NeuroDiversity: The Birth of an Idea

by Judy Singer

Judy Singer is generally credited with the coinage of the word that became the banner for the last great social movement to emerge from the 20th century. The word itself was just one of many ideas in this work, her 1998 Honours thesis, a pioneering sociological work that mapped out the emergence of a new category of disability that, till then, had no name. And in the process, prefigured a new paradigm within the disability rights movement of the time. The work attempted a panoramic view of this new terrain from within a post-modern, social constructionist, feminist, disability rights perspective. Its chapters encompassed a brief history of autism, self-exploration of Singer’s life in the middle of three generations of women “somewhere on the autistic spectrum” and her research as a participant-observer on InLv, an online community of people on the spectrum. At the same time it offered a critique of what Singer perceived to be a certain tendency towards social-constructionist fundamentalism within the disability movement, which, she argued, limited the potential of the new paradigm.This volume reproduces the original thesis with the addition of a new introduction, which gives the background to the creation of the work and offers some thoughts on the current neurodiversity movement.

Genres: Nonfiction, Autistic Spectrum Disorder, Psychology, Adhd, Science, Mental Health, Sociology

82 pages, Paperback

Published September 5, 2017

Reviews

[H.A. Leuschel · Rating 5 out of 5]

As a daughter of a mother with Asperger's syndrome, and the mother of a daughter with Asperger's syndrome, Judy Singer - also 'somewhere on the spectrum' - has written a persuasive and important essay about 'neurodiversity', a term she is credited to have coined and describes the emergence of a new category of disability. She aims to ´depict, demystify and promote the growing social movement of autistics' in the hope that 'we get used to the idea that our minds are a lot more strange and wonderful than we have lately given them credit for being.'
'People on the Autistic Spectrum are beginning to demonstrate that 'Neurotypical' is not the only way to be', proven by the unsuccessful approaches of general psychoanalysis that too often aims to cure and fix them rather than accept them for being differently wired and fighting for more appropriate inclusion. This, of course, requires widespread education of the whole community!
Reading her essay is one way to start educating yourself on the needs of the autistic community and its right for international advocacy!

[Robert · Rating 3 out of 5]

Singer claims to have coined the term "neurodiversity" in her undergrad thesis about autism, disability and society, which is printed here with a lengthy Introduction. It's a quick read and a worthwhile one from a historical perspective and for its blend of social commentary, autism advocacy and personal memoir.

It's interesting to note that the term "neurodiversity" now covers a much bigger range than just the categories of neurotypicals and autistic people/Aspies. It's been adopted as an umbrella to cover dyslexia, dyscalculia, dyspraxia, AD(H)D, stroke survivors and more. It's become an important social movement in less than twenty years but still needs much greater recognition and acceptance by society as a whole.

[Adam Stephens · Rating 3 out of 5]

I see this as being of historical value, but it presents a dated and problematic view of autism. Singer herself can be grating as a writer. Some of her ideas are not well formed, and I don't think she can see that. The book is also full of typos and other errors.

Most importantly and most problematically, though, Judy Singer is a high-functioning or Aspie supremacist, in that she puts tremendous weight into the fictions of harmful (and fairly useless) functioning labels and sees a sharp division between Autistic people who would have been labelled as having Aperger's and those who would not have been. It seems she would have argued that Asperger's syndrome doesn't deserve to be categorized with autism in the first place if she could, and laments its loss.

The book does give a good, brief, narrow glimpse at the state of the Autistic community at the turn of the millennium and for that alone I give this book three stars, not as a statement of quality but of potential value to the reader, if that's what they're looking for.

[Aurélien Thomas · Rating 4 out of 5]

Judy Singer is usually acknowledged for having coined the term 'neurodiversity', in this sociology thesis about autism and society. Part personal journey (she is the daughter and mother of women with Asperger, and is herself on the autistic spectrum) part academic (she challenges social constructivism to put forward a new model of disability) here's a punchy read which captured brilliantly the zeitgeist of our era. No cutting around the bush: here's a must read.

