Attachment Theory and Neuro-diversity
If you are seeking an in-depth, detailed comparison of Neurodivergent needs and attachment theories - that will be a later writing (which may require more than a single blog post or series could contain).
For now, this blog on Attachment Theory and Neurodiversity will cover some of the foundational ideas of how current attachment theory does not include a full and necessary understanding of Neurodivergent needs with attachment.
Neurodivergent folks operate outside of expected ‘norms’: Neurodivergent humans connect with other humans in ways not expected or often accepted by general Neuronormative society.
Neurodivergent humans are more likely to be on ‘extreme’ sides of the spectrum of need for human connection:
First Example of Neurodivergent Difference in Attachment: A person who genuinely has their social connectivity needs fulfilled by a weekly Dungeons and Dragons virtual campaign is not experiencing avoidant attachment or anxious attachment. If this fulfills this persons needs, that’s healthy for this person and does not need to be compared to or discriminated against due to this being a different level and way of meeting the same type of need.
Second Example of Neurodivergent Difference in Attachment: On the opposite end, say someone genuinely has a need for near-constant human connection. For this example, this level of need is not due to a lack of healthy and appropriate attachment or connection at any time in this person’s development. They really and truly have a higher level of need for human connection and co-regulation of their nervous system. This does not make this person anxiously attached - though they may have developed heightened levels of experiencing social anxiety and rejection trauma due to Neuronormative standards and expectations of attachment needs being less than this person’s happens to be (even though this experience can be a perfectly natural difference in human need for connection and co-regulation).We need to shift away from Neuronormative Standards for Early Childhood Attachment: Instead of focusing so heavily on the way in which caregivers connect with children in infancy and beyond within a Neuronormative understanding of how we are ‘supposed’ to healthfully attach to each other - we could focus on how each individual needs to feel connected. How often each of us needs to experience rituals of connection. How we attach to other humans and how we can support this.
We also would do well to recognize: attachment and connectedness fluctuate. Our capacity and need for human connection are not static, instead they vary depending on so many factors. There cannot be a general understanding and expectation of how to form and maintain health attachment without factoring in an understanding of Neurodiversity.
Tl:dr - Current and generally accepted attachment theory is stuck in Neuronormativity. It is not inclusive of Neurodiversity. This needs to change.
More to come on the topic of attachment theory and Neurodivergence as it’s a much needed topic to be better understood and an area of passion for me.
-
Notes: The term Neurodiversity was created by the broader online Autistic community as well as Neurodivergent community and was brought into wider consciousness and use by Judy Singer due to her publishing a thesis which was available to a wider audience than niche oniine forums.
The term Neurodivergent was created by Kassiane Asasumasu, a Hapa and Asian American Autistic rights activist and blogger from Oregon. The term was specifically created to be an inclusive term, not one that excludes folks who technically fit into it. While there are both innate and acquired Neurodivergences - all those with brains which diverge from the expected ‘norm’ are included within the term and understanding of being Neurodivergent.
Neuronormative is a term used to describe the “usual way a brain is expected to work.” The standards and expectations within a Neuronormative culture which is not inclusive of Neurodiversity is harmful to Neurodivergent folks.
