes any form of neurocognitive functioning that diverges from societal norms. It includes but is not limited to Autism, ADHD, dyslexia, dyspraxia, Tourette’s, and acquired or drug-induced cognitive states.
Example:
“Autism is a Neurodivergence; Autistic people are Neurodivergent.”
-
A term for someone’s overall neurocognitive profile. Neurotypical and Neurodivergent are neurotypes.
Example:
“The study included people from multiple neurotypes.”
-
A person whose neurotype diverges from the dominant norm. People with more than one Neurodivergence may be described as multiply neurodivergent.
Example:
“I’m Neurodivergent - I am ADHD and have sensory processing differences.”
-
A person whose neurotype aligns with and benefits from societal norms and expectations.
Example:
“My partner is neurotypical - they are not Neurodivergent.”
-
Coined by Nick Walker (2021), Neuroqueer describes both a personal stance and a political practice: embracing neurodivergence while disrupting the cisnormative, heteronormative, and neurotypical expectations of patriarchal society.
Example:
“I am stimming openly and challenging norms - I am Neuroqueering my workplace.”
Language shifts: what to say and why it matters
-
Why:
“Normal” and “abnormal” imply a harmful binary. The Neurodiversity Paradigm rejects these concepts in favour of a spectrum model (Walker, 2021).
Example:
“Participants included neurotypical and Neurodivergent children.”
-
Why:
Most Autistic people prefer the term Autism without clinical qualifiers. Terms like ASD and ASC frame Autism through a medicalised lens.
Example:
“This presentation explores Autism and physical health.”
-
Why:
Identity-first language recognises Autism as an inseparable part of the self. Most Autistic people prefer this terminology (Bonnello, 2022; Sinclair, 2013).
Example:
“I facilitate a support group for Autistic women.”
-
Why:
Euphemisms obscure structural barriers and disempower disabled communities. Saying disabled is direct, respectful, and rooted in disability justice movements.
Example:
“I work as a disability researcher, and I am currently studying the needs of Disabled workers.”
-
Why:
“Functioning” labels are inaccurate and often dismiss support needs. Using support-based language honours context, capacity, and lived reality (Alvares et al., 2020).
Example:
“I find after work I am tired and need help with cooking dinner—my support needs are higher when I get home.”
-
Why:
Behaviour is communication. Describing specifics (e.g., meltdown from sensory overload) centres the person, not just the behaviour (Jorgensen et al., 2023).
Example:
“I had a meltdown due to sensory overload at the conference.”
-
Why:
“Symptoms” imply pathology. Traits reflect individual neurocognitive expression without assuming illness.
Example:
“Executive dysfunction is an Autistic trait.”
-
Why:
Stimming is affirming and accurate. It acknowledges that movement and sensory expression are essential for regulation and expression, not something to be corrected.
Example:
“We encourage people to use their stim toys and stim during this event.”
Conclusion
Language evolves—and so should we. But it must be the people directly impacted who lead these changes. Neurodiversity-affirming language honours identity, promotes dignity, and helps dismantle systems that exclude. When in doubt, ask someone how they identify—but when referring to communities more broadly, use the language grounded in lived experience, research, and collective advocacy.
References
Alvares, G. A., Bebbington, K., Cleary, D., Evans, K., Glasson, E. J., Maybery, M. T., Pillar, S., Uljarević, M., Varcin, K., Wray, J., &
Whitehouse, A. J. (2020). The misnomer of “high functioning autism”: Intelligence is an imprecise predictor of functional abilities at diagnosis. Autism, 24(1), 221–232. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362361319852831
Andrews, E. E., Forber-Pratt, A. J., Mona, L. R., Lund, E. M., Pilarski, C. R., & Balter, R. (2019). #SaytheWord: A disability culture commentary on the erasure of “disability.” Rehabilitation Psychology, 64(2), 111.
CAPTAP. (2023). How to talk about autistic ways of being.
Bonnello, C. (2022). Results and analysis of the Autistic Not Weird 2022 autism survey. Autistic Not Weird.
Brisenden, S. (1986). Independent living and the medical model of disability. Disability, Handicap & Society, 1(2), 173–178.
Chan, J., Arnold, S., Webber, L., Riches, V., Parmenter, T., & Stancliffe, R. (2012). Is it time to drop the term “challenging behaviour”? Learning Disability Practice, 15(5).
Hartman, D., O’Donnell-Killen, T., Doyle, J. K., Kavanagh, M., Day, A., & Azevedo, J. (2023). The adult autism assessment handbook: A neurodiversity affirmative approach. Jessica Kingsley Publishers.
Jorgensen, M., Nankervis, K., & Chan, J. (2023). “Environments of concern”: Reframing challenging behaviour within a human rights approach. International Journal of Developmental Disabilities, 69(1), 95–100.