What is 'neurodiversity'? Well, in essence, it's the recognition that there are many forms of intelligence, different ways of thinking, and that not all human brains are the same (whether affected by a neurological disorder or not). So far, it's stating the obvious. Where her view are radical, though, is when she uses such human diversity to put forward a powerful metaphor: as biodiversity is essential to an ecosystem, so is neurodiversity to human society. Why is that radical? Because, whereas for decades we have been used to perceive people on the autistic spectrum as being disabled (a weakness), such view, on the contrary, acknowledges them as being different but useful (a strength).

That such a view came to prominence in our times is not so surprising. After all, Asperger was recognised in 1994, the decade when digital technologies also started to emerge. If before that such individuals might have been misunderstood, bullied, and ostracised somehow for being nerds and geeks, it shouldn't surprise us much that nerds and geeks are now in demand, with Asperger (for example) turning out to be an asset:

'Perhaps it is not too fanciful to suggest that we are entering an era of co-evolution with machines that opens up a new ecological niche for people 'on the spectrum', allowing them to flourish.'

Indeed!

Now, plainly acknowledging differences in brain functioning doesn't mean she falls into the trap of post-modernist nonsense! Disabilities are NOT just social constructs, forged by oppressive 'neurotypicals'. She owes to identity politics for bringing under the spotlights individuals who are different, yet she has no patience for social theories; and certainly no patience for whose ignoring neuroscience to serve their own political agenda (the victimhood mindset so en vogue these days among some...). She, on the contrary, perfectly makes clear that, in term of brain functioning, if 'different' doesn't mean 'less', it doesn't mean 'everybody is the same' either. As such, she sneers at psychotherapy; that she perceives (rightly or wrongly) as still seeing autism as a behavioural issue that needs to be fixed. She also values back the 'medical model'; no longer 'the bogey it once was' (doctors knowing best and fixing patronised patients through drugs and other treatments) for now being a 'partnership' with patients turned 'informed consumers'. Doctors came a long way indeed since the 1960s! She gives them that.

This book, of course, is not without its weakness. Let's nail the point: she only adresses here high functioning autism, including Asperger. Obviously, it therefore makes it easier for such individuals to be included and accepted for their differences, their brain wiring an asset. Sadly, we can't say the same of others, on the spectrum too, yet so cognitively impaired that they don't have such intellectual capabilities or level of independence. 'Neurodiversity' as inclusive and accepting is a great concept; yet one has to be careful in not letting it blind us to what still is an harrowing reality: autism can also be a seriously disabling disorder. Yes, 'normalcy' is an ideal some can (and should) have access to, but to others it still remains biologically denied.

Such caution put aside, there is no denying that 'neuro-diverse' vs 'neurotypicals' is a powerful new sociological paradigm when it comes to differences. In fact, Judy Singer only addressed Asperger, and, yet, her view was so striking that it has since been taken over by a multitude of people, experiencing from other cognitive disabilities to mental illnesses. Isn't that ground-breaking? Then there we are! Again: here's a must read.

[Hannah · Rating 3 out of 5]

I think this is a valuable read in terms of the insight it offers into the early days of the neurodiversity movement, but it’s very much a product of its time. While Singer offers perspectives about autism that would have been considered transgressively optimistic in their time, from the perspective of the current neurodiversity movement, there’s a heavy undertone of internalized ableism in a lot of her ideas.

[Mimi · Rating 3 out of 5]

✎ 3 / 5 ⭐
✎ digital 📱

✘ would not recommend

This one was hard to rate but ultimately, it looks like it's a solid good book but not necessarily the best book to start out reading about neurodiversity. Especially since I don't have a lot of the fundamental concepts and understanding of it yet. Mainly because this book is extremely dense because it was originally a thesis, and I also read it via Kindle so the references in the book where at the end of the book instead of being at the bottom of the page.

The book provided a lot of history behind the neurodiversity movement, but aside from that, I felt like it lacked a lot of movement or direction in the new century with its coverage of many other categories. Personally in 2025, I think there are better books out there but if you're looking for the historical context on the movement, the book has a good starting point.

[Rosemarie · Rating 4 out of 5]

I especially found the author's introduction useful, placing the original thesis in context. I will be referencing this book in my own MA dissertation.

