An Opinion Piece about The Challenges of Neurodiversity
As a trustee with over five years’ experience, this opinion piece is about the emergence of neurodiversity as a significant feature in the narrative of grant applications to the SWBT during and since the Covid 19 pandemic: prior to this, it featured very rarely amongst Social Work practitioners themselves but more frequently amongst their children and relatives for whom they were caring.
A word of caution here: whilst I cannot claim any expertise in respect of neurodiversity – and would welcome in full the opinions/challenges of others – I think it’s important to identify this trend with a view to understanding and helping individuals, families and, indeed, employers in this context.
It would help if our applicant-profiling were to capture this picture statistically but, regrettably, our systems are not quite sophisticated enough to do so – yet! As such, what follows is a subjective opinion – but important none the less.
By the term “neurodiversity”, I am referring to autism/ASD, ADHD and ADD, and forms of dyspraxia, dyslexia, and dyscalculia: careful to avoid the term “disorder” in the above list and preferring a “social” as opposed to a “medical” model of description, it is acknowledged that they can represent “super-powers” in their own terms offering fresh and exciting perspectives in the workplace and in providing
enhanced services to specific service-user groups.
The majority of grant applicants to SWBT are women (about two thirds), reflecting the demographic of the workforce, and there appears to have been an upsurge of requests for and undertaking of assessments for autism/ASD amongst working women, in particular, and as reported in the wider press.
Historically, this may reflect the under-representation of women – perhaps a hidden minority – and it is argued that an identification of autism/ASD can open a door of understanding both for the individual, their family and, importantly, the employer in respect of disability legislation responsibilities and the requirement to make “reasonable adjustments” for the employee in respect of service conditions.
These may include caseload adjustments, working from home arrangements, the provision of a mentor/specialist supervisor and the provision of IT packages – amongst others.
These adjustments should be viewed in positive terms and as part of a recruitment & retention drive to fill vacancies in the workforce and to reduce reliance on agency staff. In some Local Authorities, it is reported that Social Work vacancies are up to 30%.
n our limited experience, however, accessing such support services can be delayed and something of a bureaucratic nightmare at times, compounding ill-feeling on both sides.
In practical terms, we read of practitioners having to engage in “masking” behaviour, often at great personal and inter-personal expense, to comply with professional and occupational requirements in the workplace whilst seeking an assessment: it can take five years for an NHS assessment for autism/ASD to be undertaken and a private assessment can cost upwards of £500.
Sadly, we read of neurodiverse practitioners entering into conflict with employers, resigning, getting made redundant and getting sacked when help and understanding could be made available for the individual by the employer and with the support of trade unions and professional associations such as BASW.
An added outcome of such disputes can be an overlay of anxiety, depression and ill health within individuals which we see all-too-often in applications. With a positive reframing and perhaps a skills or strengths-based approach, such incidents could perhaps be avoided or reduced in severity.
In respect of ADHD and ADD in particular, interruptions in the supply of NHS-prescribed medications caused, in part, by Brexit-related supply complications as reported in the press can result in individuals seeking replacement supplies via the internet and at considerable expense – and potential danger – to themselves. This challenge has featured in a handful of applications to the SWBT.
Turning now to the children and dependents of grant applicants, the pandemic ushered in the closure of schools on occasion and an upsurge in the home-schooling of children to the detriment of the breadwinner’s ability to hold down a job – even on a part-time basis at times.
This has clearly affected Social Workers with some reportedly having no alternative but to abandon work and become benefit-dependent to keep a roof over their head.
Something of a “hang-over effect” is still in place for some families with school-age children, often with suspected vulnerabilities, showing a reluctance to return to a full school week – and often at a financial cost to their parent(s) and given the high cost of nursery and day-care provision.
More specifically, there has been a reported upsurge in the number of school-age children, often very young, identified as having special educational needs of the neurodivergent type outlined above : whilst this may be a positive step forward in ensuring a better, more tailored education for all it can come at a cost to their parents and their ability to sustain employment patterns.
As Local Authorities struggle with cash-strapped budgets, lengthy delays (often years) can arise in respect of the educational psychological assessment of children with identified needs and, perhaps more seriously, in the provision of adequate specialist schooling to meet these needs.
For vulnerable children struggling to survive in mainstream schooling in the interim, exclusion by the school or the withdrawal of the child from school by the parent on behavioural grounds can quickly escalate leaving the parent with no realistic alternative but to reduce or abandon work commitments. This appears to happen all-too-often in the applications received – and with a catastrophic effect on
household budgets.
On a macro-level, there appears to be a rowing back from the ideology of diversity, inclusion and positive discrimination in the workplace as evidenced, particularly, in the private sector by the emerging trend of managers abandoning Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) targets which risks undoing decades of progress for under-represented groups.
It is argued here that “the work has not been done” and that, on the contrary, “more needs doing”. Politically, it is important to robustly resist this mission-creep contaminating in turn the public sector and undermining jobs in the health and welfare sector amongst others.
To conclude, we are all equal but different to a degree and we have to ensure that everyone is afforded the same rights, responsibilities and protections to live a full life: this is at the heart of what we do as Social Workers.
Robert Pook, Trustee: 17.02.2025.