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 have no problem with reasonable adjustments (I welcome them) but they do have to be reasonable.

Unfortunately some adjustments can be favourable for others too but they don't get them which can cause resentment e.g. one colleague getting flexible working due to anxiety when others would love flexible working, it would make their life easier too but they don't get it.

I think it comes down to organisations looking at good working conditions for all to be honest and that will help those with additional needs and those without although obviously sometimes an adjustment is only needed by one person.

Less than 10% of people with learning difficulties are in paid employment so clearly adjustments are needed.

Remember the masks thing back in covid. We had to wear a mask unless you were 'unable' to wear a mask. Fair enough, but 'unable', turned out to be a very flexible concept.

Some people interpreted it very strictly, so you had some people enduring significant amounts of physical and emotional stress to force themselves to wear a mask, because their interpretation was it wasn't impossible. It was just very difficult and therefore they should.

Then you'd have other people who took a more relaxed interpretation to 'unable' who would refuse to wear a mask because it made them feel slightly uncomfortable, and therefore in their view they were 'unable' to.

And then we'd wonder why there was bad feeling about it...

With making phone calls, I suspect most autistic people who are able to hold down a job would be able to make a phone call if they absolutely had to, but it's more that the distress and stress that would cause them would be disproportionate. The question is how do we square that with people without any form of diagnosis who also get very anxious on the phone. In reality, some people with more extreme difficulty with phone calls will push through and force themselves to do it, because it's the job, whilst watching others who struggle less have reasonable adjustments which mean they don't have to.

It affects others because they would also benefit from extra time in professional exams so it feels unfair that you have an opportunity to improve your performance that is denied to others. I'm not saying anyone is right or wrong, I am explaining the rationale. Many people would like adjustments to their job to make it easier and more enjoyable.

But most people don’t need extra time.

My processing speed is measured to be significantly slower than average. So I get extra time to make up for that. The extra time isn’t giving me an advantage; it’s putting me back on the same level as someone with an average processing speed.

Some professional and academic exams are subject to relative marking or scaled scoring. This means that a student that gets extra time can theoretically achieve a better grade than they otherwise would do and thus directly reduce the grade of other people taking the exam.

It is obviously nonsense to pretend that a specific amount of additional time will level the playing field in this context. Some people with disabilities may find it still isn't enough whilst others will have a big advantage over their peers who don't have extra time and thus make it harder for them to get a comparative score.

I dont think folk should be permanently exempt from part of a job others are expected to do. Same goes for favourable conditions like working from home.

I think there are probably loads of work situations in which this is not a problem, simply because the person has been given reasonable adjustments which other colleagues aren't even aware of because they don't concern or affect them, and everyone just gets on with things in the best way they can.

Where I think it does become an issue are scenarios in which:

• the colleague with the RAs still doesn't seem to do his or her job despite the RAs
• other colleagues are assumed to have no impediments to doing their job, as long as those impediments aren't diagnoses (ie., just because I don't have ADHD doesn't mean I mightn't be going through a tough time or make a mistake)
• the colleague with the RAs, or his/her manager, assumes that others are and should be happy to take on additional responsiblities, again on the assumption that because they don't have anything diagnosed, it isn't a problem for them to take on extra work
• the RAs entail considerable and visible expense in workplaces where money is tight and other things are being curtailed

My extra time in exams doesn't enable me to improve performance that's denied to others. It enables me to take my time to read and have breaks because reading is physically tiring

Well, in that specific example, both parties could use text to speech software. The person with dyslexia could have their emails read aloud and they could then speak a reply that is written down got the autistic person to read, or to listen to without the pressure of a “live” conversation.

is this not petty envy as my extra time has no bearing on their ability to complete exams?

My flexible working request to start later will no affect my colleagues. I lose the extra money, no one else. I have my own workloads and one of my offerings to have this is that I will come in early when need requires and I will do the 12 or 14 hour days as I always did when necessary.
When it affects other stressed, busy colleagues and the person with the adjustments see no limit to the adjustments they should have is when people’s sympathy wanes, I find.

Time to read and take breaks sounds like something everyone taking the exam would benefit from.

OP, based on your tone on this thread, I wonder if your adjustments are causing resentment in your coworkers because of the way you come across. There's a whiff of "I'm entitled to this and I dont' care if it makes life harder for you" in your posts.

In any workplace, people who seem to just not be interested in seeing other viewpoints or trying things will always be viewed less positively. It doesn't have to be linked to ND or other disabilities. It's the difference between the colleague who had to leave early because of a migraine who logs on the next day and thanks their colleagues for picking up the slack, or the person who has to deal with a sick child who then picks up for another colleague when it happens to them. It's the person with ADHD who deploys their hyper focus to help the team on a deadline and leverages that strength, rather than simply expecting everyone else to accept they'll do less because it's harder for them to start a task.

