Talk:Neurodiversity

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 19 January 2022 and 3 May 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Meganvanderwiele (article contribs).

Autism heavy, ie - unbalanced

Understandings of Autism and 'not autism' have been central to the history and spread neurodiversity concept (especially the neurodiversity movement online) but this article should be giving an overview of : -all sorts of neurodiversity -discussing the boundaries of neurodiversity - such as the history of whether certain things are included, & when/who says

Each section is very Autism-focused to the point it makes it confusing to read.

• Other - dyspraxia, adhd, synesthesia .... etc
• debated - mental illnesses, life experiences that have neurological effects, other brain variation .... etc

The article could provide and overview of how different labels in the neurodiversity umbrella have operated within the neurodiversity paradigm or not; and where they have or contributed to it. 78.149.120.57 (talk) 14:31, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

As far as I can tell the page is not protected/locked, you're welcome to edit and improve it.--TempusTacet (talk) 15:50, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

'Neuronormative'

Hi. Use of the word neuronormative is a way to circumvent the epistemological issues with the word neurotypical (and therefore neurodivergence) - that are raised in this article.- [ Neurotypical section - see 'reception']

Unfortunately sometimes the word neuronormative is misunderstood to be part of a framework where neurotypical is 'normal' and so-called neurodiversity 'abnormal'. What it actually means is that neurotypical behaviour and strengths have been positioned as social norms, and neuro-atypical people - ADHDers, Autistics, Dyspraxics, Dyslexics, the Learning disabled etc, have then had to navigate a world which has, to date, privileged people without those conditions.

It might require an understanding of the concept of 'normativity' (see Normativity & Social norm) to understand the idea, for those who do not already have an understanding of the constructedness of language and concepts.

The use of the word neuronormative inherently questions the current 'normalisation' of certain peoples ways of thinking and behaving (and 'abnormalisaiton' of others), and questions the status quo of aspects of our societies that are supportive and helpful to some neurotypes whilst being unhelpful and discriminatory towards others. It is therefore actually a progressive way of understanding neurodiversity and so-called neurodivergence. Use of the term is also a current trend - for instance the term is used in some academic papers about neurodiversity topics. So therefore I feel it should get at least some explanation or mention somewhere in this article. ee~~ 84.65.96.97 (talk) 12:02, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

"recent addition of text-based options"

Recent… first, "recent" has no place in an encyclopedic article. Recent when? Second, it doesn't make sense given that social media started text-based (Twitter, Facebook, and their grandparents were all (pure) text). Third, the abstract of the paper doesn't say so, as far as I could see. jae (talk) 01:24, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Neurotypical/Term needs a sensible rework

So in its current state the page seems to work from the idea that some people are neurodivergents whereas most are not, even if J. Singer earlier in the archives clarified that she did not intend "neurodivergent" to be a descriptor for individuals. Anyway, under Neurotypical/Term the text jumps from the classic inclusions such as autism, ADHD, and dyslexia to include "mental and behavioral traits, such as mood, anxiety, dissociative, psychotic, personality, and eating disorders."

I believe this section needs stronger sourcing or argumentation for it to stay. The latter conditions are mostly considered treatable and curable to some point, while autism, dyslexia, and to some level ADHD are not. Seeing as most of the population will qualify for mood, anxiety, dissociative, psychotic, personality, or eating disorders at some point in their life it also seems to undermine the concept as explained earlier in the article, and sounds like overinclusion to the point of rendering the term useless. Autism not necessarily being pathological or suitable for a medical/psychiatric model is easy to understand, why the same would be true for mood, anxiety, and eating disorders is harder to understand and not explained in the article. I'd consider removing it myself if I was more well versed in the editorial process, hope someone more experienced will consider it. Evilfiredad (talk) 08:33, 13 September 2023 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Neuroscience

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 21 August 2023 and 18 December 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Kassafrass (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Hhmilius (talk) 17:47, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

Double Empathy Problem theory needs different illustration

The well-meaning illustration at Double empathy problem (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neurodiversity#/media/File:Autism_Double_Empathy_1.png) appears biased by showing the difference between the 2 as the neurodiverse person's mind being a rainbow and the other person's less interesting or even black and white, simply by the fact that it is representing what is typical. The reality is that what is typical is also a rainbow. :-D The entire point of neurodiversity is that there is inherent beauty in the way all of our minds/selves work and all ways are part of the creative good of the universe, including those which are present in more than 50% of the population (thus neurotypical). Please use a graphic that shows mutual communication difficulty without it looking like the graphic has an empathy problem itself. (this observation is being made by an autistic person) 76.114.197.177 (talk) 08:57, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

I totally agree! I will go ahead and make this change to replace the illustration with one that is more suitable to help embody that section. Kassafrass (talk) 18:43, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

Edit to 1st Paragraph in "Within disability rights movement" section

The first paragraph in the "Within disability rights movement" section was lacking clarification and stronger sources. I edited this section to help it flow better and replace/add some stronger and more recent sources. Kassafrass (talk) 18:42, 8 October 2023 (UTC)