Again, I'm thinking about language and how problematic it can be. Language and terminology seems to be forever a hot topic of debate, and no less between neurodivergent communities. I've decided to use a newer term in my training, talks and content to try to address, what I view, is some of the fallout from the phrase 'We are all neurodiverse'.
The earliest uses of the phrase 'we are all neurodiverse' that I can find are around 2020 and include Maria Chrysochoou's Ted Talk in 2021, Sonny Jane Wise's so titled book in 2024, and is some times followed by 'but we are not all neurodivergent'.
The concept of 'We are all Neurodiverse', as far as I can understand has been used to explain;
- that there is no 'typical' brain, because every brain is unique on a cellular and structural level and not identical.
- that among neurodivergent communities, no two people with the same conditions, that meet clinical criteria for diagnosis, will have the same skills or challenges
- that society is neurodiverse and that neurodiversity is natural and needed for a healthy population and culture
All of the above are true, form the basis of my work and underpin my personal values.
So what's the problem?..
Ironically, neurodiversity is the problem! More specifically, I mean the way that people interpret and process language - it varies massively, and I'm not convinced that the good messages that organisations and individuals are trying to embed by using this phrase are being interpreted that way.
There is a very recent study (Grant, Leigh, Botha, Macdonald, Williams, Williams, Rose, Memmott, & Pearson, 2025) of attitudes of neurodivergent people to 'neurodiversity' language and a stand-out theme for me, of the three that were reported in total, is;
_________________________________________
‘Understanding of neurodivergence (vs. neurodiverse)’, described a lack of understanding of neurodiversity terminology, which could be frustrating.
_________________________________________
It's interesting that 76% of people included in the study and who responded to open text questions, which resulted in this widely reported theme, identified as autistic. The next largest response being from those who identified as ADHD at 47.5%, and then as having sensory processing disorder at 25.9% and so on.
From autistic people in particular I see backlash and frustration expressed most days, towards people who describe individuals or people as neurodiverse, because only groups of people can be correctly described as neurodiverse.
What I think is also happening is that some people, including myself in the past and many other autistic people, aren't instinctively interpreting the implied, but not stated, meaning in the phrase 'we are all neurodiverse' as it is intended, i.e..;
we are all in a group, and the group can be described as neurodiverse
Instead, I feel that the implied meaning is being interpreted as;
we are all individually neurodiverse
Which of course is an incorrect use of the term 'neurodiverse'! But it's really important to accept, and anticipate, that the implied meaning may be interpreted either way, and so to avoid the implied meaning being incorrectly interpreted you either need to state the implied meaning, resulting in the complete loss of a snappy, 'branding-friendly' catchphrase, or always follow up with 'but we are not all neurodivergent', which I rarely see and is only really seen if you click through two or three times for an explanation of the phrase or watch lengthy content that includes the shortened phrase and the fuller, meanigful explanation.
So, as it is, I strongly feel that 'we are all neurodiverse', specifically alienates autistic people who need, and use language, literally, whilst also perpetuating the incorrect use of the term 'neurodiverse'. It feels to me like it's too late to take the phrase back, and that only much bigger 'machines' than me can resolve some of the fallout from it, so instead, I'm trying to use the term 'neartypical' more in my work, and NEVER say 'neurodiverse' in any context.
The origin of this term is unknown, however Alejandro Garcia claimed to have invented this term in a discussion on Threads in August 2025 (https://www.threads.com/@thephysicsoffaith )
'Near typical' can simply mean something is close to being average or standard. For example, "The temperature was near typical for this time of year".
"Near-typical" describes a trait, behaviour, or characteristic that is close to what is considered standard or common, but not identical.
When I use the term 'Neartypical' I'm describing a person, or group of people, that generally do not need to ask for accommodations or adjustments, to access or remain well, specifically in neuro-normative environments.
References
Grant, A., Leigh, J., Botha, M., Macdonald, S. J., Williams, K., Williams, G., Rose, K., Memmott, A., & Pearson, A. (2025). ‘A Lovely Safe Umbrella to Describe Yourself With’ or ‘Meaningless’: An Online Survey of UK-Based Neurodivergent Adults’ Views of Neurodiversity-Related Terminology. Neurodiversity, 3. https://doi.org/10.1177/27546330251390590 (Original work published 2025)
