Neurodiversity can be a tricky topic sometimes. We can’t see it, so it is easy to forget when addressing diversity in our organisations. And we only know our own experience of the world, so different lived experiences can be difficult to understand.
But the biggest difficulty is that we can’t view different diversities in silos. If we are talking gender diversity, we are also talking racial equality and Neurodiversity, for example. We can’t address these differences in isolation if we really want to make a difference.
Did you know that for every female diagnosed autistic, 4 males are diagnosed? For ADHD, the ratio is 1:3
It is believed that prevalence is similar in both genders, and that women and girls are better at camouflaging or masking.
This means that when we look at gender diversity in the workplace, for instance, if we don’t consider Neurodiversity in parallel, we risk decreasing the pool of women we are trying to support by 20% (based on 1 in 5 being Neurodivergent), which in turn will impact our success rate.
This short piece from the Open University articulates, far more clearly than I could, some of the issues around varied diagnostic rates between races.
To take one of their points as an example, in some Asian cultures it is considered rude to give eye contact to an adult or someone in authority, and children are discouraged from doing so. And yet lack of eye contact is often considered one of the markers of autism. Unsurprisingly, diagnoses of autism among Asian people in the UK are half that of people classed as white British.
This is another group of people where Neurodiversity can be under recognised, and potentially impact our hiring, retention and job satisfaction.
Ok, you’ve seen where this is going…
This article from Psychology Today pulls together a number of sources, explaining that 3 in 10 children with ADHD also suffer from anxiety, and children with dyspraxia have been show to have higher levels of anxiety than their peers as young as 3-4 years old.
There is also research showing that the risk of suicide in individuals with “mild”* autism is 10 times higher than in the general population. It also found that autistic women are more likely than autistic men to commit suicide, despite suicide being more common in males in general.
The interesting thing here is that we know that conventional mental well-being practices do not work for neurodivergent people. Suggesting someone with ADHD take a meditation or yoga class is like telling a fish to take a long walk. Some might be able to do it, but it’s not the solution for everyone. DBT has been shown to be more effective than CBT for neurodivergent people, for example.
We need to extend our mental well-being offerings to ensure that everyone can benefit.
Possibly a result of being more likely to challenge social “norms”, it has been found that 70% of autistic people identify as non-heterosexual:
In fact, the intersection between autism and LGBT identities has its own Wikipedia entry.
We know that there are higher rates of Neurodiversity diasgnoses in children, and high rates of research on children. But those children grow into adults, and those adults grow old. And yet there is very little research on the impact of Neurodiversity as we age.
This study found that only 0.4% of autism research focussed on older adults. But how does Neurodiversity impact the menopause, with its hormonal changes, sensory issues and emotional impact? What about the significant life change of moving from work to retirement and its impact on our routines, which in many cases keep us grounded? What about the emotional and executive function challenges of juggling work, children and grandchildren?
What can we do to make sure neurominorities are adequately represented?
There are two key things we need to keep in mind to ensure not only that we are driving inclusion for neurodiverse people, but also that we are maximising the impact of other diversity initiatives:
1. We need to treat everyone as an individual. Each person we engage with has a distinct “diversity profile”: everyone has a gender, a race, a sexual orientation, an age, etc. and we must treat each person as a whole rather than as a sum of those parts.
2. We must ensure that Neurodiversity is a strategic priority on our people agendas across organisations. This will help to drive other diversity metrics, plus creating the psychological safety for individuals to feel comfortable to disclose will increase the accuracy of any Neurodiversity metrics in place. Because until there is psychological safety, those metrics will measure rates of disclosure rather than true rates of diversity.
*This article uses the term “mild autism”, which has been repeated verbatim here, but we do not subscribe to this idea. It can be harmful to describe autism as “mild” because it plays down the challenges that the person has.