In the field of psychotherapy, practitioners work with the full complexity of human minds, and that work frequently leads to conversations about autism and other forms of neurodivergence, including ADHD, dyslexia and dyspraxia. Very often it becomes clear only after months of therapeutic work that a client may be neurodivergent, either because they start questioning it themselves or because the therapist begins to suspect it. Usually it only comes up once a trusting relationship has already been built.
But what if neurodiversity became a standard part of the intake process at therapy centres, instead of something that surfaces by accident months in? Asking early, gently and directly about neurodivergence, rather than waiting for it to come up on its own, can shape everything that follows in the therapeutic relationship. It opens the door to understanding and empathy from the first session, rather than neurodivergence only being named once trust has already been slowly built without it.
Consider the impact on a therapeutic practice when a clinician is aware, from the outset, of what it means to grow up autistic or otherwise neurodivergent in a world that isn’t built with those needs in mind. That awareness changes how a therapist reads a client’s presentation, from anxiety and burnout to relationship difficulties and low self-worth, all of which often trace back to a lifetime of masking and being misunderstood rather than to the issues they initially present with.
This isn’t limited to clinical settings. Anyone who has worked in education will recognise students who get informally labelled “probably on the spectrum” because of certain behaviours, often without any real curiosity about what’s driving them. It’s worth questioning those assumptions and biases, because they tend to undermine the very students they’re applied to, rather than helping them.
Much of the language still used in clinical assessment treats autism and other neurodivergences as disorders, dysfunctions or deficits to be corrected. The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders categorises autism alongside conditions framed this way, and that framing shapes how clinicians, and clients, come to understand a diagnosis. It’s worth questioning the assumption that human behaviour outside a narrow “typical” range needs to be pathologised at all.
An alternative, increasingly supported by autistic-led research and lived experience, is neurodivergent theory: the idea that divergence from expected functioning is a natural variation of the human mind, not a disorder. Under this framing, autism and ADHD aren’t deviations to be fixed but different, valid ways of processing and experiencing the world. This shift matters because it changes what “good outcomes” in therapy actually look like, moving away from making a client appear more neurotypical, and toward helping them understand and work with how their mind actually operates.
Should every client be screened for neurodivergence?
Not every client needs formal screening, but making it easy and normal to raise the topic, rather than something only mentioned once trust is deeply established, benefits clients who may not otherwise bring it up.
Does this apply outside one-to-one therapy?
Yes. The same principles, asking early, avoiding deficit language, and separating presenting symptoms from root causes, apply in schools, group settings and any professional relationship involving a neurodivergent person.
Where can I learn more about working with autistic and neurodivergent clients?
See our guide for professionals.
Adopting a more affirming view of neurodivergence is only the first step. It needs to show up in concrete practice: intake forms that ask open, non-pathologising questions; session structures flexible enough to accommodate different communication styles; and ongoing willingness to be corrected by neurodivergent clients about what actually helps them.
It’s possible to adopt neuro-affirming vocabulary while still, in practice, treating neurodivergent traits as things to be managed or minimised. Genuine change shows up in small decisions: not pushing a client to maintain eye contact, not treating stimming as a distraction, and not assuming a client’s difficulty with a task reflects unwillingness rather than a different way of processing.
Occasional, genuinely useful emails: new guides, articles and tools. Unsubscribe anytime.
