Is it ok to use the term ‘neurospicy’ when talking about autism and other neurodivergences?

SYDNEY: Language trends change quickly at the hands of social media users. They explode into our screens, rather than slowly evolve. This can change the ways we talk about diagnoses such as autism and concepts like neurodiversity.

But before we use a term, we should look at how it came to be and what it means to people.

So where does the new word “neurospicy” come from? And why do some people embrace it, while others reject it?

First, let’s unpack ‘neurodiversity’

The term neurodiversity evolved collectively in the mid-1990s in an online space dedicated to autistic people.

The term refers to the neurological diversity found across the human species. It is a way to include brains and minds that diverge from what society considers neurologically typical or “neurotypical”.

Australian sociologist Judy Singer first used the term in academia in her 1998 honours thesis and it made its way to mainstream media the same year.

The terms neurodivergent and neurotypical are now well studied and well defined by academics and the neurodiversity movement. Outside of this, though, language can change meaning.

The neurodiversity movement promotes equality

The neurodiversity movement came from the autism rights movement, and for many, the term neurodivergent is associated with autism.

The concept of neurodivergence has broadened over time to include people with conditions such as intellectual disability, mental illness, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), dyslexia and acquired brain injury.

However, a person cannot be diagnosed as neurodivergent. A person can only be diagnosed with a condition that indicates neurodivergence.

The neurodiversity movement is a disability rights movement that focuses on equal rights for neurodivergent people.

Advocates say people with conditions such as autism and ADHD should be accepted rather than “cured”. They argue an inclusive society should ensure equal access to ethical care and support to everyone, including neurodivergent people.

This movement began at a time when most of the autism research focused on finding a cure.

Some argue it doesn’t represent people with high support needs

One of the main criticisms of the neurodiversity movement is it doesn’t address the complex needs of many autistic people.

An autistic person can be non-speaking, have intellectual disability and severe anxiety, requiring a lot of daily support. The people who advocate on behalf of autistic people with complex needs are parents and concerned clinicians.

To these advocates, an acceptance of neurodiversity and an equal rights campaign is not enough. Some argue that neurodivergence, particularly autism, is a medical problem that needs “treatment”.

But both groups want to highlight the care and support needs of this part of the autistic population.

Why do some people favour the term ‘neurospicy’?

Words like neurodiverse, neuro-inclusive, neuro-affirming and neurospicy are neologisms (new words) related to neurodiversity.

These words don’t come from the original group in the 1990s or from medical professionals. They come from a large online community of neurodivergent people.

Neurospicy is a way of describing a person who experiences multiple forms of neurodivergence, or a collective, such as a family that has many neurodivergent members.

Why do some people dislike it?

The use of neologisms like neurospicy is controversial inside and outside the neurodivergent community.

Some parent advocates feel that terms associated with neurodiversity erase the profound difficulties of autistic people.

Speaking of her son Zack, author Whitney Ellenby says:

Neurodivergent people have also had some strong reactions to the word neurospicy. Neurodivergent podcaster Danielle Sullivan asks if neurospicy is just a cute, quirky word or a way to avoid saying disabled.

Some argue we should abandon words such as neurospicy and “neurosparkly” and be clear that we’re talking about disability:

So it seems that some neurodivergent people and people who support the medical model of autism agree about refocusing on disability.

So is it OK to say neurospicy?

Before picking up a new language trend, consider the history and the power of words.

Moving forward, we can ask individuals and families how they refer to themselves and their diagnosis. We will find a variety of responses including neurospicy, autistic, disabled, neurodivergent, has autism or ADHD, or my disability doesn’t define me.

Asking about people’s preferences gives us an opportunity to provide an affirming environment for all, and a space to continue to explore this conversation.