A question in one of our workshops this week really stuck with me:
“Why do you say ‘identified’ instead of ‘diagnosed?”
The person asking was concerned that self-identification, especially when it happens online, might diminish the experiences of those who’ve gone through long, complex diagnostic processes.
It’s an interesting point. And one worth unpacking, especially due to its controversy.
Today I’m talking about:
Info: Why ‘identified’ can feel more inclusive than ‘diagnosed’
Tips: How to navigate language with nuance
Recommendations: Resources on identity, diagnosis and neurodivergence
Why I say ‘identified’ over ‘diagnosed’
Language shapes experience. It influences who feels included, and who feels seen.
When I say someone is identified as autistic or ADHD (for example), I’m being intentional.
Here’s why:
Not everyone can access diagnosis.
In some areas of England, autism waiting lists stretch up to 20 years. ADHD assessments have closed entirely in some regions. For many, diagnosis isn’t just hard, it’s out of reach.For some, assessment is traumatic.
Clinical assessments are often deficit-focused, stressful, and triggering. They can pathologise how you move through the world, and leave lasting scars. Some people choose not to go through it. That choice is valid.You can’t be diagnosed as ‘neurodivergent’.
Neurodivergent isn’t a clinical label. It’s a social identity. A recognition that someone’s brain functions differently from what society expects.
That’s why I use ‘identified’.
It acknowledges people’s lived experience, with or without a formal piece of paper.
I hear the other side too…
There’s no denying that some people might self-identify loosely or without understanding. That can feel frustrating for those who’ve fought hard to get a diagnosis and access support.
But should we let a few edge cases invalidate everyone?
If someone’s sharing an identity that helps them understand themselves better, and feel less alone, maybe the bigger question is:
Do we create space for that? Or do we gatekeep it?
Tips for inclusive conversations
Here are five ways to approach this topic with care and nuance:
✅ Use the language people prefer
‘Identified’, ‘diagnosed’, ‘self-discovered’ - people land where they feel safest. Follow their lead.
✅ Name the barriers
Be aware of the privilege baked into diagnosis - cost, location, race, gender and more all play a part.
✅ Challenge gatekeeping
If someone resonates with a neurodivergent identity, ask why, not whether they “qualify”.
✅ Normalise nuance
You can honour both perspectives. Diagnosed and self-identified people deserve respect.
✅ Keep it human
Language evolves. People do too. That’s not a threat, it’s a strength.
Recommended Resources
Dr Naomi Fisher on Substack
Someone I hugely respect as they centre nuance, critical thinking and space for different perspectives, including the evolution of language.
Differing Minds on the social model
A short, animated video on the social model of disability.
Final thought
Language can limit. Or it can liberate.
Using the word identified is one small way we choose liberation, for those still waiting, still masking, or still figuring it all out.
But most importantly to advocate for neuroinclusion we must respect a variety of language choices and perspectives. We must create spaces where people can debate and share, but equally feel safe and seen.
As audiences, my ask from you is to simply show up with an open mind and compassionate heart.
If you want me to create a space for discussion in your setting, hit reply and let’s get something in for 2026.
Jess
PS Whenever you’re ready, here are some ways I can help:
Want me to speak or run a workshop in your organisation? Head here to book a chat and make a plan.
Book a FREE Discovery call to chat through how I can support your workplace, your school or your family.
PPS Here's what someone said about some in person sessions I ran this week… "Thank you so much for delivering two excellent sessions this week! We heard such great feedback.” |