More and more people come to me who identify as autistic or as "having" ADHD.
These are not the only descriptions that fall under the umbrella of neurodivergence, but they are by far the most common that I encounter.
Some people like having a diagnosis - they feel the need to have a quick way to communicate to other people what to expect from them. Others are less fond of being labelled. Either way, we exist in a world full of "neurotypicals" and have to find what works for us.
One question I find worthy of consideration is, do I have neurodivergence, or am I neurodivergent? To have, or to be? My own preference is for "to be" - there's less danger of self-limiting beliefs. One of the functions of counselling is to open ourselves up to change, to give ourselves the best chance of reaching our potential. If we reframe "I have autism and therefore cannot read social signals" it might look more like "I am not someone who reads social signals in the same way that others do. I may or may not wish to change that".
Neurodivergence isn't a virus, it can't be seen under a microscope. It is only a description that covers certain patterns that some people currently exhibit. There is no reason that those patterns should be regarded as fixed and immutable. Neurodivergence is about variations in how people think, process information, experience emotions, and interact with the world. It is certainly possible to choose to do those things differently, if one wishes it. Furthermore, there are other reasons beside neurodivergence that could just as well account for our atypical behaviour. For example, shame (the feeling that accompanies the belief that we are unworthy of love and belonging) could easily explain an unwillingness to see ourselves reflected in others.
Is there any reason that someone should be unhappy about their neurodivergence? Of their uniqueness? One should not make the mistake of imagining that neurotypical people have an easy life, a life to aspire to, that is forever beyond our reach. It is simply not true. We all have our unique strengths and weaknesses, we're all a bit crazy from close up. If a neurodivergent person and a neurotypical person struggle to get on the same wavelength, should we regard either of them as better than the other? The fact that there are more neurotypical people is of no consequence in establishing how things should be. As Bertrand Russell wrote - "in view of the silliness of the majority of mankind, a widespread belief is more likely to be foolish than sensible".
In conclusion, we're all different and some of us have greater difficulty in gliding through social interactions than others. We are who we are. We can have labels if we want them, if they save us time and perhaps embarrassment. That doesn't stop us from learning, changing, or discovering that after all, we were OK to begin with.
