Neurodiversity has been described as ‘a biological truism that refers to the limitless variability of human nervous systems on the planet’ (Singer, n.d.). While most animals have nervous systems, neurodiversity is often restricted to humans. Why is that?
Neurodiversity studies emerged following the burgeoning of the neurodiversity movement, a political endeavour by and for autistic people and other neurodivergent humans. This political horizon is absolutely crucial to secure human rights for neurodivergent humans and has been quite successful in raising awareness about neurodiversity and fostering changes in education and workplaces for neurodivergent humans (Chapman 2024).
But as neurodiversity scholar Sam Fellowes notes, the idea
that only forms of human diversity matter, therefore neurodiversity does not cover animals […] seems arbitrary (Fellowes 2022).
While it is not uncommon to hear about the special bond formed between neurodivergent humans, and nonhuman animals, this rarely points to animal neurodivergence. Sure, nonhuman animals often benefit neurodivergent humans as ‘emotional support’ animals or guides towards a better understanding of human sociality, but what about their perspectives and experiences?
Can’t nonhuman animals also be neurodivergent? Animal psychiatry is starting to look at autism- and ADHD-like in domestic animals (González-Martínez et al. 2024), but autism-like is not autism proper… Matters of classification aside, it is becoming increasingly clear that most nonhuman animals experience rich, subjective lives.
With this in mind, the idea that neurodiversity exists in nonhuman animals seems to be no less of a truism than human neurodiversity itself. Anyone who has lived with nonhuman animals long enough knows they can experience anxiety or depression. Veterinary psychiatry has formulated the diagnosis of Hypersensitivity-Hyperactivity (HsHa), which echoes ADHD, and epilepsy has been observed in cats and dogs. Therefore, I believe with Fellowes
that a neurodiversity advocate needs either give reason to restrict neurodiveristy [sic] to humans or should extend it to animals (Fellowes 2022).
When I call for a more-than-human turn in neurodiversity studies, multiple questions arise: Can we simply extend the neurodiversity paradigm to nonhuman animals, or does this require a larger paradigm shift? What would it mean to redefine neurodiversity as a fundamentally animal phenomenon rather than a human one? How can we oppose the dehumanisation of neurodivergent humans without reinforcing the speciesist human/animal dualism? While it is likely that animal neurodivergence exists, how could neurodivergent politics benefit nonhuman animals?
These are all questions I am aiming to answer in forthcoming blog articles and academic papers.
References
Chapman, Robert. ‘The Future of the Neurodiversity Movement.’ Boston Review, May
29, 2024. https://www.bostonreview.net/forum/the-future-of-neurodiversity/.
Fellowes, Sam. ‘Should Neurodiversity be Extended to Animals?’ June 11, 2022.
https://samfellowes.com/philosophyofpsychiatryblog/index.php/2022/06/11/should-neurodiversity-be-extended-to-animals/.
González-Martínez, Ángela, Susana Muñiz de Miguel, and Francisco Javier Diéguez. 2024. ‘New Advances in Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder-like Dogs.’ Animals 14, no. 14: 2067. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani14142067.
Singer, Judy. ‘Judy Singer’s Official Definition of Neurodiversity.’ https://neurodiversity2.blogspot.com/p/what.html.
This blog post is based on a forthcoming paper, ‘Biodiversity, Neurodiversity, Ethodiversity: Towards a More-Than-Human and More-Than-Neurological Turn in Neurodiversity Studies’ for Trace: Journal of Human-Animal Studies.
Leave a comment