[Mills · Rating 2 out of 5]

The author describes NeuroDiversity: The Birth of an Idea as "a sampler of issues to do with neurological difference" and that is very apt. It is very far from being a detailed look at neurodiversity - apart from anything else, it only discusses autism - and I honestly struggled to see what purpose it serves (outside of the author's educational journey). The focus is broad and thus so lacking in depth that we learn little. We simply are shown some of the place autism held within the sociological context of the time. It felt like an introduction to a much longer piece.

Should you choose to read this, do bear in mind that it was written 30 odd years ago and the language and attitudes can feel uncomfortable. I was surprised by one thing that felt uncomfortable actually and can't quite put my finger on why. It was the term "autistics". I have no problem with identity first language if that is what people choose and would say "autistic people" but not "autistics". I wonder if the lack of the word people feels dehumanising but I'm not sure. Anyway, I digress...

I felt quite bemused by the author's clear disdain for psychotherapy, given her journey into the world of neurodiversity is essentially a therapeutic journey, a search for understanding of herself and her closest relatives and their place in the world, albeit with academic language and a few quotations. Still, I suppose psychotherapy has also moved on much in the last few decades. I want to be very clear on this - I would describe myself as neurodiverse; I would also say that psychotherapy has saved my life.

I would like to refer you to The neurodiversity concept was developed collectively: An overdue correction on the origins of neurodiversity theory (Sagepub - Botha, Chapman, Onaiwu, Kapp, Ashley, Walker - 2024):

"Unless further archival evidence comes to light, it is possible we will never know who coined the term ‘neurodiversity’. But in any case, the coining of this term did not add anything theoretically substantial to the already existing concept of neurological diversity... Moreover, the body of theory that continued to grow through the 1990s and 2000s was also collectively developed in multiple places and dialogues rather than stemming from any single, coherent strand of literature. This includes Kassiane Asasumasu’s coining of ‘neurodivergent’ and ‘neurodivergence’ as the opposite of neurotypical; the application of neurodiversity frameworks far beyond the autistic population from the early 2000s (Antonetta, 2007; Kirby, 2004: DANDA); and ultimately a lively and ongoing set of theories, debates, and research programmes relating to what is now termed the neurodiversity approaches or paradigm (Dwyer, 2022). All this and more has formed the basis for the now flourishing field of neurodiversity studies, which spans across the arts, humanities, and social sciences.

To be clear, Singer’s work is certainly of scholarly interest as the first known sociological study of the neurodiversity movement. But from this point on, we should attribute the coining and theorising of neurodiversity to the pioneering activists who collectively developed them in the autistic community alongside neurodivergent ‘cousins’ (coined by Xenia Grant in the early 1990s: Baggs, n.d.; Sinclair, 2005). They have for too long been erased in favour of an alluringly simple yet ultimately inaccurate version of the history of the neurodiversity movement and its theory, which, in light of new evidence, and backed by our input here, is now clearer. To continue to attribute the coining and theorising of neurodiversity uncritically to any individual would from this point on be to knowingly and egregiously erase neurodivergent people from their own history."

[S · Rating 4 out of 5]

This work is a bit dated --it was written in the 90s and even though the author has updated it since there are still some ideas that are outdated. For example, the idea that aspies are overrepresented or drawn to technology. The truth is that this observation has more to do with class than an innate propensity for technology. In the 90s most people didn't have Internet access or a PC. Also, back then, only the most privileged would have been able to get a diagnosis. Most people had no idea what AS was, even doctors, so they still would have been labeled as "morally defective" or "schizophrenic" as Judy Singer says herself. The part about trauma is outdated as well, we know now that a large percentage of people with ASD go on to develop complex PTSD, often from childhood trauma. Once I was diagnosed with AS, my ongoing trauma was dismissed by counselors and therapists. Doctors took the opposite view than the one in the past --an autistic child could not be traumatized. Now we know that is not the case. Hopefully we can come full circle.

[Tyler Upchurch]

5 stars because it is important, historic, and thought-provoking, though it is not precise, fulsome in content, or beyond question in its assumptions.

