Neurodiversity has a class problem

Unmask. Set boundaries. Leave the job that is harming you. Rest until you recover. Every one of those is a purchase, and we keep offering them as though they were free.

A critique from inside the movement · content note: poverty, burnout, suicidality

I want to say something about my own movement, and I want to say it carefully, because I am not trying to burn anything down. I am trying to point at a hole that a lot of people are falling through while we talk over the top of it.

Neurodiversity discourse has produced genuinely liberating ideas. The social model applied to cognition. Masking named as labour rather than character. Burnout defined by us instead of about us. Identity-first language. Community. I have built my working life on this material and I am not walking any of it back.

But almost all of it has been written by people with institutional access, and it shows. Not in the theory — in the advice.

Read the standard advice as a price list

Here is what we tell each other, constantly, in good faith. Unmask. Set boundaries at work. Reduce your sensory load. Leave the environment that is harming you. Ask for accommodations. Take time to recover. Find your people. Do less.

Now read it again as a list of things you have to be able to afford.

WHAT EACH ONE ACTUALLY COSTS

Unmask at work. Requires that being read as odd will not cost you the job, or that losing it would not cost you the housing.

Set boundaries. Requires enough replaceability in your labour, or enough savings, that “no” is survivable.

Leave the harmful environment. Requires another environment to go to, and money in between.

Request accommodations. Requires knowing your rights, having the executive capacity to document them while depleted, and being able to absorb retaliation if it comes.

Reduce sensory load. Requires control over where you live and work. Renters, shift workers, and people in shared housing do not have it.

Rest until you recover. Requires income that does not depend on your presence. This is the most expensive item on the list and we say it the most freely.

None of that advice is wrong. All of it is addressed to somebody with options, while sounding as though it is addressed to everyone. And when a person cannot act on it, the failure lands on them — one more thing they could not manage, filed alongside everything else they could not manage.

We have built a liberation framework whose core prescriptions are luxury goods, and then we wonder why it has not liberated everyone.

The people who cannot stop

I keep thinking about the specific position that almost nothing in this discourse speaks to.

You are autistic. You are in the early stages of burnout — the exhaustion of internal resources beyond measure, as we ourselves defined it (Raymaker et al., 2020; Higgins et al., 2021), driven overwhelmingly by environmental conditions (Mantzalas et al., 2022). You have children, or aging parents, or both. Your income covers the month and nothing more. There is no partner earning enough to absorb a gap, no family with money, no savings.

You cannot stop. So you keep going, which deepens the burnout, which degrades your work, which puts the job at risk, which is the only thing standing between your household and losing everything.

Now hold that against the advice. Rest. With what. Leave. To where. Set a boundary. With what leverage. The entire toolkit is unavailable at precisely the moment it is needed, and the person is left holding both the collapse and the sense that they failed to prevent it.

The catch-22 nobody names

And then, if it gets bad enough, you do what you are supposed to do. You apply for disability.

Here is the structure of that process, stated plainly. To qualify, you must demonstrate that you cannot work. To survive the months or years the determination takes, you must work. And working is evidence against your claim.

There is exactly one group of people who can satisfy both conditions: those who can afford to stop. Savings, a partner’s income, family money, an inheritance. Everyone else is filtered out by the mechanics of applying, before any clinician looks at anything.

The disability system does not assess whether you are disabled. It assesses whether you can afford to prove it.

I went through it. Two years. Denied, appealed, denied. I did not file the final appeal because I had a trauma response and missed the deadline. And I had every advantage the process rewards: graduate education, a partner, people who could help me advocate, the literacy to read the forms. I was living below the poverty line the entire time and I still had more than most applicants will ever have.

If it failed me with all of that, it is not a system that occasionally makes errors. It is a system doing what it was built to do, which is to be extremely difficult to enter.

Where I sit, and why it matters

I should be precise about my own position, because the argument is weaker if I pretend to be outside it.

I am white. I have graduate education and enormous student debt. I grew up poor but safe. I worked in restaurants, nonprofits, and government for twenty-four years, and the wage progression was real but slow enough that what it cost me exceeded what it bought. I live below the poverty line now. The safety that let me heal was not earned through financial independence — it came from a partner who supported this work while I could not.

