Two paradigms: fix the person, or hold the person
The world seems to divide along cultural paradigms about what neurodivergence means — and the older paradigm was never the deficit one.
I have learned in my research that there is an interesting delineation in the world that seems to divide along the lines of cultural paradigms and dominant belief systems related to being neurodiverse: Global North versus Global South.
The Global North seems dominated by the medicalization and othering of neurodiverse people and by finding ways to fix them. The Global South has long held onto cultural practices — and this is documented in multiple ways — that demonstrate support, acceptance, community responsibility, and reverence for those whose neurological functions push beyond the boundaries of what northern, white-dominated society might call "normal."
Akhund connects to ages-old understandings of being neurodiverse that had largely been overshadowed by the medicalization and pathologization of neurodivergence. The article calls for us to remember that neurodiversity, and ways to accept and celebrate it, have been around as long as humans have been around.
That reframes the whole timeline. The deficit model is not the base state that acceptance is slowly improving on. The deficit model is the newer arrival.