Neurodiversity is the idea that there are natural variations in how individuals’ brains operate. In 2021, Haley Moss, an autistic lawyer based in Florida, put out a book in conjunction with the American Bar Association entitled Great Minds Think Differently: Neurodiversity for Lawyers and Other Professionals. She cites a 2016 white paper put out by the Autistic Self-Advocacy Network (ASAN) which describes neurodiversity as “an umbrella term that encompasses neurocognitive differences such as autism, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, dyslexia, Tourette’s syndrome, anxiety, obsessive-compulsive disorder, depression, intellectual disability and schizophrenia as well as ‘normal’ neurocognitive functioning.”1 Individuals in the latter category may be referred to as “neurotypical” and individuals in the prior categories may be described as “neurodivergent.” An environment that is “neurodiverse” therefore includes both neurodivergent and neurotypical individuals.
This edition of BarTalk has a mental health theme. As the ASAN white paper would suggest, there is a substantial intersection between neurodivergence and mental illness. However, it is important to distinguish between the concepts of mental health and mental illness; the mental health concerns of someone with mental illness, whether they are practising law or not, may be different than the mental health concerns of a neurotypical lawyer.
Additionally, one should be careful to avoid categorizing issues of neurodiversity as simply relating to mental illness. One can easily categorize epilepsy as a neurodivergence but, by itself, it is not a mental illness. I am autistic; while my brain can connect concepts together in ways which sometimes require cognitive behavioural therapy, to say my day-to-day problems are mental health or mental illness related would be inaccurate. My day-to-day concerns relate to sensory overstimulation in conjunction with executive functioning impairments, which said overstimulation may exacerbate. While my behavioural “quirks” sometimes relate to me connecting concepts together in ways which would not happen with other people’s brains, more frequently, they are explained by sensory overstimulation.
In many cases, these sensory overstimulation issues could be “reasonably accommodated” if they got sufficient space in the existing public dialogue regarding autism as opposed to the social and behavioural impairments which take up much of the oxygen in the room. I would suggest that the understanding of autism as primarily a social disability traces back to when post-Freudian mental health professionals (such as the infamous Bruno Bettelheim) monopolized the field from the 1940s to the 1970s. While mental health is important, there is a context in the field of autistic employment where invoking mental health issues may not be constructive. This creates an added challenge integrating autistic people into a profession, such as law, where mental health issues are so rampant.
While it is important to avoid the narrative that neurodivergent individuals “have superpowers,” neurodivergent talent has something to bring to the table. Simon Baron-Cohen theorizes that autistic people are exceptionally able to systemize information. Such a skill brings value to the legal profession. However, there are two key barriers which autistic talent face: firstly, they struggle to get through the door due to misconceptions about their abilities regarding business development; secondly, when they are allowed through the door, their employers run into accommodation issues due to insufficient knowledge about autism and the many different ways in which autism can affect performance. Individuals with other neurodivergences, while they bring additional benefits to the table, face similar barriers.
1. See Jessica M.F. Hughes, Increasing Neurodiversity in Disability and Social Justice Advocacy Groups, Autistic Self-Advocacy Network (2016). | ↩