The New York Times article, “Should the Autism Spectrum Be Split Apart?” by Azeen Ghorayshi, discusses this dilemma within the neurodiversity community: when autism is scaled on a spectrum, the most profound patients get neglected.
The idea of having a spectrum was first proposed when the diagnostic manual first came out for clinics around the world. Doctors realized that the manual, which only had one clear criterion for autism, did not fit every patient who had a broad range of conditions characterized by challenges with social skills, repetitive behaviors, or speech difficulties. After decades of reclassifying types of autism with many controversies included, in 2013, psychiatrists decided to come up with a unified benchmark-- “autism spectrum disorder”.
However, the autism spectrum has a critical disadvantage. By including more less profound autism patients, the majority of research is devoted to these people and not to patients with more serious autism. It’s much more convenient to do so—people with less profound autism are more comfortable talking with researchers, doing brain scans, and other activities needed for research. Unintentionally, the spectrum is marginalizing people with profound autism. Jackie Kancir, the executive director of the National Council, says, “They have usurped this population to the point of exclusion.”
The dilemma with neurodiversity categorization and definition will be a continued effort. There might not be a one-size-fits-all solution that benefits all patients equally, but with a collective attempt, society can help those who are the most vulnerable.
Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/10/01/health/autism-spectrum-neurodiversity-kennedy.html?searchResultPosition=1