So I am writing from inside the gap and slightly above it at once. That is exactly the vantage point where you can see the mechanism, and I do not think it is an accident that most of the people producing this discourse are further from the edge than I am. From further away it genuinely looks like a set of choices people are failing to make.

And I want to name what this costs when it intersects with everything else. Autistic people who are Black or Brown, trans, unhoused, undocumented, or without family support meet all of this plus the documented disparities in who gets identified at all, how early, and who receives services once eligible (Mandell et al., 2002, 2007, 2009; Bilaver et al., 2021; Burkett et al., 2015; Zuckerman et al., 2013). I can tell you what the class filter did to me. I cannot tell you what it does when it compounds, and I am not going to pretend otherwise.

This is not a rhetorical stake

I want to be blunt about where this ends, because it is easy to discuss a support gap as though it were an inconvenience.

People lose jobs. Then housing. People self-medicate a nervous system nobody helped them regulate, which is precisely what the self-medication literature describes — substances selected for the distress they relieve, not at random (Khantzian, 1997; Hall & Queener, 2007). People become isolated. People cycle through emergency rooms and psychiatric wards and shelters. And suicidality among autistic adults without intellectual disability sits at rates that should have produced emergency policy a decade ago (Newell et al., 2023; Brown et al., 2024), while responsibility for it stays dispersed across enough institutions that none of them is ever accountable (Cleary et al., 2022).

Most of those people believe they failed. That belief is not a distortion — it is what happens when the only available account of your difficulty locates it inside you, which is exactly what minority stress research keeps finding: the distress tracks the conditions, not the neurotype (Botha & Frost, 2020).

I almost did not make it. Twice. And the reason I am able to write this is not resilience. It is that I was eventually given the conditions to heal — by a person, privately, because no system would. That should not be a privilege. It should not be luck.

What we are actually reproducing

Here is the part I find hardest to say to my own people.

When a movement’s central prescriptions require resources most of its constituency does not have, and it keeps issuing them anyway, it stops being a liberation framework and becomes a set of standards people fail to meet. Which is the thing we objected to in the first place. We built the analysis to escape a normative standard we could not satisfy, and then we produced another one — unmasked, boundaried, rested, self-advocating — and left most people unable to satisfy it for material reasons we do not discuss.

That is neuronormativity with better vocabulary. Chapman (2023) makes the underlying point historically: “normal” was never a natural category but a productivity standard with an economic history. If we are not careful, the neurodivergent version becomes a wellness standard with the same structure — and the same people fall short.

Nobody intends this. That is the whole point. Ableism operates through the ordinary practices of a field regardless of what anyone intends (Bottema-Beutel et al., 2021), and so does class. It does not require a single person in this movement to be indifferent. It only requires that the advice be written by people for whom it is affordable.

And then there is the paywall

There is a version of this that is not structural at all. It is a choice, and it is happening in front of us.

People are moving up inside this movement, and some of them are taking the collective analysis with them — branding it, trademarking it, and putting it behind a paywall. A framework about how ableist systems enclose, gatekeep, and extract, sold as private intellectual property with a price at the door.

I want to name precisely what that is. It is classism. Not a difference of business model, not a debate about whether writers deserve to be paid — of course we do, and I earn from this work too. It is classism because of who it filters. The person I have been describing for this entire essay — burnt out, still working, no buffer, months behind on everything — is exactly the person who cannot pay. So the analysis that would tell them their difficulty is structural rather than personal is available to everyone except the people it would most relieve.

And notice the compounding. If you have institutional access, you already had the vocabulary. You met these ideas in a seminar, or a workplace training, or a graduate reading list, and you did not pay a subscription for them. The paywall does not restrict you. It restricts the person who was going to encounter this for the first time on a phone, at midnight, after a shift, wondering what is wrong with them.

Charging admission to the explanation is not a neutral commercial decision when the explanation is the thing that stops people blaming themselves.

There is a second problem underneath the price, which is ownership. This analysis is inherited. It comes from disability justice, built by disabled queer and trans people of colour; from the social model; from Black feminist thought and standpoint theory; from liberation psychology; from autistic self-advocates who were writing before any of this was monetisable. Trademarking a piece of that lineage converts a commons into an asset with a single owner and a licensing fee — which is a fair description of elite capture: a collective liberation idea taken over by whoever was best placed to take it.

