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

there are stats online

It's currently considered a disability from a legal perspective. It's also currently considered one condition. I think both of these things will change in the future.

Our understanding regarding the brain, Neurodiversity and Autism is relatively primitive. I genuinely believe in a few decades we will look back and be astounded that we ever bought into the ND/NT binary model in the manner that it's currently being pushed. Many of us instinctively know that this is far more complex and grey than what is being portrayed. The false certainty is really damaging, especially for people that are suceptible to black and white thinking and will be drawn to the idea that their identity can be attached to a an ND/NT binary distinction.

Someone smearing shit most likely doesnt need reasonable adjustments or protection from discrimination in the workplace. They might need protections in terms of service delivery

Im not sure why you want to take away people's right to ask for reasonable adjustments by redefining the scope of the equalities act because other people are more severely impacted by thier disability.

Its a really important bit of legislation that has helped a lot of people work more easily.

Autism isn’t a disease to begin with - it is a neurodivergence that people are born with.

The people you refer to who are profoundly autistic often have multiple other conditions alongside their autism so of course you cannot compare them to those who don’t.

The fact that autism is a spectrum doesn’t stop it from being a disability - autism runs in my family af every single one of us with a diagnosis would be considered high-functioning - however we are al severely impacted by our condition on a daily basis - we have to be, otherwise we wouldn’t have been diagnosed to start with!

I understand how you came to that conclusion but that is not my reasoning.

It is not possible to choose to live a life where you are largely unaffected by blindness/deafness/paralysis.

It is possible for what it used to be acceptable to call "high functioning" people with ADHD and autism to choose to live a life that is largely unaffected by our conditions.

Where our difficulties are no worse than those of the poor, the less intelligent, the very short, the very tall, the fat etc etc etc

It is, in my day to day lived experience, ridiculous to define everyone on a spectrum as wide as ASD as disabled.

Life is full of difficulty for almost everyone. I have argued long and hard with people, and will continue to do so, that ADHD is real and can be difficult. But I'm beginning to agree with NT people, that ND conditions are now so prevalent that they must start to be considered just a part of the normal spectrum of the human condition.

Please do not accuse me of wanting to take away anyone's right to ask for reasonable adjustments, I have not done so.

But those stats for ASD/ADHD people not working are only for people with diagnoses. I'm surrounded in my daily life by in work people or people retired after long successful careers who are clearly ASD or ADHD or both but who I don't believe have diagnoses.

Before asserting that people with those conditions aren't getting employment, you would need to count in all the ones who have the condition but haven't got a diagnosis.

Fair enough. I apologise.

But you were so adamant its not a disability for lots of people, and if it isnt thats the consequence, so i mistook that to be your meaning.

This is sensitive for me as my son has asd and if he joins the workforce, he may need some protection. He is neither a poo smearer, nor surgeon material. And this push for autusm to just be a difference will affect him most, as those for who its a difference will be fine as it matches then, those who are very obviously disabled will be obviously disabled. But my son falls in that gap. He goes to a special school. its quite scary thinking people might argue his protections away.

Its perfectly possible to have a long term condition that doesn't cause significant difficulty with carrying out functions when compared to a person without the condition. It is the later that makes the condition a disability, not the fact of having the condition. To justify RA a person needs to have a condition AND for that condition to cause significant difficulties AND for the adjustment requested to remove the barrier causes by the difficulty AND for this to be possible without significant detriment to others or the needs of the business.

@Imdunfer it may seem like everyone has ADHD these days but even ADHD UK (who obviously has skin in the game) think the prevalence among adults is only 3-4%

adhduk.co.uk/about-adhd/

For autism, the number seems to be just over 1%. I must admit I am also surprised that it is this low. But again it is Autism UK saying this:

www.autism.org.uk/advice-and-guidance/what-is-autism

I'm in my late 50s and have both autism and ADHD. I coped very well by using heavy masking. The effort of doing that has caught up with me now and I am too ill to work. I am definitely disabled although I would not have thought that a few years ago. Although when I look back on it, I was wrong - all my relationships have been abusive. This is due to people pleasing tendencies and low self esteem which is common with ND women and also my total inability to understand body language, facial expressions or inferred meanings.

I've very much underachieved academically and in my career. I was the one who could always do the maths A-Level homework and the rest of the class had my phone number and used to phone me to ask me how to do it. I worked hard too but go an E. My psychiatrist had some explanation for this - can't remember what it was. Never ever got promoted at work either, despite working hard and being well-liked. Other people did. This is also typical of ND women.

Yes but you only get an ADHD or autism diagnosis if you have significant difficulties and have done since childhood.

