Neurodiversity Discrimination Terminology

01

Why Language Matters

When we talk about racism, homophobia, or sexism, we have shared words that help us name what is happening, explain it to others, and challenge it. But what about discrimination against people who are autistic, have ADHD, or are neurodivergent in other ways? Does an equivalent vocabulary exist?

The short answer is yes — but it is still developing. Some of these words come from academic research, some from disability rights law, and some from neurodivergent communities themselves, particularly online spaces like Reddit and advocacy blogs. The long answer is what this report sets out to explain: a guide to the evolving vocabulary that names, describes, and challenges discrimination against neurodivergent people.

02

Foundation Terms

These foundational concepts underpin the entire field and should be understood before engaging with the more specialised vocabulary that follows.

Neurodiversity

Singer, 1998

The natural variation in how human brains work — just as there is biodiversity in nature, there is neurological diversity among people. Neurodiversity is a property of a group or population, not of an individual. A single person cannot be 'neurodiverse' — they are neurodivergent.

Neurodivergent (ND)

Asasumasu

Any person whose brain works differently from dominant societal norms. This umbrella term includes autistic people, people with ADHD, dyslexia, dyspraxia, dyscalculia, Tourette syndrome, OCD, and others.

Neurotypical (NT)

Autistic community

Someone whose brain works in ways considered standard or typical by prevailing cultural norms. Originally used by autistic communities to describe non-autistic people; now broader. Some advocates prefer neuroconforming — because 'typical' implies this is the norm. Contested term

Neuronormativity

Academic / Advocacy

The system of norms, expectations, and structures built around neurotypical ways of thinking, behaving, and communicating — which treats these as the standard against which all other minds are measured and found lacking.

03

Discrimination Vocabulary

The vocabulary for naming discrimination against neurodivergent people draws from multiple traditions — disability rights, medical sociology, and community advocacy — often with tension between them.

Ableism

Disability rights

Discrimination and prejudice against people with disabilities, including neurodivergent people. Can be individual (deliberate acts) or structural (built into systems and institutions). The dominant framework in disability rights law but debated in neurodiversity advocacy circles as not fully capturing neurodivergent experience.

Sanism

Michael Perlin, 1992

Prejudice and discrimination specifically directed at people with mental health conditions or neurodevelopmental differences — particularly relevant to ADHD and autism. Less widely used than ableism but considered more specific by some advocates.

Neurodiscrimination

Emerging / Community

An emerging umbrella term specifically for discrimination on the basis of neurological difference. Not yet widely adopted in legal or institutional contexts but increasingly used in advocacy and HR practice. Emerging term

Masking

Autistic community

The conscious or unconscious suppression or camouflage of neurodivergent traits in order to appear neurotypical and avoid social sanction. A survival strategy with significant psychological costs — associated with burnout, late diagnosis, and identity confusion.

Key Distinction

Active discrimination (deliberate, targeted, individual acts) and passive or structural discrimination (built into systems, policies, and environments through default assumptions about how people work) are both important — but very different challenges requiring different responses. Much neurodivergent workplace discrimination is structural rather than deliberate.

04

Language Debates & Contested Territory

The field is characterised by genuine disagreement about terminology that reflects deeper ideological commitments about identity, disability, and the nature of neurodivergent experience. The most significant debate is between identity-first language (autistic person, ADHD person) and person-first language (person with autism, person with ADHD).

Many autistic and ADHD communities strongly prefer identity-first language, arguing that their neurological difference is integral to who they are and not a separate 'condition' to be detached from their personhood. Many medical and educational institutions default to person-first language based on older disability rights principles. Both preferences deserve respect, and the safest approach — particularly in direct communication — is to ask.

A second ongoing debate concerns whether neurodivergent conditions should be understood primarily as disabilities (requiring reasonable adjustments and legal protection), as differences (neutral variations in human cognition), or as conditions with both dimensions simultaneously. This debate has significant legal and policy implications, particularly under the UK Equality Act 2010 and analogous frameworks in other jurisdictions.