A trademark says this is mine and you may access it on my terms. A lineage says this was given to me and I am accountable to the people who made it. One encloses. The other is a commons you tend and hand forward. My work cannot be sold back to you because it was never mine to sell, and where I do charge for something — a course, a workshop — the analysis itself stays outside the gate.

It also rebuilds the exact hierarchy the movement was formed to dismantle. Expert over layperson. Knowledge behind a barrier. One authority who defines what counts as the accurate account, sold by the person who decides. That does not produce liberation. It produces subscribers.

So this is the part of the class problem that no one gets to call unintentional. The rest of what I have described in this essay happens through ordinary practice, without anyone deciding to exclude anyone. Setting a price does not. Somebody chose the number, and somebody knows who cannot meet it.

What changes it

Not better advice. A second door.

The medical route should stay open for the people it genuinely serves — permanent, static support needs, where a clinical finding is the accurate description. But there is no route at all for disability that is episodic and environmentally caused, and that is the hole nearly everyone I am describing falls into. Including, it should be said, high-support-needs people in burnout. This is not a carve-out for mild autism. It is a category the system does not possess.

And we already know how to build it, because we have. Workers’ compensation does not ask whether you have a permanent impairment inside you. It asks whether the workplace injured you. That is environmentally-caused, frequently temporary disability, already funded, already legally established, and nobody finds it radical. Veterans’ service-connected disability works the same way. If a warehouse floor can injure a spine, an environment can injure a nervous system, and the burden of proof should sit in the same place.

THE SECOND DOOR, CONCRETELY

Support keyed to need, not to a finding. If a person cannot sustain work in a given environment, that is the fact requiring response.

A recognised category for episodic and environmentally-caused disability. Time-limited, renewable, reviewable. It does not have to be permanent to be real.

Fund it at the point of collapse, not after the loss. Three months of reduced hours and an adapted workspace in year one is cheaper than a lost career, a lost home, and years of crisis service use. That is a testable claim and somebody should test it.

Expand vocational rehabilitation rather than build new. It already exists, already funds support, and is already less impairment-fixated than the disability determination process. It took me two and a half years to get a small grant from it. Fund it properly, remove the impairment gate, make it fast.

And note who else is standing at this same missing door. People with long COVID, currently failing disability determination for precisely this reason — fluctuating, environmentally triggered, no stable finding. People with ME/CFS. People with chronic illness of variable capacity. People with episodic mental health conditions. Our case is not special. It is one instance of a category the whole apparatus lacks, and that makes the coalition much larger than us.

One more thing is missing and it is evidentiary: nobody counts the denied. How many autistic adults apply for disability, how many are refused, and what happens to them at one, two, and five years — employment, housing, health, survival. That data does not exist, because systems do not audit their own failures. Its absence is not neutral. It is what allows this to keep being described as a series of individual misfortunes.

Say it differently

In the meantime, there is something small and free that anyone writing in this space can do, and I include myself in the correction.

Stop issuing prescriptions as though they were universal. Not leave the job that is harming you, but if leaving is available to you, here is why it matters — and if it is not, here is what the harm is doing and none of it is your failure. Name the resource the advice requires. That one habit converts a standard people fail into information people can use, and it costs nothing.

Because the person I am most worried about is not going to unmask, or set a boundary, or rest. They are going to work tomorrow, in a body that is already past capacity, because the alternative is losing the house. And every piece of advice we hand them lands as one more thing they are failing to do.

They are not failing. They are working without a net, in a system that only catches people who can afford to fall.

WHAT WE ARE ASKING FOR

A second door. Support keyed to need rather than to a permanent finding inside a person. Recognition of episodic and environmentally-caused disability. Funding at the point of collapse instead of after the loss. And someone, finally, counting the people the current system turns away.

This is part of why I am building Kaleidoscope Systems — not to sell a framework, but to build a coalition. Nobody changes a benefits architecture alone. If you are working toward every autistic person having their needs met, we will work with you. You do not have to agree with me about anything else.

References

Every source below is one I hold and have read.