The reflective preface to the reprint provokes interesting thoughts on, among other things, autistic attacks on autistic parents. It also points toward a kind of balanced perspective where being autistic is regarded, in the end, as just being human with the subsequent capacity of being good and bad. Some get so wrapped up in the narrative of oppression that they forget oppressed people can also themselves be oppressors. Denying that either implicitly or explicitly is just another form of oppressive distortion from which we need deliverance.

[Jane]

I found this to be a tedious read. I read this as it is a seminal work for critical disability studies. Yet, I find much of Singer's discourse outdated and problematic as she relies heavily on Aspergus Sepremisist views.

[Melis Baloglu · Rating 3 out of 5]

Neurodivergent kavramını ilk ortaya atan kişinin tezi olduğu için heyecan verici ancak belki tez tadından çıkarılıp basılabilirdi.

[Uli Vogel · Rating 4 out of 5]

Do keep in mind it's a thesis, though a very personal one. It helped me readjust my perspective on the whole matter.

[Kimberly · Rating 3 out of 5]

I'm hesitant to give this a star rating -- Singer's original thesis serves as a historical document in the emergence of neurodiversity movements, but even with a more current introduction it's definitely dated. It tends towards overgeneralization/stereotypes and an outdated language/view of autism. But as an academic text, it has a valuable place within the subject of neurodiversity and disability studies overall.

[Cíntia Nagaoka · Rating 4 out of 5]

The introduction made reading the book worth it, because it summed up all the important points of neurodiversity movement nowadays, while the book was just a summary of her thesis and it didn't add up much. Basically, I learned more about the methodology of her work than about neurodiversity itself.

[Daniel Nolting · Rating 3 out of 5]

The book is compiled of the original theses in which Judy Singer introduces the concept of neurological diversity. She seems very competitive in the fact that she was first, failing to really acknowledge that other people were coming up with their own ideas of neurodiversity simultaneously as she was. The thesis itself is very prone to outdated stereotypes such as the one that autistic people are computer 'geeks' and 'nerds'. As other reviewers have put it, the text has undertones of both 'asperger supremacy' and internalised ableism, to the point where she writes in the newer introduction, that she has a hard time identifying herself with the word 'autistic', since it "carries to much heavy freight" for her. I wish she would have taken the stance to identify with being autistic, since that was the official term at the time she wrote the introduction, and also as a way to destigmatize it, so that others in the future, wont have such a hard time identifying with it as she has. It's also evident in her use of apostrophe every time she talks of herself as 'on the spectrum' or in any way 'autistic', almost unwilling to be associated with these. Of course this was a different time, so even though it probably isn't the best introduction to the neurodiversity movement nowadays, it certainly has historical value.

I found the sections discussing the historical and philosophical theory behind the neurodiversity concept very engaging, as well as the sections where she presents certain arguments, quoting statements from autistic people, such as a very interesting critique of psychotherapy.

Overall I give it three stars because of the at times very outdated language, which really doesn't read comfortably today, as well as lacking other essential aspects, which just makes it a pretty inadequate introduction to the modern neurodiversity movement.

[☾⋆｡ A °✩.⟡ · Rating 1 out of 5]

This book sucked so hard, actually. I was prepared to forgive quite a lot of the abelist rubbish since the thesis was written in the 90s, but her doubling down on it in the intro...Major cockup to say the least :/
Idc actually what the fuck she did for the neurodiversity movement, can we stop talking about this woman, she sucks and she's honestly bringing the vibe down. Many other writers are a lot smarter than her and actually know what they are talking about. Go read them instead.

"My thesis made clear from the start that I was only advocating for people with high-functioning autism, (or the Syndrome-formerly-known-as-Asperger) when I argued that Aspies should view ourselves as a neurological minority, and that our focus should be on minority rights, not medicalisation." ... "I was happy to identify as a mild Aspie, but the word “autistic” carries too much heavy freight for me." ... "The word ‘disability’ ...fails to encapsulate the situation of people on the spectrum. It has too many connotations of physical and intellectual impairment, and conversely, no association to impairments of social communication for people who are neither physically nor intellectually disabled."
👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎

[Safaira · Rating 5 out of 5]

I do not have this with most books, but finding out I was at the end of it made me want more. Where to begin?

