Protected: 3. Critical Neurodiversity Studies: Social and Cultural Responsibility, Standpoint Theory and Critical Material Phenomenology

Panellists: Monique Botha, Sahana V. Rajan, Jane Dryden
Chair: Chunye Chai

Monique Botha | Social and Cultural Responsibility in Neurodiversity Research: evaluating ethics and impact 

Abstract: Research on human development has a problem with ableism, whereby, those deemed to have atypical trajectories are often determined to be inferior based on underdetermined science (often pseudoscience), or worse, dehumanized, objectified, or stigmatised under the guise of objectivity, scientific inquiry, and with the knowing support of researchers who fail to humanize the objects of their study. Increasingly, researchers, activists and allies are writing more about this phenomenon. Neurodiversity scholarship can play a role in either dismantling or sustaining these systems depending on how typically versus critically, it is engaged with. The rise of Neurodiversity-Lite, has seen a change in language, without a shift in praxis in many cases, simply obscuring pathologisation with meaningless platitudes about inclusion, often endorsing a capitalistic superhero approach to neurodivergence – focusing on individual production value, instead of inherent rights. I argue that this dehumanization in research and scholarship cascades into wider society, including in creating harmful interventions, dehumanization of neurodivergent people in the media, and by the wider public, including in creating hostile State systems – impeding disability justice and access to “Good Lives”. In this talk, I present the beginnings of a critical guide to Social and Cultural responsibility in neurodiversity research. I underpin this praxis with: Rigour, Ethical Responsibility, Power Sharing, and Subversive Impact. Ultimately, the goal is for researchers to take steps towards acknowledging their power, agency, and responsibility towards the creation of neurodivergent liberation, and in dismantling the hostile State. I do this by presenting this framework and reflecting on my own experiences as a multiply-neurodivergent scholar, torn between fields who understand neurodivergence radically different from one and other, and as I emerge from a precarious role, into a permanent one. 

-

Sahana V. Rajan (Online) | Intra-active Bodyminds: Toward an Ontology of Neurodiversity Through Critical Material Phenomenology 

Abstract: In clinical settings, neurological difference is often reduced to a series of measurable deviations from an assumed norm. In activist spaces, it is frequently reframed as purely social construction. Yet neither framework fully captures the complex material-discursive reality of neurodivergent being. This paper develops a critical material phenomenology of neurodiversity that moves beyond both medical materialism and social constructivism by synthesizing Barad's agential realism, Price's bodymind framework, and Guenther's critical phenomenology. 

Through this theoretical integration, I argue that neurological difference emerges through complex intra-actions between material conditions, power relations, and embodied experience. Rather than existing as either pure biological fact or social construction, neurodiversity materializes through ongoing material-discursive practices that cut across traditional nature/culture divides. This framework allows us to understand neurological difference as neither essentially determined nor purely constructed, but rather as continuously enacted through multiple, overlapping agencies and power relations. 

The paper advances critical neurodiversity studies by offering an ontological framework that: 1) accounts for the material reality of neurological difference without reducing it to medical determinism, 2) acknowledges the role of power relations and social conditions without losing sight of embodied experience, and 3) provides theoretical resources for liberatory praxis by revealing how different material-discursive configurations enable or constrain neurological being. 

This intervention contributes to the critical turn in neurodiversity studies by demonstrating how material feminist theory and critical phenomenology can inform more nuanced understandings of neurodivergent experience while supporting liberatory political projects. It suggests that attending to the intra-active nature of neurological difference opens new possibilities for resistance and collective transformation. 

-

Jane Dryden | Standpoint Theory and the Medicalization of ADHD Discussions 

Abstract: Given increasing attention to neurodiversity and the importance of lived experience, why is the public discourse around ADHD still heavily medicalized, even from ADHDers themselves? This paper uses standpoint theory and contrasts with other disability movements, including autistic self-advocacy, to explore dynamics behind the ongoing medical framing of ADHD. 

Standpoint theory starts inquiry from the perspective of the marginalized, to generate critical questions and insights that contrast with the assumptions and practices of the dominant group. O’Donovan (2010) argues for the value of developing an ADHD standpoint, to challenge the emphasis on ADHD deficits and to demonstrate the unique perspectives and insights ADHDers can contribute. Lived experience on its own, however, does not necessarily produce better knowledge without robust critical reflection within a community engaged in a shared struggle for liberation (Collins 1991, Wylie 2003, Harding 2004, Toole 2023). This community discussion is shaped by historical, material, and social conditions. Táíwò (2020, 2022) points out the risk of “elite capture,” where the most advantaged members of marginalized groups retain control over priorities and agendas. We must pay attention to community dynamics even while endorsing the value of individual lived experience. 

In the case of ADHD, the most prominent community discussions position ADHD as a biological deficit within the individual person, to be treated with biomedical resources, with expertise being held by the medical/psychological community (Brown 2024). Even when ADHD influencers are ADHDers themselves, with few exceptions the knowledge that they disseminate is framed by the parameters of biomedicine. By contrast, in other disability movements, critical reflection and sharing of lived experience have led to challenging the deficit model and deference to biomedical expertise. 

Standpoint theory can help us think through the shaping of ADHD community narratives and possibilities for cultivating community dialogue capable of offering an alternative standpoint. 

***

Speaker Bios:

Monique Botha: Dr Monique Botha is a neurodivergent community psychologist who works with marginalized communities to conduct transformative research, primarily in the context of neurodiversity, queerness, and gender diversity. They are assistant professor at Durham University, and are currently completing a Leverhulme funded early-career research fellowship on what (de)humanizing and objectifying research looks like, and how we can combat it to ensure neurodivergent people are not exposed to research-based violence and testimonial injustice.

-

Sahana V. Rajan: Sahana V Rajan is a non-binary, pansexual, autistic Assistant Professor of Philosophy and Senior Associate Dean at Jindal Global Business School (O.P. Jindal Global University) where they also serve as Associate Director of the Centre for Neurodiversity Studies. Their research integrates care ethics, material feminism, and neurodiversity studies, with particular focus on academic labor and ontological questions. A vocal advocate for queer and neurodivergent inclusion in academia, they are currently developing frameworks for understanding neurological difference through critical material phenomenology while working toward more inclusive academic spaces. More information about me here: https://sahanarajan.com/ 

-

Jane Dryden: Jane Dryden is Professor of Philosophy at Mount Allison University. She teaches courses on history of philosophy, feminist philosophy, philosophy of disability, aesthetics, and biomedical ethics. Her current research concerns vulnerability and relational autonomy in the contexts of neurodiversity and gut issues, as well as ableist and healthist pressures to normalcy within gut microbiome research. She also writes on disability in the history of philosophy, focusing on German idealism. 

***