Why so much hostility toward reasonable adjustments for autistic/ADHD students/workers?

[KeenTaupeDog]

I keep seeing backlash whenever someone with autism/ADHD asks for reasonable adjustments. Things like:
• being accused of cheating or getting “special treatment”
• people assuming you're lying or gaming the system
• resentment for accommodations that simply level the playing field

Why do so many people react this way?
Is it ignorance about what these conditions actually mean?
Envy?
Fear that fairness is “zero-sum”?
Or something deeper around stigma toward invisible disabilities?

Would be interested in honest perspectives — especially from those who’ve witnessed or experienced this dynamic.

If you dont think adhders etc. should be employed if they cant stay in work due to their adhd, then are you happy with them sitting at home and claiming benefits? Or dying of hunger?

Not looking to fight — just trying to understand where this reaction comes from.
Am a apsergers sufferer and people at uni accused me of cheating when they found out i had remote exams

I find that list actually very annoying! My ASD ex told a LOAD of lies just as one example, and of the other things on the list that aren't necessarily a negative, she was very few of those too. Diagnosed, I was in the assessment with her, with very few questions regarding it. You can almost tell she has ASD to look at her.

I am retired now but I quite frankly did not care if a colleague had special equipment, or did less work for the same pay as me. Their earnings are none of my business.
What I did resent, however, was poor management pushing extra work on to me so that my own workload was impossible.
I worked 3 days per week in a team of 2. My full time colleague was given a reasonable adjustment to work from home due to a physical problem, but wasn’t expected to take phone calls ( it would have been relatively easy to install a line and computer in his home).
As a result not only did I have to take all of his calls, complete urgent work on his cases, attend all meetings when we would previously have alternated, I then had to feed back on meetings/ tell him what had happened on some of his cases, which took up even more of my time.
His workload was never increased to account for his total lack of interruption, which was such a bonus as we dealt with complicated decisions. This could have eased my situation.
I never blamed him, but in the end I had to make a stand to management as my workload was unmanageable.
I am not interested in colleagues moaning about something which doesn’t directly affect them being ‘fair’, it’s not fair that some people have genuine issues which make things harder for them.
I do have an issue with management not doing their job and actually managing reasonable adjustments so that they are reasonable for everyone.

@Marshmallow4545 this makes no sense. An exam candidate who has the ability to perform well but has diagnosed low working memory or executive function that impact on performance at speed can achieve in line with ability when awarded extra time.

A candidate without the same obstacles can achieve in line with ability without being awarded extra time. They don’t run out of time but reach the boundary of ability. Extra time does not magically enable better performance for candidates who have already answered questions to the best of their ability in ‘normal’ time.

For example DS2 had extra time in A level physics, maths and further maths (autistic, ADHD, low processing and working memory, reading and writing difficulties etc) and so got high grades in line with his ability. But only in line with his ability because he could answer questions correctly. It levelled the playing field with those who could answer questions correctly in given time. It did not give him a big advantage. With some subjects like maths it’s easier to see - if you don’t know the answer 25% extra time will not help you. His extra time had no effect on candidates who were unable to answer questions in normal time who just didn’t know the answer.

A lot of invisible illnesses can be at least as intrusive as ND can be.

Good question! I also wonder these things. In the same breath, I also wonder where people stand with autistic/ADHD children attending mainstream education settings. I have seen many moms complain because they feel the ‘extra needs’ that have to be met for ND kids is unfair (slightly different treatment perhaps) or that it takes away from their kids learning, because of the distractions. So, what do those people propose happens?
I feel it’s a “not my problem, not my concern” issue.
A lot of people don’t want to find a solution, they just don’t want it to affect them personally.
Asking for adaptions is not a big ask. It’s certainly not cheating, it’s not unfair treatment and it’s not pandering. Autistic and ADHD people deserve to have the same opportunities as all of their NT peers/colleagues/friends/family.

We are nowhere near where we need to be for acceptance in society (of neurodivergent people) and it’s a damn shame.

FWIW I have been diagnosed as not ND.

Earlier in my life, I had what I used to call "nervous tummy" before social occasions, sometime so much I could not go, or was physically sick. I didn't make eye contact until my teens, and only the reason it changed was because I trained myself to do it.

I interrupt, blurt out, say the wrong thing professionally and get people's backs up. I overcommit and procrastinate, come home burned out from back to back meetings and life admin and time with my loved ones is what suffers.

All this hurt me professionally but from feedback I learned to be aware of it, to bite my tongue and approach both people and planning in more effective ways, and when I fail at managing it to recognise it, to accept that whatever I messed up at was important to someone, and most importantly to take responsibility for doing wrong and apologise to that person.

Even so, I am late for meetings, late to follow up, late late late and constantly feeling like I'm running up a down escalator trying to outpace all the mundane tasks and create space to achieve what I think I should be capable of.

