Weighing In Academic Writers on Neurodiversity

Abstract

Neurodiversity as a concept, identity, and movement has radically challenged pre-existing ideas of human difference and value. First proposed by Judy Singer (1998) and largely developed through the work of community activists, neurodiversity posits an alternative to pathologizing and medicalized understandings of human differences. This article explores the ways neurodiversity is being used, defined, and deployed based on a corpus of 94 academic texts published across social science disciplines (2006–2021). Using discourse analysis methods derived primarily from Fairclough (2001, 2003), we examine how neurodiversity has been claimed and refashioned within academia. Neurodiversity was often seen as an embodied difference, and was variously portrayed as dichotomous, universal, or existing on a spectrum. Many authors followed an “Autism Plus” strategy, keeping autism at the center of discussions. Academic writers of the texts on neurodiversity overwhelmingly launched their own claims to authority, even as they simultaneously positioned themselves as out of the fray.