As i understand it employers have to attempt all reasonable adjustments but if all possibilities have been explored then an employer has the right to terminate employment if the employee cannot fulfill the the job role. Correct me if I'm wrong

A recent study suggests around 1/7 adults when screened qualified for an ADHD diagnosis (14%).

https://digital.nhs.uk/data-and-information/publications/statistical/adult-psychiatric-morbidity-survey/survey-of-mental-health-and-wellbeing-england-2023-24/attention-deficit-hyperactivity-disorder#:~:text=more%20comprehensive%20assessment.-,Key%20findings,CMHC)%20screened%20positive%20for%20ADHD.

Around 1.9% of children have an Autism diagnosis and it's estimated that for every 3 children diagnosed there will be 2 that are undiagnosed. This means at least 3% of the population will have Autism.

10% of the population are dyslexic and around 5-10% have dyscalculia. 5-20% have dysgraphia. 5-10% of the population have dyspraxia.

1% has Tourettes Syndrome

2% of the population are learning disabled.

Of course there will be some overlap with these conditions but you can see how a pretty large percentage of the population is potentially ND. Add to this people that have physical disabilities and you can see that there are an awful lot of people that can legally claim adjustments.

There of course will also be people that just miss out on an official diagnosis but have ND traits or chronic health conditions that have a very real and debilitating impact on their lives and yet often they can't do easily request adjustments and are often expected to absorb the fallout from other peoples adjustments. It's a very messy and complex area.

I also have type 1 diabetes, which my work place occupational health said, I can get reasonably adjustment for and not do any night shift. Not a lot of people got jealous over that, as night shift pays more. Most time, jealously is irrational.

I totally understand why someone with type 1 diabetes should need reasonable adjustments. But what if multiple people have problems and also need the same adjustment, you end up with very few people who can cover night shifts. It may be that the remaining staff are happy to cover, but what if they're not? And this is just one example of how reasonable adjustments can impact on other people.

I have a diagnosis.

From an NHS psychiatrist.

I still would not describe the difficulties I've had in my life as any more difficult than the difficulties of many, many people who are not ND

So does that leave us describing half the population as disabled? It's a nonsense and I can see why NT people are beginning to become very frustrated by it .

But it does not say 1 in 7 adults have ADHD. It says that 1 in 7 adults score positive on the ASRS screener which is often used when deciding whether it is worth sending somebody for an assessment. I’m guessing this tells us more about the screener than anything else.

What the stats mask is that some professions really draw ND people. My DH is a software developer and 50% of his colleagues are ND.

This was a reply to @Marshmallow4545 not sure why the quote didn't work.

We know that there are incredibly high conversion rates from being referred after screening to successfully obtaining a diagnosis. NHS clinics have admitted a circa 95% conversion rate under FOI requests.

Well that’s good. If you are in the environment that is right for you then your difficulties are going to have less of an impact. For example, DB was told that his career alone is an indicator of ND because many people doing that type of work are ND. His wife has a career that involves supporting ND people so
sbe has a very strong understanding of his issues. He is therefore in a very good environment. Most of us ND people are like square pegs in round holes.

The fact remains that it is literally part of the diagnostic criteria that you have to have had difficulties since childhood.

That is because you get triaged first. You fill out a load of questionnaires like the ASRS and a few others. Then you have a call witb somebody (a nurse? psychologist!) and they decide whether you should go to a full assessment.

No, the statistics relate to referral from the GP Vs diagnosis. Triage is intermediary step but the 5% encompasses those that were removed during this step of the process and those that completed the full assessment and didn't gain a diagnosis.

Why would we believe your unverified opinion they asd/adhd? Everyone has traits but to be diagnosed, it needs to impact your life in a negative manner e.g. autistic people are diagnosed if they have developmental lags that affect their lives i.e. unable to make friends or pass interviews to get jobs in the first place

It's not so much envy, just an assumption that everyone else can just deal with the discomfort, stress etc and put up with it. A PP talked about having to work in the office and how exhausting it is, meaning they were good for nothing beyond a ready meal and bed in the evening. I think that would resonate with a lot of people, whether neurodiverse or not.

Then I think the argument becomes - if some ND people can happily find square peg shaped holes to fit in, what's the obligation on an ND person vs the obligation on the workplace/state to make a round hole into a square peg shaped hole for an ND person with reasonable adjustments?

Many people feel that the balance has tipped too far into forcing an environment to fit all and every person, rather than accepting that it's not always possible. In some cases it's clear cut - I'm hearing impaired so I am never going to be an airline pilot or air traffic controller - and in other cases the boundary is more nebulous.