So, one of two possibiliities: either I actually am ND, but am also proof that these challenges can be managed and IME at least life is better for it, or I'm not ND and therefore proof that NT people can have crippling challenges in many of the same ways as ND people.

I would like the posters on this thread who think ND challenges are more significant than NT ones, or require accomodation that NT people don't, to consider this.

I think that some people are not reasonable in terms of what they expect - just because you want to do a particular job, doesn’t mean you are suitable for it. If someone says they want to do the full time job but have to have 70% of the workload, is that reasonable or not? When those adjustments impact other people in the team, it might not be.

I have spent years trying to help people get the adjustments they need, but there are times when it’s just not possible.

I think the exam thing is complex. At school, exams are to test knowledge and the time constraint is based on an average sped to absorb the question, and write down the answer. DS struggles to write legibly at speed due to his SPD. In the old days, a reasonable adjustment for him would be extra time to allow him to write more slowly in order to be legible, or for him to have a scribe.

Now, we're being told that a reasonable adjustment is that he needs to learn to type. I think that's a good plan and frankly, in this day and age, is how he will be expected to communicate much of his knowlegge in the future anyway. now to figure out how to get him to commit to typing as he is weirdly resistant

I don't know that "deserving" always come into it. Some opportunities are earned, not entitlements. Not everyone can do everything, that's just life.

Very true. I have ME/CFS as well as ND. I would add that people with ND are much more susceptible to health conditions (mental and physical) due to the stress of living with ND.

Truthfully? Because having to provide RA can be a great big headache.
For one thing, oftentimes, the 'unadjusted' job is the one that needs doing. The targets set are the ones that need meeting. The location specified is the one it needs doing from, and the start and finish times are there for a reason.
It can be incredibly difficult to adjust the things people often want adjusting while still meeting performance and without other people picking up the slack.
That isn't the fault of the person with disabilities, but that doesn't stop it from looking unfair when a person is being paid the same as everyone else and gets more breaks, starts later, has a reduced workload because they need a slower pace etc.
The answer here of course is that if the adjustments take this form, they're not actually 'reasonable'. However that's no a fight many employers want to have with employees if it risks a discrimination claim. So they fall back on the easy option of getting colleagues to fill the gaps. Hence resentment builds.

I'll be devil's advocate:

Isn't part of what timed exams measure, the ability to work at speed? At a very basic level, isn’t someone who knows their multiplication tables more useful in a role requiring frequent mental arithmetic than someone who has to laboriously work out 7x6 every time (all other things being equal)? I don't really see how this is different from just acknowledging that some people have abilities that are more valuable to employers.

As a teacher I would certainly agree that many lower-attaining students would not be helped by extra time because their levels of ability would not enable them to take advantage of it. But equally, it’s not true that candidates without particular disabilities don’t run out of time. I’ve known plenty of NT students whose brains just worked a bit slower than those of others, and who would really have benefited from some additional time in exams (but didn’t qualify for it).

And I’ve been in numerous exams where although I’m not ND, and was a fairly high achiever, I would definitely have benefited from more time so I could double check calculations, add extra points in essays etc.

I’m not ND and my job was changed to 80% on phone and I can’t cope and don’t talk at home on the days I’m on phone.
As an introvert I’m talked out. I now work 3 days a week.
I only get annoyed at people applying for a job that is 80% on the phone. Then once they have the job apply for reasonable adjustments! And then don’t have to do phone!

I’ve never understood why more employers don’t extend things like this tbh, assuming it fits with the work to be done.

Saves so much hassle and nobody feels hard done by.

I think it's because there seems to be a perception from a lot of ND people (and I speak as an autistic person myself) that all these horrible bits of jobs are fine to pile onto NT coworkers, as though they don't experience any difficulties with any of them. Of course NT people don't like dealing with angry people on the phone, and can get overwhelmed in loud, bright environments with loads of conflicting demands on their attention, or can get stuck when awkwardly trying to make conversation with a stranger. Just because these things are hard for autistic people, doesn't make them UNIQUELY hard for us and no problem whatsoever for NT people - they're not superhuman. I'm sure the same applies with ADHD. I can fully see how it doesn't seem fair to the NT coworkers that they have to take on all or most of the horrible tasks because of an untrue assumption that they can just do them without effort or emotion, like robots.