Bilaver, L. A., Sobotka, S. A., & Mandell, D. S. (2021). Understanding racial and ethnic disparities in autism-related service use among Medicaid-enrolled children. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 51(9), 3341–3355. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-020-04797-6

Botha, M., & Frost, D. M. (2020). Extending the minority stress model to understand mental health problems experienced by the autistic population. Society and Mental Health, 10(1), 20–34. https://doi.org/10.1177/2156869318804297

Bottema-Beutel, K., Kapp, S. K., Lester, J. N., Sasson, N. J., & Hand, B. N. (2021). Avoiding ableist language: Suggestions for autism researchers. Autism in Adulthood, 3(1), 18–29. https://doi.org/10.1089/aut.2020.0014

Brown, C. M., Newell, V., Sahin, E., & Hedley, D. (2024). Updated systematic review of suicide in autism: 2018–2024. Current Developmental Disorders Reports, 11(4), 225–256. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40474-024-00308-9

Burkett, K., Morris, E., Manning-Courtney, P., Anthony, J., & Shambley-Ebron, D. (2015). African American families on autism diagnosis and treatment: The influence of culture. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 45(10), 3244–3254. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-015-2482-x

Chapman, R. (2023). Empire of normality: Neurodiversity and capitalism. Pluto Press.

Cleary, M., West, S., Kornhaber, R., & Hungerford, C. (2022). Dispersed responsibility of a collective problem: Autism, suicidality, and the need for change. Issues in Mental Health Nursing. https://doi.org/10.1080/01612840.2022.2122642

Hall, D. H., & Queener, J. E. (2007). Self-medication hypothesis of substance use: Testing Khantzian’s updated theory. Journal of Psychoactive Drugs, 39(2), 151–158. https://doi.org/10.1080/02791072.2007.10399873

Higgins, J. M., Arnold, S. R. C., Weise, J., Pellicano, E., & Trollor, J. N. (2021). Defining autistic burnout through experts by lived experience. Autism, 25(8), 2356–2369. https://doi.org/10.1177/13623613211019858

Khantzian, E. J. (1997). The self-medication hypothesis of substance use disorders: A reconsideration and recent applications. Harvard Review of Psychiatry, 4(5), 231–244. https://doi.org/10.3109/10673229709030550

Mandell, D. S., Ittenbach, R. F., Levy, S. E., & Pinto-Martin, J. A. (2007). Disparities in diagnoses received prior to a diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 37(9), 1795–1802. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-006-0314-8

Mandell, D. S., Listerud, J., Levy, S. E., & Pinto-Martin, J. A. (2002). Race differences in the age at diagnosis among Medicaid-eligible children with autism. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 41(12), 1447–1453. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.CHI.0000024863.60748.53

Mandell, D. S., Wiggins, L. D., Carpenter, L. A., Daniels, J., DiGuiseppi, C., Durkin, M. S., Giarelli, E., Morrier, M. J., Nicholas, J. S., Pinto-Martin, J. A., Shattuck, P. T., Thomas, K. C., Yeargin-Allsopp, M., & Kirby, R. S. (2009). Racial/ethnic disparities in the identification of children with autism spectrum disorders. American Journal of Public Health, 99(3), 493–498. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2007.131243

Mantzalas, J., Richdale, A. L., & Dissanayake, C. (2022). A conceptual model of risk and protective factors for autistic burnout. Autism Research, 15(6), 976–987. https://doi.org/10.1002/aur.2722

Newell, V., Phillips, L., Jones, C., Townsend, E., Richards, C., & Cassidy, S. (2023). A systematic review and meta-analysis of suicidality in autistic and possibly autistic people without co-occurring intellectual disability. Molecular Autism, 14(1), 12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13229-023-00544-7

Raymaker, D. M., Teo, A. R., Steckler, N. A., Lentz, B., Scharer, M., Delos Santos, A., Kapp, S. K., Hunter, M., Joyce, A., & Nicolaidis, C. (2020). “Having all of your internal resources exhausted beyond measure”: Defining autistic burnout. Autism in Adulthood, 2(2), 132–143. https://doi.org/10.1089/aut.2019.0079

Zuckerman, K. E., Mattox, K., Sinche, B., Blaschke, G. S., & Bethell, C. (2013). Racial, ethnic, and language disparities in early childhood developmental/behavioral evaluations. Clinical Pediatrics, 53(7), 619–631. https://doi.org/10.1177/0009922813501378