In just 70 pages I have realized a lot. I have never consciously thought about disability movements and never even about neurodiversity movements. I have never considered autistic people getting discriminated against at the workplace. Now I know in what type of bubble I have lived.

The biggest message I got out of this was the countereffect of psychotherapy. I never considered that psychotherapy might be bad for anyone, but with the labels and feelings the therapists assigned to their patients who were just autistic, it is understandable why some autists would not like it. Especially since one therapist told a woman that she might be behaving in a certain manner because of sexual parental abuse. It is insulting.

If I ever want to work as a therapist or anything alike, I will try to think more about brain structure, different needs in society (not a person to be fixed, but a person to consider and with different needs) and also a person who is actually very sensitive sometimes.

I normally do not relate with most activism, but if there is any I would get behind, it's the Neurodiverse movement!

[Beth Gea · Rating 4 out of 5]

Este libro me ha proporcionado lo que más me gusta de un libro de no ficción: un montón de ideas y conceptos para seguir investigando y sobre los cuales seguirn pensando y reflexionando.

Se lee en unas cuantas horas y, a pesar de tratarse de una tesis universitaria, se lee muy bien y no está llena de palabros rimbombantes. Me gusta el estilo de Singer.

A pesar de no estar en el espectro autista, llegué a este libro a través del concepto de neurodiversidad y neurodivergencia. Y creo que, salvando las distancias, muchas de las cosas que dice son aplicables a las aacc.

[fuzzy.bookdragon · Rating 4 out of 5]

Really useful reference and overview of neurodivergence set within the context of autism and societal disablement. Gives a solid sense of the evolving neurodiversity movement in the late 90s and of the various theories regarding autism. Author is careful to point out that her thesis was looking at high-functioning autistic individuals and those with neurodivergence that incorporates many of the same traits, as she was motivated to understand these differences compared to neurotypical individuals within the context of her own family experience.

[Miguel Vences · Rating 4 out of 5]

Definitely, an interesting book to introduce yourself to the autistic spectrum from a sociological perspective more than a psychological one, with thought-provoking material for its time, and also a historical introduction to the concept of Neurodiversity, coined first to describe the people on the spectrum and that now carries under its umbrella a wide variety of conditions that are getting more recognition and less stigma.

[Carla Groom · Rating 5 out of 5]

Part thesis, part autobiography, beautifully written and delightfully short. A special book with a special place in the history of our species and its ongoing battle to reconcile sameness and difference. I especially loved the author's honest account of wrestling with postmodernism, the elements of social constructivism she decided to keep and those that just were not compatible with the genetic reality of her family.

[Sarah · Rating 4 out of 5]

An interesting paper composed as a book. It asked a lot of questions. The comments it made about language were particularly relevant given how much of the language had moved on from what was used in this paper. I found a lot of the questions and discussion points. Interesting a good starting point for looking at the beginning of autistic and Neurodiversity advocacy in general.

[Sam King · Rating 5 out of 5]

This truly groundbreaking classic has been a driving force of neurodiversity movement for over 20 years. Some things have changed but this will always be an essential read for anyone who truly wants to understand neurodiversity and the origins of neurodiversity movement.

[Anna · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is okay if you read it like you’d read a historical document; it’s outdated to the point it’s a little uncomfortable (especially since the intro is from 2016), but interesting as it is part of the origins of a movement which is now far bigger.

[Mrtfalls · Rating 4 out of 5]

Good intro. Wish it had been longer though.

[Swastika · Rating 5 out of 5]

The book is great for its time, but trigger warning- it uses the r-word and functioning labels quite often.

[Stephen Bedard · Rating 5 out of 5]

While not the final word on neurodiversity, it may be the first word. It is worth reading to begin to understand the beginnings of the neurodiversity movement.

[harvey ☆ · Rating 4 out of 5]

love hearing about autism history so much. a bit all over the place and disorganized but i think it adds to the charm. i like hearing about all of it

[Rain · Rating 4 out of 5]

A good introduction to the topic, a narrow focus & outlook that feels quite acknowledged by the author.