Having multiple disabilities, the hostility I've come across is a mix of a few things:
-- Not seeing why X person gets a particular accommodation when it could be for far more people, like WFH as pp mentioned. Some get hostile at the disabled person rather than taking it to management.
-- Those higher up have badly managed things and the accommodations have caused a severe impact. IME this results in people under having to do jobs that are tasks of people above because it's cheaper to give the lowers a 'recognition bonus' occasionally than hiring enough staff at the right pay scale to actually do those tasks when there are multiple people at that pay scale on reduce work hours.
-- Ableism and defining reasonable as unnoticeable & getting hostile if they notice it.
-- Disabled person being an ass about it or at least coming across that way to some people. Refusing to do tasks that could be done, even if it takes them longer, is the one I see raise the most hackles.
-- It's not actually hostility, I'm being sensitive. I had this recently when I got a piece of equipment from occupational health and multiple coworkers that usually rarely talk to me saw it and talk to me at length in a way that my sore, exhausted self that already struggles to read tone in unfamiliar people read as a few of the hostile types - being hostile that I had something they thought would benefit them and dismissing my disability by talking about getting them without going through occupational health. It turned out they were getting information so they could see if they could talk to the managers about getting more of them and really, my poor mood doesn't change that them getting that equipment wasn't an attack or anything to do with how they felt on me having it.

but if those adjustments dont exist, those disabled people wont be able to find jobs. would you rather they die of hunger? or sit at home and claim benefits
and there are plenty of adhd autistic ppl who cant hold jobs or form relationships outside of family. what is your point?
so should disabled people just sit at home and do nothing all day. would it be fair for them taking your money via benefits

I find these kind of remarks far more hostile and more ableist than anything I've ever gotten about getting work accommodations. This is a deplorable way to talk about disabled people.

Children who can’t cope with mainstream shouldn’t be in a mainstream school. There are some kids with disabilities who can be educated in a MS school but the idea that most children with SEN being suitable for MS is about politicians saving money and not about what’s best for children.

By needs. a popular one is children with behavioural issues being “allowed” to be violent towards their classmates for bureaucratic and financial reasons. It’s not fair on anyone including the child with needs, rest of the class and adults at school.

Everybody has limitations when it comes to work. Someone who can’t cope with shouting and screaming can’t be an emergency responder and someone who can’t cope with heights can’t work on mountains. Not everyone can do everything.

You are answering in quite a faux-naive way.

Let’s take the example of queuing - I have an autistic DS, and one time, at a theme park, that he received a pass to not queue, of course it was an advantage. Basically, the fair ‘reasonable adjustment’ should have been to use a virtual queue / be able to exit the queue and come back / etc but for practical reason the system was to use the fast track and as a result we got to go on way more rides than we would have been able to with a NT child.

So yes, the difficulty is that often for practical reasons, the adjustment can actually give an advantage.

I think this kind of flexibility is great.

And no it doesn't affect others but I could see that if say you were paying for a before school child minder and denied moving your start and finish time by half an hour it might annoy you if granted to someone else, for whatever reason.

The general consensus is that the benefits of things like this should be considered for all. I doubt a huge number of people would want to sacrifice an hour's pay but it is the 'only applies to some' that causes problems.

I also don't think it helps when you hear things like I read on here the other week where someone said they needed to go and sit in a quiet room playing Candy Crush to decompress. Clearly not everyone but you can see why people might have an issue with that.

Depends what they are, unfortunately adjustments for one person can result in another person having to take on additional responsibilities that they don’t like eg answering all the phone calls rather than half and that’s the bit of the job they hated anyway and meanwhile the person with reasonable adjustments gets to do more of the better part of the job. (Made up example) someone always getting to finish at 4pm in a 2 person office that needs 8am-8pm cover means someone else always having to work late.

remember there are people who play the disability card to get arrangements they want rather than need. I’ve had to mediate before in such situations and it’s so difficult because you do understand both sides’ points of view

Salaries are usually confidential. Some autistic adults are fine at their job and then as soon as they’re diagnosed they want lots of adjustments which means others have to work more hours, do the less desirable tasks etc on the same or similar pay.

The same people complaining about disabled people needing reasonable adjustments in order to work are rhe same people moaning that the Benefits bill is too large and disabled people need to get a job. It's absolutely hilarious

I think about accommodations offered to some children at school these days - from things like wobble cushions and elastic bands on chair legs or being allowed fidgets during lessons, to being able to leave the classroom at any time and go off to a quiet room to decompress, or having extra 1-2-1 time in a resource centre or calming room full of beanbags and toys. Me, as a kid, would have been quietly seething with jealousy about some of this stuff. I just got on with my work and did as I was told - why didn't I get cool stuff to sit on or play with or get to go hang out with a special teacher in the fun chillout room?

So there's an element of that. You can't usually see the sorts of disabilities or conditions that these reasonable adjustments are designed for. Very few people object to screen readers for blind or VI people, or a personal assistant for someone with a significant physical disability. But the "everyone would like this" adjustments of cherry picking work tasks, extra time, extra breaks, "special treatment" is going to invoke some jealousy. And if it isn't managed well so other workers suffer as a result, then frustration.

You do sound ND to be honest. If you are, what you are describing is masking.

Masking is incredibly tiring and stressful and the more you do it, the more tired and stressed you are. Intelligent female NDs tend to be absolute masters of masking , including me, but it the end it causes our downfall- illness. My health has been very poor since roughly the age of about 50 which my ADHD (consultant) psychiatrist puts down to the stress of living with undiagnosed and untreated ADHD and autism.