Obstacles in the way of Neuro-Affirming Practice in Educational Settings & Ways Forward

Implementing neurodiversity-affirming practices in education, healthcare, and other systems is often hindered by pervasive narratives and biases. Recognizing and addressing these obstacles is crucial for fostering inclusive and supportive environments for neurodivergent and disabled individuals. Here are some common barriers that I have been working on with Stimpunks, who have a more in-depth page with glossary links in their article 14 Obstacles to (Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Belonging) DEIB and Neurodiversity Affirming Practice

1. Politics of Resentment: This involves manipulating status anxieties and organizing groups based on perceived deprivation or threats, leading to resistance against inclusive practices.
   
2. Sameness-Based Fairness: The misconception that fairness means treating everyone identically rather than equitably addressing individual needs undermines efforts to provide appropriate support.
   
3. Fundamental Attribution Error: Overemphasizing personal characteristics while underestimating situational factors contributes to misinterpretations of neurodivergent behaviours.
   
4. Conquering Gaze from Nowhere: An uninvolved, supposedly neutral perspective that claims objectivity but lacks genuine understanding or participation, leading to misrepresentations.
   
5. Scientism: The belief that science is the sole source of valuable knowledge can dismiss lived experiences and alternative understandings crucial for neurodiversity-affirming practices.
   
6. Epistemic Injustice: Dismissing or undermining the knowledge and experiences of neurodivergent individuals erodes their agency and dignity.
   
7. Behaviourism: Approaches that reduce individuals to mere behaviours, ignoring the complexity of human experience, can be dehumanizing and counterproductive.
   
8. Ableism: Societal biases that value certain bodies and minds over others perpetuate discrimination and hinder inclusive practices.
   
9. Deficit Ideology: Viewing neurodivergent traits as deficiencies justifies unequal outcomes and obstruct the recognition of diverse strengths.
   
10. “Better Get Used to It” Mentality: Forcing individuals to adapt to oppressive conditions rather than addressing and changing those conditions perpetuates harm.

Building an inclusive and supportive education system means recognizing the diverse and unique ways children learn and experience the world. Too often, neurodivergent students face barriers that prevent them from thriving.

To create truly neurodiversity-affirming educational settings, we need to challenge these common obstacles. The list below provides some examples of how we can challenge and deconstruct these barriers to provide more neuro-affirming care and practice to support young people:

1. Rigid Ideas of Fairness

Many schools operate under the idea that fairness means treating every child the same. But real fairness—equity—means giving each child what they need to succeed. Some students need quiet spaces, alternative communication methods, or more flexible deadlines. All students sensory needs will be different whether or not they are Autistic, everyone needs access to sensory tools and to be able to move and work in ways that suit them. A neurodiversity-affirming approach embraces individualized support, not one-size-fits-all rules.

2. Blaming the Child Instead of the System

When children struggle in school, too often, the focus is on “fixing” their behaviour rather than adapting to the environment. Instead of assuming a student is “difficult” or “defiant,” educators should ask: How can we change the learning space to better support this child?

3. Ignoring Lived Experience

Neurodivergent students, their families, and neurodivergent educators have valuable insights into what works. But too often, schools prioritize outdated research or external “experts” over the voices of those who actually experience neurodivergence every day. Listening to neurodivergent voices should be central to policy and practice. The theory of Monotropism could provide great insights and be able to offer a better neuro-affirming framework to support Autistic/ADHD students.

4. Over-Reliance on Behavior Control

Traditional classroom management techniques often focus on compliance rather than understanding. Behavioural approaches like ABA, Positive Behaviour Reward Systems (PBS), and rigid discipline systems are harmful. Instead, schools should foster co-regulation, trust, and collaboration—helping children develop self-advocacy skills rather than forcing them to mask their needs. There are alternative ways to behaviourism.

5. Ableism in School Culture

Many school policies assume that neurotypical ways of thinking, learning, and communicating are “better.” This can lead to repressing natural Autistic needs such as stimming, discouraging alternative communication, or prioritizing spoken language over written or assistive tech options. A neurodiversity-affirming school values all forms of learning and communication equally.

6. Seeing Differences as Deficits

Instead of focusing on what neurodivergent students “lack,” schools should highlight strengths-based learning. A child who struggles with timed tests may excel in deep, creative thinking and being in flow. A student who finds group work overwhelming might thrive in independent projects. Recognizing strengths, rather than pathologizing differences, leads to better outcomes for all.

7. Forcing Kids to “Toughen Up”

Some educators believe students must simply “get used to” overwhelming environments—whether it’s bright lights, loud noises, or rigid schedules. But forcing students to endure distress doesn’t teach resilience; it teaches helplessness. Schools should be proactive in creating sensory-friendly, flexible environments that allow all children to feel safe and engaged. We need to embrace Radical resilience. We can use our resilience, our strength, to challenge the systems and advocate for our neurodivergent and disabled needs in a society that predominantly values neuronormativity, at all costs. 

