Neurodiversity and the Individual Attention Fallacy

"When my six-year-old autistic son was kicked off our neighborhood swim team, the coach offered a familiar justification: "He requires too much individual attention. It isn't fair to the other kids." I've heard versions of this complaint countless times as a parent of neurodivergent children. I've come to recognize it as what I call the "individual attention fallacy"-a deeply misleading excuse that institutions use to exclude neurodivergent people while obscuring the real problem."

"The fallacy works like this: A teacher, coach, or program leader complains that a neurodivergent child is consuming more than their "fair share" of attention, thereby depriving neurotypical children of necessary resources. On the surface, this seems reasonable. After all, attention is finite, and leaders can only focus on so many things at once. The argument positions the neurodivergent child as the drain on limited resources, making their exclusion seem justified, even compassionate toward other children."

"But this framing hides a crucial truth: These leaders aren't losing attention because of neurodivergent children. They're doing so by rigidly enforcing irrelevant social norms. Consider my son's swim practice. The coaches didn't just want six-year-olds to swim safely and happily. They demanded that children swim specific strokes in specific lanes, stand perfectly still on the pool deck, and remember complex instructions in a chaotic environment with dozens of kids and coaches all shouting"

Leaders often claim neurodivergent children consume an unfair share of individual attention, positioning them as drains on finite resources. That complaint functions as the 'individual attention fallacy,' an excuse for exclusion that obscures the real cause. Rigid enforcement of irrelevant social norms creates situations where more attention appears necessary. Many neurodivergent children do not inherently require specialized treatment; altered expectations or modest adjustments can reduce attention needs. Attention can expand with additional staff and resources, but political choices often favor exclusion over investment. The fallacy shifts blame onto individuals instead of addressing systemic underfunding and poor program design.

Read at Psychology Today