The suggestion that the human genome is a diverse and forever evolving is a concept embraced when discussing the term neurodiversity. Conditions like Autism and ADHD are viewed as naturally occurring changes within the human genome, and that they have been prevalent since the day dot.
The human species is a collection of diversity, and human brains are no different. We are all a culmination of genetics, up bringing, culture, education and circumstance. We are an incredibly diverse species and all the aforementioned factors make an individual.
Although a hotbed of fiery debate within the autism community the foundations of neurodiversity is continually backed up by more research science, the recognition that autism, ADHD and other “pathologically diagnosed” conditions are a result of genetics, coding and environment as opposed to any damage caused by, for example, vaccination.
The term neurodiversity itself dates back to at least the late 1990’s but has come to the fore in more recent times, but there is a whole audience of people, neurotypical and autistic who have never heard the term before.
In this series we explore a number of voices from on the spectrum who are at opposing sides of this debate and hope to give a broader insight into the world and debate surrounding neurodiversity. The first article is from Jonathan Mitchell, who was recently featured in Newsweek and who rejects neurodiversity. The second is by Philip Gluyas, also mentioned in the Newsweek article, who has won two court victories over two American cure proponents for defamation. Both have strong and opposite views on the subject.
Due to the contentious nature of this series, comments are closed on individual articles but we encourage all comments (which are moderated) on this opening post.
We hope that you enjoy what we bring to the fore.