Speaking Respectfully: The Power of Neuroaffirmative Language

The Power of Neuroaffirmative Language

Imagine you’re reading a short profile about a new pupil joining your class. 
One version says: “Poor time management, talks too much, easily distracted.” 
Another says: “Spontaneous, enthusiastic, endlessly curious.” 
 
Same child. Different framing. 
 
Which version helps you see their potential? 
 
Language shapes how we see the world—and each other; how we see our students and how they see themselves. In the context of neurodiversity, the words we use carry enormous weight. Enter neuroaffirmative language, an approach that respects and celebrates neurological diversity rather than treating it as something to fix or cure. 

What Is Neuroaffirmative Language? 

For teachers, neuroaffirmative language isn’t just about sensitivity—it’s about creating classrooms where all learners feel respected, understood, and able to participate fully. The language we use with pupils, colleagues, and parents can shape inclusion more powerfully than we realise. Neuroaffirmative language is rooted in the neurodiversity paradigm, which views neurological differences—such as autism, ADHD, dyslexia, and Tourette syndrome—as natural variations of the human brain (Singer, 1999; Walker, 2021). This stands in contrast to the medical model, which focuses on deficits, disorder, and normalization. Rather than framing people as broken, neuroaffirmative language centers lived experience and strength. It recognizes that challenges faced by neurodivergent individuals often arise from external systems—education, employment, healthcare—that are not designed with them in mind (Chapman, 2020).   

Why Language Matters 

The language we use shapes how students are perceived—not only by others but by themselves. Linguistic research shows that our words influence public attitudes, institutional practices, and individual identity (Boroditsky, 2011). For example, saying someone “suffers from autism” implies that their neurology is inherently negative or burdensome. In contrast, referring to someone as an “autistic person” can affirm that autism is a central and valued part of their identity (Brown, 2011; Botha et al., 2021). 

This brings us to a key distinction: identity-first language puts the identity first (e.g., “autistic person”), while person-first language places the individual before the diagnosis (e.g., “person with autism”). Both are valid. What matters most is respecting the language individuals prefer for themselves. 

A more nuanced understanding of neurodivergent communication is also vital. Damian Milton’s (2012) concept of the double empathy problem challenges the assumption that autistic people alone struggle with communication. Instead, it suggests that misunderstandings between autistic and non-autistic people are mutual. This reframes the issue from one of deficit to one of difference—and invites us to build bridges, not place blame.  

As a teacher, the words you choose—whether in parent-teacher meetings, pupil reports, or classroom conversations—carry more influence than you might realise. Neuroaffirmative language helps foster not just understanding, but a sense of belonging. 

From Awareness to Affirmation 

It’s no longer enough to be “aware” of neurodiversity. Affirmation requires intentional effort. 

Here are a few neuroaffirmative practices: 

• Respect language preferences: Some people prefer identity-first language (“autistic person”), while others prefer person-first (“person with autism”). Ask and follow their lead (Botha et al., 2021). 
• Avoid deficit-laden terminology: Terms like “low-functioning” or “disordered” can be stigmatizing. Consider describing specific support needs instead (Bottema-Beutel et al, 2021). 
• Value lived experience: Peer-reviewed research is vital, but so is community knowledge. First-person narratives from neurodivergent individuals provide insight that is often missing from clinical perspectives (Kapp, 2020; Bascom, 2012). 

Language in Action 

Here’s a snapshot of how language can reflect respect and inclusion: 
This isn’t about being “politically correct.” It’s about being accurate, inclusive, and compassionate. 

The Bigger Picture 

Neuroaffirmative language forms a key pillar of a broader equity-driven movement—challenging stigma, centering neurodivergent voices, and prompting organizations and institutions to redefine how they understand and support diversity (Dawson, 2022). This aligns closely with Ireland’s commitment to inclusive education, reflected in policy and curriculum. The Department of Education’s emphasis on Universal Design for Learning (UDL) and equity-based practice echoes many of the same values—flexibility, learner voice, and meaningful participation. Neuroaffirmative practice is not only progressive, but deeply relevant to today’s classrooms. Ultimately, neuroaffirmation is about listening, adapting, and building environments where all brains can thrive. 

As Judy Singer, who coined the term neurodiversity, once said: 
“If we can respect biodiversity, why not neurodiversity?” (Singer, 1999) 

This blog was written by Professor April Hargreaves, Programme Director of Psychology at ICEP Europe and Director of Research for Neurodiversity Spark in Northern Ireland. 

More about the language of autism is covered in unit 1 of the Understanding Autism module in the Inclusive and Special Education programme, a joint postgraduate from ICEP Europe and Hibernia College. 

References 

• Bascom, J. (Ed.). (2012). Loud Hands: Autistic People, Speaking. Autonomous Press. 
• Boroditsky L. How language shapes thought. Sci Am. 2011 Feb;304(2):62-5. doi: 10.1038/scientificamerican0211-62. PMID: 21319543. 
• Botha M, Hanlon J, Williams GL. Does Language Matter? Identity-First Versus Person-First Language Use in Autism Research: A Response to Vivanti. J Autism Dev Disord. 2023 Feb;53(2):870-878. doi: 10.1007/s10803-020-04858-w. Epub 2021 Jan 20. PMID: 33474662; PMCID: PMC7817071. 
• Bottema-Beutel K, Kapp SK, Lester JN, Sasson NJ, Hand BN. Avoiding Ableist Language: Suggestions for Autism Researchers. Autism Adulthood. 2021 Mar 1;3(1):18-29. doi: 10.1089/aut.2020.0014. Epub 2021 Mar 18. PMID: 36601265; PMCID: PMC8992888. 
• Brown, L. X. Z. (2011). Identity-First Language. Autistic Self Advocacy Network. 
• Chapman, R. (2020). The reality of autism: On the metaphysics of disorder and diversity. Philosophical Psychology, 33(6), 799–819. https://doi.org/10.1080/09515089.2020.1751103 
• Dawson, C. (2022). Neurodiversity is Human Diversity, an Equity Imperative for Education. International Journal for Talent Development and Creativity, 10(1), 217–232 
• Kapp, S. K. (Ed.). (2020). Autistic Community and the Neurodiversity Movement: Stories from the Frontline. Palgrave Macmillan. 
• Milton, D. E. M. (2012). On the ontological status of autism: the ‘double empathy problem.’ Disability & Society, 27(6), 883–887. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2012.710008 
• Singer, J. (1999). Why can’t you be normal for once in your life? From a “problem with no name” to the emergence of a new category of difference. In Corker & French (Eds.), Disability Discourse. 
• Walker, N. (2021). Neuroqueer Heresies: Notes on the Neurodiversity Paradigm, Autistic Empowerment, and Postnormal Possibilities. Fort Worth, TX: Autonomous Press. 

Explore the MA in Inclusive and Special Education   today and take the next step in your professional development.