8. Excluding Students from Decision-Making

Too often, adults make decisions about neurodivergent children without including them in the process. Self-advocacy can start early. Schools need to invite students and their parents/ carers to participate in decisions about their learning, accommodations, and school policies. We need more trust and collaboration.

9. Prioritizing “Fixing” Over Acceptance

Some interventions focus on making neurodivergent students appear more neurotypical—rather than supporting their natural ways of thinking and communicating. Schools should celebrate neurodivergent identities instead of pushing conformity. Encourage celebrations of diversity, including events such as Weird Pride Day.

10. Ignoring Structural Inequities

Many neurodivergent students also face intersecting barriers, such as racism, classism, and gender discrimination. A neurodiversity-affirming school needs to recognize and address the full spectrum of a child’s identity—not just their neurotype.

The double empathy problem (Milton, 2012) is DEEP. The DEEP (DOUBLE EMPATHY EXTREME PROBLEM) arises from feelings of disconnect; not only from cultural, sexual, political, religious, neurodivergent, or any other cross-section of differences but also through embodiment, or lack thereof.

The double empathy gap is non-linear; it is deep, multidimensional, rhizomatic, and holographic (Mirra, 2023). DEEP could be a huge contributing factor that leads to burnout and ill health for so many neurodivergent young people. The DEEP gap can break people at their core, leaving them fragmented, disconnected, disoriented and disembodied, feeling like they’re in a void space.

We Need to Create New Spaces and Modes of Neurodiversity Affirming Practice.

We need to untangle ourselves from the sticky web of neuronormative ideals that are causing harm and limiting the potential for neurodivergent, disabled and people from other minority groups – we deserve better. We need to create new spaces of opportunity that welcome everyone and celebrate our wonderful diverse world. When we embrace neurodiversity, everyone benefits.

The list below suggests some ways forward, and it is also integrated into the principles of our Neuroqueer Learning Spaces project—ideas for a radical neuro-affirming ways forward.

Ways Forward

Cavendish Space: caves, campfires, and watering holes: psychologically and sensory safe spaces suited to zone work, flow states, intermittent collaboration, and collaborative niche construction.

Embodiment: to stay present in our own bodies to sensations, emotions and the external environment without going into dysregulation without going into fight/flight/freeze/fawn.

Co-regulation: An embodied presence of togetherness; being with people in a meaningful way to help balance and recharge the sensory system and bodymind.

Inclusion: Providing equal access to opportunities and resources for people who might otherwise be excluded or marginalised.

Connection: Meaningful embodied presence, communication and understanding between people

Sensory safety: Feeling safe in your environment to meet your own sensory needs without judgement

Psychological safety: Psychological safety is a condition in which you feel (1) included, (2) safe to learn, (3) safe to contribute, and (4) safe to challenge the status quo—all without fear of being embarrassed, marginalized, or punished in some way. (Clark, 2020)

Learner safety:  Feeling safe to engage in the discovery process, ask questions, experiment and explore

Intermittent collaboration: Group work with flexible breaks enabling time to think & work by yourself

Empathy: To understand and relate to another person’s authentic needs

Niche construction: Often an adaptable space created to meet the sensory and physical needs of the individual or group

Neurological pluralism: Understanding spiky profiles, collaborative niche construction, and special interests is critical to fostering neurological pluralism.

Somatic liberty “Cognitive liberty as an ethical value boils down to the idea that individuals have the right to absolute sovereignty over their own brains and their own cognitive processes.” (Walker, N. 2021, Neuroqueer Heresies, pg 143)

Cognitive liberty: “Advocates of cognitive liberty often break this idea down into two fundamental guiding ethical principles (originally inspired by the two “commandments” offered by Timothy Leary in The Politics of Ecstasy):

Individuals have the right to tamper with their own brains and cognitive processes, or to voluntarily have them tampered with, in any way they choose.” (Walker, N. 2021, Neuroqueer Heresies, pg 143)

Flow: Flow is intrinsically related to the theory and monotropism. “Flow states are heightened moments of concentration, motivation and enjoyment, leading to total absorption in the present moment. A striking parallel exists between flow states and phenomenological accounts of autistic daily life.” (Heasman, B. et al. 2024. Towards autistic flow theory: A non-pathologising conceptual approach)

Equity: “The state of being free of bias, discrimination, and identity-predictable outcomes and experiences”. (Equity Literacy Institute)

A truly inclusive education system is one that adapts to students, not the other way around – Luke Beardon’s golden equation sums up the importance of this by stating: “Autism + Environment = Outcome.

When schools embrace neurodiversity, every child benefits—not just neurodivergent students. Flexibility, creativity, and student-centered learning create environments where all young people can thrive.