But that’s not the fault of the person who requires adjustments.

If you’re struggling because someone in your team needs X, Y or Z adjustment, then that’s a management failure.

There’s a difference between “benefitting from X ” and “needing X otherwise you can’t do Y”.

I know this isnt the point if your post, but things like health and safety legislation apply to everyone, not just disabled people. Your friend should be able to ensure her work is safe.

There also isnt a register of disabled people. It could be that your friends bad back meets the definition of disabled under the equalities act in terms of asking for her own adjustments. It doesnt always, but it can sometimes.

If someone is able to answer the phone from parent/friend/family member, they are perfectly capable of answering the phone from a stranger, unless they have a physical disability. They are just choosing not to, cause it causes them too much stress/anxiety. But as adults we need to strive to be better and improve ourselves, not to seek excuses and escape from doing things we don't like. Recently it's been very easy to just fill in some from online and be diagnosed with ADHD/autism. It's some type pf plague in this country, as it's not happening elsewhere in Europe on this scale, so something it definitely wrong here. If someone has a career, is married, has kids, then it means they are pretty average people and they don't need any label or medication to function. Life is hard in general for everybody and people have different personalities and need to adjust their lives accordingly. Some people are extrovert, some are introvert and some are total nerds - some life activities are more difficult for some types of people, but we cannot seek diagnoses for everything. These days even 5 year olds are put on SEN register - no disabilities and no cognitive deficiencies, on track with their English/maths. But sometimes they don't want to do an activity because they prefer to play with lego, so let's label them early to give them excuses not to have to do stuff in the future. It's sheer madness.

Okay, so would you get extra time at work to do the same work that someone else is doing, because you have slower processing?

Because then it becomes an issue - why wouldn't people get upset at someone getting the same pay for less output? And why would an employer accept it?

If we are saying part of the value of an exam is to understand how people perform in scenarios where they need to think clearly under pressure (and this may or may not be the case in professional exams, but I should imagine it would be part of it), then adding extra time does change the playing field.

Yes but doesn't really change the fact that I have to work more/harder if others work less.

2025 you don't just land a job and many have to put up with it but don't expect me to be happy clappy about it.

It can be the fault of the person requesting the adjustment if the adjustment isn't strictly necessary but something that they would simply like to make their life easier. Most of us have the opportunity to opt out of things and dodge responsibilities and we may feel tempted from time to time, especially when we are all struggling. Generally though we should be reluctant to do this when we know that it would cause problems for others.

Some adjustments are absolutely necessary but to pretend that they are all equally necessary is ridiculous and plainly untrue. It makes a mockery of those who genuinely require them

Yeah I'm sure everyone also has 30% corrected vision and they struggle to read because their eyes are constantly shaking which as well as vision worse than normal also causes chronic tiredness

It takes way more effort for me to read than it does a sighted person

I think everyone feels a bit short changed atm. Working hard, still can’t afford a good quality of life, often being dumped with more work as companies try to cut corners and make more people redundant or on worse pay and benefits. And then someone else is getting something you’re not, and you can’t always see that they are really more ‘deserving’ than you. Even worse if there’s still the same amount of work and pressure but more of it lands on you now.
it’s much easier to be annoyed at that person than the entire system that’s rigged against you both.

People who are more intelligent can learn things faster and be more productive. People who have emotional intelligence do better, people who are attractive earn more. Where do you draw the line for adjustments? (That's a real question, I don't know...)

but extra exams tho? how does that affect you?

yes but the question is why are people resentful? Headcount means so much in so many companies, if work is determined based on a team of 6 dividing the work between them, and one only works 80% of the time, or makes no phone calls or whatever, how is that reasonable? the answer is that it isn't. But management don't care, so of course resentment builds up. Is that fair? no. But it is life.

There are a LOT of reasonable adjustments that could be made in most workplaces that would benefit everyone. When i had a hugely stressful job with sometimes stupid hours - there was never ever any need for me to be in the office as much as i was. (this was early 2000s) i repeatedly requested permission to do all my extra work from home, because of childcare requirements etc, but nope. Nobody was allowed. The result? massive turnover of staff.

Standing desks, better chairs, regular breaks, the ability to go outside for a breather, starting later, starting earlier, transcription software, specialist phone equipment... all of these things would benefit many many people. But workplaces provide the bare minimum. So when a reasonable adjustment request is made? Rather than invest time and effort into working out how it is reasonable for everyone, it is often just implemented because companies are frightened of being taken to tribunal.

But not every request for adjustments are reasonable.