There are also disadvantages with the term ‘neurodiversity’ (see eg. previous post). It tends to imply that people’s brains are different. Of course people’s brains are not the same. They are different people. But that doesn’t necessarily mean that their differences are just due to their brains. Don’t get me wrong! Of course the brain constructs people. But so do their development and experiences, maybe particularly in the family situation but also outside.
It’s wrong to think that people are their brains (see eg. previous post). All sorts of myths are being promulgated about who we are. People need to be understood as wholes, as their brains are only part of them. Whelpley et al (2023) note the distinction between the social and medical models of neurodiversity and the need for a more person-centred approach to neurodiversity. Maybe switching the term ‘neurodiversity’ to ‘biopsychosocial diversity’ would help to create this more personal focus.
2 comments:
Thanks, Escovan! I do understand the attraction of the term ‘neurodiversity’ in the sense you mean. But neurodiversity is only a label. What matters more is that people’s needs are met rather than the diagnosis.
A bit late comment, but biopsychosocial diversity would be a much better term. It would mroe accurately reflect the state of affairs. Speaking of neuro - is there even such a thing as "your (or my) brain"? While we are alive it is one and the same thing. bw
Post a Comment